LeviF

Considering the (British) act that preceded it we can almost certainly deduce that "good character" meant Protestant as well.

Your statement was that America was not founded as an ethno-nationalist state. The first, and several subsequent, Naturalization laws as well as the Constitution itself contradict this at least to some extent. We can argue to what degree that might be but your initial statement is categorically false.

The first time non-European aliens were made eligible for naturalization didn’t come until the 1830s. And it was some Indian tribe and came with some strings attached.

I can’t really speak to Trump’s genealogy, but ethnic Germans can be seen as cousins of sorts to the ethnic Americans in general. They assimilate just fine and have intermarried quite a lot with the old American stock. Again, ignorance of the history of the early laws of this country with respect to immigration especially is no friend. I’ve spoken to the heritage black Americans already in this very thread. If you can’t be bothered to read just say so and have done with it.

Again, citizenship is a legal matter we apply to people. Nationality is not, at least not in the historic use of the term. People that claim to be part of a sovereign nation within the United States should lay no claim to the term “native” except as applies to whatever failed state their parentage hailed.

It’s supported by both. The ignorance is yours. To you, nationality is an accidental fiction. Something that you can step into and out of. This is a fundamental philosophical difference that separates you from thousands of years of thinking on the matter. We can’t have a productive conversation about it.

No. They aren't. They are descended from the first settlers of this giant land mass but in most cases failed at statecraft. In the cases where they did not (say, the Aztecs), they were rightly and ruthlessly conquered. The "natives" of this country are those who are descended from the founders of this country (described above) and those that lived and assimilated among and with them in the 17th and 18th centuries. If you became a Japanese citizen through marriage and became entitled to the rights of a Japanese citizen, renouncing your US citizenship and permanently relocating yourself to Osaka, would you then consider yourself Japanese?

Then being "American" is pure accident, meaningless. And as far as they go, many of them "choose" to not be American. So why should they be able to lay claim to the term "native American?"

Which part is BS? Many of the so-called "indigenous" peoples maintain their sovereignty from the United States all the while attempting to reap the benefits of American citizenship, for all that's worth. Why would these people be Americans by any reasonable definition?

First, our respective understandings of the term "native Americans" is going to be wildly different. I'm going to assume that your definition is related to the descendants of the stone age peoples that crossed the land bridge that purportedly existed between what we now call Russia and Alaska. Some are, and some are not. Which sounds like a non-answer but is consistent with what I stated upthread. Careful reading should tell you that "America," as I speak of it, is not simply a land mass.

Yeah, that was kind of my point.

Your ethnicity is a gift from God. Given freely by Him via providence through your parentage. Also unmerited, unearned. No earthly accident (such as where you happened to be born) can change that. If you are indeed a Christian, you might do well to see whether “Enlightenment” thinking has wormed its way into your faith. Such as the idea that your blood brothers are of lesser import than the foreigner. Myself, I have little skin in the religious game. Though I freely acknowledge that the founding of America was particularly Christian, and Protestant.

Everyone is a blood and soil nationalist about the places they actually care about.

You can basically look at it two ways. First is that the foundational American stock (those who are genealogically American and those who have married and assimilated with genealogical Americans) is made up of the descendants of the English who founded the Virginia and Massachusetts Bay colonies, and the descendants of the slaves brought into the aforementioned Virginia colony. This is admittedly the more restrictive of the two. The second is the folkways model as outlined in Albion's Seed (those who, by stock or by assimilation, are part of the four cultures that migrated from the island of Great Britain). Notably, neither *require* citizenship, as citizenship is an accident, rather than part of the essence, of a person. Also notably, both require you to admit that the American essentially exists outside of unintelligible allegiance to some sort of democratic ideology or as a widget in an economic zone. Another impossible challenge for you, to be sure.

Leftist not commit the fallacy of accident challenge: impossible.

Ah, yes, famous section of immigration policy, there. Ellis Island and its consequences have been a disaster for America and, consequently, the human race. Emma Lazarus (interesting surname btw) was never elected to anything. In the leftist state religion that ***** poem and the Civil Rights Act are the confessions.

If you can't define "American" by some essential parameters then no, there is no such thing as an "American." I don't write the rules, I just ruthlessly enforce them.

Evergreen

Democrats officially state it out loud: there is no such thing as an “American.”

Cost cutting. But they're paying out their contracts. Unless he had a stipulation in his contract that he only flies private or something I don't see how this saves much.

Reminiscent of McDonald’s lowballing the woman whose cooch got third degree burns from their coffee and later won a brinks truck off them.

And yet you have major news publications promoting the "Fascist/Nazi thing," as you put it. If it's so unproductive, as you claim, why is it boosted by state-aligned media?

I hear these guys manage a lot of incidents https://joinstatepolice.ny.gov

Should he still get a nickname? @BringBackFergy

While a significant portion of the userbase here has ties to WNY, the list of posters that I'm pretty sure are still local to the 716 or 585 is pretty short. I'm not gonna poast about the local school board elections because they're statistically relevant to only me. NYS politics might get a little more play but at the end of the day the only politics most any of us have in common are national politics.