I Am Mexican, and favor border security

[romacox]

I am of Mexican decent. My Father was 3/4 Mexican, so I am almost half. Years ago my favorite Uncle came her illegally before becoming a U.S. Citizen. So I have a great respect, admiration and love for the Mexicans who have contributed much to this society. Mexicans respect and take care of their family (Very close family ties), something that has been lost in the American culture. Mexicans also have an understanding of love (Mi Vida) that is beautiful. I hope my Mexican friends retain this part of their culture, and teach it to the Gringo.

It is not about anti Mexican. The reason the Constitution gives the Federal Government the power to regulate Naturalization is because if immigrants are brought into the American way of life faster than they can be assimilated, we are assimilated instead of them. Which means we find ourselves with conditions that made Mexicans leave Mexico in the first place. Securing borders works like the firewall in a computer...it lets in the good effects, and keeps out the bad effects. That is the purpose of regulating immigration numbers.

My Grandmother (fantastic lady) was a Redando. Still today a picture of one of My Redando relatives hangs in the one of the Arizona State buildings. You see Mexicans were instrumental in bringing Arizona and California into the Union. They were very successful and wealthy land owners there (owned large ranches, vineyards). My family was among those who had Ranch land taken.

After those States entered the Union the Mexicans were highly respected, and held public office for many years. But once gold was found, things changed. You see most of the land was owned by Indians and Mexicans (who got along very well). So, for the white Americans to obtain the gold ridden land they declared that if one had one drop of Indian blood in him he could not testify against a white man.

Juan Muretta owned a good gold producing mine, and some white men waited for him to leave his property to sell some gold. They then raided his home, raped his wife, and took possession of his land. He went to his friend, the Sheriff for help. The sheriff told him there was nothing he could do as a Mexican because he could not testify against these white men. Juan took revenge, and became a "Mexican Robin Hood", stealing from the rich white man, an giving to the once wealthy Mexicans who were now poor because their property had been taken in the name of Gold. That, my friend, gave rise to the Legend of Zoro. Today this story is told among the Mexicans who hold Muretta as a hero.

There are some Mexicans who truly desire to become American citizens. But there is also a movement called Recontista. Recontista means to re-conquer: take the land back that once belonged to Mexico and President Calderone promotes it. http://mayorsam.blogspot.com/2006/06...r-tuesday.html

So you will recognize the word when you hear it it is enunciated this way: ree (note r is pronounced like a very short motor boat sound) cone tee s tu

[YumYum]

I had a Mexican tell me "We may have lost the war, but we are winning the battle."

I agree with you when you say: "Which means we find ourselves with conditions that made Mexicans leave Mexico in the first place."

Much of California has become like Mexico; broke and in debt, and the cities are over crowded and polluted. But the blame cannot be put on the people of California or Mexico, the fault lies in the lap of corrupt leaders.

I have witnessed first hand how this country ruins Mexican youth who have moved here from Mexico. The kids come here, well behaved and obedient to their parents and respectful to the law. Then they get involved with gangs and they get on drugs, and it ruins their lives. The difference from white youth, is that most white youth who are skinhead racists come from dysfunctional white families to begin with, whereas the Mexican youth from Mexico that moved here with their parents and then became gang bangers, came from good, balanced families. This country ruins young immigrants.

[romacox]

You know Che Guevara (like Juan Murrieta)is a terrorist by American history, and a hero to many South of our Border.

Large Corporations (perceived to be Americans by South America) promised Venezuela prosperity as they bought up farm land to build factories (NAFTA, WATO, Globalization: erasing of borders). But the promises turned sour as they treated the people more like slaves, and pouted the land. At first Che, who was a medical doctor in Argentina, tried peaceful and legal means to combat the injustice to his people. Eventually he became a Marxist Revolutionary fighting what he perceived to be "American Capitalism."

Note: I do not condone the violence Murrieta and Che promoted, but One man's terrorist is often another man's Freedom figter. The most successful revolutionaries are men like Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Jesus because once they were assassinated there were many others to pick up the touch, and who won the harts and minds of the oppressors.

