U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-10-2011, 10:02 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,029,168 times
Reputation: 601

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
According to the 1930 census he was an "AL" for which IBM explains to you: as an ¨alien¨ (which doesn´t mean illegal alien at that time).

That would really screw up the claim of "illegal alien", wouldn't it.

My statement is directly from the OP link. That doesn't make my statement incorrect, it merely means you have information that may make my point even more so, especially if you found him on a 1920's census, or if you are able to show that he came with papers.
But ¨AL¨ means an alien that hasn´t filed ¨First Papers¨ (intent to naturalize), an interesting fact after being present in the United States for a length time. I have much more than the 1920 Census (with her Grandparents married and together at that point), including WWI Draft Cards, Department of Labor certificates, and Death Certificates. Governor Martinez also doesn´t appear to know the correct story of why her father was raised by his Aunts, not his parents.

I have the exact detail of whether her paternal Grandparents naturalized...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-11-2011, 07:52 AM
 
403 posts, read 281,640 times
Reputation: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
That doesn't make her a hypocrite. Just because she gained citizenship from her grandparent's illegal entry and the birth of her parents that should play no role in her opinion that birthright citizenship gained in this manner is not what the intention of the 14th was. It means she is a sensible, patriotic American, not a hypocrite.

ORLY? So if an 'anchor baby' supports birthright citizenship they should be shipped back to whatever place their parents came from, but if they don't support birthright citizenship then that makes them a patriotic American? Gotcha.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2011, 08:05 AM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,959,787 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viridian Ideals View Post
ORLY? So if an 'anchor baby' supports birthright citizenship they should be shipped back to whatever place their parents came from, but if they don't support birthright citizenship then that makes them a patriotic American? Gotcha.
We are not talking first generation here. we are talking an event that happened 80+ years ago.
That said how is it wrong for someone to recognize that illegal behavior is wrong? That any form of bad behavior is wrong? I have german blood. So if I recognize that the holocaust was wrong I am a hypocrit? Ok how about if I say Submarines attacking civilian ships is wrong? The germans did these things.
What if my grandfather was a sailor on a Uboat? Im still wrong for condemning these actions?
The Kennedy's made a fortune from bootleg whiskey. made a ton of money from all sorts of illegal activities. So if a Kennedy says organized crime is wrong they are wrong?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2011, 08:17 AM
 
403 posts, read 281,640 times
Reputation: 60
I'm not advocating that anyone is a hypocrite.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2011, 08:37 AM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,949,633 times
Reputation: 22179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viridian Ideals View Post
ORLY? So if an 'anchor baby' supports birthright citizenship they should be shipped back to whatever place their parents came from, but if they don't support birthright citizenship then that makes them a patriotic American? Gotcha.
The parents of the anchor babies most definitely should be shipped back, but if they chose to abandon their children, and a large number of them claim they would, then they are terrible parents but the anchor babies in that case could stay, but if the parents are at all decent, they would want to take their children home with them when they go.

That means the fate of the anchor babies would be up to their parents if they are minors, if they are over 18, they themselves would have to decide if their family means more to them than money or if the money matters most.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2011, 10:46 AM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,719,222 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
But ¨AL¨ means an alien that hasn´t filed ¨First Papers¨ (intent to naturalize), an interesting fact after being present in the United States for a length time. I have much more than the 1920 Census (with her Grandparents married and together at that point), including WWI Draft Cards, Department of Labor certificates, and Death Certificates. Governor Martinez also doesn´t appear to know the correct story of why her father was raised by his Aunts, not his parents.

I have the exact detail of whether her paternal Grandparents naturalized...
Whether he/they "naturalized" matters not, the claim is that he/they are "illegal aliens" by those advocating for granting DL's to illegal aliens and claiming that Martinez's grandfather/grandparents were illegal aliens. It's good you have found them on the 1920's census (before the requirement of needing documentation to enter the USA, thus he/they would/could not be "illegally aliens"). As for the Governor, everything I have read that she has said is that she was aware that her grandparents came here without documentation (which she seems to be rather correct on), she has never said they came here illegally (this is said/assumed/interpreted by those advocates for DL's to illegals to place her in a box of hypocrisy).Thanks for bolstering my original comment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2011, 11:26 AM
 
Location: Tempe, Az
1,421 posts, read 1,242,262 times
Reputation: 410
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viridian Ideals View Post
ORLY? So if an 'anchor baby' supports birthright citizenship they should be shipped back to whatever place their parents came from, but if they don't support birthright citizenship then that makes them a patriotic American? Gotcha.
It dont count in Martinezs case. Like me: she AN her parents were born HERE. Besides: Im cool with taking away birthright for anchors with BOTH parents illegal if the anchors are kids. If Martinez was 18 or older when the new law passd; she would still be a US citizne. But her age 16 borther or sister, if she had one would have to leave the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2011, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,029,168 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
We are not talking first generation here. we are talking an event that happened 80+ years ago. That said how is it wrong for someone to recognize that illegal behavior is wrong? That any form of bad behavior is wrong?...
Actually I am going to bring up the point of the most documented area to Governor Martinez's ancestry. It is no different from any current scenario. Behaviors and their causes, as well as the principles against them, should stay relatively static over what really amounts to a short matter of time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
...I have german blood. So if I recognize that the holocaust was wrong I am a hypocrit? Ok how about if I say Submarines attacking civilian ships is wrong? The germans did these things. What if my grandfather was a sailor on a Uboat? Im still wrong for condemning these actions?...
Or being an American (and prior servicemember) to say that the United States dropping not just one, but two atomic bombs, on a largely civilian population was wrong?...

