"Anchor baby" is offensive and hurtful?

[Unkotare]

Its an invasion not immigration, if Mexico wants to go to war over the term 'anchor baby' they can bring it!

Clearly you're very emotional about this and that is understandable, but you are misusing the above terms.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No one has a'splained how a Mexican baby citizen bankrupts our economy while a white baby citizen doesn't.

If you can't figure out the strain it puts on our social system and the money that entails you don't belong in this conversation.

Sounds like a good argument in support of a path to citizenship.

???????????????

If the problem with immigration is the strain it puts on our social system then maybe we ought to think about finding a legal status that allows people to do for themselves without fear. It's pretty easy.

 

[Unkotare]

No one has a'splained how a Mexican baby citizen bankrupts our economy while a white baby citizen doesn't.

If you can't figure out the strain it puts on our social system and the money that entails you don't belong in this conversation.

Sounds like a good argument in support of a path to citizenship.

???????????????

If the problem with immigration is the strain it puts on our social system then maybe we ought to think about finding a legal status that allows people to do for themselves without fear. It's pretty easy.

Not easy or simple.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

...You should take your own advice before showing your ass.

I don't understand what you mean in this context, but I am comforted by the obvious - that you do not understand what you mean, either. Done yet?

Your response To the 80% of Americans comment was to say Trump's 'meteoric rise' made that no longer true.
I then pointed out that Trump doesn't even have majority support from Repubs let alone the country.

Your point cannot be true.
Get it now?

I am done. When I have to explain the obvious three times, I'm talking to the wall.

1. it was not obvious

2. you explained it (clearly) once (immediately above)

I am not responsible for your prior cryptic meanderings.

I did, indeed, refute a previous 80%-in-favor-of-a-path-to-citizenship posting by trotting-out Trump's "meteoric rise" in the polls as a counterpoint.

And I am entirely happy to concede that he neither speaks for all Americans nor all Republicans.

But I question the veracity of such 80% figures, when a draconian answer-man like Trump takes off like a bat out of hell, in the polls.

My spidey-sense tells me that high 'support numbers' like those you reference, are Pre-Trump, and that much of that volume was actually reflective of people who had given-up all hope of a harsher treatment of Illegal Aliens, having seen their own government look the other way and wink so many times, to the point where they would go-with-the-flow.

Well, one benefit of Trump's appearance on the political stage is that he has given voice to that long-simmering, massive discontent and resignation-to-fate, and in a forceful manner, raising hopes and expectations again, and given people courage to voice their old concerns and anger over 12,000,000 invaders present upon United States soil without permission.

The number may, indeed, have been 80% at some point - hell, I really don't know or care.

But the Smart Vegas Money is on that number being much lower, nowadays.

Much to your consternation, and that of other Pro-Illegal advocates.

If true, then you're in for a rough ride in the coming months, so, sit back and enjoy the show.

The rest of us certainly will.

You just wrote a whole lot yet said nothing.
Look up the latest numbers and refute the 80%. Your 'spidey sense' supposition does nothing.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No one has a'splained how a Mexican baby citizen bankrupts our economy while a white baby citizen doesn't.

If you can't figure out the strain it puts on our social system and the money that entails you don't belong in this conversation.

Sounds like a good argument in support of a path to citizenship.

???????????????

If the problem with immigration is the strain it puts on our social system then maybe we ought to think about finding a legal status that allows people to do for themselves without fear. It's pretty easy.

Not easy or simple.

I'm referring to the point I clarified for you.
The idea is easy to understand!!!!
You people have comprehension issues.

 

[Kondor3]

...You just wrote a whole lot yet said nothing. Look up the latest numbers and refute the 80%. Your 'spidey sense' supposition does nothing.

Yep.

You hold to that position, in light of what's happening all around you.

I refute nothing... substantive polling of the American public - after Trump's announcement of candidacy on June 16, 2015 - does not yet exist., insofar as I am aware.

But it's a good bet that your precious 80% number - if it was ever real - has slipped - considerably - since whatever timeline that you're referring to.

And - of course - the only 'poll' that really matters a damn, is the one in which the entire American People participate - utilizing voting booths.

