Immigration for the Elite

So almost the reverse of xenophobia. Tell that to the millions who have flocked to the US in droves over the centuries to find greener fields instead of fighting for their countries of origin.

Anocdote: At Dell a gentleman from Ecuador with whom I worked with became a citizen. He swore by his country of origin and stated several times that Ecuador was a much better country than the one he swore fealty to. All of us in the lab on both sides of the fence asked him repeatedly why he left Ecuador and after months of our questioning, he stated he loved his country but didn't like the corruption in his own government, but instead of staying and fighting for someplace he loved, he came to the US and hates it. He flies an Ecuadorean flag on his car and bad mouths this country every day.

I don't care if you like this country or not, but trying to turn this country into something it is obviously not from the inside is tantamount to treason, especially when you take the oath of allegience at immigration or swear an oath of allegience to the US Constitution to serve in public office/military duty. That may seem extreme to some, but some of us take the oath seriously. Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

I've been wondering, and this post just pushed it over the edge, how the people on this board feel about "elite immigrations" to the US by people of some notoriety. Peter Jennings, who anchored at ABC for some time, was Canadian. Lara Logan, the new darling of CBS, is South African. And Christian Amanpour with ABC & CNN is either Irani or English. Now granted, the last two are married (currently) to US citizens.

But I guess one of my questions is: should celebrity status alone allow you to live and work in the US?

And do you agree with DFW5 above: should the fact that you are admitted to the US legally prevent you from criticizing the US at all or show some love for your heritage? What if you are a naturalized citizen?

My own anecdote: I know a Spanish lady who met a US Marine who was posted to Spain. They dated, got married and eventually came back to the States. He mustered out of the Marines and went into private industry. She became a US Citizen, and they had kids. I met her working in an office. She loved her heritage country of Spain and sported a Spanish flag on her desk. She occasionally criticized the US. But she also loved it here with her husband and family.

The point of the two anecdotes: You can't anticipate a person's response to citizenship. And besides, citizenship only ensures your right to criticize the US. It's one of those niggling Constitutional Rights.

I've been wondering, and this post just pushed it over the edge, how the people on this board feel about "elite immigrations" to the US by people of some notoriety. Peter Jennings, who anchored at ABC for some time, was Canadian. Lara Logan, the new darling of CBS, is South African. And Christian Amanpour with ABC & CNN is either Irani or English. Now granted, the last two are married (currently) to US citizens.

But I guess one of my questions is: should celebrity status alone allow you to live and work in the US?

And do you agree with DFW5 above: should the fact that you are admitted to the US legally prevent you from criticizing the US at all or show some love for your heritage? What if you are a naturalized citizen?

My own anecdote: I know a Spanish lady who met a US Marine who was posted to Spain. They dated, got married and eventually came back to the States. He mustered out of the Marines and went into private industry. She became a US Citizen, and they had kids. I met her working in an office. She loved her heritage country of Spain and sported a Spanish flag on her desk. She occasionally criticized the US. But she also loved it here with her husband and family.

The point of the two anecdotes: You can't anticipate a person's response to citizenship. And besides, citizenship only ensures your right to criticize the US. It's one of those niggling Constitutional Rights. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

I don't mind anyone who wants to become a citizen in any country as long as they are doing it legally, celebrity or not...I know how long and drawn out the process takes, some people's situations are viewed as more important (for work or military purposes) and the government will usually expedite their process.

I think it's perfectly normal for anyone who has immigrated to the US to still be proud and support their heritage. I am from the UK, born in London, but I have dual citizenship with the EU & US, and as much as I love London, and Europe in general, that doesn't stop me from loving the US as well. There are pros and cons to both places....

I have no problem at all with people having multiple allegiances. I think that's quite common.

We allow U.S. citizens born here to criticize the place. Why wouldn't we let naturalized citizens do the same?

Heck, TTH is critical of the place all the time & we haven't kicked him out yet

Now acts of treason are a different story.

I've been wondering, and this post just pushed it over the edge, how the people on this board feel about "elite immigrations" to the US by people of some notoriety. Peter Jennings, who anchored at ABC for some time, was Canadian. Lara Logan, the new darling of CBS, is South African. And Christian Amanpour with ABC & CNN is either Irani or English. Now granted, the last two are married (currently) to US citizens.

But I guess one of my questions is: should celebrity status alone allow you to live and work in the US?

And do you agree with DFW5 above: should the fact that you are admitted to the US legally prevent you from criticizing the US at all or show some love for your heritage? What if you are a naturalized citizen?

My own anecdote: I know a Spanish lady who met a US Marine who was posted to Spain. They dated, got married and eventually came back to the States. He mustered out of the Marines and went into private industry. She became a US Citizen, and they had kids. I met her working in an office. She loved her heritage country of Spain and sported a Spanish flag on her desk. She occasionally criticized the US. But she also loved it here with her husband and family.

