Thread: Question on Anchor babies

Chris, i.e. Greg?, is in and out like a freakin jackrabbit. Actually, now that I think about it, he reminds me more of that old non-PC cartoon, SPEEDY GONZALES! Won't see THAT one showing on Cartoon Network anytime soon.

Since Michelle's parents adjusted their status to legal resident I don't see a problem.

However children born to guest workers should not be automatic citizens, they should have the same status as their parents. The stupid US government however gives them citizenship and this actually causes many headaches for guest workers who don't want their children to have it.

I saw some postings on immigration portal.com where Indian H1B workers who moved back to India with their US born child could not get Indian citizenship for their child! The US does not allow them to revoke the US citizenship of their children born here! And India does not allow dual citizenship, to the kid is stuck with US citizenship against everyones wishes!! Now that is what I would call a Facist policy by the US!

I would have no problem with ALberto Gonzalez if his parents came here illegally and he ended up in this position as AG. I don't see it as his fault.

However if he is unable to stand up for what is right from wrong, just because his parents did it, then I find that to be an unacceptable stand for our AG.

If a person's parents drove without a driver's license and the person grew up and became a police officer, I would expect him to be able to separate his love and forgiveness for his parents mistake, and to understand the importance of enforcing the law that people must have a drivers license. If he cannot do that and he pulls people over who do not have drivers licenses and lets them go then he has no business being a police officer. He should have been something else.

The same principle applies to AG Gonzalez, but to an even greater degree because of the consequences to our country.

The problem with anchor babies is that they are being used as pawns. Illegals bear these children on US soil as that very "Anchor" to gain "rights" that they are not otherwise entitled to. It isn't the fault of the children, and it really is a difficult issue. If congress were to withdraw automatic citizenship it would probably cut the birthrate though.

This issue about Michelle Malkin being an "anchor baby" is all over the liberal/OBL blogospere over the past month or so. Just more smoke from those who can't make a legitimate argument.

Originally Posted by JadedBaztard

Actually, now that I think about it, he reminds me more of that old non-PC cartoon, SPEEDY GONZALES! Won't see THAT one showing on Cartoon Network anytime soon.

I saw a newer Looney Tunes Christmas special last December, I'm pretty sure it was on the Cartoon Network.. but in any case the main character was the loathesome penny-pinching Scrooge McDuck - a huge store owner who intended to make his workers show up on Christmas day, and one of his numerous employees was a Mexican toy assembler.. played by none other than Speedy Gonzales. It was only a bit-part, but I thought the scene was a pretty amusing jab

Kate, I think your avatar is cute. I have a 16 pound male cat who sleeps like that.

Like this Liz?

[img]
Funny%20jokes,%20pictures,%20and%20videos[/img]

I agree with the guy that started this thread..She's indeed an anchor baby that she speak out against.

Her parent came as a visitor but something tells me they planned to make sure the baby would be american instead of asian..This is illegal.

If the parents were here LEGALLY then the 'Anchor Baby' tag does NOT apply.

Personally, I think the 14th Amendment should have been repealed as soon as the last documented slave died.

No more babies of slaves, no more need for the amendment.