Enjoy your delusion while you can.

Your wake-up call appears to be en route.

 

[Kondor3]

...If the problem with immigration is the strain it puts on our social system then maybe we ought to think about finding a legal status that allows people to do for themselves without fear. It's pretty easy.

True.

We need to empower Illegal Aliens to return home under their own power, quickly, at their own expense, and to discourage them and others from coming again in future.

Make it impossible for them go get jobs or housing or cars or financial services or schooling or medical care or welfare or other goods, services or benefits, and rescind Sanctuary City status wherever it exists across the country, and put teeth into the law to rigorously punish those who give aid and comfort to them, and they will Self-Deport, on their own, without costing us a single dime in capture-and-detain-and-transport operations.

They may do so without fear, and it will be much easier than rounding them up and transporting them home.

It will have the added benefit of providing a grand entertainment, as these sneaks and invaders are pressured quickly to leave United States soil, as they deserve.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

...You just wrote a whole lot yet said nothing. Look up the latest numbers and refute the 80%. Your 'spidey sense' supposition does nothing.

Yep.

You hold to that position, in light of what's happening all around you.

I refute nothing... substantive polling of the American public - after Trump's announcement of candidacy on June 16, 2015 - does not yet exist., insofar as I am aware.

But it's a good bet that your precious 80% number - if it was ever real - has slipped - considerably - since whatever timeline that you're referring to.

And - of course - the only 'poll' that really matters a damn, is the one in which the entire American People participate - utilizing voting booths.

Enjoy your delusion while you can.

Your wake-up call appears to be en route.

It's more likely that the 25% of Repub voters who support Trump are part of the same 20% that already opposed legal status or a path to citizenship.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

...If the problem with immigration is the strain it puts on our social system then maybe we ought to think about finding a legal status that allows people to do for themselves without fear. It's pretty easy.

True.

We need to empower Illegal Aliens to return home under their own power, quickly, at their own expense, and to discourage them and others from coming again in future.

Make it impossible for them go get jobs or housing or cars or financial services or schooling or medical care or welfare or other goods, services or benefits, and rescind Sanctuary City status wherever it exists across the country, and put teeth into the law to rigorously punish those who give aid and comfort to them, and they will Self-Deport, on their own, without costing us a single dime in capture-and-detain-and-transport operations.

They may do so without fear, and it will be much easier than rounding them up and transporting them home.

It will have the added benefit of providing a grand entertainment, as these sneaks and invaders are pressured quickly to leave United States soil, as they deserve.

The idea of 'self deportation' was not only seen as not a solution when Romney used it but soundly defeated with him. In other words, your guys are starting with a losing proposition.

 

[PainefulTruth]

Is there anything a left loon can't make politically correct? This garbage is getting really old


Trump Defiant After Reporter Says 'Anchor Baby' Is an Offensive Term

At a town hall event in New Hampshire yesterday, a reporter challenged Donald Trump on his repeated use of the term "anchor baby."

The reporter asked Trump if he is aware that the term is "offensive" and "hurtful."

"You mean it's not politically correct and yet everybody uses it? Ya know what? Give me a different term," he shot back.

The reporter suggested he modify his language and instead say "American-born children of undocumented immigrants."

"You want me to say that? No, I'll use the word anchor baby," Trump said, as the reporter tried to interject again.

"Excuse me. I'll use the word anchor baby," he concluded before moving on to another question.




WATCH: Trump Defiant After Reporter Says 'Anchor Baby' Is an Offensive Term

 

[bedowin62]

the "path to citizenship' should absolutely start at THE END OF THE LINE OF PEOPLE CURRENTLY WAITING PATIENTLY to come in LEGALLY. Yea at the very back, behind others who ARENT HERE YET. The ones from ALL RACES AND ETHNICITIES

The Democrat Plan, no mattet how much these douchebags play the race card; is about PANDERING FOR VOTES mostly HISPANICS WHO ARE already here by virtue of sneaking across our southern border.

libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[PainefulTruth]

Is there anything a left loon can't make politically correct? This garbage is getting really old


Trump Defiant After Reporter Says 'Anchor Baby' Is an Offensive Term

At a town hall event in New Hampshire yesterday, a reporter challenged Donald Trump on his repeated use of the term "anchor baby."

