Huckabee for President

[Cryozombie]

Is anyone among us going to stand up and say, "You know what, before I am an American, I am a _____ " - Fill in the blank, with whatever will you. If this man is so cavalier with Citizenship today of a group; what is there to prevent him from being cavalier with your Citizenship tomorrow?

Yes Sir. Before I am an American I am a Human Being. My responsibilites as Such come before being an American.

And his statement isn't that Untrue. If an Undocumented alien comes here and is pregnant, but leaves and has the child elsewhere, it is NOT a citizen. So in my opinion, It very much is first the child of their parent, secondly a citizen of whereever its from.

And in fact, Id say most of us would agree that applies to us as well... If forced to choose: Your Parents or your Country, I bet most of us would pick our parents.

 

[michaeledward]

Yes Sir. Before I am an American I am a Human Being. My responsibilites as Such come before being an American.

And his statement isn't that Untrue. If an Undocumented alien comes here and is pregnant, but leaves and has the child elsewhere, it is NOT a citizen. So in my opinion, It very much is first the child of their parent, secondly a citizen of whereever its from.

And in fact, Id say most of us would agree that applies to us as well... If forced to choose: Your Parents or your Country, I bet most of us would pick our parents.

Any person born in the continental boundaries of the United States, or on any of our forward deployed military basees is a "Natural Born Citizen". The status of the parents is irrelevant on this point.

Governor Huckabee stated he approves of sending American Citizen, by force, if necessary out of the country. That seems to be a violation of human rights, and the rights of American Citizens.

 

[Cryozombie]

Governor Huckabee stated he approves of sending American Citizen, by force, if necessary out of the country. That seems to be a violation of human rights,

Not it's not. There is NO "human right to live in the U.S.A."

and the rights of American Citizens.

That one I'll grant you.

 

[Ray]

Personally, I think people who are born in the US of parents who are illegally in the US should not be citizens. Only those whose parents are legally in the US.

 

[michaeledward]

I am not too keen on the 'citizen at birth' idea, myself.

It is, however, the law of the land. It has served the nation well for two centuries (or more).

Governor Huckabee's suggestion of forcing the citizen children of immigrants to leave the country, reminds me of some of the darkest days in human history. See Indian Removal Act of 1830.

Although, for a moral compass, sometimes it is better to look higher.

Admiral Matthew Dougherty: Jean-Luc, we're only moving 600 people.
Captain Picard: How many people does it take, Admiral, before it becomes wrong? Hmm? A thousand, fifty thousand, a million? How many people does it take, Admiral?

 

[Ray]

I am not too keen on the 'citizen at birth' idea, myself.

It is, however, the law of the land. It has served the nation well for two centuries (or more).

Governor Huckabee's suggestion of forcing the citizen children of immigrants to leave the country, reminds me of some of the darkest days in human history. See Indian Removal Act of 1830.

Although, for a moral compass, sometimes it is better to look higher.

Some things that served the nation well at inception do not serve them today. In the late 1700's there were no illegal aliens coming to the US committing homicides, burglaries, "importing" drugs, and so on. That was a time of growth. Besides, show me some evidence that it served the country well in 1874, 1958, 1962, 1973, etc. Laws change...{in fact, Missouri cancelled the "extermination order" in the 1970's}.

"Looking higher" You certainly cannot seriously throw out a sci-fi movie and fictional characters with a contrived plot and events as "looking higher." It's not acceptable. {And that comes from an owner of the klingon dictionary and cassette tape giving lessons on the language}.

Sending illegal aliens home with their children is the compassionate thing to do. Which is why it is wise to change the law to not make children of illegal aliens citizens at birth.

This is hugely different than the Indian Removal Act of 1830.

 

[michaeledward]

Some things that served the nation well at inception do not serve them today. In the late 1700's there were no illegal aliens coming to the US committing homicides, burglaries, "importing" drugs, and so on. That was a time of growth. Besides, show me some evidence that it served the country well in 1874, 1958, 1962, 1973, etc. Laws change...{in fact, Missouri cancelled the "extermination order" in the 1970's}.

"Looking higher" You certainly cannot seriously throw out a sci-fi movie and fictional characters with a contrived plot and events as "looking higher." It's not acceptable. {And that comes from an owner of the klingon dictionary and cassette tape giving lessons on the language}.

