BF2S Forums Australian politics thread.

Jay wrote:

If the U.S. thinks itself a Christian nation, we should do more to protect foreign Christians.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

If the U.S. thinks itself a Christian nation, we should do more to protect foreign Christians.

This is funny on so many levels.

Jay wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

That's more than 10% of the total amount of legal immigrants we let in. How many do you want?

While we are on the subject of immigration, I wish the U.S. would step up and take the Christians and other non-Muslim religious minorities in Iraq-Syria as refugees. Non-Muslims are discriminated against pretty badly because of their religion. If the U.S. thinks itself a Christian nation, we should do more to protect foreign Christians.

We could make extra refugee slots specifically for them that way Muslims can't cry racism because the amount of slots available for them will remain unchanged.

Watch less fox news

Last edited by SuperJail Warden (2015-08-20 08:25:07)

Ty wrote:

I'm a New Zealander, Australian immigration policy targets me hardest of all. A New Zealander can live, work, and pay taxes in Australia for a decade and be no closer to gaining citizenship or being able to vote, (taxation without representation eh?) or even access the sort of taxpayer funded services Australians enjoy. Despite paying for them.

Russell Crowe - who owns the South Sydney NRL team, is a named "National Treasure", who has been featured on Australian stamps, who has an Australian wife and kids and has lived in Australia since he was young - can not acquire Australian citizenship because he is from New Zealand and happened to be away promoting a movie when the current laws came in.

I know there was a reason for this sort of thing when the "brain drain" was being used as a scapegoat by both countries administrations and there was a fear of people using NZ citizenship as a back door for migration to Australia, (which is legitimate but could have been solved in other ways,) really it's a bit shit.

Ty wrote:

I'm a New Zealander, Australian immigration policy targets me hardest of all.

On Monday, Bush was trying to clean-up controversy over his use of the term "anchor babies" last week, but instead found himself in another mess after he said the offensive term was "frankly, more related to Asian people."
...
Further attempting to clarify his comments, the Republican presidential contender said he was actually talking about immigrants other than those who cross the U.S.-Mexico border.

"What I was talking about was the specific case of fraud being committed where there's organized efforts and, frankly, it's more related to Asian people coming into our country, having children in that organized efforts taking advantage of a noble concept which is birthright citizenship," he said. "I support the 14th amendment."

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Jay wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Immigration is a campaign topic in the U.S. Jeb Bush, the smart Bush, managed to upset 2 electorates with his comments about anchor babies. Thought you guys would find it funny compared to your immigration discussion.

Because it's a real thing: http://m.ocregister.com/articles/touris … deral.html

It's a very real thing here. I can go to at least 4 different residential developments within a 15 minute drive and find what are essentially 'baby' shops. 

And yeah, it is him being deliberately ignorant on it.  He's using the term "anchor babies" to conjure up the old republican mainstay of poor mexicans coming across to the US to have kids (there was some serious vitriol on this topic on these boards in the past by stupid fuckers like ATG) as a way to stay in the country because it's a phrase that drums up anger at illegal immigration (an issue conservative voters are adamant about) and establishes him as agreeing with the party platform even though his wife is Mexican and he's previously shown tolerance for the latin community (he speaks spanish!!).  By deflecting the comment to Asians he maintains the simple support of the latin community while also keeping the stupid racist conservatives who don't want no messeeecan anchor babies.

The reality is (and the linked article touches on it) the Asians coming here (overwhelmingly Chinese) are wealthy - ie. not the poor immigrants eating up our welfare services and popping out 6 babies by the time they are 20 as fits the conservative hatemongers boogeyman

Last edited by SuperJail Warden (2015-08-25 11:23:43)

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Jay wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Immigration is a campaign topic in the U.S. Jeb Bush, the smart Bush, managed to upset 2 electorates with his comments about anchor babies. Thought you guys would find it funny compared to your immigration discussion.

Because it's a real thing: http://m.ocregister.com/articles/touris … deral.html

It's a very real thing here. I can go to at least 4 different residential developments within a 15 minute drive and find what are essentially 'baby' shops. 

And yeah, it is him being deliberately ignorant on it.  He's using the term "anchor babies" to conjure up the old republican mainstay of poor mexicans coming across to the US to have kids (there was some serious vitriol on this topic on these boards in the past by stupid fuckers like ATG) as a way to stay in the country because it's a phrase that drums up anger at illegal immigration (an issue conservative voters are adamant about) and establishes him as agreeing with the party platform even though his wife is Mexican and he's previously shown tolerance for the latin community (he speaks spanish!!).  By deflecting the comment to Asians he maintains the simple support of the latin community while also keeping the stupid racist conservatives who don't want no messeeecan anchor babies.

The reality is (and the linked article touches on it) the Asians coming here (overwhelmingly Chinese) are wealthy - ie. not the poor immigrants eating up our welfare services and popping out 6 babies by the time they are 20 as fits the conservative hatemongers boogeyman

Last edited by Jay (2015-08-25 14:25:25)