House Republicans still want to rip out the 14th amendment....

[Kondor3]

Perhaps we simply need a new Amendment to close the existing loophole in the 14th that Illegal Aliens use to pop-out Anchor Babies by the bushel-basketful?

I clearly remember reading that politicians in the 1830-50 in NYC and Chicago stated the same EXACT criticism about the Irish "popping out" too many babies.

Well, there ya go... a time-honored tradition... venting spleens at breed-like-rabbits types.

Then again, the Irish weren't popping-out kids just to stay on US soil, so, there's just a wee bit o' difference in all that, after all.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Bullshit.


Slavery as an institution was on its way out without needing a bloody civil war.


East Germany and the former USSR succumbed to freedom.

.

Agreed. Personally I think when the Boll Weevil hit, it would have been the end of slavery, and the CSA would have as good of relations with the USA as Canada does.

Enjoying your alternate Universe?

At least I know when I am playing with a fantasy, which puts me miles ahead of you and your ilk.

Or have you discovered more secret codes hidden in my posts?

Ahhh, the good old "ilk" method.

Pretty boring. C-

Have you nothing better to offer?

I don't need to look for any secret codes in your content - it is really quite obvious.

Boring?

Well, I would be happy to discuss the topic, buy you keep changing the subject to me, and your deep need to discuss how racist you think I am.

Some nice alternative history would be more interesting IMO.

You do realize how boringly predictable everything you say is?

Why? Because your racism bores me.....

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Birthright citizenship is a stupid and self defeating policy for sure. We are the only country in the world that allows people who enter the country illegally and happen to give birth on our land to have that baby be granted full citizenship. Not only that but illegal immigrants are provided advocacy and benefits that not even American citizens have access to



If White people had been allowed to vote on immigration policies in 1965, the immigration door would NEVER have been opened to the Third World.

 

[-S-]

So now Republicans want to change the rules to a person born in America is only an American citizen if one of their parents is an American citizen?





You know, conservatives, there's an easier strategy to win national elections, and it doesn't even involve changing the rules of citizenship.

It's called, "Don't be assholes."
Works like a charm.

 

[whitehall]

You almost gotta laugh that the progs would bring up citizenship when we haven't even seen the president's birth certificate in six years. The 14th Amendment was intended to award citizenship to former slaves who were taken to the U.S. against their will. Generations of progs have expanded it (for political reasons) to extending citizenship to criminals who have entered the Country illegally.

 

[Kondor3]

So now Republicans want to change the rules to a person born is only an American citizen if one of their parents is an American citizen?

Well, that posthumously changes my grandfather's status.



You know, conservatives, there's an easier strategy to win national elections, and it doesn't even involve changing the rules of citizenship.

It's called, "Don't be assholes."
Works like a charm.

Simple solution...

The rules can be changed to...

1. grandfather-in all prior births, to conform to the old rule, and to allow those citizenship categorizations to stand.

2. exclude all future such births from categorizing the offspring as a citizen.

Done.

Whether it's a SCOTUS-level re-interpretation of the 14th, or new related legislation that will stand close Constitutional scrutiny, or an actual Amendment...

One way or another, that can be handled easily.

The trick lies in pushing the changes through to fruition, not in crafting the language.

 

[-S-]

So now Republicans want to change the rules to a person born is only an American citizen if one of their parents is an American citizen?

Well, that posthumously changes my grandfather's status.



You know, conservatives, there's an easier strategy to win national elections, and it doesn't even involve changing the rules of citizenship.

It's called, "Don't be assholes."
Works like a charm.

Simple solution...

The rules can be changed to...

1. grandfather-in all prior births, to conform to the old rule, and to allow those citizenship categorizations to stand.

2. exclude all future such births from categorizing the offspring as a citizen.

Done.

Whether it's a SCOTUS-level re-interpretation of the 14th, or new related legislation that will stand close Constitutional scrutiny, or an actual Amendment...

One way or another, that can be handled easily.

The trick lies in pushing the changes through to fruition, not in crafting the language.

The only thing I don't understand is..

What's the point? How does this help our country?
I see how it helps the Republican party come election season, but are there any things about this that actually help the country?

If not, then why go through the trouble?

 

[mudwhistle]

Damn, they just never learn.

