Why the GOP really wants to alter the 14th Amendment
in [Toyota]
|
From: §ñühw¤£f on 12 Aug 2010 10:15 Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:11:02 -0400, Kali wrote: > >> Must read Op-Ed by Harold Meyerson. >> Excellent arguments; well researched. >> >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- >> dyn/content/article/2010/08/10/AR2010081004586.html >> >> Excerpts >> ------------------------------- >> By pushing for repeal of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause, >> the GOP appears to have concluded: If you can't win them [Latinos] >> over -- indeed, if you're doing everything in your power to make >> their lives miserable -- revoke their citizenship. > > Um, who said "revoke Citizenship"? the writer of the Op Ed piece? > > These people aren't Citizens. They aren't Resident Aliens. They're not > even "Undocumented Aliens". They are illegal immigrants. > > Since it is becoming more and more apparent you only hear/read what > supports your issues, the repeal of the 14th Amendment refers to illegals > coming here and haviung children, who then become "anchor babies" and make > it easier for the illegals to get through the immigration process, which > they totally bypassed in the first place. Also, "Baby Tours" from around > the world that cater to pregnant women from everywhere, bring them here > when their about ready to pop, they have the kids who are now "US > Citizens", and then return home. Well, at least that's better, since when > the kid becomes of age (s)he has to decide whether to stay where they > reside or excercise their US Citizenship. > > That's what's being targeted in the 14th Amendment, and not what Randi > Rhodes told you to think it meant. > > Basically, if an illegal alien comes and has a kid, the kid will be > treated as illegal since IT NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN BORN HERE IN THE FIRST > PLACE. > > What's so hard to understand about that? > > Heh, if you had half a klew you'd know that there are Chinese websites where they advertize "come to america, have a child" so it will have american citizenship. ITs not just a mexicans-only issue. People want their kids to have US citizenship for the benefits, regardless of country. -- www.skepticalscience.com|www.youtube.com/officialpeta cageprisoners.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org _____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____ / __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\ _\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\ /___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
From: Jeff Strickland on 12 Aug 2010 11:10 "Hachiroku ????" <anonymous(a)not-for-mail.invalid> wrote in message news:i3ve7d$v48$1(a)tioat.net... > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:11:02 -0400, Kali wrote: > >> >> Must read Op-Ed by Harold Meyerson. >> Excellent arguments; well researched. >> >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- >> dyn/content/article/2010/08/10/AR2010081004586.html >> >> Excerpts >> ------------------------------- >> By pushing for repeal of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause, >> the GOP appears to have concluded: If you can't win them [Latinos] >> over -- indeed, if you're doing everything in your power to make >> their lives miserable -- revoke their citizenship. > > Um, who said "revoke Citizenship"? the writer of the Op Ed piece? > > These people aren't Citizens. They aren't Resident Aliens. They're not > even "Undocumented Aliens". They are illegal immigrants. > That's wrong. A Resident Alien is a legal immigrant with a Green Card. Children of resident aliens (arguably) should be granted automatic citizewnship, especially if the parents are actively seeking to become citizens themselves. I suppose that if a resident alien was not seeking to become a citizen, then the child should not be granted citizenship, although that would be a very small number of children, and the impact would not amount to much. Illegal immigrants and Resident Aliens are not the same thing. Resident Aliens are ALWAYS legal immigrants, with the few exceptions of when an illegal finds a loophole to change his status after overstaying a Visa. Technically, if the Visa is valid, the alien can apply for a change of status, and generally he can remain as a resident alien until the change is accepted or rejected. This alien is a Conditional Alien, if not an outright Resident Alien. Let's say somebody comes as a Visitor with the proper Visa, and goes to a Federal building and applies to change from a visitor to a resident because his aunt or uncle is already here, is a citizen, and agrees to sponsor him. This immigrant can remain here until the application floats to the top of the pile and a decision is made. If the immigrant wants to change his status because the sponsor is a minor child that was born here of illegal immigrant parents, then the application floats to the top of the stack faster, and is almost always accepted because the child is a citizen by birth. This is because of 14.
