51
   

May I see your papers, citizen?

 
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 04:14 pm
@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:


Roger, I wonder if you and I could work out a set of details that both of us could feel comfortable.


Probably. At any rate, I could accept details with which I am not completely comfortable with if I were assured of fairly effective enforcement of the whole agreement.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Sat 1 May, 2010 04:20 pm
@ebrown p,
Re Keeping illegals away from our jobs:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/30/AR2010043001863.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 08:19 am
A rather middle of the road view on Mexico . . . AZ's neighbor that sparked this law . . .http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/opinion/02friedman.html?hp

A blog on the matter that clarifies some of the legal changes to date: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/05/new_az_antiillegal_immigrant_l.html

A look at the protests: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126440329


And, finally, Liane Hansen interviewed the bill's sponsor, John Kavanaugh, but the audio will not be available until noon, Eastern Daylight Time. Find it under Weekend Edition, Sunday.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 08:37 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Re Keeping illegals away from our jobs:


Whatever that is it sure ain't free market capitalism. Really, it's clean cut socialism and anathema to bargain hunting consumers.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 08:40 am
@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:
I hate the idea of national ID.

Why? That's one of those things I don't get about Americans. What's the big deal about a national ID?
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 09:06 am
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

ebrown p wrote:
I hate the idea of national ID.

Why? That's one of those things I don't get about Americans. What's the big deal about a national ID?
personally I think it's part of the "american psyche" anachronistic for sure but it's "I am who I say I am and I don't want no government telling me otherwise". I understand that in an 19th century sorta way. I actually think we should place some kind of micro-chip into the body of every new-born baby in the delivery room.
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 09:19 am
@dyslexia,
Dyslexia wrote:
personally I think it's part of the "american psyche" anachronistic for sure but it's "I am who I say I am and I don't want no government telling me otherwise".

That is the opposite of my own experience. It's the German governments respecting who I am, and the American governments telling me I'm someone else. America doesn't need a national ID to screw up my name.

OK, maybe I should explain that. In real life, I go by the name of "Thomas", but my full first name is "Gunter Thomas". German authorities never had a problem with that. In my official documents, including my much-demonized national ID, the name "Thomas" is underlined to indicate that that's the name I'm going by. So if German officials ever called me by my first name -- which they never did, because they would have considered it disrespectful -- it would certainly have been my correct name, "Thomas".

Not so in America. American officials diligently follow a two-step process to mangle my name. First, they'll have nothing of that talk about the underlining business. To them, my first name is whatever the first item in my list of given names is: "Gunter". Second, even though we've never met, they simply assume they can call me by my first name. So it never occurs to them to even ask "may I call you 'Gunter'?", to which I would reply, "no -- you can call me 'Thomas' or 'Mr B.', but not 'Gunter'. I've never gone by the name of 'Gunter'". They simply call me what they mistakenly think my name is, and if I don't like it, that's my problem.

Consequently, America and I are at an impasse about my name. I'm telling everyone I'm "Thomas", and American authorities are telling me I'm "Gunter", or at best "Gunter T." There's an alien with a false identity for you.
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 09:33 am
@Thomas,
My grandfather was given a name by his mother, some unpronounceable string of cherokee words, at the age of 8 he changed his name to "Edgar". While there was nothing legal about either of his names (he was born in 1883) he remained "Edgar" for the rest of his life, Social Security, Drivers License, U. S. Army etc.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 09:41 am
@dyslexia,
Now that is kind of cool.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 09:43 am
@Thomas,
But I don't think he could do it if he'd been born in 1983, not 1883, and tried to change his name in 1989. Could he?
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 09:43 am
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

I'm not sure what I think about it, still mulling. But, my immediate reaction is a kind of totalitarian (word instead of nazi or socialist(!) super watch.

On the other hand, is it like my passport?

I'm listening while wary.

Tell me what good it would do.


So I said several pages back. I've come around to thinking I am not against a national i.d. I think my wariness is about admittedly vague fears about its use in practice, such as that only certain people positively must carry them.

0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 09:53 am
@Thomas,
nope.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 10:11 am
In 1970, my brother decided his name ought to be different. So, he got himself a new Social Security card and began using the new name. He was never challenged on it and never had to use his surname or his given names again.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 12:47 pm
My youngest was given the name Owen after the Welsh national hero found in the Henry V plays by Shakespeare where he is called Owen Glendower.

He was supposed have my mother's maiden name, Hughes, as his middle name but because my ex and I were embattled over the name . . . my ex suddenly wanted to name the kid after his grandfather, who was William James B. As we had an Emily and a Nathaniel . . . and as everyone assumed , incorrectly, they were named after Dickinson and Hawthorne . . . I said no. I just didn't want a kid growing up thinking he was named after an ugly building at Harvard or that he had to somehow teach at Harvard.

We named him Owen Douglas as a compromise but he hated Douglas. When he was 13, he went to Ireland on a school-sponsored trip and learned that the Irish spelling of his name is Eoin. At 13, he would have had to pay $60 for the name change and have written permission from both parents but his father seldom spoke to him. When he was 21, he paid $185 to change his name to Eoin Hughes B.

On another note, Massachusetts does something stupid with drivers' licenses. After a person visits the Registry of Motor Vehicles for a new license, they are given a paper copy. Then the license is mailed to the driver. DUH! Why not give the license to the driver immediately and save money?
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 01:08 pm
@plainoldme,
The DMV does a background search before issuing the official ID.
Always Eleven to him
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 01:16 pm
@DrewDad,
I venture to say that if my father and I walked down a street in AZ speaking German, we would not be asked for our papers. <sigh>
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 03:50 pm
I thought this bill didn't go into effect for ninety days.. but I suppose it is reasonable to have a neighbor state government response in place.

http://www.koat.com/news/23337893/detail.html
SANTA FE, N.M. -- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has directed a state agency to help New Mexicans worried about traveling to Arizona and dealing with its new immigration enforcement law. He says he was "deeply concerned" that New Mexico residents could be stopped under that state's law.
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 04:21 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

I thought this bill didn't go into effect for ninety days.. but
I suppose it is reasonable to have a neighbor state government response in place.

http://www.koat.com/news/23337893/detail.html
SANTA FE, N.M. -- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has directed a state agency
to help New Mexicans worried about traveling to Arizona
and dealing with its new immigration enforcement law. He says he was "deeply concerned" that New Mexico residents could be stopped under that state's law.
Does this mean that Governor Richardson
will be an accomplice to federal CRIME,
in being in America illegally ???

Will the Governor subvert America's immigration laws
and be complicit, after the fact, in violation of America's borders ??





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 04:24 pm
@Always Eleven to him,
Always Eleven to him wrote:
I venture to say that if my father and I walked down a street in AZ speaking German,
we would not be asked for our papers. <sigh>
The Germans are not intruding into America; the MEXICANS are! <counter-sigh>





David
dyslexia
 
  2  
Reply Sun 2 May, 2010 04:24 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
help New Mexicans
New Mexicans are american citizens.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 05:45:31