Automotive Deals BOTYSFKT Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Subscribe & Save Ruby jewelry Amazon Cash Back Offer harmonquest_s1 harmonquest_s1 harmonquest_s1  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Segway miniPro

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 29 posts in this discussion
Initial post: May 14, 2006 4:13:40 PM PDT
from Phillipine?????

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2006 10:17:43 PM PDT
A. Barringer says:
So... do you have information to present or are you just spouting inflamatory statements? Why should her opinion change besed on her parents at any rate?

Next.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 23, 2006 8:13:12 AM PDT
Barringer:

Why the defensiveness? It looks to me as if M. Hamza asked a legitimate question.

As for your last question... It's very relevent how Malkin's parents became residents here, since she is one of the most rabid critics of most immigrants to this country -both legal and illegal.

Anyway, from what I've heard, Malkin was born in the US while her parents were on an "extended vacation." Her American birth later made it easier for them to become legal residents here. It's funny that an Asiatic woman who was born in this way loves to throw around the term, "anchor babies," when she most likely could be one herself.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 13, 2007 1:01:59 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 13, 2007 1:02:20 PM PDT
So if your parents were drug addicts then you couldn't be anti-drug yourself? Your point doesn't make any sense at all. Even if what you say is true, how would any of that be Malkin's fault?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 15, 2007 11:26:09 AM PDT
She is NOT a critic of Legal Immigration. Obviously, you know nothing about her.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 9, 2007 9:41:32 PM PDT
I should say if what you say is true, I couldn't agree with you more, Caesar.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 22, 2007 7:30:39 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Dec 21, 2009 1:18:07 AM PST
bmovies says:
"Anyway, from what I've heard, Malkin was born in the US while her parents were on an "extended vacation.""

What you heard was wrong. Michelle's parents were here on a work visa.

"Her American birth later made it easier for them to become legal residents here. "

They were already legal residents long before Michelle was born, and what made that easier was the fact that from 1898-1946, the Phillipines was a commonwealth of the United States which means before, during, and after the war, Filipinos were legally American nationals. (And her Grandfather fought under General MacArthur). Which means that Malkin is NOT an "anchor baby."

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 22, 2007 7:39:42 AM PDT
Thank you for setting the record straight. Some people are really grasping at straws trying to denounce her.

I read the book and thoroughly enjoyed it. I guess when you can't dispute the message you try to discredit the messenger.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 25, 2008 4:58:44 PM PDT
lilkunta says:
A Barringer: Obviously MHamza does have info otherwise s/he wouldnt be asking the question. MHamza also asked the question 2 find out more info.
If any1 in inflamatory it is Michelle Malkin.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 25, 2008 5:02:57 PM PDT
lilkunta says:
PMKeating
A child of drug addicts can be antiDrug.
All MHamza wanted 2 know if is Michelle is herself an anchor baby. I c no wrong in that.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 25, 2008 5:04:03 PM PDT
lilkunta says:
JoshJennings: Yes she is. An ex is she is a critic of student visa. That is legal temporary immigration which she criticises.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 25, 2008 5:05:53 PM PDT
lilkunta says:
bm: Do have proof of this? & what relevancy does her grandad fightin under MacArthur matter?

I too have read they were here on a temp work visa, then when she was born she anchored them to the US. Thus she is an anchor baby as she delayed their departure & alter helped them get a permanent visa.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 1, 2009 6:25:22 AM PDT
Maybe it would be good for you to open your eyes and see that she is telling it like it is----maybe you don't like her honesty, it's a shame our government isn't open and honest with us like she is. Someday you'll find out the truth in what she says-it's coming.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 1, 2009 1:35:06 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Oct 1, 2009 1:36:41 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 1, 2009 1:38:38 PM PDT
lilkunta says:
roberta: Michelle aint telling nothing. She isnt being honest. If she wants to be honest why dont she admit her parents had her to anchor themselves to the USA?

Michelle Maglalang's parents were in the US on visas( it is debatable whether is was a student visa or work visa)
THEY WERE NOT CITIZENS. Michelle Maglalang is herself an anchor baby.

I will never find truth in what Michelle says bc she on purpose say inflammatory things,

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 1, 2009 1:41:12 PM PDT
lilkunta says:
Josh: ' bm ' has set no record straight. Michelle Maglalang's parents were in the US on visas ( student visa ? work visa ?we don 't know )
THEY WERE NOT CITIZENS. Michelle Maglalang is herself an anchor baby.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 3, 2009 1:25:41 PM PDT
Why the sudden spam-fest of ad hominem attacks against the author? Get a life. Who is paying these people to attack her? Pathetic.

Great book, recommended read for anyone interested in the immigration debate. Ignore the spammers.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 4, 2009 12:41:08 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 4, 2009 12:41:31 PM PDT
lilkunta says:
Josh: No influx. These questions have always been asked. & they are right to be asked since Malkin says many problem are because of immigrants , & stated that "citizenship is to precious to be wasted on anchor babies", of which she is one.

What is pathetic is the viritrol Malkin states. She put those high school students ( who were against army recruiters @ their school) names, addresses, emails, & phone #s on her website, then was outragedd when her name, address, phone, was put on the internet!