The point of the two anecdotes: You can't anticipate a person's response to citizenship. And besides, citizenship only ensures your right to criticize the US. It's one of those niggling Constitutional Rights. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

I think to put this out of context is basically trying to ensinuate something that isn't there. I don't have a problem with immigrants who want to come here and assimilate into the culture. Nor do I have a problem with people that have dual citizenship. However, when someone renounces their citizenship to a foreign power in favor of US citizenship, they should not begin a campaign to change THIS society into the society they wanted for their country of origin.

I also believe there is a big difference between criticizing your country/government and comparing your country of origin to the country you swore allegience to. Edit: If it's a matter of culture, this is a free society, they have the right to celebrate there heritage, I never said they had to stop. There are plenty of different cultures in this country that celebrate something almost on a daily basis, to which we as a society benefit from by learning about foreign cultures.

I have no problem at all with people having multiple allegiances. I think that's quite common. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

You don't like it here anyway, TTH. When is it you are retiring to France?

But I guess one of my questions is: should celebrity status alone allow you to live and work in the US?

And do you agree with DFW5 above: should the fact that you are admitted to the US legally prevent you from criticizing the US at all or show some love for your heritage? What if you are a naturalized citizen?

My own anecdote: I know a Spanish lady who met a US Marine who was posted to Spain. They dated, got married and eventually came back to the States. He mustered out of the Marines and went into private industry. She became a US Citizen, and they had kids. I met her working in an office. She loved her heritage country of Spain and sported a Spanish flag on her desk. She occasionally criticized the US. But she also loved it here with her husband and family.

The point of the two anecdotes: You can't anticipate a person's response to citizenship. And besides, citizenship only ensures your right to criticize the US. It's one of those niggling Constitutional Rights. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

I think these things are not only a US immigration "Problem". It happens in europe as well. And immigration in europe is very much tougher than in US. The USA is a country of immigrants in the first place.

I think there are two (or more) kinds of people: there are the masochists who criticise anything and averyone without making better points or even try to improve their situation., they like suffering. But they would never admit that, so they blame their situation to be the fault of others, like something they are powerless to influence. The typical "victim mentality". These are the people who will always find a reason to complain (talk about women in abusive relationships who get into yet another abusive relationship again and again - you can`t really say it`s just the other ones fault......)

Those are the kind of people who can also be immigrants and then complain about the country they are immigrating in. That said i mean not critizicing, i mean complaining about how screwed up the USA is and pretending they have no othert choice but living here. These are the people i personally say: Go somewhere else. You can do it. I don^t like living in Europe, great! That is why i move to NYC soon. But sitting somewhere and complaining and not doing something to improve and not leaving is ..hm....

On the other han d i understand people who are born in a country and cannot emmigrate for whatever reason ( no money not enough education - its not so easy to get citizenship or work permissions these days....) . Those are the poor fellows who criticise their country because they can`t leave.

Then there are these ones who are born somewhere (or immigrated) and love the country they live in but also criticise it at points, and try to improof things and statements. I think this kind of criticism is comprehensible citizenship behaviour :-)
. I don`t think that as an immigrant you have to be an uncritical Yay-sayer and eat everything you get served out of gratitude that you are allowed to step foot in a country you have not been born in

As to elitist immigration: I have nothing against it, if someone has good skills and does not live off welfare mainly that is a good thing. There is something that is unique in the USA thought that is the Greencard lottery for diversity. So i think it evens out the elitist immigration :-).

Other countries don`t have that. I think the US-laws are really creative

I don't have a problem with immigration as long as it is done legally. My family immigrated to the U.S. from Welch, Irish decent to serve in WWII. Very patriotic family. Grandfather: WWII, Father: Korea, Brothers: VN, and myself Gulf War Vet. although my service was National Guard at a state side Hospital. I tell everyone that I had a rich uncle pay for school. The problem I have is when people come to this country, but despise it. My friends wife is from Canada and brought her retired mother to the U.S. for health reasons, but the mother hates the U.S. even though she now gets the treatment that she could not get in Canada at the tax payers expense. I don't blame people for wanting to come to the U.S. there is no other place I would want to live full time.

I'm okay with deporting TTH.

When I see someone waving the Stars and Stripes whilst thumping on a Bible I immediately move my wallet into a more secure position.....

When I see someone waving the Stars and Stripes whilst thumping on a Bible I immediately move my wallet into a more secure position..... Originally Posted by Randy4Candy

I have no problem for anyone coming that goes through the process in the proper and legal manner. Once they are naturalized, they have most all of the same rights as a natural born citizen except holding the office of President. That includes any criticism they want to do. I served the flag that is flying under my name for 20 years. That time was spent making sure all citizens have the right to speak out and do many things I do not agree with like burning the flag. A lot of brave men and women have given their lives in service to that flag and to uphold the rights of people to even burn same.

