Why the GOP really wants to alter the 14th Amendment
in [Toyota]
|
From: ah on 12 Aug 2010 19:38 On 8/11/2010 10:21 PM, Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:07:35 -0500, pandora wrote: > >>>>> That position completely ignores the REALITY of illegal immigrants >>>>> that have no citizenship in the first place do not get citizenship for >>>>> no other reason than the mother manages to plop out a baby within >>>>> minutes of crawling under the wire. >>>> >>>> With such a policy, one would be revoking the citizenship of the >>>> *baby*. You know what the Constitution says? Born *here* in the US, >>>> you're a citizen. Live with it. >>> >>> No, it doesn't. >>> >> Yes, it does. > > Pardon me, your ignorance is showing yet again. The CONSTITUTION does NOT > allow for "Born here, Citizen here". > > The CONSTITUTION does NOT allow for Free Speech. > > The CONSTITUTION does NOT allow for the right to bear arms. > > Yes; you heard it right here, Folks. -- a "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Nv28lunRSY" h
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 12 Aug 2010 22:24 On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:38:09 -0400, ah wrote: >>>>> With such a policy, one would be revoking the citizenship of the >>>>> *baby*. You know what the Constitution says? Born *here* in the US, >>>>> you're a citizen. Live with it. >>>> >>>> No, it doesn't. >>>> >>> Yes, it does. >> >> Pardon me, your ignorance is showing yet again. The CONSTITUTION does NOT >> allow for "Born here, Citizen here". >> >> The CONSTITUTION does NOT allow for Free Speech. >> >> The CONSTITUTION does NOT allow for the right to bear arms. >> >> > > Yes; you heard it right here, Folks. ZOOOOOM! WHERE in the Constitution does it allow for Free Speech?
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 12 Aug 2010 22:25 On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:49:22 -0400, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: > "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message > news:A6Z8o.10910$EF1.7115(a)newsfe14.iad... >> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:40 -0500, pandora wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:24:05 -0700, edspyhill01 wrote: >>> >>>> On Aug 11, 11:58 pm, Hachiroku ???? <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:08:05 -0700, edspyhill01 wrote: >>>>> > On Aug 11, 10:21 pm, Hachiroku ???? <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote: >>>>> >> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:07:35 -0500, pandora wrote: >>>>> >> >>>> That position completely ignores the REALITY of illegal >>>>> >> >>>> immigrants that have no citizenship in the first place do not >>>>> >> >>>> get citizenship for no other reason than the mother manages to >>>>> >> >>>> plop out a baby within minutes of crawling under the wire. >>>>> >>>>> >> >>> With such a policy, one would be revoking the citizenship of the >>>>> >> >>> *baby*. You know what the Constitution says? Born *here* in the >>>>> >> >>> US, you're a citizen. Live with it. >>>>> >>>>> >> >> No, it doesn't. >>>>> >>>>> >> > Yes, it does. >>>>> >>>>> >> Pardon me, your ignorance is showing yet again. The CONSTITUTION >>>>> >> does NOT allow for "Born here, Citizen here". >>>>> >>>>> >> The CONSTITUTION does NOT allow for Free Speech. >>>>> >>>>> >> The CONSTITUTION does NOT allow for the right to bear arms. >>>>> >>>>> > You are frothing from the mouth again. Somebody get a paper bag for >>>>> > Roachie can breath into. >>>>> >>>>> Where in the Constitution does it say people who are born here are >>>>> Citizens?- Hide quoted text - >>>>> >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> >>>> Oh oh. We are going deep in rightwing world. >>> >>> He doesn't seem to understand that an Amendment then becomes part of the >>> Constitution. Of course, Hachoo would like the 19th amendment to be >>> repealed as well. >> >> >> Talk about LaLa land... >> >> No, the 19th amendment is just fine. The next amendment should require >> either an IQ test or a small civics test to keep 'leaders' like Obungler >> from being elected. > > > He got elected. You live with your mother, spent time in jail for a felony, > and you swap motherboards for a living. Maybe you should abandon this IQ > issue. Just slip away quietly. My lifestyle has nothing to do with the fact I can think rings around you.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 12 Aug 2010 22:40 On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:38:57 -0500, pandora wrote: > On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 16:48:32 -0400, Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: > >> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:40 -0500, pandora wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:24:05 -0700, edspyhill01 wrote: >>> >>>> On Aug 11, 11:58 pm, Hachiroku ハチロク <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:08:05 -0700, edspyhill01 wrote: >>>>> > On Aug 11, 10:21 pm, Hachiroku ハチロク <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote: >>>>> >> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:07:35 -0500, pandora wrote: >>>>> >> >>>> That position completely ignores the REALITY of illegal >>>>> >> >>>> immigrants that have no citizenship in the first place do not >>>>> >> >>>> get citizenship for no other reason than the mother manages >>>>> >> >>>> to plop out a baby within minutes of crawling under the wire. >>>>> >>>>> >> >>> With such a policy, one would be revoking the citizenship of >>>>> >> >>> the *baby*. You know what the Constitution says? Born *here* >>>>> >> >>> in the US, you're a citizen. Live with it. >>>>> >>>>> >> >> No, it doesn't. >>>>> >>>>> >> > Yes, it does. >>>>> >>>>> >> Pardon me, your ignorance is showing yet again. The CONSTITUTION >>>>> >> does NOT allow for "Born here, Citizen here". >>>>> >>>>> >> The CONSTITUTION does NOT allow for Free Speech. >>>>> >>>>> >> The CONSTITUTION does NOT allow for the right to bear arms. >>>>> >>>>> > You are frothing from the mouth again. Somebody get a paper bag >>>>> > for Roachie can breath into. >>>>> >>>>> Where in the Constitution does it say people who are born here are >>>>> Citizens?- Hide quoted text - >>>>> >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> >>>> Oh oh. We are going deep in rightwing world. >>> >>> He doesn't seem to understand that an Amendment then becomes part of >>> the Constitution. Of course, Hachoo would like the 19th amendment to >>> be repealed as well. >> >> >> Talk about LaLa land... >> >> No, the 19th amendment is just fine. The next amendment should require >> either an IQ test or a small civics test to keep 'leaders' like Obungler >> from being elected. > > I'd *almost* agree to that as it would keep idiots like yourself from > voting. I am probably the most informed person you have contact with. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uyJSXCZRpc&feature=related Better to have people like this deciding our leaders.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 12 Aug 2010 22:42
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:35:40 -0500, pandora wrote: > On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 16:50:19 -0400, Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: > >> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:06:17 -0500, pandora wrote: >> >>>> When you don't look up facts, you make stuff up. And when you don't >>>> know what the facts are, or the various arguments are, you are >>>> depending on others to tell you what to think. This is one of the >>>> great laws of the universe, genius. >>> >>> And don't forget, after that he insults and then runs away. >> >> Do you ever add anything substanative? > > Did your dictionary fail you? > Yup. I meant substantioal. Something you never add. Ah well, a spelling error once in a while is better than being wrong all the time. |