The reporter asked Trump if he is aware that the term is "offensive" and "hurtful."

"You mean it's not politically correct and yet everybody uses it? Ya know what? Give me a different term," he shot back.

The reporter suggested he modify his language and instead say "American-born children of undocumented immigrants."

"You want me to say that? No, I'll use the word anchor baby," Trump said, as the reporter tried to interject again.

"Excuse me. I'll use the word anchor baby," he concluded before moving on to another question.




WATCH: Trump Defiant After Reporter Says 'Anchor Baby' Is an Offensive Term

Being so easily offended is offensive. The fact is the US is the only developed nation that allows anchor babies, and its got no legal or Constitutional authority. It just happens because the Democrats need a continual influx of ignorant voters.

 

[kaz]

No it isn't offensive and it is a great phrase for Republicans to campaign on.

The only people who are offended by it are left wing hacks who's votes you already own

 

[Kondor3]

...The idea of 'self deportation' was not only seen as not a solution when Romney used it but soundly defeated with him. In other words, your guys are starting with a losing proposition.

Yes, you Pro-Illegals types continue to play that worn-out old card.

What you're omitting here, is that the Romney flavor of Self-Deportation did not include sufficient barriers to remaining here.

Establish a more draconian range of barriers, and the concept suddenly becomes viable, and at an amazingly rapid pace.

Don't just establish more stringent barriers to employment.

But also establish additional barriers related to housing, cars and trucks, banking, money-wire-transfer services, schooling, medical care, etc, etc, etc.

Self-Deportation suddenly becomes both viable and popular.

There is Self-Deportation Lite - the Romney variety - and there is Self-Deportation Industrial Strength - which is the way to go.

You folks are really big on telling the American People why it is impractical to send back the 12,000,000 invaders.

It is fast becoming apparent that the American People are no longer listening to you as they once did.

Why?

Because there is somebody on the public stage now who is telling the American People that you're wrong.

And that 'somebody', in turn, is forcing his peers on that side of the aisle, to man-up, grow-a-pair, and say similar things.

What makes this possible is a weak, shallow field of candidates on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Oh, that, and 7 (by then, 8) years of Illegals-friendly governance; autocratic rule-by-Imperial-Decree (EO) in favor of Illegals, and public disgust with that.

You Pro-Illegals types cannot help yourselves; comfortable in your arrogant smugness that you've made it impossible to reverse this invasion's effects; you continue to push your luck, and you continue to push the American People, until they finally turn on you, in a meaningful, forceful and effective fashion.

We're now about to enter the Backlash Phase, and, this time around, you Pro-Illegal types are having a difficult time, convincing yourselves you're in trouble.

Far be it from any of us, to try to argue you out of your delusion.

The longer you believe it, the closer we get to overturning the existing state of affairs, which is more favorable to you rather than the Nation at-large.

So you just sit tight, and keep believing...

 

[Hutch Starskey]

...The idea of 'self deportation' was not only seen as not a solution when Romney used it but soundly defeated with him. In other words, your guys are starting with a losing proposition.

Yes, you Pro-Illegals types continue to play that worn-out old card.

What you're omitting here, is that the Romney flavor of Self-Deportation did not include sufficient barriers to remaining here.

Establish a more draconian range of barriers, and the concept suddenly becomes viable, and at an amazingly rapid pace.

Don't just establish more stringent barriers to employment.

But also establish additional barriers related to housing, cars and trucks, banking, money-wire-transfer services, schooling, medical care, etc, etc, etc.

Self-Deportation suddenly becomes both viable and popular.

There is Self-Deportation Lite - the Romney variety - and there is Self-Deportation Industrial Strength - which is the way to go.

You folks are really big on telling the American People why it is impractical to send back the 12,000,000 invaders.

It is fast becoming apparent that the American People are no longer listening to you as the once did.

Why?

Because there is somebody on the public stage now who is telling the American People that you're wrong.