Sending illegal aliens home with their children is the compassionate thing to do. Which is why it is wise to change the law to not make children of illegal aliens citizens at birth.

This is hugely different than the Indian Removal Act of 1830.

Are you suggesting that all undocumented workers are responsible for the social ills you reference, whereas American Citizens are completely innocent of those ills?

Are you suggesting that today, we are not living in a time of growth?

Morality tales are often best told in the realm of science fiction. Because those things that are unspeakable in polite society, can be demonstrated via allegory.

As for 'compassion', sending American Citizens out of their country does not seem compassionate in any way. And that is what Governor Huckabee proposed on the Television yesterday. He did not propose changing the law. What was proposed was the forced migration of a large group of people; some of whom are American Citizens.

Candidate Huckabee indicated that he wished to create a class of American refugees.

They go with their parents.
...
They will go home {out of the United States} within 120-day window, and then they have the process of starting to return.

Notice he said the 'process' of starting to return. The Governor does seems to be suggesting that citizens may not be allowed to return to their country; unless they complete some undefined "process".

 

[Ray]

Are you suggesting that all undocumented workers are responsible for the social ills you reference, whereas American Citizens are completely innocent of those ills?

C'mon. You can read - is that what I said? I don't think so.

I also didn't say "undocumented workers" I said "illegal aliens." It's nice if some have a job -- that's a couple more crimes committed (possibly) by the employer and the illegal alien. Do you let them use your social security number?

So illegal aliens are not responsible for "all" the social ills. Do you suggest that we can't do something, somewhere to lower our social ills?

Morality tales are often best told in the realm of science fiction. Because those things that are unspeakable in polite society, can be demonstrated via allegory.

I'm certain that's not allowed in logic. Let's make something up to demonstrate our point...perhaps we can also just fabricate our point to begin with.

There comes a point when we must distinguis between reality and fantasy (sorry: science fiction).

As for 'compassion', sending American Citizens out of their country does not seem compassionate in any way.

So lets keep the children of illegal aliens in the US and send their parents back to where they came from? That seems a heck of a lot more humanitarian?

As I said, let's change the law - if you are in the country legally (not you specifically) and you give birth to a child then that child is a citizen. If you are not in the country legally and you give birth to a child then that child is a citizen.

And that is what Governor Huckabee proposed on the Television yesterday. He did not propose changing the law. What was proposed was the forced migration of a large group of people; some of whom are American Citizens.

Candidate Huckabee indicated that he wished to create a class of American refugees.

As IBM used to say: "think"

 

[Phoenix44]

I have no problem with whatever religion our president practices, or doesn't practice. What I don't want is a president whose religion determines his presidential decisions--as Huckabee would. This comes directly from his website:

My faith is my life - it defines me. My faith doesn't influence my decisions, it drives them...I don't separate my faith from my personal and professional lives.

I want a president who actually CAN separate his faith from his professional life.

I would not vote for Huckabee simply because of his views on the issues--some of which are informed by his religion, some not necessarily so. He is in favor of the Iraq War, in favor of covenant marriage, against reproductive privacy, against universal healthcare, against stem cell research, and no matter how he words it, in favor of regressive taxation.

I assume this does not make me a "Christian Hater."

 

[michaeledward]

C'mon. You can read - is that what I said? I don't think so.

Let's review ... your language in italics

there were no illegal aliens coming to the US committing homicides, burglaries, "importing" drugs, and so on

That is what you said.

I also didn't say "undocumented workers" I said "illegal aliens." It's nice if some have a job -- that's a couple more crimes committed (possibly) by the employer and the illegal alien. Do you let them use your social security number?

There are between ten and twelve million of the people to whom we are referring ~ leaving aside our different descriptions for the moment. How many of those twelve million do you suppose are "committing homicides, burglaries, 'Importing' drugs and so on" as compared to those who have jobs, and have employers who are withholding payroll taxes from them; as a ratio. How many do you suppose?

I believe the argument about "homicides, burglaries and importing drugs", is a 'red herring'. The definition from Wikipedia reads: A red herring is a metaphor for a diversion or distraction from an original objective.

So illegal aliens are not responsible for "all" the social ills. Do you suggest that we can't do something, somewhere to lower our social ills?

Very good. It would seem that you to some extent, agree that "homicides, burglaries, and 'importing' drugs" is less than relevant to our discussion. So perhaps we can leave it aside for the time being.

