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.
It seems some of you don't know what the definition of an "anchor baby" is. I got this definition from fAIR.
Quote:
The term “anchor baby” may be unfamiliar to most Americans but it succinctly describes a troubling aspect of American immigration. An anchor baby is defined as an offspring of an illegal immigrant or other non-citizen, who under current legal interpretation becomes a United States citizen at birth.
You still don't get my point do you? Michelle Malkin is against giving citizenship to babies born to temporary visa holders, YET she benefited from the same thing. She's a hypocrite that's all.
My great grandfather's brother provoked a fight in a bar in San Francisco in the 1870's. No question about it, according to witnesses, he started it. He was stabbed and killed on the spot by the guy he'd assaulted.
Today, I find my self solidly AGAINST people who provoke fights in bars. Even though one of "my people" did it, years ago, I'm now I'm coming out against it. If that means that I'm a 'hypocrite', then sign me up on the hypocrite list...
I know an even BIGGER hypocrite...my wife's first cousin, whose mother's family was from Mexico. After one of their frequent trips down to "see family", taking along the oldsters, he'd often tell of coming back across the border onto the "smooth, well maintained highways" of California and joking "Thank GOD, we lost THIS"....(i.e., Mexico 'lost' California)
Was he a 'hypocritical Mexican-American'? Sounds like he was, by your definition. To ME, he was just a guy born in the US, who liked living in the US, and didn't see it as any 'disloyalty' to his cousins in Mexico. He liked THEM, but he preferred the highways up HERE.
My great grandfather's brother provoked a fight in a bar in San Francisco in the 1870's. No question about it, acvcording to witnesses, he started it. He was killed on the spot bt the guy he'd assaulted.
Today, I find my self solidly AGAINST people who provoke fights in bars. One of "my people" did it, years ago, but now I'm coming out against it. If that means I'm a 'hypocrite', then sign me up on the hypocrite list...
I know an even BIGGER hypocrite...my wife's first cousin, whose mother's family wasw from Mexico. After one of their frequent trips down to "see family", taking along the oldsters, he'd often tell of coming back across the border onto the "smooth, well maintained highways" of California and saying "Thank GOD, we lost THIS"....(i.e., Mexico 'lost' California)
Was he a 'hypocritical Mexican-American'? Sounds like he was, by your definition. To ME, he was just a guy born in the US, who liked living in the US, and didn't see it as any 'disloyalty' to his cousins in Mexico. He liked THEM, but he preferred the highways up HERE.
Hypocrisy? Maybe....
Apples and oranges.... how did you benefit from that bar fight your great grandfather got in? As for your other story, i just didn't get it. Went right over my head.
Her parents came here on a work visa and gave birth to her while they were still on the work visa. In her definition..not mine, she's qualifies as an "anchor baby".
I am a staunch opponent of birthright citizenship, and do not believe anyone born in this country to parents who are not citizens should be considered a U.S. citizen. However, to attempt to assign the label of “anchor baby” to Michelle Malkin on the basis of her parents’ legal work status in this country is disingenuous; particularly coming from someone who ‘claims’ to abhor such a derogatory label.
Unless you are privy to the circumstances of her birth; or the status of her parents’ immigration case before, during, or after her birth; you are not in a position to judge. As far as we know, it’s possible her parents were granted citizenship a few days prior to her birth.
Again; if you can provide ‘credible’ info delineating the immigration process of her parents; I will respectfully stand corrected. I searched for info, and found none. Perhaps you will have more success.
My great grandfather's brother provoked a fight in a bar in San Francisco in the 1870's. No question about it, according to witnesses, he started it. He was stabbed and killed on the spot by the guy he'd assaulted.
Today, I find my self solidly AGAINST people who provoke fights in bars. Even though one of "my people" did it, years ago, I'm now I'm coming out against it. If that means that I'm a 'hypocrite', then sign me up on the hypocrite list...
I know an even BIGGER hypocrite...my wife's first cousin, whose mother's family was from Mexico. After one of their frequent trips down to "see family", taking along the oldsters, he'd often tell of coming back across the border onto the "smooth, well maintained highways" of California and joking "Thank GOD, we lost THIS"....(i.e., Mexico 'lost' California)
Was he a 'hypocritical Mexican-American'? Sounds like he was, by your definition. To ME, he was just a guy born in the US, who liked living in the US, and didn't see it as any 'disloyalty' to his cousins in Mexico. He liked THEM, but he preferred the highways up HERE.
Hypocrisy? Maybe....
Along the same vein; there are many people who were amnestied back in the 80’s who vehemently oppose our current illegal alien invasion. Perhaps they ‘see’ something detrimental in massive illegal immigration not visible during that time.
Along the same vein; there are many people who were amnestied back in the 80’s who vehemently oppose our current illegal alien invasion. Perhaps they ‘see’ something detrimental in massive illegal immigration not visible during that time.
Bunch of hypocrites!! I know a number of these 'turncoats' myself. Next time I see one I'll use your post to 'get on their case'!! WHO do these people think they ARE, anyway???
Memo to the pro illegal alien crowd: there was that 'small' thing called amnesty back in 1986---------as far as I am concerned, those folks are grandfathered in as now being here legally assuming they did the paperwork. And their children are US citizens by default.
In other words: even if both of Ms Malkin's parents were here illegally when she was born ca. 1971----------who cares??
With one or two possible exceptions: all of us anti illegal types are OK with putative Anchor Babies born 1986 or prior.
Good call, but don't expect anyone to give up an inch.
Redirect, redirect, redirect.
By the way, this isn't related, but did any of them ever comment on that whole Shawna Forde thing?
I didn't keep up with that thread, but as I said in the beginning of it -- if she were lying she needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. That is the type of behavior that makes it so difficult for real rape victims to get help from the police.
Since it looks like she lied --- I hope that she gets arrested for making a false police report (if she even did contact the police). At the very least I hope Karma bites her on the azz.
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.
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.