And that 'somebody', in turn, is forcing his peers on that side of the aisle, to man-up, grow-a-pair, and say similar things.

What makes this possible is a weak, shallow field of candidates on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Oh, that, and 7 (by then, 8) years of Illegals-friendly governance; autocratic rule-by-Imperial-Decree (EO) forcing of Pro-Illegals developments, and public disgust.

You Pro-Illegals types cannot help yourselves; comfortable in your arrogant smugness that you've made it impossible to reverse this invasion's effects; you continue to push your luck, and you continue to push the American People, until they finally turn on you, in a meaningful, forceful and effective fashion.

We're now about to enter the Backlash Phase, and, this time around, you Pro-Illegal types are having a difficult time, convincing yourselves you're in trouble.

Far be it from any of us, to try to argue you out of your delusion.

The longer you believe it, the closer we get to overturning the existing state of affairs, which is more favorable to you rather than the Nation at-large.

So you just sit tight, and keep believing...

The idea that any or all of the requisite
' barriers' would or could be put in place and maintained is silly. It would require an entirely new gov't agency to regulate and enforce these measures nationwide on the scale necessary to effect the desired change. Not feasible at all.

 

[Kondor3]

...Not feasible at all.

Thank you for your feedback.

I think we'll try it, regardless, and find out whether you're right.

Stay tuned... some-such thing is far more likely to unfold than old-fashioned round-em-up-and-detain-em-and-transport-em operations on such a scale.

And... setting up such barriers is the only way to discourage FUTURE waves of invaders, anyway.

The details or mechanics of the thing can be accomplished relatively easily, in our present technologically advanced times.

All it takes is a little imagination and vision and competency.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

...Not feasible at all.

Thank you for your feedback.

I think we'll try it, regardless, and find out whether you're right.

Stay tuned... some-such thing is far more likely to unfold than old-fashioned round-em-up-and-detain-em-and-transport-em operations on such a scale.

And... setting up such barriers is the only way to discourage FUTURE waves of invaders, anyway.

The details or mechanics of the thing can be accomplished relatively easily, in our present technologically advanced times.

All it takes is a little imagination and vision and competency.

All it takes is a little imagination and vision and competency.

And a shitload of money and personnell to impliment and enforce.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

The term "Anchor Baby" is not offensive. What is offensive, is the way illegal aliens are using their babies to take advantage of a loophole in American law to stay in the US and collect government benefits.

The 14th Amendment is a loophole?

Trump was right, the 14th Amendment isn't a loophole that allows foreigners to drop their crotchfruit all over the country. Article 1 section 8 of the U.S Constitution says that only Congress has the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, not the president.

What does naturalization have to do with nullifying the "BORN" designation of the 14th Amendment. Are you people that easy to fool? The amendment says "born or naturalized".

born or naturalized. Not, came over illegally and plopped a baby.
the baby factory that plopped the baby was not born here or naturalized prior to the plopping, therefore it is acceptable to send that whore back to the country she came from.
as far as breaking up families? thats her decision to leave or take the vile spawn she produced, she is the one that chooses to break up her family.
Until they can speak English they are only a lump of parasitic cells, its ok to abort.

 

[Correll]

...Not feasible at all.

Thank you for your feedback.

I think we'll try it, regardless, and find out whether you're right.

Stay tuned... some-such thing is far more likely to unfold than old-fashioned round-em-up-and-detain-em-and-transport-em operations on such a scale.

And... setting up such barriers is the only way to discourage FUTURE waves of invaders, anyway.

The details or mechanics of the thing can be accomplished relatively easily, in our present technologically advanced times.

All it takes is a little imagination and vision and competency.

All it takes is a little imagination and vision and competency.

And a shitload of money and personnell to impliment and enforce.

It is already taking a shitload of money and personnel to police and care for the illegals already here.

As we ship them back, we will be saving money with every illegal we no longer have here.

 

[Kondor3]

...And a shitload of money and personnell to impliment and enforce.

1. e-Verify already exists.

2. we merely expand upon that concept

3. enforcement organisms already exist, suitable to task