Is there a politician with the balls to lobby for a rewrite of the 14th / the anchor baby statute?

[Bob Blaylock]

That’s sounds cool on a message board in cyberspace...BUT tell me how racists like me are ******* Americans over and degrading every community we inhabit.
“Monkey with the constitution”...WTF?
You mean like end slavery and extend voting rights to women and negroes? Did you hate that “monkey-ing” as well? Do you only hate to monkey with the constitution when REAL Americans might be the beneficiaries? You don’t find that weird huh?

If you search enough through JoeB131's past postings, you'll find that he's expressed utter contempt for the Constitution, condemned it as having been written by “white slave rapers who shit in chamber pots”, or similar words, and expressed the opinion that it ought to be disregarded.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The thing is, we are all part of the problem. Yeah, we all bemoan illegal aliens, but then when we need to get someone to hang that drywall when that DIY project turned out to be harder than Chip and Joanna made it look, we go right down to the Home Depot to hire some Day Laborers.

Or better yet, go to PeopleReady (formerly known as Labor Ready) and get some legitimate American workers, who've been vetted and background checked, and PeopleReady handles all the bureaucratic bullshit such as taxes, worker's comp, and so on. Everything is done legally, and above-board.

 

[BrokeLoser]

That’s sounds cool on a message board in cyberspace...BUT tell me how racists like me are ******* Americans over and degrading every community we inhabit.
“Monkey with the constitution”...WTF?
You mean like end slavery and extend voting rights to women and negroes? Did you hate that “monkey-ing” as well? Do you only hate to monkey with the constitution when REAL Americans might be the beneficiaries? You don’t find that weird huh?

If you search enough through JoeB131's past postings, you'll find that he's expressed utter contempt for the Constitution, condemned it as having been written by “white slave rapers who shit in chamber pots”, or similar words, and expressed the opinion that it ought to be disregarded.

Oh trust me..l know JoeB131 lunacy quite well...The dude is totally lost and all over the place....he’s as LefTarded as they come around here.

 

[JoeB131]

You mean other than flipping it to benefit Americans and not wetbacks?

Your bigotry is not a good reason.

The reason why they have wetbacks here is that employers would rather hire them than you for whatever scrub jobs they have.

 

[JoeB131]

If you search enough through JoeB131's past postings, you'll find that he's expressed utter contempt for the Constitution, condemned it as having been written by “white slave rapers who shit in chamber pots”, or similar words, and expressed the opinion that it ought to be disregarded.

Again, what part of that isn't true.

They were slave rapists (not slave rapers)
they didn't have indoor plumbing.

We really should take their bad ideas and keep doing them just because they said so. They were just dudes. They didn't shit marble.

So maybe a "Right to Bear Arms" might have made sense in 1787, but does it make sense today? We don't have militias anymore. They were replaced by the National Guard back in the early part of the 20th century. Shortly after that, when the murder rate was twice what it is now in the 1930's, the government passed sensible gun control laws that no one had a problem with until the National Rampage Association decided it needed to move more product when people stopped hunting small animals for fun.

 

[JoeB131]

Or better yet, go to PeopleReady (formerly known as Labor Ready) and get some legitimate American workers, who've been vetted and background checked, and PeopleReady handles all the bureaucratic bullshit such as taxes, worker's comp, and so on. Everything is done legally, and above-board.

Okay. Let's look at that. Do you know what kind of people are hired by firms like "PeopleReady"? the kind of losers who can't get full time jobs because of drug problems or punching out their boss.

I worked for a company, the one that decided to screw me on my insurance after I busted up my knee. They hired "temps" from a company like that. Of course, they were all undocumented aliens. Then they were bought by a bigger company, whihc pretty much said, "No more Mexicans".

Now, this is after I left, but what the people who were still there told me was that the white "Americans" they hired were all scuzzy meth heads, the only people they could find to work for those wages, who often quit after a week when they got high after their paycheck. The office Girls were afraid to walk to their cars alone.

So much for "vetting".

 

[Claudette]

Worst amendment ever, how many times has that pile of vague asinine words been twisted into something it was NEVER INTENDED to address? I doubt it will ever be touched, it is the holy grail for Democrats and they will defend it at all costs.

That amendment was added to insure that the children of the freed slaves were recognized as US citizens.

They don't need it anymore. The whole thing should be rewritten so we done have anymore anchor babies.

 

[JoeB131]

That amendment was added to insure that the children of the freed slaves were recognized as US citizens.