Other Countries would be wise to protect their borders from intrusion by NAFTA, WATO and Globalization (the erasing of borders). and we would be wise to do the same . Hire only legal immigrants, and legal American borne workers. To do otherwise is promoting Corportism, NAFTA, WATO, Globalization...the erasing of borders.

[Dunedain]

Good for you. Sell it to your community.

[ClayTrainor]

You know Che Guevara (like Juan Murrieta)is a terrorist by American history, and a hero to many South of our Border.

Large Corporations (perceived to be Americans by South America) promised Venezuela prosperity as they bought up farm land to build factories (NAFTA, WATO, Globalization: erasing of borders). But the promises turned sour as they treated the people more like slaves, and pouted the land. At first Che, who was a medical doctor in Argentina, tried peaceful and legal means to combat the injustice to his people. Eventually he became a Marxist Revolutionary fighting what he perceived to be "American Capitalism."

Note: I do not condone the violence Murrieta and Che promoted, but One man's terrorist is often another man's hero. The most successful revolutionaries are men like Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Jesus because once they were assassinated there were many others to pick up the touch, and who won the harts and minds of the oppressors.

Other Countries would be wise to protect their borders from intrusion by NAFTA, WATO and Globalization (the erasing of borders). and we would be wise to do the same . Hire only legal immigrants, and legal American borne workers. To do otherwise is promoting Corportism, NAFTA, WATO, Globalization...the erasing of borders.

Very interesting post.

I have a question for you. Who gets to decide what a "legal" and "illegal" immigrant is, or who should get to decide in your opinion?

[coyote_sprit]

The difference from white youth, is that most white youth who are skinhead racists come from dysfunctional white families to begin with, whereas the Mexican youth from Mexico that moved here with their parents and then became gang bangers, came from good, balanced families. This country ruins young immigrants.

That's bullshit, while some white people are skinheads, the majority are scared shitless to even speak about race for fear of being branded a racist.

Edit: Misread your message skimmed and didn't see the "who are" only the "are", sorry.

[Dunedain]

That's bullshit, while some white people are skinheads, the majority are scared shitless to even speak about race for fear of being branded a racist.

I've actually never met a "skinhead" in my life. Obviously, very uncommon type of folk. Now a Mexican gang member? Loads o' those.

[romacox]

There are hate groups among all races...no matter if you call them skinheads or not.

Mexicans, Blacks, Whites (all races) are not the enemy...not who we should be angry at. It is the elitists that control The Federal Reserve, Our Politicians, International Corporations, International Banks, WATO, the IMF (those who imprisoned two Border Patrol agents, Ramos & Compion, to free a know drug lord) etc.. that we need to protect one another from. To be angry at one another is to play right into the hands of those who would enslave us

[Met Income]

Very interesting post.

I have a question for you. Who gets to decide what a "legal" and "illegal" immigrant is, or who should get to decide in your opinion?

Well, the state. Whoopsies!

[RevolutionSD]

I don't care what race you are, you are anti-free market when it comes to labor, and that's an anti-liberty stance. :(

[romacox]

Ron Paul opposes Amnesty and illegal immigration
http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-05-07/ron-paul-no-amnesty/

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Video+ron+paul+against+amnesty&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=q2MuS6XgL8iVtgf67sHvDQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBAQqwQwAA#

Ron Paul calls it "Corporatism", and also points out it is not Free enterprise as the IMF parades it.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Video+ron+paul+against+amnesty&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=q2MuS6XgL8iVtgf67sHvDQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBAQqwQwAA#client=firefox-a&emb=0&q=ron+paul+on+corporatism&view=3

But let me again emphasize: Mexicans, Blacks, Whites (all races) are not the enemy...not who we should be angry at. It is the elitists that control The Federal Reserve, Our Politicians, International Corporations, International Banks, WATO, the IMF (those who imprisoned two Border Patrol agents, Ramos & Compion, to free a know drug lord) etc.. that we need to protect one another from. To be angry at one another is to play right into the hands of those who would enslave us

[__27__]

I don't care what race you are, you are anti-free market when it comes to labor, and that's an anti-liberty stance. :(

+1

If a person wishes to enter their labor into the market in exchange for compensation, we should welcome them with open arms, not AR15's and demands of assimilation. I should be able to walk from Juarez to El Paso and back again as easy as I walk from my town in Minnesota to the next town over.

