Comments on: One Last Immigration Post http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html Dispatches from a Small Business Sun, 12 Feb 2012 09:39:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: notafish http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html/comment-page-1#comment-2605 notafish Mon, 08 May 2006 14:01:13 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html#comment-2605 <p>Um... if the Mexican wasn't immunized, implying that they lack the immunizations which we have; how could someone you care about, presumably someone in the US with these immunizations, catch one of the diseases for which they have been immunized? You know, assuming, as I think the writer has, that immunizations work. Or am I missing something?</p> Um… if the Mexican wasn’t immunized, implying that they lack the immunizations which we have; how could someone you care about, presumably someone in the US with these immunizations, catch one of the diseases for which they have been immunized? You know, assuming, as I think the writer has, that immunizations work. Or am I missing something?

]]> By: Tim Allen http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html/comment-page-1#comment-2604 Tim Allen Fri, 05 May 2006 04:20:22 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html#comment-2604 <p>Coyote's post is right on the money, as is the example of congress passing a law preventing citizens from criticizing elected officials. In fact, The US actually passed that law before and appologized for it just today.<br /> http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/14497780.htm<br /> They were called anti-sedition laws.<br /> </p> Coyote’s post is right on the money, as is the example of congress passing a law preventing citizens from criticizing elected officials. In fact, The US actually passed that law before and appologized for it just today.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/14497780.htm
They were called anti-sedition laws.

]]> By: Frank Ch. Eigler http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html/comment-page-1#comment-2603 Frank Ch. Eigler Fri, 05 May 2006 03:18:41 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html#comment-2603 <p>> [...conservatives...] mock the those who support immigration </p> <p>You lost me right there. How is it not clear that these marches were all about *illegal* immigrants? Those mocking these marches are not against *immigration* per se, but the illegal ways celebrated by the marchers.<br /> </p> > [...conservatives...] mock the those who support immigration

You lost me right there. How is it not clear that these marches were all about *illegal* immigrants? Those mocking these marches are not against *immigration* per se, but the illegal ways celebrated by the marchers.

]]> By: Max Lybbert http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html/comment-page-1#comment-2602 Max Lybbert Thu, 04 May 2006 23:34:21 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html#comment-2602 <p>/* But, if countries are like a country club, the U.S. allows more new members into their club than every other country club in the world combined. What other country in the world allows in over 400,000 new members a year while another 500,000 try to become members by climbing over the walls to get in?<br /> */</p> <p>The numbers are huge. OTOH, we have integrated all those people, so I don't see where the problem is.</p> <p>/* And Congress can not pass a law that would suspend free speech. In fact, the idea of preventing people from burning the American Flag would necessitate an Amendment to the Constitution because it would suspend free speech. So that example does not really work here either.<br /> */</p> <p>Actually, that was the point of the example. Quite simply, that Congress doesn't decide what your rights are, the laws written by Congress don't give you rights, but that Congress is limited (through the Constitution) from restricting the rights you already have.</p> <p>You'll notice the Bill of Rights doesn't say "the people are hereby granted the following rights," but rather "the people have the following rights, and Congress cannot infringe on them."</p> /* But, if countries are like a country club, the U.S. allows more new members into their club than every other country club in the world combined. What other country in the world allows in over 400,000 new members a year while another 500,000 try to become members by climbing over the walls to get in?
*/

The numbers are huge. OTOH, we have integrated all those people, so I don’t see where the problem is.

/* And Congress can not pass a law that would suspend free speech. In fact, the idea of preventing people from burning the American Flag would necessitate an Amendment to the Constitution because it would suspend free speech. So that example does not really work here either.
*/

Actually, that was the point of the example. Quite simply, that Congress doesn’t decide what your rights are, the laws written by Congress don’t give you rights, but that Congress is limited (through the Constitution) from restricting the rights you already have.

You’ll notice the Bill of Rights doesn’t say “the people are hereby granted the following rights,” but rather “the people have the following rights, and Congress cannot infringe on them.”

]]> By: BridgetB http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html/comment-page-1#comment-2601 BridgetB Thu, 04 May 2006 20:39:13 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html#comment-2601 <p>Hi Coyote, good post again but I am shocked to hear that you are an anarcho-caplitalist. I thought you beleived in a limited elected government established to protect and defend individual rights not some variant of competing systems of force! Hmmm. I wonder how open immigration fits into the anarchist model?<br /> </p> Hi Coyote, good post again but I am shocked to hear that you are an anarcho-caplitalist. I thought you beleived in a limited elected government established to protect and defend individual rights not some variant of competing systems of force! Hmmm. I wonder how open immigration fits into the anarchist model?

]]> By: Publius http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html/comment-page-1#comment-2600 Publius Thu, 04 May 2006 19:02:05 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2006/05/one_last_immigr.html#comment-2600 <p>But, if countries are like a country club, the U.S. allows more new members into their club than every other country club in the world combined. What other country in the world allows in over 400,000 new members a year while another 500,000 try to become members by climbing over the walls to get in?<br /> And Congress can not pass a law that would suspend free speech. In fact, the idea of preventing people from burning the American Flag would necessitate an Amendment to the Constitution because it would suspend free speech. So that example does not really work here either. <br /> Being against illegal-immigration is not same as being pro-WASP. Unless you believe the there are not Catholics who are anti-illegal immigration, nor anyone whose ancestral heritage is more than the tiny island of England, Scotland, and Wales. <br /> And Cinco de Mayo is not a religious celebration in the same way that St. Patrick’s Day is. St Patrick’s Day celebrates an Englishman who brought Christianity to Ireland and became the Patron Saint of Ireland. Cinco de Mayo celebrates a victory by Mexican forces over Napoleon’s Army. The problem is that once Napoleon found out he sent more soldiers and then defeated the Mexican forces and essentially turned Mexico into a French Colony. It would be similar to the Germans celebrating defeating the Polish in World War II and conveniently forgetting they lost the war. Nothing religious there.</p> <p>There are a lot of idiots on both side of this debate, but at the same time there is a tremendous misinformation campaign going on too. I simply want people to understand the issue and what is really at stake here. </p> But, if countries are like a country club, the U.S. allows more new members into their club than every other country club in the world combined. What other country in the world allows in over 400,000 new members a year while another 500,000 try to become members by climbing over the walls to get in?
And Congress can not pass a law that would suspend free speech. In fact, the idea of preventing people from burning the American Flag would necessitate an Amendment to the Constitution because it would suspend free speech. So that example does not really work here either.
Being against illegal-immigration is not same as being pro-WASP. Unless you believe the there are not Catholics who are anti-illegal immigration, nor anyone whose ancestral heritage is more than the tiny island of England, Scotland, and Wales.
And Cinco de Mayo is not a religious celebration in the same way that St. Patrick’s Day is. St Patrick’s Day celebrates an Englishman who brought Christianity to Ireland and became the Patron Saint of Ireland. Cinco de Mayo celebrates a victory by Mexican forces over Napoleon’s Army. The problem is that once Napoleon found out he sent more soldiers and then defeated the Mexican forces and essentially turned Mexico into a French Colony. It would be similar to the Germans celebrating defeating the Polish in World War II and conveniently forgetting they lost the war. Nothing religious there.

There are a lot of idiots on both side of this debate, but at the same time there is a tremendous misinformation campaign going on too. I simply want people to understand the issue and what is really at stake here.

]]>