does this bug anyone else? the rules were posted... just complain enough and the weak will bow down. http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1984879,00.html
It bugs me that you're bugged. If you're not 100% Native American, you're an immigrant like 99.9xinfinity of the people in this country. Babies born in this country are citizens of this country. That's the law. Rules excluding them from sweepstakes of any sort on the basis of their ancestry are inherently in violation of anti-discrimination laws. And people who get angry about immigrants coming to this country for a better life for themselves and their children have no understanding whatsoever about the best stuff that came from the settlers' wholesale slaughter and genocide of the people the country actually belongs to.
Babies born in this country aren't illegal immigrants. I'm not promoting illegal immigrants but I am intuitively pissed off by America-first types who are anti-immigrant - legal or not - as our founding fathers were illegal immigrants that conquered and slaughtered a native people for personal gain. Subsequent to that horriblest of horrible injustices this country was built by immigrants and the great dream of an American melting pot was not imagined to be predicated by years-long legal struggles or English as an official language. So while I'm not promoting the breaking of any law including immigration ones I understand the wish to move here for a better life (as, incidentally, encouraged by the inscription on the damn Statue of Liberty) and I find it grossly ironic that "Americans" are so obsessed with protecting borders their founding fathers greedily and bloodily thwarted. But my opinion on all that stuff doesn't matter too much in this case since the kid is an American citizen.
2 things. this wasn't initially a immigration post, but i'll reply to that also. 1) the contest rules say that only mothers who are legal residents are eligible. my beef is that even though the rules clearly state who is and isn't eligible, people can b**** and moan and cry and they'll get their way. as if the entire county functions on the burger king slogan. this is what is wrong in schools today also. as kinky called it, wussification, call it politically correct if you want, but it boils down to a company that is scared to take a stand. the rule was included to exclude mothers crossing the border in hopes that their child would be the first. the fact that they live here and work here does not change the fact that they are indeed here illegally. 2) immigration. even 100% native americans migrated here at some point about 10,000 years ago. or if you don't believe that, maybe you think it was 1,500 years ago (but thats a different debate). lets get basic here, an immigrant - a person who migrates to another country http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/immigrant the majority of my ancestors came over during the colony years so technically they were not immigrants since they did not change countries when they moved, i'm also 1/16th shawnee. i'd also take issue with the 99.9% claim, but i'm too lazy to look up the US demographics.
Okay. I think the rules were crappy then and Toys-R-Us was right to change them after the fact. You take issue with the 99.9% thing? Maybe you're right. Maybe it's 99.5. Or even 99.1 (even though it isn't). What was the percentage before "Americans" showed up? My point is that the righteousness of Americans against immigrants is disgusting crap considering that the ancestors of natural citizens here not only immigrated to begin with but did it in a far worse way than today's illegal immigrants -- they did it by murdering the people that were here before them and stealing their land. The fact that the descendants of those genocidal land stealers get pissed off about people wanting to come here and work for minimum wage or whatever is disgusting at the very least. For the record, I think the rule that someone has to be born in America to be president is crap too. Our first five or ten presidents weren't born here -- they invaded the country and killed the people in charge. I hear Schwargenegger wants to run for president. I think he should be allowed. I don't agree with his politics and I wouldn't vote for him, but at least he didn't kill people to rise to power like our founding fathers did.
ok, thats what i was originally trying to find out. the rule itself bugged you, but not the outcome. the exact opposite is how i sit. i should have made this a poll, but obviously too late for that now. how do you wish to define "Americans"? and in this definition do you considers "Americans" those governed by the United States, or those who governed by the US, Canada, or Mexico (i.e. North America)? i'll agree with this point, although the wording and facts aren't completely right, the basic premise we do agree on. i too think this can probably be done away with, but it's not going to happen...
I define "Americans" here as those people that stole the land we now call the US from the people we used to call Injuns and now call "Native Americans." And I define those of their descendants who strike a righteous pose in 'defending' this country from 'invaders' that have only come here to work hard and make a life for themselves in a country that is supposed to have a history of embracing immigrants as spoiled assholes. I'm not a historian so I won't pretend to be up to a fight on the particulars. If I'm wrong about the settlers that founded this country having been able to do so only as a result of the slaughter of American Indians, please correct me. If not, I'm not at all sure any minor fact correction would make me less repulsed by the spoiled brats born in this country as a result of that genocide whining about someone who has risked life and limb for the opportunity to come here and work for a living wage.
I have a problem with the last part. From what I've seen, yes there are those who work, but there are also alot of these immigrants who drain society by taking our free resources that should really be only given to the needy. I guess you could say, "double dipping?". They don't pay income tax and they receive health benefits etc etc etc etc etc.
I don't think Schwarzenegger should, only because Alexander Hamilton didn't get to. Also, I wonder if there's a slippery slope of changing the Articles of the Constitution, unless this could be done by an Amendment. Incidentally, I do concur with pretty much everything else you've said in this thread. But both my parents were immigrants, and my mom was temporarily illegal (expired student visa), so I'm probably biased.
at what point, or do you ever, consider everyone Americans? i believe you take a negative look at the past, meaning you may think the intention was genocide, rather than a consequence. was the main purpose of the land grab by the founders to a) kill/rape/steal or was it b) ignorant and selfish? i'd like to see your take on the issue of manifest destiny. the majority of illegals do or are: 1) good people and hard workers 2) just trying to make a better life for themselves and their family 3) pay income tax (on a false or stolen social security number) the majority of illegals do not: 1) abuse the system for their personal gain having said that, they are still law breakers. those of you that take issue with this and think they should be afforded certain benefits that law abiding citizens are afforded, sorry. write your congressman, have the law changed. when this occurs, you will then gain ground to stand on, until that time you are wrong. the supreme court would have the power overturn it, unless it were an amendment... why anyone would challenge the idea of allowing a non native born citizen to become president??? perhaps the '86 amnesty, but i doubt anyone that benefited from that, or anyone that will benefit when the 110th congress gives amnesty again, has nearly enough money, wealth, or prestige to even think about running for president.... then again thats 11 million people, they probably have a good chunk of change.
Give the money to the baby in the form of a college trust she can have when she turns 18 ~ problem solved.
Wow. Batman on his white people are the devil soapbox. Should I take over from here? White people....killed all the indians....they were simply peace loving people....never engaged in warfare...raped of their land...blahblahblah.
Yeah, I'm not entirely sure how the european invasion of the Americas is relevant to a Toys R Us contest and the associated rules. That being said, Batman's argument that anti-immigration/xenophobic americans are being rather hypocritical is meritous. And that being said, there exist legal ways to immigrate.
I think the rules originally stated that the mother had to be a legal resident. A rule is a rule is a rule. I'm not even sure the mother entered the contest by her own will. I know plenty of illegal immigrants, and I can guarantee you there is nothing they will do to let the gov't know of who or where they are. Most likely the hospital entered it for her without her knowledge nor the dad's knowledge. I don't even think the parents understood what was going on. Now they might get deported, and at the very least get looked at by Immigration Services.
Exactly. I have no problem with immigration at all, if it is legal. I think it is great when people want to come here and make a living or come here for what ever reason they want but do it legally. I have little tolerance for illegals though.
