Comment: .

(See in situ)


.

Was not the Union a confederation of states, Mr. Hultberg? Even post-AOC. So since Mr. Lincoln decreed it was not a compact and caused the death of more than 800,000 Americans, the issue is settled and we're left to deal with this usurpation? This is important since you press the issue of nation states and seem to want to defend the original intent.

Tim Kelly points out in his article that you are conflating the definitions of Immigration with Naturalization as understood by the ratifiers.

Naturalization being the term expressly used in the Constitution and thus irrelevant to the discussion. They have that delegated power but not the unlimited consent to control the movement of people all people.

Will E-Verify threaten us with a national ID? No more than we already have with our Social Security number. E-Verify merely opens up the data base to all private employers so they can easily verify an applicant’s citizenship.

You felt a need to defend that point specifically, for good reason.

Sure, it merely opens up the federal governments databases. Could point me to where the founders were in support of the general government keeping a record of every single citizen?

If so where was this power enumerated in the constitution?

No where have I come across such an argument. But I'm honest enough to admit I'm no scholar of the federalist/anti-federalist papers, either.

Point to me a program of the Federal government not used for the explicit purpose of looting and controlling people. They all start out small and innocuous. This is hardly an argument.

I find it incredible that even a paleoconservative could so flippantly accept an immense power grab by the federal government. This is a point I will never accept. It is an inexcusably dangerous proposition.

E-Verify is program run by the Dept. of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration. That should be reason enough.

I do not know how to take your preoccupation with race or cultures. I have not witnessed this as being an issue. Cultures may retain some of their heritage. There is nothing wrong with that.

But by and large after the first generations, their children are fully immersed. This is what I witnessed in an area of high illegal immigrants.

Socio-economic differences may remain, but that's not the issue.

Recall, Ron Paul pointed out

Every time you think about this toughness on the border and ID cards and REAL IDs, think it’s a penalty against the American people too. I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in. In economic turmoil, the people want to leave with their capital and there’s capital controls and there’s people controls. Every time you think about the fence … think about the fences being used against us, keeping us in.

I'm not sure what to make of your position to be honest. You seem to be arguing against every principle of decentralization and conservatism I'm aware of here.

Even though we disagree, I thank you for your article Mr. Hultberg.

I strongly suggest people check out Tim Kelly article for the Future of Freedom Foundation.

http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/immigration-the-const...