Going on RIGHT NOW, in the HOR Judiciary Committee:

Hearing Birthright Citizenship Is it the Right Policy for America - Hearings - Judiciary Committee

HEARING: BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP: IS IT THE RIGHT POLICY FOR AMERICA?

Among the list of those invited is a person from the Claremont Institute, an extreme-Right-Wing think-tank.


And Rep. King just did this about 3 hours ago, at the hearing.

View attachment 40561



This HOR may just go down in history as most stupid HOR we have ever had.

Many, many important issues, and they are focused on wanting to kill the 14th amendment because of what they call "anchor babies".

Go figure.

Just trying to make America the same as our foreign critics.

This is the only country stupid enough to allow this nonsense.

 

[Edgetho]

You almost gotta laugh that the progs would bring up citizenship when we haven't even seen the president's birth certificate in six years. The 14th Amendment was intended to award citizenship to former slaves who were taken to the U.S. against their will. Generations of progs have expanded it (for political reasons) to extending citizenship to criminals who have entered the Country illegally.

It's a little more complicated than that. A Chinese man was refused entry back into the USA even though he was born here.

There were also dozens of cases of people stealing land in US Territories that weren't States yet from others, even though they were born here and grew up on the Land.

They called it the 'Wild West' for a reason.

But you're right. The 14th was never intended to facilitate 'anchor babies'

 

[mudwhistle]

You almost gotta laugh that the progs would bring up citizenship when we haven't even seen the president's birth certificate in six years. The 14th Amendment was intended to award citizenship to former slaves who were taken to the U.S. against their will. Generations of progs have expanded it (for political reasons) to extending citizenship to criminals who have entered the Country illegally.

It's a little more complicated than that. A Chinese man was refused entry back into the USA even though he was born here.

There were also dozens of cases of people stealing land in US Territories that weren't States yet from others, even though they were born here and grew up on the Land.

They called it the 'Wild West' for a reason.

But you're right. The 14th was never intended to facilitate 'anchor babies'

Wasn't it to give citizenship and equal rights to black slaves?

Isn't it time for a repeal.......to keep Democrats (who historically opposed the amendment) from abusing it?

 

[Kondor3]

So now Republicans want to change the rules to a person born is only an American citizen if one of their parents is an American citizen?

Well, that posthumously changes my grandfather's status.



You know, conservatives, there's an easier strategy to win national elections, and it doesn't even involve changing the rules of citizenship.

It's called, "Don't be assholes."
Works like a charm.

Simple solution...

The rules can be changed to...

1. grandfather-in all prior births, to conform to the old rule, and to allow those citizenship categorizations to stand.

2. exclude all future such births from categorizing the offspring as a citizen.

Done.

Whether it's a SCOTUS-level re-interpretation of the 14th, or new related legislation that will stand close Constitutional scrutiny, or an actual Amendment...

One way or another, that can be handled easily.

The trick lies in pushing the changes through to fruition, not in crafting the language.

The only thing I don't understand is..

What's the point? How does this help our country?
I see how it helps the Republican party come election season, but are there any things about this that actually help the country?

If not, then why go through the trouble?

Removes a huge incentive to try to sneak across our borders, then to pop-out a puppy, in order to try to weasel a way to stay here.

 

[-S-]

You almost gotta laugh that the progs would bring up citizenship when we haven't even seen the president's birth certificate in six years. The 14th Amendment was intended to award citizenship to former slaves who were taken to the U.S. against their will. Generations of progs have expanded it (for political reasons) to extending citizenship to criminals who have entered the Country illegally.

It's a little more complicated than that. A Chinese man was refused entry back into the USA even though he was born here.

There were also dozens of cases of people stealing land in US Territories that weren't States yet from others, even though they were born here and grew up on the Land.

They called it the 'Wild West' for a reason.

But you're right. The 14th was never intended to facilitate 'anchor babies'

Wasn't it to give citizenship and equal rights to black slaves?

Isn't it time for a repeal.......to keep Democrats (who historically opposed the amendment) from abusing it?

Try to keep in mind that the Democratic voters who opposed the amendment and other pushes for civil rights were southern and socially conservative.

That group belongs to the Republican party now. In fact, they are the Republican base.

Nothing has changed as far as which party politically 'abuses' ('benefits' I think is the word you were meaning) from the amendment.