I would suggest that we do not have an illegal alien problem, but rather an illegal employer problem. As you might expect, you and I probably disagree with which course of action to take concering this issue.

I'm certain that's not allowed in logic. Let's make something up to demonstrate our point...perhaps we can also just fabricate our point to begin with.

There comes a point when we must distinguis between reality and fantasy (sorry: science fiction).

I did distinguish between fact and fiction. I referenced the 'Trail of Tears', in which the Cherokee nation of Georgia suffered a force migration to the Mid-West. Do we need to review the forced migration of the native Africans to serve on the plantations in the new world? Do we need to review the forced migration of the people living in the Holy lands in the middle of the last century?

Perhaps you can provide an example from 'reality' where the forced migration of one group has turned out well?

So lets keep the children of illegal aliens in the US and send their parents back to where they came from? That seems a heck of a lot more humanitarian?

Let us acknowledge that those whom you describe as "the children of illegal aliens", in many cases, are American Citizens. If it is acceptable to force American Citizens out of the country, for humane or any other reason, what other acceptable actions can be taken against American Citizens? Let us strip away the rights of American citizens, because we can; for they are small and weak, and being with their parents is more important than the Protections of our Nation of Laws.

As I said, let's change the law - if you are in the country legally (not you specifically) and you give birth to a child then that child is a citizen. If you are not in the country legally and you give birth to a child then that child is a citizen.
As IBM used to say: "think"

I am reminded of the Saturday morning cartoon, about Bill. http://www.school-house-rock.com/Bill.html

The law as it exists today, makes children born in the United States citizens. It can be changed. But as it stands now, the facts are the facts.

And, although it has not been mentioned in this discussion, if someone were to suggest to alter the law 'retroactively' ~ the question becomes what other laws can be changed 'retroactively'.


I will wait for Mr. Huckabee to "clarify" his position. What he said on Meet the Press was exceedingly stupid, and self-contradictory.

 

[Ray]

Let's review ... your language in italics

there were no illegal aliens coming to the US committing homicides, burglaries, "importing" drugs, and so on

That is what you said.

Thank you for acknowledging that you were mistaken, that I did not say that "all undocumented workers are responsible for the social ills you reference, whereas American Citizens are completely innocent of those ills?"

There are between ten and twelve million of the people to whom we are referring ~ leaving aside our different descriptions for the moment. How many of those twelve million do you suppose are "committing homicides, burglaries, 'Importing' drugs and so on" as compared to those who have jobs, and have employers who are withholding payroll taxes from them; as a ratio. How many do you suppose?

Here's a favorit tactic from the left: "one homicide is too many."

Examine your "how many's." Now let's do a quick Q&A:
Q) How many of the illegal aliens are here illegally?
A) All of them.

Q) How many of the illegal aliens that hold jobs are doing so illegally?
A) All of them.

Q) How many of the employers who knowingly employ illegal aliens are breaking the law?
A) All of them.

I believe the argument about "homicides, burglaries and importing drugs", is a 'red herring'. The definition from Wikipedia reads: A red herring is a metaphor for a diversion or distraction from an original objective.

you can believe what you wish. I know that your are completely wrong on this, the specific argument that I brought up.

Very good. It would seem that you to some extent, agree that "homicides, burglaries, and 'importing' drugs" is less than relevant to our discussion. So perhaps we can leave it aside for the time being.

Mike, you don't understand English? I didn't say that crimes committed by illegal aliens were not relevant to the discussion. You are inventing stuff.

I would suggest that we do not have an illegal alien problem, but rather an illegal employer problem. As you might expect, you and I probably disagree with which course of action to take concering this issue.

Mike, you are again inventing stuff...maybe you got it from "Star Trek" or something.

I did distinguish between fact and fiction. I referenced the 'Trail of Tears', in which the Cherokee nation of Georgia suffered a force migration to the Mid-West. Do we need to review the forced migration of the native Africans to serve on the plantations in the new world? Do we need to review the forced migration of the people living in the Holy lands in the middle of the last century?

Now that is a maroon herring and not relevant to the specific discussion.

Let us acknowledge that those whom you describe as "the children of illegal aliens", in many cases, are American Citizens. If it is acceptable to force American Citizens out of the country, for humane or any other reason, what other acceptable actions can be taken against American Citizens? Let us strip away the rights of American citizens, because we can; for they are small and weak, and being with their parents is more important than the Protections of our Nation of Laws.