From: Mike on 12 Aug 2010 11:21 If you did a proper search you would discover the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause was to allow slaves, born in the US, to become citizens. It was a footnote in a much later Supreme Court case that extend that right to others born in the US. "Kali" <yourgoddesskali(a)gmail.inv> wrote in message news:i3vab3$fcq$1(a)blackhelicopter.databasix.com... > > Must read Op-Ed by Harold Meyerson. > Excellent arguments; well researched. > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- > dyn/content/article/2010/08/10/AR2010081004586.html > > Excerpts > ------------------------------- > By pushing for repeal of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause, > the GOP appears to have concluded: If you can't win them [Latinos] > over -- indeed, if you're doing everything in your power to make > their lives miserable -- revoke their citizenship. > ------------------------------- > The Confederates had renounced all allegiance to the United States. > They made war on the United States -- the Constitution's definition > of treason -- and, in an effort to keep 4 million Americans > enslaved, killed more of our soldiers than any foreign army ever > did. > > Yet Lincoln was determined to make it easy for Confederates to > regain their citizenship. By taking an oath to support the United > States and its Constitution, Confederates were made Americans again. > > Suppose, though, that Lincoln had been filled with the spirit of > today's Republicans.... > -------------------------------- > > He points to another well done piece by EJ Dionne at WaPo, very much > worth a read. > > -- > Kali
From: dr_jeff on 12 Aug 2010 11:38 Mike wrote: > If you did a proper search you would discover the 14th Amendment's > citizenship clause was to allow slaves, born in the US, to become citizens. > It was a footnote in a much later Supreme Court case that extend that right > to others born in the US. Yeah, so? The rights in the Bill of Rights (like freedom of speech) were not written to provide for the right of people to speak their mind on the internet, but, nonetheless apply there. Does the reason why someone has a right matter? It is now part of the US Constitution. The native-born citizen clause to be eligble for US President was written to prevent the British immigrating to the US in its early years and take over the government, not to prevent people like Dr. Q, a brilliant brain surgeon from Johns Hopkins who hopped the fence from becoming President. Nonetheless, this clause is also part of the US Constitution. Kali would also note that more Americans were killed in battle in WWII than in the Civil War, about 291,000 vs. 212,000. There were larger losses outside of battle in the Civil, such as from illness than in WWII, however. Jeff > "Kali" <yourgoddesskali(a)gmail.inv> wrote in message > news:i3vab3$fcq$1(a)blackhelicopter.databasix.com... >> Must read Op-Ed by Harold Meyerson. >> Excellent arguments; well researched. >> >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- >> dyn/content/article/2010/08/10/AR2010081004586.html >> >> Excerpts >> ------------------------------- >> By pushing for repeal of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause, >> the GOP appears to have concluded: If you can't win them [Latinos] >> over -- indeed, if you're doing everything in your power to make >> their lives miserable -- revoke their citizenship. >> ------------------------------- >> The Confederates had renounced all allegiance to the United States. >> They made war on the United States -- the Constitution's definition >> of treason -- and, in an effort to keep 4 million Americans >> enslaved, killed more of our soldiers than any foreign army ever >> did. >> >> Yet Lincoln was determined to make it easy for Confederates to >> regain their citizenship. By taking an oath to support the United >> States and its Constitution, Confederates were made Americans again. >> >> Suppose, though, that Lincoln had been filled with the spirit of >> today's Republicans.... >> -------------------------------- >> >> He points to another well done piece by EJ Dionne at WaPo, very much >> worth a read. >> >> -- >> Kali > >
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 12 Aug 2010 12:59
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 08:50:18 -0700, Jeff Strickland wrote: >> He can't help it, he is a rightwingnut true believer. These guys clam >> up over the weekends because Limpballs, Manatee, Billow, Dreck don't >> blather talking points on weekends. They just sit there staring at >> their screens wishing they had something to say. > > LOL. I've not read any of his posts until today. It's interesting to > watch these guys pop out of the woodwork and act like fools. > > > > <JS> > I've been posting for years, many of them. Not on alt.kooks, where you > apparently come from, but I've been posting for years and years. And, agree > with me or not, I always post a uniform message. I don't need Limbaugh, et > al, to form my own opinions and positions. > > > </JS> You can keep telling these people this, but since they need Franken, Maddow, Rhodes to tell them what they need to know they think everybody needs everything parsed for them. |