They don't need it anymore. The whole thing should be rewritten so we done have anymore anchor babies.

There's more to it than that, it actually expanded rights for everyone, citizen and non-citizen alike.

 

[Claudette]

That amendment was added to insure that the children of the freed slaves were recognized as US citizens.

They don't need it anymore. The whole thing should be rewritten so we done have anymore anchor babies.

There's more to it than that, it actually expanded rights for everyone, citizen and non-citizen alike.

That may be but it was put in for the children of freed slaves. It should be rewritten.

 

[JoeB131]

That may be but it was put in for the children of freed slaves. It should be rewritten.

Why? I mean other than your bigoted fear of Hispanics, you guys really haven't given a good reason.

Remember, the main reason why the 14th was written the way it was to ENCOURAGE immigration. America wanted Immigrants. We had all this land and no one to live on it, so we wanted people to come over from Europe.

Our real problem is that we don't have enough babies being born here, immigrant or native born. We are not reproducing at replacement rates.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

No need for me to comment at all. The following makes any point that I could have.

If you search enough through JoeB131's past postings, you'll find that he's expressed utter contempt for the Constitution, condemned it as having been written by “white slave rapers who shit in chamber pots”, or similar words, and expressed the opinion that it ought to be disregarded.

Again, what part of that isn't true.

They were slave rapists (not slave rapers)
they didn't have indoor plumbing.

We really should take their bad ideas and keep doing them just because they said so. They were just dudes. They didn't shit marble.

So maybe a "Right to Bear Arms" might have made sense in 1787, but does it make sense today? We don't have militias anymore. They were replaced by the National Guard back in the early part of the 20th century. Shortly after that, when the murder rate was twice what it is now in the 1930's, the government passed sensible gun control laws that no one had a problem with until the National Rampage Association decided it needed to move more product when people stopped hunting small animals for fun.

 

[imawhosure]

The nonsensical 14th has stood misinterpreted long enough...It's time for patriots to demand a good hard look at our founders intent. The entire constitution, every word in it was written by the people for the people....to protect and benefit Americans...How was the 14th twisted into something that does nothing but hurt Americans and the founding principles of all we stand for?
Imagine if we had laws that permitted criminals to rob banks and give the stolen loot to their children while forbidding the banks from recovering the loot or demanding it be returned....Why would we allow illegal foreigners to steal their children the most coveted title the world has ever known...the title of AMERICAN CITIZEN?
It simply doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
On what basis can such foolishness be supported?
Would you support a politician committed to amending the 14th in favor of Americans...why or why not?
Birthright Citizenship: A Fundamental Misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment

Fast answer is no, with a caveat------------->to do it, they would be required to do what is best for the country, instead of what is best for their re-election. As of now on a Federal Government basis, only the President is term limited, and there in lies the problem.

As long as they are allowed to run for re-election infinitum till death, we will never see a challenge to this except by the President, or in the Supreme Court, and notice that they are the only ones who are term limited, or have lifetime jobs that are not required to run again and get votes!

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Okay. Let's look at that. Do you know what kind of people are hired by firms like "PeopleReady"? the kind of losers who can't get full time jobs because of drug problems or punching out their boss.

I worked for a company, the one that decided to screw me on my insurance after I busted up my knee. They hired "temps" from a company like that. Of course, they were all undocumented aliens. Then they were bought by a bigger company, whihc [sic] pretty much said, "No more Mexicans".

Now, this is after I left, but what the people who were still there told me was that the white "Americans" they hired were all scuzzy meth heads, the only people they could find to work for those wages, who often quit after a week when they got high after their paycheck. The office Girls were afraid to walk to their cars alone.

So much for "vetting".

I've worked off and on through Labor Ready/PeopleReady since 2004. I still regard them as my “backup employer” for times when there are gaps between projects with my primary employer; and my primary employer very often uses PeopleReady workers for some of the more mundane work on its major projects. In fact, it was through PeopleReady that I got into my primary employer, almost three years ago. What is now my primary employer was building this solar power system on top of a Home Depot, and I was one of the hired grunts sent to this project via PeopleReady. On that project, I managed to make the right impression on the right people, and got kept for several other similar projects after that, and later that same year, was hired directly. I have a very good friend who, about a year later, also went from being a PeopleReady grunt on a solar project, to being hired directly my my company, and I've heard of a few others who got in by similar paths. It seems that my company, at least, is finding enough good workers through PeopleReady that it continues to use them, where lots of raw manpower is needed, and continues, once in a while, to find workers who are good enough to be worth hiring directly. We've had a few that we've had to fire, but not very many.