The party that benefits politically from this amendment is the party without socially conservative southerners.

Same trend as always.

Minorities and social conservatives mix like water and oil.
Namely, they don't.
Hence why no party can hold the voting majority of either group at the same time.

 

[Kosh]

You almost gotta laugh that the progs would bring up citizenship when we haven't even seen the president's birth certificate in six years. The 14th Amendment was intended to award citizenship to former slaves who were taken to the U.S. against their will. Generations of progs have expanded it (for political reasons) to extending citizenship to criminals who have entered the Country illegally.

It's a little more complicated than that. A Chinese man was refused entry back into the USA even though he was born here.

There were also dozens of cases of people stealing land in US Territories that weren't States yet from others, even though they were born here and grew up on the Land.

They called it the 'Wild West' for a reason.

But you're right. The 14th was never intended to facilitate 'anchor babies'

Wasn't it to give citizenship and equal rights to black slaves?

Isn't it time for a repeal.......to keep Democrats (who historically opposed the amendment) from abusing it?

Try to keep in mind that the Democratic voters who opposed the amendment and other pushes for civil rights were southern and socially conservative.

That group belongs to the Republican party now. In fact, they are the Republican base.

Nothing has changed as far as which party politically 'abuses' ('benefits' I think is the word you were meaning) from the amendment.

The party that benefits politically from this amendment is the party without socially conservative southerners.

Same trend as always.

Minorities and social conservatives mix like water and oil.
Namely, they don't.
Hence why no party can hold the voting majority of either group at the same time.

See the far left will deny their own history, this is what makes them more dangerous than ISIS..

 

[-S-]

You almost gotta laugh that the progs would bring up citizenship when we haven't even seen the president's birth certificate in six years. The 14th Amendment was intended to award citizenship to former slaves who were taken to the U.S. against their will. Generations of progs have expanded it (for political reasons) to extending citizenship to criminals who have entered the Country illegally.

It's a little more complicated than that. A Chinese man was refused entry back into the USA even though he was born here.

There were also dozens of cases of people stealing land in US Territories that weren't States yet from others, even though they were born here and grew up on the Land.

They called it the 'Wild West' for a reason.

But you're right. The 14th was never intended to facilitate 'anchor babies'

Wasn't it to give citizenship and equal rights to black slaves?

Isn't it time for a repeal.......to keep Democrats (who historically opposed the amendment) from abusing it?

Try to keep in mind that the Democratic voters who opposed the amendment and other pushes for civil rights were southern and socially conservative.

That group belongs to the Republican party now. In fact, they are the Republican base.

Nothing has changed as far as which party politically 'abuses' ('benefits' I think is the word you were meaning) from the amendment.

The party that benefits politically from this amendment is the party without socially conservative southerners.

Same trend as always.

Minorities and social conservatives mix like water and oil.
Namely, they don't.
Hence why no party can hold the voting majority of either group at the same time.

See the far left will deny their own history, this is what makes them more dangerous than ISIS..

Did I "deny history", or simply point out a fact you dislike to hear?

Are you able to point out something I said above that is factually incorrect?

I'm absolutely dying for you to try

 

[Kosh]

You almost gotta laugh that the progs would bring up citizenship when we haven't even seen the president's birth certificate in six years. The 14th Amendment was intended to award citizenship to former slaves who were taken to the U.S. against their will. Generations of progs have expanded it (for political reasons) to extending citizenship to criminals who have entered the Country illegally.

It's a little more complicated than that. A Chinese man was refused entry back into the USA even though he was born here.

There were also dozens of cases of people stealing land in US Territories that weren't States yet from others, even though they were born here and grew up on the Land.

They called it the 'Wild West' for a reason.

But you're right. The 14th was never intended to facilitate 'anchor babies'

Wasn't it to give citizenship and equal rights to black slaves?

Isn't it time for a repeal.......to keep Democrats (who historically opposed the amendment) from abusing it?

Try to keep in mind that the Democratic voters who opposed the amendment and other pushes for civil rights were southern and socially conservative.

That group belongs to the Republican party now. In fact, they are the Republican base.

Nothing has changed as far as which party politically 'abuses' ('benefits' I think is the word you were meaning) from the amendment.

