Posted on 01/06/2011 9:22:56 PM PST by presidio9
America used to have a newspaper with this same name.
I wonder what happened to it.
Yeah, like we could have never picked our own fruit and mowed our own grass.
Whew.
Speechless.
False Premise. Mexican troops overran an American outpost and marched on the fort that was in Brownsville. This is 30 years after the border was settled with Santa Anna. The reparations for invading the US were severe but just.
Why? Because the U.S. has treated Mexico in ways that it has treated no other nation, creating potent incentives for Mexicans to move north.
Bad policy demands more bad policy?
this post needs a barf alert
You got THAT right!
X = 1000!
Irrational drivel.
But there was ONE line I found interesting as it (possibly) confirms my own observations.
The one about Mexicans comprising 60% of the illegal’s in the U.S.
I want the other 40% deported too, no matter Where they are from or what “Colour” they might be.
No exceptions.
Pass AZ type immigration enforcement, and ask EVERYONE who has “contact” with the police about their immigration status.
Maybe that way we can detect and kick out more of that other 40%!
I will tolerate the umbrage of having MY own citizenship questioned if it leads to deportation of illegals from all countries and of any “race”.
http://www.polisci.upenn.edu/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=73
Look who wrote this garbage. A professor sitting in his ivory tower. He doesn’t suffer at all from illegal immigration. Plus Mexico gets the lion’s share of our legal immigration slots
The pious hypocrites of the elites. Whatever would we do without them?
Where’s the Barf Alert?????
“There are families in New Mexico who have owned their ranches since the 1500s. They are good citizens and I doubt any of them want the corrupt Mexican government back in New Mexico.” — thank you for that information, I did not know that
Umm, if they didn't have title to the lands, then they weren't "their lands," were they?
>>The billions in wages sent to Mexico each year may also indicate a condition of citizenship. The drain on local economies would seem to point to a loyalty directed somewhere else.<<
Where are all the LIBs screaming “Commerce clause, Commerce clause”?
Ok..everyone has to go back home. Looks like I am going back to Germany.....
If one goes back far enough, there ain't no home for nobody. I'm just saying that the Mexicans illegally in the US need to be taken care of by their local gov't back in Mexico so the long standing social justice issues of Mexico are resolved there.
Amen brother. Since Mexico is like a welfare mom who would rather let someone else take care of their kids so they can go the bar and drink
There ya go. I guess he’ll be invited to the next Liberal wine tasting.
Rubbish!!!!!!! Which one of those Mexicans who would come illegally, would decide not to because "the U.S. apportioned more of its overall legal immigration admissions to Mexicans?"
That logic is saying that the solution to Mexican illegals is to keep increasing the number of Mexicans allowed until every Mexican who wants to come is allowed to come. That is merely legalizing open borders or advance legalization of all illegals.
But, after all, what the professor really wants to do is surrender American land and sovereignty to Mexico.
As for his history, the professor should save his Big Lie presentation for his uninformed and pliable students. To whom he can conceal such inconvenient facts as the following:
■ In 1821 - before Mexican independence - the Spanish Governor of Mexico granted Moses Austin a charter to settle Texas. He did this because the Mexico population lacked the right-stuff to settle and tame a wild and sparsely populated territory.
■ The story did not begin in 1846, when the U.S. provoked a war, as the professor falsely claims. In 1836, Texas won its independence from Mexico - the same way Mexico won its independence from Spain. In 1845, the US granted Texas statehood.
■ The inhabiters of California were Spaniards ("Californios") who did not want to be part of the independent Mexico and openly rebelled. The Mexican presence there was not as settlers but troops sent to squelch the rebellion, collect taxes and seize church owned land. (The land was returned to the Church by President Lincoln.)
■ Mexico owes very its existence to the US. Mexicans lost their independence to France after Emperor Napoleon III's armed invasion and occupation during the US Civil War. The "Second Mexican Empire" (as the French rulers called it) only ended when after the Civil War the US sent troops to the border and asserted the Monroe Doctrine; the French troops were withdrawn; and the puppet government, forced to hold power without French troops, fell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.