We live in a great country from that respect and even though I get upset at some of the things that go on in this country, I served and many died to allow all to vent their feelings. I do sometimes wish that the ones that gripe about our country and freedom so much would decide to move to a place they feel would better serve and suit their feelings. I doubt if they could find it. Enough said about that.

Top

Democracy only works if people criticize the government. Ideas like the First Amendment are only meaningful if people use them. I believe it's not just a citizen's right, but his or her responsibility, to criticize and campaign against the things they find objectionable. If we all just nodded our heads, waved our flags and were complacent, there's not much use for a Bill of Rights at all, is there?

We allow U.S. citizens born here to criticize the place. Why wouldn't we let naturalized citizens do the same?

Heck, TTH is critical of the place all the time & we haven't kicked him out yet Originally Posted by atlcomedy

"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."

Thomas Jefferson

And I'm leaving just as soon as I have my money sack full. And I take donations [Hint, hint!]

Seriously, I have an elderly parent I have to consider. Plus if I'm going to make my stash last as long as I am statistically likely to, I need my investments to increase about 60% or the price of natural gas to go back up to $7/mcf. But Obama has been great for the stock market, like most Democratic presidents, so the 60% increase isn't out of the question. $7 natural gas, unfortunately, seems rather elusive.

And ya'll make it sound like I'm just abandoning the U.S. for France. Not true!!!! I actually plan to spend a fair amount of time in N.Z. during the northern hemisphere winter.

And I'm leaving just as soon as I have my money sack full. And I take donations [Hint, hint!] Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Just to give TTH some new revenue ideas, the 2010 Stella Awards:

For those unfamiliar with these awards, they are named after 81-year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued the McDonald's in New Mexico , where she purchased coffee. You remember, she took the lid off the coffee and put it between her knees while she was driving. Who would ever think one could get burned doing that, right? That's right; these are awards for the most outlandish lawsuits and verdicts in the U.S. You know, the kinds of cases that make you scratch your head.

*SEVENTH PLACE*
Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas was awarded $80,000 by a jury of her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store. The store owners were understandably surprised by the verdict, considering the running toddler was her own son

* SIXTH PLACE *
Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles , California won $74,000 plus medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Truman apparently didn't notice there was someone at the wheel of the car when he was trying to steal his neighbor's hubcaps.

* FIFTH PLACE *
Terrence Dickson, of Bristol , Pennsylvania , who was leaving a house he had just burglarized by way of the garage. Unfortunately for Dickson, the automatic garage door opener malfunctioned and he could not get the garage door to open. Worse, he couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the garage to the house locked when Dickson pulled it shut. Forced to sit for eight, count 'em, EIGHT days and survive on a case of Pepsi and a large bag of dry dog food, he sued the homeowner's insurance company claiming undue mental Anguish. Amazingly, the jury said the insurance company must pay Dickson $500,000 for his anguish. We should all have this kind of anguish Keep scratching. There are more...

*FOURTH PLACE*
Jerry Williams, of Little Rock, Arkansas, garnered 4th Place in the Stella's when he was awarded $14,500 plus medical expenses after being bitten on the butt by his next door neighbor's beagle - even though the beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced yard. Williams did not get as much as he asked for because the jury believed the beagle might have been provoked at the time of the butt bite because Williams had climbed over the fence into the yard and repeatedly shot the dog with a pellet gun.

* THIRD PLACE *
Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania because a jury ordered a Philadelphia restaurant to pay her $113,500 after she slipped on a spilled soft drink and broke her tailbone. The reason the soft drink was on the floor: Ms. Carson had thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument.

*SECOND PLACE*
Kara Walton, of Claymont , Delaware sued the owner of a night club in a nearby city because she fell from the bathroom window to the floor, knocking out her two front teeth. Even though Ms. Walton was trying to sneak through the ladies room window to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge, the jury said the night club had to pay her $12,000....oh, yeah, plus dental expenses.

* FIRST PLACE *
This year's runaway First Place Stella Award winner was: Mrs. Merv Grazinski, of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, who purchased new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On her first trip home, from an OU football game, having driven on to the freeway, she set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to go to the back of the Winnebago to make herself a sandwich. Not surprisingly, the motor home left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Also not surprisingly, Mrs. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not putting in the owner's manual that she couldn't actually leave the driver's seat while the cruise control was set. The Oklahoma jury awarded her -- are you sitting down? -- $1,750,000 PLUS a new motor home. Winnebago actually changed their manuals as a result of this suit, just in case Mrs. Grazinski has any relatives who might also buy a motor home.

@PJ

You sound like you don't believe in the jury system. How anti-US Constitution of you.

Most of these cases, if not all, would have been defended by silk stocking insurance defense firms who are more than able to mount a serious defense. Makes me wonder, as Paul Harvey would have said, what the rest of the story is.