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 4, 2009 2:44:54 PM PDT
I respectfully disagree. Her argument stands on the facts and her own personal background is irrelevant. Everyone in this country with the exception of Native Americans are immigrants, but our country should be careful who we admit. We should do our best to only admit hard working, tax paying people. There is too much abuse of the immigration/welfare system by third-world people who have no business here.

Posted on Oct 5, 2009 6:31:52 AM PDT
lilkunta says:
Facts? What facts?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 5, 2009 6:38:25 AM PDT
lilkunta says:
josh: Facts, that facts? Michelle's personal background IS relevant! She herself is an anchor baby. So if we are to begin mass deportations, she needs to go back to the phillipines with her parents.

The true americans are the native american and african americans; as afram were born here & truly built this country thru the horridness of enslavement.

"third world".. wow, you saying this show me you mentality. The correct term is developing countries. If the US and its barbaricness hadnot gone from continent to continent raping, infecting, killing, & stealing humans, Im sure these countries wouldnt be developing, they would be developed! Afr labor built the US, Asian labor built the railroads, asian & indo( bangladesh, pakistan, indian, etc) buitl & continue to built the tech industry!

So if you are anti immigration abuse fine; since the maglalangs abused it they need to be put on a flight to cebu/manilla.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 21, 2009 1:01:10 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 21, 2009 1:18:25 AM PST
bmovies says:
"Do have proof of this?"

Proof of what? That the Phillipines was an American commonwealth from 1898-1946? Thats a historical fact. Or that people who are residents of an American commonwealth are by law American citizens? That too is a historical fact. Do you have any proof that her parents applied for F1/F2 visas so that they could have a child in the US, thereby proving your claim that shes an anchor baby who delayed her parents departure (and whats the date of that supposed departure that was supposed to take place? You dont know), and helped them get a permanent visa? No, you dont have any proof.

"I too have read they were here on a temp work visa, then when she was born she anchored them to the US. Thus she is an anchor baby as she delayed their departure & alter helped them get a permanent visa."

Lies.

She can't be accurately called an anchor baby. The term refers to an illegal alien who enters the US to have a child so they can gain US citizenship for their child and future immigration benefits for themselves.

Her parents were in the US legally (her Father was a physician in training who was here with an employee sponsored visa) and no evidence they applied for their F1/F2 visas so they could have a child in the US. No evidence any of her family members are in the US illegally and even if they were not an issue unless she was supporting their illegal residence--e.g harboring them. She was born in the US. You cant deport her or any member of her family because they're citizens, all legal and proper.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 21, 2009 12:18:27 PM PST
lilkunta says:
Ah the old commonwealth excuse. Too bad it doesnt count. At the time that the Phillippines was a commonwealth was NOT the time of Michelle's birth.

I suggest you read up on your idol. MICHELLE's definition of an anchor baby is a baby born to a NON US CITIZEN, illegally here or legally here.
Michelle is an anchor baby.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 4, 2010 6:16:54 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 4, 2010 6:48:46 AM PDT
bmovies says:
"Ah the old commonwealth excuse."

Old? Yeah, right. Like you heard that argument before I mentioned it here. Face it, you didnt know that info until I brought it up.

"Too bad it doesnt count"

Riiiight. Doesnt count,. And from what rule book did you pull that from? The so called "commonwealth excuse" destroys your claim of "anchor baby" completely. And you cant dismiss it with a wave of your hand. No matter how hard you try, that little fact is not going to go away.

"At the time that the Phillippines was a commonwealth was NOT the time of Michelle's birth."

Ah, the old strawman. I NEVER said it was a commonwealth during Michelles birth. It was during the birth of her parents and grandparents. I already pointed out that it was a commonwealth up until 1946. I never claimed that Michelle was born before that. (strawman argument from wiki: "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]")

"MICHELLE's definition of an anchor baby is a baby born to a NON US CITIZEN, illegally here or legally here"

Wrong. That is not Michelle's definition. That's your definition. Michelle's definition of an anchor baby is a baby born to illegal aliens. Not to people legally here, even if they're not US Citizens.

From Michelle: "countless 'anchor babies' delivered by illegal aliens on American soil, undermines the integrity of citizenship-not to mention national security"

"Michelle is an anchor baby. "

Michelle was born to parents who were born in an american commonwealth. Hence she was born to US citizens (today her Father is a Pediatrician in New Jersey). And the term anchor baby refers to babys born to non us citizens who are here illegally only. Not legally.

By the way, I just noticed something. In your posts you keep refering to "here" as in here in the United States. "born here" "are here", etc. Yet your profile says your location is not "here", but in Nigeria. Could you clarify where you are from?

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 5, 2010 1:26:49 PM PDT
lilkunta says:
bm:Mr/Mrs Maglalang were Phillipine citizens only. Not USA citizens. If they were USA citizens MrMaglalang wouldn thave entered the USA on a student visa.

Pleae try and use accurate and respected encyclopedias, not wikipedia.

Michelle feels anchor babies are babies born to non USA citizens, whether or nor they are here legally (via B1, B2, J1,etc visas). She was born to nonUSA citizens, though they were her legally.

I am from planet Earth.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  11
Total posts:  29
Initial post:  May 14, 2006
Latest post:  Apr 28, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about