Statue of Liberty, Then and Now

[spookyturtle 9,465]

“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

 

Why did they ever put that plaque on the statue? What were they thinking? Did those snowflake liberal Democrats pull a fast one on GOP? Should Trump write an Executive Order and have it removed or altered? Should the statue be torn down and replaced with one of Trump in his bathrobe holding a sign that says no Mooslims allowed?

 

Discuss.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

I am throwing you a courtesy reply , because of your tenure and I hate that you have become like another poster that talks to himself a lot.

 

That having been said, I think there is a keyword you are missing, all the Ellis Island crowd was what ?   LEGAL

[Gloss 57]

29 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I am throwing you a courtesy reply , because of your tenure and I hate that you have become like another poster that talks to himself a lot.

 

That having been said, I think there is a keyword you are missing, all the Ellis Island crowd was what ?   LEGAL

Not sure what legal vs illegal immigrants has to do with Trump's Muslim bans. 

[Póg mo 1,749]

Many people assume that their family immigrated to the United States legally, or did it “the right way.”  In most cases, this statement does not reflect the fact that the U.S. immigration system was very different in the past and that their families might not have been allowed to enter had today’s laws been in effect. When many families arrived in the United States, there were no numerical limitations on immigration, no requirements to have an existing family or employment relationship with someone in the country, and no requirement to obtain a visa prior to arriving. The definition of who is “legal”—and who is not—changes with the evolution of immigration laws. In some cases, claiming that a family came “legally” is simply inaccurate—unauthorized immigration has been a reality for generations.https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/did-my-family-really-come-legally-todays-immigration-laws-created-a-new-reality

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

38 minutes ago, Gloss said:

Not sure what legal vs illegal immigrants has to do with Trump's Muslim bans. 

Muslim ban huh.  Nice try now go to the back of the line 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

40 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

Many people assume that their family immigrated to the United States legally, or did it “the right way.”  In most cases, this statement does not reflect the fact that the U.S. immigration system was very different in the past and that their families might not have been allowed to enter had today’s laws been in effect. When many families arrived in the United States, there were no numerical limitations on immigration, no requirements to have an existing family or employment relationship with someone in the country, and no requirement to obtain a visa prior to arriving. The definition of who is “legal”—and who is not—changes with the evolution of immigration laws. In some cases, claiming that a family came “legally” is simply inaccurate—unauthorized immigration has been a reality for generations.https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/did-my-family-really-come-legally-todays-immigration-laws-created-a-new-reality

A lot of words but little meaning . They still followed the law of the land at the time.    That might be one of the more absurd rationalizations I have ever heard here.  The drinking age was 18 when I turned 18. Later it changed to 21, does this mean I was drinking illegally when I was 18. 

Edited March 18, 2017 by Nature Boy Flair

[Póg mo 1,749]

14 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

A lot of words but little meaning . They still followed the law of the land at the time.    That might be one of the more absurd rationalizations I have ever heard here.  The drinking age was 18 when I turned 18. Later it changed to 21, does this mean I was drinking illegally when I was 18. 

Was it also legal to break treaties with native Americans, in order to steal their lands? 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

29 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

Was it also legal to break treaties with native Americans, in order to steal their lands? 

A perfect example of what happens when you don't have strong borders and maintain the strength to defend them.  Thanks 

[spookyturtle 9,465]

2 hours ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I am throwing you a courtesy reply , because of your tenure and I hate that you have become like another poster that talks to himself a lot.

 

That having been said, I think there is a keyword you are missing, all the Ellis Island crowd was what ?   LEGAL

I just posted what the plaque says so people here could discuss it. That's what the country was all about back in the day.

 

[jg121783 3,915]

First of all it is not a Muslim ban. A vast majority of Muslims world wide are unaffected and non Muslims from the banned countries are also affected. Muslims from countries with a vetting process are unaffected.

 

 

Secondly let's do a comparison of now versus the Ellis Island days.  Back then you weren't allowed in if you had a disease that posed a health risk to Americans. Today illegals are bringing illnesses such as drug resistant TB and leprosy with them unchecked. Back then there were no government handouts for immigrants and if it was deemed they couldn't provide for themselves they weren't let in. Today illegals demand government handouts and get them.

 

[Dakine10 5,452]

54 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

First of all it is not a Muslim ban. A vast majority of Muslims world wide are unaffected and non Muslims from the banned countries are also affected. Muslims from countries with a vetting process are unaffected.

 

 

  The 2 court rulings called it a "Muslim ban", and a clear violation of the establishment clause. The force of Trumps own gigantic pie hole is behind that; it was always his intent to ban Muslims. Sorry, your fake information spin won't cut it this time.

[jg121783 3,915]

1 hour ago, Dakine10 said:

  The 2 court rulings called it a "Muslim ban", and a clear violation of the establishment clause. The force of Trumps own gigantic pie hole is behind that; it was always his intent to ban Muslims. Sorry, your fake information spin won't cut it this time.

Some activist judges called it a Muslim ban. You liberals keep side stepping the fact that these countries were originally listed by Obama and Trump has targeted them because they have a high amount of terrorist activity along with the fact that little if any vetting goes on in these countries. It's a national security issue. Not a Muslim issue.

[Dakine10 5,452]

41 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Some activist judges called it a Muslim ban. You liberals keep side stepping the fact that these countries were originally listed by Obama and Trump has targeted them because they have a high amount of terrorist activity along with the fact that little if any vetting goes on in these countries. It's a national security issue. Not a Muslim issue.

 

  No one is side stepping. Obama didn't try to use an executive order to ban these countries or he would have faced the same issue. Trump is trying to do it after talking about banning Muslims on the campaign trail. He couldn't have made it any easier for the judges.

 

  As far as being about national security, the original 90 day ban was said to give DHS time to assess security and vetting protocols. Sixty days has already passed since then so where does another 90 days come from. It just shows again that they are winging it here and they are not doing a very good job of it. It's amateur hour at the white house and unfortunately, it looks like it will be for 4 years.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

13 hours ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I am throwing you a courtesy reply , because of your tenure and I hate that you have become like another poster that talks to himself a lot.

 

That having been said, I think there is a keyword you are missing, all the Ellis Island crowd was what ?   LEGAL

At the time the Statue of Liberty was erected, what was the status of the US-Mexican border? Was there a fence? Were there official crossing points where potential entrants were screened? What was the deterrent and inspection process during the 1800's and early 1900's for our southern border? 

[spookyturtle 9,465]

7 hours ago, jg121783 said:

First of all it is not a Muslim ban. A vast majority of Muslims world wide are unaffected and non Muslims from the banned countries are also affected. Muslims from countries with a vetting process are unaffected.

 

 

Secondly let's do a comparison of now versus the Ellis Island days.  Back then you weren't allowed in if you had a disease that posed a health risk to Americans. Today illegals are bringing illnesses such as drug resistant TB and leprosy with them unchecked. Back then there were no government handouts for immigrants and if it was deemed they couldn't provide for themselves they weren't let in. Today illegals demand government handouts and get them.

 

Back then you could walk across the Mexican border into the US without consequence. No vetting.