[LibertyEagle]

Ron Paul opposes Amnesty and illegal immigration
http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-05-07/ron-paul-no-amnesty/

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Video+ron+paul+against+amnesty&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=q2MuS6XgL8iVtgf67sHvDQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBAQqwQwAA#

Ron Paul calls it "Corporatism", and also points out it is not Free enterprise as the IMF parades it.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Video+ron+paul+against+amnesty&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=q2MuS6XgL8iVtgf67sHvDQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBAQqwQwAA#client=firefox-a&emb=0&q=ron+paul+on+corporatism&view=3

+1

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

I am of Mexican decent. My Father was 3/4 Mexican, so I am almost half. Years ago my favorite Uncle came her illegally before becoming a U.S. Citizen. So I have a great respect, admiration and love for the Mexicans who have contributed much to this society. Mexicans respect and take care of their family (Very close family ties), something that has been lost in the American culture. Mexicans also have an understanding of love (Mi Vida) that is beautiful. I hope my Mexican friends retain this part of their culture, and teach it to the Gringo.

It is not about anti Mexican. The reason the Constitution gives the Federal Government the power to regulate Naturalization is because if immigrants are brought into the American way of life faster than they can be assimilated, we are assimilated instead of them. Which means we find ourselves with conditions that made Mexicans leave Mexico in the first place. Securing borders works like the firewall in a computer...it lets in the good effects, and keeps out the bad effects. That is the purpose of regulating immigration numbers.

My Grandmother (fantastic lady) was a Redando. Still today a picture of one of My Redando relatives hangs in the one of the Arizona State buildings. You see Mexicans were instrumental in bringing Arizona and California into the Union. They were very successful and wealthy land owners there (owned large ranches, vineyards). My family was among those who had Ranch land taken.

After those States entered the Union the Mexicans were highly respected, and held public office for many years. But once gold was found, things changed. You see most of the land was owned by Indians and Mexicans (who got along very well). So, for the white Americans to obtain the gold ridden land they declared that if one had one drop of Indian blood in him he could not testify against a white man.

Juan Muretta owned a good gold producing mine, and some white men waited for him to leave his property to sell some gold. They then raided his home, raped his wife, and took possession of his land. He went to his friend, the Sheriff for help. The sheriff told him there was nothing he could do as a Mexican because he could not testify against these white men. Juan took revenge, and became a "Mexican Robin Hood", stealing from the rich white man, an giving to the once wealthy Mexicans who were now poor because their property had been taken in the name of Gold. That, my friend, gave rise to the Legend of Zoro. Today this story is told among the Mexicans who hold Muretta as a hero.

There are some Mexicans who truly desire to become American citizens. But there is also a movement called Recontista. Recontista means to re-conquer: take the land back that once belonged to Mexico and President Calderone promotes it. http://mayorsam.blogspot.com/2006/06...r-tuesday.html

So you will recognize the word when you hear it it is enunciated this way: ree (note r is pronounced like a very short motor boat sound) cone tee s tu

Hard times lead people to having to go back to depend on their families. Family is not a solution, but a major cause of tyranny.
In ancient times of tyranny, the dark days of pimping and whoring, the eldest by tradition went into the employment of the ruling monarchy while the second eldest customarily went into the service of the Church. The rest of the children were left to live out a meager existence because they had to go about the illegal business of surviving on land 100% owned by the monarchy and the Church.
Texas was never owned by Mexico, but was owned by the Comanche. That is why the Anglos were allowed to settle the state serving as a buffer zone between them and Mexico.
In other words, when the Comanches wanted something, they just rode down into Mexico and took it.
You know, it was never the United States that defeated Mexico with it always being the state of Texas with General Sam Houston doing it the first time and then the Texas Rangers doing it ten years later the latter doing it while leading the U.S. Army out from being pinned down under seige of the Mexican army. It was the Texas Rangers who had the knowledge of how to defeat Mexico in the end understanding the "take no prisoners" mentality shared by all who lived in this area.
One can't destroy a natural law; rather, one destroys oneself when attempting such a vain action.