Except a majority of Americans don't think of it like that. They'll say it was revenge for Pearl Harbor (a military target, with a failed ultimatum notice) or that it would save American lives in an invasion. But we remain the only country to use an atomic bomb on another.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2011, 01:24 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,959,787 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Actually I am going to bring up the point of the most documented area to Governor Martinez's ancestry. It is no different from any current scenario. Behaviors and their causes, as well as the principles against them, should stay relatively static over what really amounts to a short matter of time.



Or being an American (and prior servicemember) to say that the United States dropping not just one, but two atomic bombs, on a largely civilian population was wrong?...

Except a majority of Americans don't think of it like that. They'll say it was revenge for Pearl Harbor (a military target, with a failed ultimatum notice) or that it would save American lives in an invasion. But we remain the only country to use an atomic bomb on another.
So as a veteran I will say to target civilians is wrong. In the day that it was done it was an accepted practice initiated by the axis powers. Does it make it right? NO. To say that it wouldnt have saved American lives would be less than accurate to say the least given what we experienced up and to that point in the war. Could we have accepted a conditional surrender which the enemy found acceptable? Sure. Would they have offered the same? NO
The principle is not the same.
The needs of the nation and the dynamics of the nation were completely different 80 years ago.
Using the WWII analogy. 70 years ago we would launch 50 or more bombers to hit a single target. The reason was our ability to hit the target was so poor we saturated the target.
The dynamics have changed. We can noy pick a window to drop a single bomb through to hit a target.
Should we continue the practice because it worked back then? Or should we adapt modify our approach to meet todays technology and needs?
Immigration is no different. The needs and dynamics have changed.
We no longer have a vast shortage of manual labor or unskilled workers. We certainly produce enough.
This individual has called out that illegal immigration is wrong. Those on the pro-side are condemning this because they disagree. In effect claiming the individual is either a hypocrite or a traitor to the race or cause. I say neither is true.I say the individual recognizes that times and needs have changed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2011, 04:44 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,029,168 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
So as a veteran I will say to target civilians is wrong. In the day that it was done it was an accepted practice initiated by the axis powers. Does it make it right? NO. To say that it wouldnt have saved American lives would be less than accurate to say the least given what we experienced up and to that point in the war...
Today in particular is relevant for your words. Are you saying we were (and currently are) driven to respond in a more barbaric fashion as our enemies had? That it was more of an act of revenge?

My Grandfather (one-half German heritage) was a Crew Chief of a B-17 bomber in Europe. An avid hunter before the war, once he came back he would no longer shoot fowl (from being shot at in the air, he didn´t want to put a bird through that same experience afterward). I fully believe he had PTSD from the war, but not from anything other than what was done to him.

War, any war, is hell, to which we are often reminded on this planet...

It is also a natural response to flee from that devastation or perceived threat, causing most of the mass migrations we have seen through time...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
...Immigration is no different. The needs and dynamics have changed. We no longer have a vast shortage of manual labor or unskilled workers. We certainly produce enough...
I´m of the mind that we need to increase U.S. production (or source our simple wares from other close-by locations) of goods. Automation will prevent that from increasing very many jobs, but we need to do what we can (bringing in workers if we cannot motivate our own populace to do it). Recently there was a story of a guy in the U.S. able to make and sell chopsticks to China.

We probably also want to focus on getting off oil as our primary fuel for automobiles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
...This individual has called out that illegal immigration is wrong. Those on the pro-side are condemning this because they disagree. In effect claiming the individual is either a hypocrite or a traitor to the race or cause. I say neither is true.I say the individual recognizes that times and needs have changed.
Governor Martinez switched from Democrat to Republican some years back, I think mostly to provide a vehicle for political potential. It isn´t always based on party (New Mexico has another past Republican ex-governor wanting a more open immigration policy), but there is a good many fear tactics she is relying on from Conservatives. Governor Martinez is trying to change New Mexico driver´s license policy (unsuccessfully so far) for political reasons, not a practical basis.

Back on topic, Susana Martinez´s most known ancestry is that she had a Great Grandfather (General Toribio Ortega) that was a part of the Mexican Revolution. Prior to his death in 1914, his wife (Fermina Juárez Ortega) moved herself and their young children (including Susana´s Grandmother Francisca) to El Paso to get away from the conflict (any current ironies?). Over 600,000 other Mexicans did too (not all to El Paso of course), meaning that they also were not ¨illegal¨ at the time (or later).

Her Grandfather, Adolfo Rodriguez Martínez, came later in 1917 (declaring he didn´t have intent to immigrate), filling out two WWI Draft Cards that both declared himself to be an ¨Alien¨ (and thus not to be considered for a military draft), even though he was working as a machinist for a U.S. railroad (with both him and his wife Fracisca as far back East as Wilmington, Delaware for at least a couple years). It was rather the death of Francisca in 1934 that had Susanna´s father (born in 1932) be raised by his Aunt´s than Adolfo ¨abandoning¨ the family.

Both paternal Grandparents have apparently valid Social Security numbers on their Death Certificates, although her Great Grandmother Fermina Juárez Ortega also is marked with a number, but remaining to be a citizen of Mexico (as annotated on her Death Certificate). Yes, it´s a moot point, but I now rightfully feel I have a better understanding of Susana´s ancestry than she does.

Oh, Ruben Navarette refutes any ancestral relationship to her, and the link doesn´t appear to pan out between them (Susana had a Great Aunt Juanita Ortega, that married a Pablo Navarrete in San Diego). Susana´s maternal lines ultimately look to be mostly from Mexico, although it is from even earlier migrations. She can perhaps be relieved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top