The party that benefits politically from this amendment is the party without socially conservative southerners.

Same trend as always.

Minorities and social conservatives mix like water and oil.
Namely, they don't.
Hence why no party can hold the voting majority of either group at the same time.

See the far left will deny their own history, this is what makes them more dangerous than ISIS..

Did I "deny history", or simply point out a fact you dislike to hear?

Are you able to point out something I said above that is factually incorrect?

I'm absolutely dying for you to try

Once again the far left denies their own history!

And shows they will rewrite it to fit their religious dogma.

See they want to be validated for their revisionism of history and then what you to prove them wrong!

Silly far left drones..

 

[-S-]

It's a little more complicated than that. A Chinese man was refused entry back into the USA even though he was born here.

There were also dozens of cases of people stealing land in US Territories that weren't States yet from others, even though they were born here and grew up on the Land.

They called it the 'Wild West' for a reason.

But you're right. The 14th was never intended to facilitate 'anchor babies'

Wasn't it to give citizenship and equal rights to black slaves?

Isn't it time for a repeal.......to keep Democrats (who historically opposed the amendment) from abusing it?

Try to keep in mind that the Democratic voters who opposed the amendment and other pushes for civil rights were southern and socially conservative.

That group belongs to the Republican party now. In fact, they are the Republican base.

Nothing has changed as far as which party politically 'abuses' ('benefits' I think is the word you were meaning) from the amendment.

The party that benefits politically from this amendment is the party without socially conservative southerners.

Same trend as always.

Minorities and social conservatives mix like water and oil.
Namely, they don't.
Hence why no party can hold the voting majority of either group at the same time.

See the far left will deny their own history, this is what makes them more dangerous than ISIS..

Did I "deny history", or simply point out a fact you dislike to hear?

Are you able to point out something I said above that is factually incorrect?

I'm absolutely dying for you to try

Once again the far left denies their own history!

And shows they will rewrite it to fit their religious dogma.

See they want to be validated for their revisionism of history and then what you to prove them wrong!

Silly far left drones..

I knew you had nothing

 

[mudwhistle]

So now Republicans want to change the rules to a person born in America is only an American citizen if one of their parents is an American citizen?





You know, conservatives, there's an easier strategy to win national elections, and it doesn't even involve changing the rules of citizenship.

It's called, "Don't be assholes."
Works like a charm.

I think people that come here and have babies for this purpose are assholes.......so are the assholes that encourage, transport, or welcome them here with open arms.

 

[-S-]

So now Republicans want to change the rules to a person born in America is only an American citizen if one of their parents is an American citizen?





You know, conservatives, there's an easier strategy to win national elections, and it doesn't even involve changing the rules of citizenship.

It's called, "Don't be assholes."
Works like a charm.

I think people that come here and have babies for this purpose are assholes.......so are the assholes that encourage, transport, or welcome them here with open arms.

On the surface, I agree with you, but on deeper inspection, and once I attempt to look at it from their perspective, it's harder for me to condemn them all.

Some of them (not ALL, but some) come from absolutely terrible, dangerous walks of life. They see a way to get themselves, and their children, out of the situation. So they take it.

I don't condone them for taking advantage of the system, but I also won't condemn them all when some have very legitimate reasons for wanting out as soon as possible.

 

[mudwhistle]

So now Republicans want to change the rules to a person born in America is only an American citizen if one of their parents is an American citizen?





You know, conservatives, there's an easier strategy to win national elections, and it doesn't even involve changing the rules of citizenship.

It's called, "Don't be assholes."
Works like a charm.

I think people that come here and have babies for this purpose are assholes.......so are the assholes that encourage, transport, or welcome them here with open arms.

On the surface, I agree with you, but on deeper inspection, and once I attempt to look at it from their perspective, it's harder for me to condemn them all.

Some of them (not ALL, but some) come from absolutely terrible, dangerous walks of life. They see a way to get themselves, and their children, out of the situation. So they take it.

I don't condone them for taking advantage of the system, but I also won't condemn them all when some have very legitimate reasons for wanting out as soon as possible.

Hate to break this to you....but if our immigration laws were as draconian as their home country's, they wouldn't even attempt to come here in the first place.

 

[g5000]

]

Confederates were dimocrat slavers!

Confederates were awesome patriots who dared defend their rights!