Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » AMERICANS ARE RACIST AND IGNORANT
  • AMERICANS ARE RACIST AND IGNORANT

    Filed at 6:33 am under by dcobranchi

    Check out the comments on this CNN article about a proposed AZ law. The bill would clearly violate the explicit wording of the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868. And yet the commenters at CNN are going on about how the Framers of the Constitution never intended for the children of illegal immigrants to have citizenship.

    We amended the Constitution. It says that if you are born in the US you are a citizen, by birthright.

    13 Responses to “AMERICANS ARE RACIST AND IGNORANT”


    Comment by
    COD
    June 15th, 2010
    at 8:30 am

    I guess they’ll be revoking the right to vote from women, and forcing blacks back into slavery soon too. After all, it was never the original intent of the Founders to have women voting…


    Comment by
    Daryl P Cobranchi
    June 15th, 2010
    at 9:06 am

    You joke. But the teabaggers have actually proposed repealing the 17th Amendment which allows citizens to vote for their Senators.


    Comment by
    JJ
    June 15th, 2010
    at 12:44 pm

    I say let’s take out the second amendment then, before they get any further with this power play for armed white guys to establish an American Taliban . . .


    Comment by
    Rob
    June 15th, 2010
    at 5:43 pm

    Sounds like an unconstitutional law. But your comment about the teabaggers lead me to believe you’d be against changing the constitution to deal with the anchor baby issue. So, I just want to keep track of how y’all think:

    You’re FOR modifying/redefining the constitution when expanding federal govt power through interpreting the commerce clause in ways never imagined by founders. Or when it enhances rights for the less-righted.

    You’re AGAINST modifing/redefining the constitution when it would attempt to deal with illegal immigration in ways you don’t like. Or maybe when it would tinker with an already-established amendment.

    Is that about right?

    What’s your take on the 21st Amendment?


    Comment by
    Daryl P Cobranchi
    June 15th, 2010
    at 5:56 pm

    Since they didn’t propose amending the Constitution to deal with the so-called anchor baby problem, your first point is moot.

    The Commerce Clause is vague enough that courts have allowed the current interpretation. That’s obviously no true for the 14th Amendment’s “reinterpretation.” You’re knocking down straw men.

    The 18th Amendment was a stupid conservative idea. Of course I like the 21st.


    Comment by
    NMcV
    June 15th, 2010
    at 7:58 pm

    This will make me very unpopular, but I’d like the 14th Amendment modified to make citizens only of native-born children whose parents are here legally. I don;’t care if they’re on green cards or student visas. I do care that any idiot can stay here because he made his wife pregnant and forced her to make the dangerous trek across the border so that she’d have an anchor baby and he could then not be deported.

    I also believe that more workers should be allowed into the country, bringing their families with them. The process needs to be streamlined. Immigrants – of all colors, ethnicities, and language – are the backbone of the nations. But we need to be able to filter out those who won’t add value to our population.


    Comment by
    Daryl P Cobranchi
    June 15th, 2010
    at 8:08 pm

    Yeah. ‘Cause the ONLY reason they would want a baby is to anchor them into the US.

    Some of these kids are 18-years-old and have never set foot outside the US in their lives. If they’re not citizens of the US, then where are they citizens? Should we put them on a ship and float them around the Atlantic like The Man Without a Country?


    Comment by
    StarGirl
    June 15th, 2010
    at 9:17 pm

    The way to deal with illegal immigration is to cut off the job supply, by strengthening employment laws. But as long as Americans are interested in cheap restaurant help, lawn care, child care, and food processing, they’ll balk at that. And as long as there are under-the-table jobs here, the problem’s not going away.


    Comment by
    Daryl P Cobranchi
    June 16th, 2010
    at 7:03 am

    Rob,

    I’m FOR amending the Constitution when the amendment would expand rights for people and against it when it restricts. So, I’m for 1-8, 13-15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, & 26. I would have opposed the 18th and am opposed to repealing or modifying the 14th.

    There are, of course, other reasons for being in favor of or opposed to proposed amendments. For example, the GOP obsession about having a Balanced Budget amendment is just a stupid idea.

    Clear now?


    Comment by
    Daryl P Cobranchi
    June 16th, 2010
    at 7:04 am

    And, of course, I’d oppose any DOMA-type amendment.


    Comment by
    COD
    June 16th, 2010
    at 2:44 pm

    I’m waiting for the first prominent AZ teabagger to get busted for paying an illegal nanny under the table. You know it’s coming…


    Comment by
    JJ
    June 16th, 2010
    at 7:47 pm

    We know the 14th was originally meant to deal with an intractable problem of people who had been brought to America rather than coming of their own volition.

    Interesting parallels to the babies at issue.


    Comment by
    NMcV
    June 17th, 2010
    at 9:28 pm

    Daryl, yes, there are people who come here to have babies solely to anchor themselves to this country. There ARE women who’ve been pushed into doing that.

    I don’t believe that the children who are already here should be deported, because under the Constitution, they are citizens. Don’t jump to conclusions about what I believe.

    We as a nation have the right to deny entrance to anyone we wish to keep out. That “anyone” has changed radically over time. In the past racism limited “anyone” to Anglo-Saxon Protestants, and a few “others” because the nation did need maids and gardeners. The answer to past and present racism is NOT open borders.

    Yes, enforce the current laws and cut off the job supply. Jail those who repeatedly hire illegals. That’d be a big step right there.