[REDNECK WOMAN]

Guess you can call me racist because I believe in border patrol and I did not vote for MR 0.

[RevolutionSD]

Guess you can call me racist because I believe in border patrol and I did not vote for MR 0.

No but I'll call you anti-liberty for being against the free market in labor.

[constituent]

It is not about anti Mexican. The reason the Constitution gives the Federal Government the power to regulate Naturalization is because if immigrants are brought into the American way of life faster than they can be assimilated, we are assimilated instead of them. Which means we find ourselves with conditions that made Mexicans leave Mexico in the first place. Securing borders works like the firewall in a computer...it lets in the good effects, and keeps out the bad effects. That is the purpose of regulating immigration numbers.

You leaped from "naturalization" to "immigration." Your statement, though well constructed, is logically inconsistent. Deliberately so, it appears.

[ItsTime]

I just wanted to type in bold

[torchbearer]

I just wanted to type in bold

source?

[ItsTime]

source?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=660

[torchbearer]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=660

in that case, you better limit how much bold you use. ;)

[Lord Xar]

No but I'll call you anti-liberty for being against the free market in labor.

Stop being a goof. Yeah, I said it. I am sick and tired of you open border apologists who, in the name of liberty, try to define who is part of this "movement".
Then all the open border apologists, in the guise of "libertarianism", just promote big government. You think the subsidies will stop? You think big government will stop by
allowing this neverending flow? Nope. But you all know that. This corportism isn't gonna stop because you believe in open borders, it's gonna get worse. The writing is on the wall, and yet
you keep piping that same ol' tune.

It is ILLEGAL to hop the border, plain and simple. Now, whether you want to argue semantics of who decides etc.. that is another point. We have laws. Those laws need to be enforced.

When you have unyielding immigration, or in your eyes "free market" - you have a destruction of the society. Balkanization. There is very little assimiliation going on and the states are going broke.

I can't stand when perps like you come here and try to define the liberty movement with your marxist agenda, because to me - that is what you are pimping.

Anyone with half a brain can see, the illegal immigrants you let in - the bigger government will become, more leftists will now vote, etc... so, in my eyes, you are promoting the globalist agenda AND big government. Because when you subsidize something, you get more of it. You think these "new" illegals who will get amnesty will vote for liberty? Are you out of your mind? They will vote left... thus destroying the very thing you say you are for? The free market, liberty - freedom.... You will have to pay the freight for you lack of foresight.. but maybe this is what you prefer..

So, it is you who is anti-liberty.

[Met Income]

Stop being a goof. Yeah, I said it. I am sick and tired of you open border apologists who, in the name of liberty, try to define who is part of this "movement".
Then all the open border apologists, in the guise of "libertarianism", just promote big government. You think the subsidies will stop? You think big government will stop by
allowing this neverending flow? Nope. But you all know that. This corportism isn't gonna stop because you believe in open borders, it's gonna get worse. The writing is on the wall, and yet
you keep piping that same ol' tune.

It is ILLEGAL to hop the border, plain and simple. Now, whether you want to argue semantics of who decides etc.. that is another point. We have laws. Those laws need to be enforced.

When you have unyielding immigration, or in your eyes "free market" - you have a destruction of the society. As is clearly reported. Balkanization.

I can't stand when perps like you come here and try to define the liberty movement with your marxist agenda, because to me - that is what you are pimping.

Anyone with half a brain can see, the illegal immigrants you let in - the bigger government will become, more leftists will now vote, etc... so, in my eyes, you are promoting the globalist agenda AND big government. Because when you subsidize something, you get more of it. You think these "new" illegals who will get amnesty will vote for liberty? Are you out of your mind? They will vote left... thus destroying the very thing you say you are for? The free market, liberty - freedom.... You will have to pay the freight for you lack of foresight.. but maybe this is what you prefer..

So, it is you who is anti-liberty.

The law is not always just. Like many other laws, this one is anti-free market.

[Lord Xar]

The law is not always just. Like many other laws, this one is anti-free market.

