June 28, 2007. A very important date in American History
 

June 28, 2007 a very important date in American History.

Were we all sleeping? I guess so. It just hit me today how important yesterday was in American history. Really. Yesterday was a red letter day.
Two things happened yesterday that have very significant impact on our nation.

First, The Senate failed to pass the immigrant reform bill. Now I will make no judgments on the merits of the bill or if the killing of the bill was right or not, but this bill was a sea change in the way America deals with Illegal immigration. While the bill didn’t pass, it is likely that failure to pass the bill will actually also lead to major changes in how America deals with illegal immigration.

While this first item has a tremendous impact on the Future of America, something else happened yesterday that is just as momentous but it looks backwards at Americas past.

Yesterday the US Supreme Court reversed some 30 years of practice based on the historic Supreme Court decision Brown vs. The Board of Education. The court determined that a school district cannot use race as a determining factor on who gets to attend a certain school. For good or ill, this has effectively ended an Era. Brown vs. Board was an historic ruling that held firm control over American Education for a generation.


And yesterday passed mostly around here in arguments about movies and speculation on the location of KHz’s retirement home. Interesting.

Dude, Yesterday was JUNE 28th! :)

my personal spell/fact check!

thanks ive corrected....good grief.

Still says July 28th...:D:D.... HAW>...

Didn't know you were a Prophet... :hmmm...

sometimes i am more stupid than even myself.

Worth bumping, Ferd!

Now, they need to talk to Ron Paul about his Amendment on illegal immigration. Did you see my thread? :D

Uh, yeah, I see that. :killinme

regardless... of the date..

The Dem's were a'screamin' yesterday!!

Could be the catalyst for a Democratic President tho...

I guess this makes me a Moran.

on the immagration thing, I think the republican can hand this around the dems neck. 85% of Americans opposed that bill and all the major Dems supported it.

the other one is too close to call. However, the noted Juan Williams interviewed Thurgood Marshall on the subject and Juan says the decision was a good one.

Could be a Republican would come up with something the people want. :D Ron Paul already has a great option.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...0&postcount=10

Wow for Juan!

Ferd,

all of that is deeper than I care to get on here. I don't mind discussing spiritual things in depth. But as far as political things - well, I come for the fellowship more than anything else. So it's ok with me that we were discussing movies, etc.

Maybe that makes me shallow, but some days..................... I guess I just don't care. Isn't that awful of me. :haloplug

Margie, I understand your feelings and dont think you are "undeep" at all.

it is just that there are a very few days in a given year that really matter. Yesterday was one of them.... and nobody (me includedd) even really noticed.

You're right, Ferd. Sometimes I will notice that something significant has happened that will no doubt change the course of history, but I don't usually spend alot of time discussing it just because it's already done and there's nothing I can or could have done about it. Maybe I should rethink that. Maybe I should discuss those things.

But, hey, today's my birthday. So I'm lettin' somebody carry the weight of the world on their shoulders for today. :)

well, have a very happy birthday.

FERD!!!! You have to admit that Ron Paul's Amendment, I referenced above, is a workable solution to part of the illegal immigration problem.

I dare you to tell me it isn't!!! Hehehehhehe!

Not workable and flies in the face of 230 plus years of American tradtion and law.

that is not the answer. we need rational immagration based on law. Not kneejerk reactions bound by the unbendable force of constitutional decree.

plus, you would never get that to pass with a 2/3 majority.

We shall see. I don't think any person that is illegal should be able to legalize their children here. It would stop the flow of a lot of things.

LOL! it would stop nothing. they come here because their kids are hungry and they want to feed them. they dont care about what is legal.

So long as we dont deal with the reasons they come here and restrict the methods by which they get here, they will come.

if that were to pass, you could end up sending a 20 year old nearly english only person who has NEVER once been to any country other than the USA back to some third world nation to live in a culture they have never experienced....because THEIR PARENTS broke the law.

we dont hold one person responsible for other peoples actions.

FERD! They do come here to make their children legal!!! They can get visas, green cards. They just can't be legal. That isn't stopping them from working and eating.

lets just be clear. yes they come here to have "anchor babies" but if they could not have "anchor babies" and there were still reasons for them to come, and ways to get here, they would still come.


AND lets also be really articulate about this.

You are willing to punish one person for the transgressions of another.

No, Ferd. I want them to come here legally.

Me too. however sans rational immagraiton law, that is not going to happen.

creating an amendment to the constitution that deals only with the children of law breakers, is neither rationoal immagration law, nor is it in the best traditions of the American Spirit.

and you can say you want them to come here legally... and I believe you...but when you are punishing innocent children of law breakers you are punishing innocent children...