It's true that the quality of workers that you can get through PeopleReady is quite variable, but the poorer ones usually don't last very long. Certainly, better than hiring unvetted wetbacks off the street, with no idea where they came from.

On this particular project, for the first phase, we were divided up into teams of three, to build out solar panel assemblies. The two cretins with whom I was teamed up were pretty useless. In fact, when I read your puerile rantings against capitalism, and the generally bad work attitude that you continually express, I am very much reminded of them, and almost exactly the same sort of crap that I heard from them. My team managed to outperform the other teams, as far as how fast and with what quality we did our work, but it was no thanks to my two teammates. In fact, I could work even faster, if I could convince them to go away and do something else, and let me work alone without their “help”.

At a phase a week or two into the project, when they no longer needed as many PeopleReady grunts, my two teammates were among the first ones cut. I have no doubt that if you had been working with me on that project, my experience with you would have been almost exactly the same as with those two cretins, and that you would ultimately have met the same fate that they did.


I'm guessing that your expressed contempt for PeopleReady and similar agencies, and those who work through them, is simply an expression of your bad attitude in general toward productive work, and being expected to be able to perform it in exchange for your wages.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

That amendment was added to insure that the children of the freed slaves were recognized as US citizens.

They don't need it anymore. The whole thing should be rewritten so we done have anymore anchor babies.

I think citizenship should be defined in the Constitution, but I think it should now be defined differently.

As you said, there are no longer any former slaves, so no need to continue guaranteeing citizenship to them, which was the original intent and purpose of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

I'd leave it to better-qualified minds than mine to work out the details, but the general idea I have is along these lines.

• Citizenship should be based entirely on the parents' citizenship, and not on where one is actually born. A child born here of foreign parents should no more be granted American citizenship than a child born of American parents who happen to be in a different country at the time should be denied American citizenship.
  
• If, at the time of birth, both parents are citizens, then the child is a full citizen. If only one parent is a citizen, then the child is a half-citizen, with the other half of his citizenship being that of his foreign parent. Perhaps there could be some rule that counts the parents as citizens, if they are not at the time of birth, but are naturalized within some period of time thereafter; that's one of the details that I'd leave up to better-qualified minds to work out.
  
• A half-citizen would only be counted as half a person, for purposes of Congressional representation, and Electoral College representation, and if allowed to vote (I'm undecided as to whether anyone who isn't a full citizen should be allowed voting rights), his vote would count only half that of a full citizen. Other privileges of citizenship would be denied or limited, compared to a full citizen. An important principle, to me, is that one cannot have full citizenship to this country, nor enjoy the full rights and privileges thereof, as long as one retains any citizenship or allegiance to any foreign country.
  
• After reaching adulthood, a half-citizen could achieve full citizenship, through some simple process that involves renouncing the foreign half of his citizenship, and declaring his full allegiance to the United States, repudiating any allegiance to any other country. He could also choose to renounce his American citizenship, and declare his full allegiance to the other country; I guess it'd be up to that other country how to recognize his citizenship, either while he has half-American citizenship, or after he's renounced that and declared his allegiance to that other country.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Why? I mean other than your bigoted fear of Hispanics, you guys really haven't given a good reason.

The desire that our nation protect its sovereignty, put the interests of its own people above those of any foreigners, and not allow itself to be overrun by foreigners, does not constitute any form of “bigotry” against any of the foreigners against which we want our country and its people to be protected. Only treasonous pieces of subhuman shit who hate their own country and their own countrymen, claim that.

OK, so I will admit that I am bigoted against treasonous subhuman pieces of shit who would betray their own country and their own countrymen, to pander to foreign invaders.

 

[OldLady]

That amendment was added to insure that the children of the freed slaves were recognized as US citizens.

They don't need it anymore. The whole thing should be rewritten so we done have anymore anchor babies.

I think citizenship should be defined in the Constitution, but I think it should now be defined differently.

As you said, there are no longer any former slaves, so no need to continue guaranteeing citizenship to them, which was the original intent and purpose of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

I'd leave it to better-qualified minds than mine to work out the details, but the general idea I have is along these lines.

• Citizenship should be based entirely on the parents' citizenship, and not on where one is actually born. A child born here of foreign parents should no more be granted American citizenship than a child born of American parents who happen to be in a different country at the time should be denied American citizenship.
  
