U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
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 02-23-2013, 10:22 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,011,547 times
Reputation: 601

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
Some of us are not well versed in any of the types of visas whether it be the VWP or your I-601...
Visas are ultimately issued by the Department of State (and a waiver of a visa would not be one). An I-601 is the form for a process from USCIS, there are "I" (for being related to Immigration) and "N" (for being related to Naturalization) forms there. It is notable for the specific connection to illegal immigration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
...Any immigrant here illegally should not be able to adjust their status within our borders and I don't care what their ethnicity or nationality is. Have I finally made myself clear to you?..
It's been done for years, even before Obama became President. As long as the person* was granted entry (I was about to say "inspected", but that isn't true anymore) to the United States (the opposite of "Entry Without Inspection", or EWI), they can attempt to adjust status within the United States. That has been made much more complex by "The Matter of Quilantan" (sorry, it's a PDF), where the person* is now just required to prove they were "admitted" by an Immigration Officer.

Spouses of Active Duty servicemembers can also "Parole In Place" (PIP) no matter how they entered the United States. "PIP" and "The Matter of Quilantan" happened during the Obama administration, but do not rationally relate to being a directive from him. Obama did specifically change that K-3/K-4 visa holders with less than two years of marriage would not be removed without arbitration if their spouse/sponsor died.

* - The connotation I use is that the "person" has married or is married to a U.S. citizen when they adjust status, although it may not necessarily be so in all cases...

Is that more clear?...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
...It isn't ethnocentricism to want a particular nationality added to a "legal" program. You're comparing apples to oranges here. Ethnocentricism is where you put your ethnic group above our laws and desire your ethnic group to be rewarded for breaking them and call anyone who disagrees with you a racist among other unwarrented labels.
Of course you are saying "you" and "your" in the third person? "Ethnocentrism" means centering on a specific ethnicity. It does not infer law-breaking or any other behavior within the term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-24-2013, 06:40 AM
 
31,488 posts, read 14,573,470 times
Reputation: 8354
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Visas are ultimately issued by the Department of State (and a waiver of a visa would not be one). An I-601 is the form for a process from USCIS, there are "I" (for being related to Immigration) and "N" (for being related to Naturalization) forms there. It is notable for the specific connection to illegal immigration.



It's been done for years, even before Obama became President. As long as the person* was granted entry (I was about to say "inspected", but that isn't true anymore) to the United States (the opposite of "Entry Without Inspection", or EWI), they can attempt to adjust status within the United States. That has been made much more complex by "The Matter of Quilantan" (sorry, it's a PDF), where the person* is now just required to prove they were "admitted" by an Immigration Officer.

Spouses of Active Duty servicemembers can also "Parole In Place" (PIP) no matter how they entered the United States. "PIP" and "The Matter of Quilantan" happened during the Obama administration, but do not rationally relate to being a directive from him. Obama did specifically change that K-3/K-4 visa holders with less than two years of marriage would not be removed without arbitration if their spouse/sponsor died.

* - The connotation I use is that the "person" has married or is married to a U.S. citizen when they adjust status, although it may not necessarily be so in all cases...

Is that more clear?...



Of course you are saying "you" and "your" in the third person? "Ethnocentrism" means centering on a specific ethnicity. It does not infer law-breaking or any other behavior within the term.
How many times do I have to repeat that I personally don't think that anyone who has been in our country illegally at any point should not be able adjust their status within our borders before you stop repeating the same things over and over that are irrelevant to MY particular VIEWS?

As for the word ethnocentricism the dictionary defines it this way: the belief in the inherent superiority of one's own ethnic group or culture. Does Makulski think that the Poles are superior by advocating that Poland be a part of the VWP? I don't think so! How do you know that she isn't advocating for other countries that are not a part of the VWP currently as well?

However, Hispanics who think their ethnic group should be above our immigration laws and rewarded for breaking them indicates that they think they are superior to others in regards to our laws. I note you have never acknowledged that but instead you grasp at straws about Makulski when she isn't advocating for the Poles to be above our laws.

I am done with this discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,011,547 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
How many times do I have to repeat that I personally don't think that anyone who has been in our country illegally at any point should not be able adjust their status within our borders before you stop repeating the same things over and over that are irrelevant to MY particular VIEWS?...
It's just important to note that former or current illegal aliens, usually because they are married to U.S. citizens, have been adjusting their status both within and outside the country for years. And it all has been done under the law. "The Matter of Quilantan" came through from an immigration appeals board, ruling that those allowed through a Port of Entry could adjust status within the boundaries of the United States just as if they had entered under a visa and overstayed.

It hasn't been Mexicans coming from Visa Waiver Program countries fraudulently, and allowed to adjust status here, without ever needing a visa...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
...As for the word ethnocentricism the dictionary defines it this way: the belief in the inherent superiority of one's own ethnic group or culture. Does Makulski think that the Poles are superior by advocating that Poland be a part of the VWP? I don't think so! How do you know that she isn't advocating for other countries that are not a part of the VWP currently as well?

However, Hispanics who think their ethnic group should be above our immigration laws and rewarded for breaking them indicates that they think they are superior to others in regards to our laws. I note you have never acknowledged that but instead you grasp at straws about Makulski when she isn't advocating for the Poles to be above our laws...
As has been pointed out before, I'm not Hispanic. If Poland is added to Visa Waiver Program, it covers all of the nationalities of my ancestors for where they immigrated from. But there doesn't seem to be anyone else here advocating changes to the VWP to "make it harder for foreign people to visit America" like I am.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 02:31 PM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,711,508 times
Reputation: 22158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
Some of us are not well versed in any of the types of visas whether it be the VWP or your I-601. Any immigrant here illegally should not be able to adjust their status within our borders and I don't care what their ethnicity or nationality is. Have I finally made myself clear to you?

It isn't ethnocentricism to want a particular nationality added to a "legal" program. You're comparing apples to oranges here. Ethnocentricism is where you put your ethnic group above our laws and desire your ethnic group to be rewarded for breaking them and call anyone who disagrees with you a racist among other unwarrented labels.
That needs to be part of the reform of immigration. They have to stop rewarding those who break the laws because what's going on is making the whole process extremely unfair. We're one of the only nations in the world that tries to bring in more unskilled and illiterate populations than to bring in qualified and capable types of immigrants.
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