So, wouldn't it behoove all of us to deal with the things that "cause" this massive exodus into this country of mostly third worlders, than "Just keep em' coming"? That makes no sense.

So, you keep pimping this idea of "open borders", all the while millions keep coming, government is getting biggers, corporatism is out of control, welfare/entitlements are busting at the seems..... and you are saying "let them keep coming". Yet, by allowing and wanting open borders, you will just faciliate to a greater degree everything you are suppose to be against?

welfare/entitlements/taxation/big government etc..

It makes no sense.

[Met Income]

So, wouldn't it behoove all of us to deal with the things that "cause" this massive exodus into this country of mostly third worlders, than "Just keep em' coming"? That makes no sense.

So, you keep pimping this idea of "open borders", all the while millions keep coming, government is getting biggers, corporatism is out of control, welfare/entitlements are busting at the seems..... and you are saying "let them keep coming". Yet, by allowing and wanting open borders, you will just faciliate to a greater degree everything you are suppose to be against?

welfare/entitlements/taxation/big government etc..

It makes no sense.

No, I'd take away the welfare state, thereby, removing the dis-incentives for unproductive leeches to come and stay here. Productive workers (even if they are foreign) should be allowed to work here.

[1000-points-of-fright]

There are some Mexicans who truly desire to become American citizens. But there is also a movement called Recontista. Recontista means to re-conquer: take the land back that once belonged to Mexico and President Calderone promotes it. http://mayorsam.blogspot.com/2006/06...r-tuesday.html

So you will recognize the word when you hear it it is enunciated this way: ree (note r is pronounced like a very short motor boat sound) cone tee s tu

It's la reconquista, from the verb reconquistar. There is no such word as recontista.

[Dianne]

I have no problem with legal immigration. I do have a problem with illegal immigration with respect to immediately being put on the US government "pay" list. You have to admit, it is completely absurd and unconstitutional for you and I to be forced to pay for the rest of their lives.. the child of anyone who crosses the border just for free medical care.

Of course there is not a UN baby, this government does not like. Ask the African born King Obama, who says "F*** Americans... take their money and give it to any place other than the 59 states (lmao) he ripped off... I mean precides over.

[Akus]

I have no problem with legal immigration. I do have a problem with illegal immigration with respect to immediately being put on the US government "pay" list. You have to admit, it is completely absurd and unconstitutional for you and I to be forced to pay for the rest of their lives.. the child of anyone who crosses the border just for free medical care.

Of course there is not a UN baby, this government does not like. Ask the African born King Obama, who says "F*** Americans... take their money and give it to any place other than the 59 states (lmao) he ripped off... I mean precides over.

African born king Obama? wow :(

I think illegal immigration is not a problem, it is a symptom of a problem. When you have govt handouts and a minimum wage law and other benefits, it only makes sense that the people are going to cross. Why work? Why benefit the country that you just entered, when you can exploit the welfare system.

Big labor's got the States by the balls and until they let go, the border will be crossed.

Don't give me that "build the wall" nonsense, or "enforce the laws". If you're broke dude from Guatemala or some such and you are just trying to find a place with no civil wars and what not, a wall will not make you turn around, especially after you managed to cross Mexico.

[Akus]

Hey, romacox, is that true that all the other Latinos hate Mexicans because they're the closest to the border?

[Grimnir Wotansvolk]

Well, let's say we have a ranking system for criminal acts; 1-10. 1 would be something like stealing a loaf of bread or leeching your neighbor's wifi, 6 would be rape, and 10 would be genocide.

The U.S. government scores an 11 on that scale, meanwhile illegal immigrants are maybe a 2.5 at their worst. Letting the former loose on the latter just seems, I don't know, a little lopsided. The heartless beast is shouting, "follow the law, FOLLOW THE LAW!" while its fangs drip with blood, and somehow I just don't buy it.


edit: and some more food for thought - South and central america is economically destitute thanks mostly to moves made by the U.S. and its cronies. I've always understood the Paulites to be people who pride themselves on rigorously applying history's lessons to present and future endeavors, yet condemning illegal immigrants for taking a little back from the country that put them in this desperate position to begin with strikes me as being a little historically bankrupt.