• If, at the time of birth, both parents are citizens, then the child is a full citizen. If only one parent is a citizen, then the child is a half-citizen, with the other half of his citizenship being that of his foreign parent. Perhaps there could be some rule that counts the parents as citizens, if they are not at the time of birth, but are naturalized within some period of time thereafter; that's one of the details that I'd leave up to better-qualified minds to work out.
  
• A half-citizen would only be counted as half a person, for purposes of Congressional representation, and Electoral College representation, and if allowed to vote (I'm undecided as to whether anyone who isn't a full citizen should be allowed voting rights), his vote would count only half that of a full citizen. Other privileges of citizenship would be denied or limited, compared to a full citizen. An important principle, to me, is that one cannot have full citizenship to this country, nor enjoy the full rights and privileges thereof, as long as one retains any citizenship or allegiance to any foreign country.
  
• After reaching adulthood, a half-citizen could achieve full citizenship, through some simple process that involves renouncing the foreign half of his citizenship, and declaring his full allegiance to the United States, repudiating any allegiance to any other country. He could also choose to renounce his American citizenship, and declare his full allegiance to the other country; I guess it'd be up to that other country how to recognize his citizenship, either while he has half-American citizenship, or after he's renounced that and declared his allegiance to that other country.

I would say simply that if one parent is a US citizen, the child is. If the parent is in the limbo period of immigrating here and waiting the 3-5 years before they can apply for US citizenship, if they provide their permanent residence card when the child is born, the child will become a US citizen when the parent does. If the parents do not become citizens but remain here, the child can apply for citizenship at 18.

 

[busybee01]

So JoeB131 busybee01 bodecea Unkotare Dana7360 candycorn would not support a politicians fight to flip the current interpretation of the 14th to benefit Americans...they believe the 14th was written for Mexico and not for America....they approve of criminal Mexicans stealing citizenships for their children...they believe criminal Mexicans should have that right.
I’m sure they’re good Americans who look out for Americans...I’m sure they don’t have roots in Mehico....Hahaha
WEATHER53 we’ll just assume you’re drunk.

The 14th was not meant for Mexico or any other country. The current interpretation is the correct one. You can try to change it Constitutionally. There are no criminals except for white supremacists who are determined to keep the country as white as possible. You are not a good American..

 

[BrokeLoser]

So JoeB131 busybee01 bodecea Unkotare Dana7360 candycorn would not support a politicians fight to flip the current interpretation of the 14th to benefit Americans...they believe the 14th was written for Mexico and not for America....they approve of criminal Mexicans stealing citizenships for their children...they believe criminal Mexicans should have that right.
I’m sure they’re good Americans who look out for Americans...I’m sure they don’t have roots in Mehico....Hahaha
WEATHER53 we’ll just assume you’re drunk.

The 14th was not meant for Mexico or any other country. The current interpretation is the correct one. You can try to change it Constitutionally. There are no criminals except for white supremacists who are determined to keep the country as white as possible. You are not a good American..

Haha..don’t be scared...tell us Gustavo....which nation / who benefits most by the gross misinterpretation of the 14th...Mexicans or Americans?
Who was the U.S. constitution written for...who is it supposed to benefit and serve?
This is a very simple question to answer for those whom are honest.

 

[bodecea]

So JoeB131 busybee01 bodecea Unkotare Dana7360 candycorn would not support a politicians fight to flip the current interpretation of the 14th to benefit Americans...they believe the 14th was written for Mexico and not for America....they approve of criminal Mexicans stealing citizenships for their children...they believe criminal Mexicans should have that right.
I’m sure they’re good Americans who look out for Americans...I’m sure they don’t have roots in Mehico....Hahaha
WEATHER53 we’ll just assume you’re drunk.

What a sad sad sad little boy you are......you'd better hope they don't introduce a literacy test for citizenship.

 

[busybee01]

Why? I mean other than your bigoted fear of Hispanics, you guys really haven't given a good reason.

The desire that our nation protect its sovereignty, put the interests of its own people above those of any foreigners, and not allow itself to be overrun by foreigners, does not constitute any form of “bigotry” against any of the foreigners against which we want our country and its people to be protected. Only treasonous pieces of subhuman shit who hate their own country and their own countrymen, claim that.

OK, so I will admit that I am bigoted against treasonous subhuman pieces of shit who would betray their own country and their own countrymen, to pander to foreign invaders.

That is a good one. If we were talking about white Europeans, you would have no issues. You are the treasonous subhuman piece of shit.