Very well, let the children of illegal aliens stay in the US. They can stay here without their parents, their parents can be deported.

I am reminded of the Saturday morning cartoon, about Bill. http://www.school-house-rock.com/Bill.html

The law as it exists today, makes children born in the United States citizens. It can be changed. But as it stands now, the facts are the facts.

Yes, it can be changed. As you stated you are "not too keen on the 'citizen at birth' idea,..."

I will wait for Mr. Huckabee to "clarify" his position. What he said on Meet the Press was exceedingly stupid, and self-contradictory.

The one thing you and I agree on is that neither of us are Huckabee supporters.

 

[michaeledward]

The "Christian Leader" candidate recently tells us he is taking the high road.

For the past week, he has been calling Governor Romney dishonest. Today, Mr. Huckabee told 150 of his closest reporter friends that he was not going to authorize a campaign advertisment that restates claims of Mr. Romney's dishonesty.

The ordained minister wanted to demonstrate his virtue about withholding the attack ad. To best demonstrate how noble he was being, he showed the 150 reporters the advertisment attacking Mr. Romney; just so everyone would know what a good guy he was.

You can see the advert, and some questions that follow for Mr. Huckabee here : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/31/tpm-cafe-huckabee-confer_n_78971.html

 

[michaeledward]

Proving once again that Mr. Huckabee doesn't know enough to get the job which he is seeking, he appeared on Jay Leno's Tonight Show last evening.

When Ms. Bhutto was assassinated in Pakistan last week, Mr. Huckabee told us he didn't know, because he was busy campaigning.

When the National Intelligence Estimate was released last month, telling the world that Iran has not had a nuclear weapons program for the past four years, Mr. Huckabee did not know what an NIE was.

And, now he crosses a picket line to appear on The Tonight Show, and claims ignorance of the ongoing strike.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/us/politics/02cnd-campaign.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Mr. Huckabee on Wednesday professed his support for the striking television writers union just a few hours before he was expected to board a plane for a taping of the “Tonight Show” with Jay Leno where he will face a vocal picket line of striking writers.

Mr. Leno’s program is returning to the air for the first time since the strike began on Nov. 5. Speaking to reporters, Mr. Huckabee said he was unaware that he would be crossing a picket line and believed that the program had reached a special agreement with the union.

Oops.

 

[Big Don]

The "Christian Leader" candidate recently tells us he is taking the high road.

For the past week, he has been calling Governor Romney dishonest. Today, Mr. Huckabee told 150 of his closest reporter friends that he was not going to authorize a campaign advertisment that restates claims of Mr. Romney's dishonesty.

The ordained minister wanted to demonstrate his virtue about withholding the attack ad. To best demonstrate how noble he was being, he showed the 150 reporters the advertisment attacking Mr. Romney; just so everyone would know what a good guy he was.

You can see the advert, and some questions that follow for Mr. Huckabee here : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/31/tpm-cafe-huckabee-confer_n_78971.html

The bit with the ad was brilliant, politically. He gets all the bang out of it he would have, plus he gets to play the "good guy" by not airing it, PLUS, his campaign saves all the money they would have spent to air it. Brilliant, but, kinda Clintonesque...

 

[michaeledward]

The chickens have come home to roost, is, I believe, how the saying goes.

An ignorant on foriegn policy issues preacher has a superior showing in the Iowa caucuses.

For decades, the Republican Party has played the evangelical Christian movement as a tool to be used to secure elections; and then returned to the toolbox; allowing the corperatists to take the citizens money and hand it over to the very few, and very rich.

I think that the primaries are a choice between that fascist leaning tendancy (Ron Paul's term) and the remnents of the Moral Majority. That would be ... Romney for the corperatists and Huckabee for the evangelicals.

Early results in Iowa

Evangelicals 1
Corperatists 0

Huckabee 36
Romney 23

Ray, did you participate?

 

[Ray]

Ray, did you participate?

Unfortunately I started 2nd shift this week...I have a deal worked out so I can leave on Tuesday's & Thursday's for a couple hours to teach the two groups that have....alas, I was teaching kenpo instead of casting my vote for my favorite non-Democrat.

 

[michaeledward]

The Huckster wins the West Virginia Caucus.

The First Super Tuesday Win goes to the Governor.

Who'd a thunk?