PO, under current law, an illegal immagrent CAN be sent home with their American child. That child on their 18th birthday can come back to America as a citizen.

It is an excellent piece of legislation PO... it is just that the wrong person submitted it.

The need to not be American citizens in the first place. They are coming here not wanting to be loyal to this country. That is what I don't like.

The immigrants in times past came here desiring to become what this country represented.

The aliens don't want that.

And excuse me for calling them immigrants because an immigrant wants to align themselves with the ideals of the country they are immigrating to and the larger percentage do not.

I am sick of seeing Mexico's flag flying around here!!!

Yes, I thought it would cover a myriad of situations just with that piece of legislation.

If John Cornin or Pete Sessions, or Duncan Hunter (some of my absolute favorites) submitted it, it would still be bad legislation.

I have no problem with calling these law breakers illegal aliens. that is an accurate discription.

you are right in part about some....but we have LEGAL immagrents from all over the world that do not want to be American... they just want the benifit...that isnt an illegal alien issue. that is an immagrent issue.

you are STILL suggesting we punish the innocent children of law breakers. that is a very bad idea.

Ferd,
If the parents are not obeying the law, than why should we reward the children for that. It just teaches them to be dishonest when they grow up.

if a man or woman has hungry children that they cannot feed, and they know that getting to America will aford them the ability to feed their kids, they will come. period.


the problem isnt anchor babies.

the problem is
1. Businesses find the benifit of working illegal aliens better than the risk of being caught. (this needs to change)
2. Politicians use immagration law as a ploy to get votes. (they vote to limit the number of legal immagrants when they should be raising those numbers to match the actual need)
3. our boarders are protected just enough to still make it easy for illegal aliens to get here but tuff enough that they require very bad men to help them. (we need to seal the souther boarder, then look at the northern one)


we need RATIONAL policy that first CONTROLLS ACCESS, then and only then, we need to scientifically identify the acutal number of LEGAL IMMAGRANTS needed and allow a simple process to bring them in.

I'm so glad it was defeated! Too bad the President was on the wrong side of this bill. But it's not surprising considering he's been for loosening the borders for a while now. Immigration is what started my bitterness against this administration.

I'm from AZ and unfortunately McCain is my Senator -though I didn't vote for him and will never vote for him. A local radio show here said this morning that McCain was speaking on the Senate floor yesterday and said there would be violence in the streets if the bill wasn't passed.

I haven't verified it, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did say that. McCain, the President and others have done everything and said everything to try to force this amnesty bill down our throats. Thankfully it didn't work.

And about the violence in the streets . . . it's a hot, sunny day here in the big PHX, and as of yet I don't see any violence. Too hot! :lol

If a 5 year old has a dad that robbed banks would you make the same arguement for sending that kid to jail?

PO, we do not punish children for the sins of their fathers....or mothers.


you are making a very good argument for slavery reperations....(I think that is a very bad idea too)

this was a bad bill for a LOT of reasons. amnesty being only one.

The rational behind the amendment is to take away a big factor in them coming here - the anchor babies. I believe that is the biggest factor for them.

We have to whittle away at every incentive, but you are right - a whole lot more to the issue.

Personally, here, I see Mexican men fathering children on both sides of the border and it gripes me to no end. I guess, in a way, it is a little satisfaction to me that they can't make the babies legal - no matter how many they want to father.

Ferd,
It isn't punishing the children, IMO. It is stopping the nonsense of Mexicans coming here, easily, to become American citizens for the wrong reasons. They don't give a hang about it. Yes, for food, but not for what we want them here for.

Don't move in here and hang your flag on the front porch.

The rational is twisted. it hurts the kids not the parents.

Now if you want to pass a law that removes the "anchor" and allows a state to deport the family, then allow the child to return to America as a legal adult citizen, we can talk.


but I dont believe the "ancor baby" is the big factor. the come here for money. you take away that money they will not stay.

by taking away the money, I mean allow more legal immagration, and severly punish businesses that hire illegals.

So we continue to give them amnesty by default!!

I don't see it that way. The Mexican government needs to get on board and get their country going on something more than drugs.

I read an article about some Mexican women that were starting a business making cactus jelly. They needed some capital and I think Mexico needs to step up to the plate and look at what they could do with their own people's skills in the way of crafts, etc, much like Africa has been doing.

clearly Mexico has failed its people. and reguardless of how you see it, when you take away the right of a person born in Amercia from being an American citizen, because of the law breaking of their parents, you are punishing the baby for the sins of their parents...

and you are going against 230 years of American tradition AND established Constitutional law.

We need to deal with the issue. NOT deal with the innocent children of the issue.