Wren wrote:

M Butler wrote:

Learn to spell and learn to question without being rude, Russ, and I'll consider responding to your questions.


Russ wants us to do what he does not do.

The 14th Amendment will not be changed, thus no need exists to debate the question. The Congress can't change it on its own, for the Constitution prevents, thus no need exists to debate the question.

The immigrants are not going home. The great majority have already made the US their home, many with children as birthright citizens.

How to fix the problems:

(1) secure the borders;

(2) make Big Businesspart of the solution instead of the problem;

(3) begin a guest worker program that leads eventually to naturalization.

M. Butler, you do good work.


Congress doesn't need to change the 14th Amendment. It only takes five black robed High Priests of the law in Washington to tell us what it really states when it doesn't.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside....

Prior to being submitted to the states for a vote, the 14th Amendment actually read:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, except Indians NOT taxed, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside....

Congress was fully aware that some eastern tribes no longer existed as formal organizations, that those Indians from former tribes no longer had tribal affiliations, were citizens of the state wherein they resided, and were Indians taxed. Yet a majority of justices somehow divined from the language of the ratified 14th Amendment the fact that ALL Indians that had not formally surrendered to the US, and had that surrender recognized, were not US citizens.

That raises some interesting possibilities considering the fact that the indigenous peoples south of the border are extended Indian tribes. They look Indian, they tell me they consider themselves Indian. The Mexican government sends textbooks to the US extolling the virtues of their Aztec ancestry.

That being the case, the US Supreme Court has already determined that "Indians" holding allegiance to a foreign state not withing the jurisdiction of the United States, including their offspring born within the USA, would be required to formally surrender to the US and have that surrender accepted.

Even CNN disputes Butler's claims in their poll:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/images/06/21/lou.dobbs.tonight.poll.results.pdf

WatchDog wrote:

Wren wrote:

M Butler wrote:

Learn to spell and learn to question without being rude, Russ, and I'll consider responding to your questions.


Russ wants us to do what he does not do.

The 14th Amendment will not be changed, thus no need exists to debate the question. The Congress can't change it on its own, for the Constitution prevents, thus no need exists to debate the question.

The immigrants are not going home. The great majority have already made the US their home, many with children as birthright citizens.

How to fix the problems:

(1) secure the borders;

(2) make Big Businesspart of the solution instead of the problem;

(3) begin a guest worker program that leads eventually to naturalization.

M. Butler, you do good work.


Whether right or wrong, didn't he post polls that verified his statement? Have you?

He asked for you to back up your claims. I see little evidence of you being willing to do that. I will advise you the same as Buttler, either put up - or shut up. Provide the sources for your wild claims, or just go away.

He is right...you and Buttler have both decided to be evasive, intentionally making claims about stats & such, and seem totally unwilling to back them up. You, along with Buttler, have chosen his option number 1. Refusal to provide source material for your claims puts you both in the crackpot, windbag, category.

About the 14th: The thought occurred to me that citizenship for the child is actually a benefit for the parents that we presently grant. I am totally against ANY benefits to the criminal illegal alien. Therefore, I will be supporting the present congressional effort being made to change that court ruling. Which, by the way, if congress chooses to pass the bill, the previous court decisions in the 1800's attempting to deal with the children of slaves will no longer be valid.


His posts are not competently supported because his evidence remains skewed and flawed.

14th Amendment: apparently you do not understand American law or the Constitution. Congress can't change the 14th Amendment, other than begin an amendment process, which in our current climate is going to go nowhere.

You are right about one thing: if the 14th amendment is eviscerated, the government will have the same power to come after you, podjo, as it does now the immigrants.

Careful what you ask for, hmmm?

Let's say I break into your house:

A lady wrote the best letter in the Editorials
in ages!!! It explains things better than all
the baloney you hear on TV.

Her point:

Recently large demonstrations have taken place
across the country protesting the fact that Congress
is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration.

Certain people are angry that
the US might protect its own
borders, might make it harder
to sneak into this country and,
once here, to stay indefinitely.
Let me see if I correctly understand
the thinking behind these protests.
Let's say I break into your house.
Let's say that when you discover
me in your house, you insist that I leave.
But I say, "I've made all
the beds and washed the
dishes and did the laundry
and swept the floors. I've
done all the things you don't
like to do. I'm hard-working
and honest
(except for when I broke into your house).

According to the protesters:
You are Required to let me stay in your house
You are Required to add me to your family's insurance plan
You are Required to Educate my kids
You are Required to Provide other benefits to me & to my family
(my husband will do all of your yard work because
he is also hard-working and honest, except for that
breaking in part).

If you try to call the police or force me out,
I will call my friends who will picket your
house carrying signs that proclaim my
RIGHT to be there.

It's only fair, after all, because you have
a nicer house than I do, and I'm just
trying to better myself. I'm a hard-working
and honest, person, except for well,
you know, I did break into your house
And what a deal it is for me!!!

I live in your house, contributing only a
fraction of the cost of my keep, and
there is nothing you can do about it
without being accused of cold,
uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and
bigoted behavior.

Oh yeah, I DEMAND that you to learn
MY LANGUAGE!!! so you can
communicate with me.

Why can't people see how ridiculous
this is?! Only in America .
if you agree, pass it on (in English).
Share it if you see the value of it.

Wren wrote:

WatchDog wrote:

Wren wrote:

M Butler wrote:

Learn to spell and learn to question without being rude, Russ, and I'll consider responding to your questions.


Russ wants us to do what he does not do.

The 14th Amendment will not be changed, thus no need exists to debate the question. The Congress can't change it on its own, for the Constitution prevents, thus no need exists to debate the question.

The immigrants are not going home. The great majority have already made the US their home, many with children as birthright citizens.

How to fix the problems:

(1) secure the borders;

(2) make Big Businesspart of the solution instead of the problem;

(3) begin a guest worker program that leads eventually to naturalization.

M. Butler, you do good work.


Whether right or wrong, didn't he post polls that verified his statement? Have you?

He asked for you to back up your claims. I see little evidence of you being willing to do that. I will advise you the same as Buttler, either put up - or shut up. Provide the sources for your wild claims, or just go away.

He is right...you and Buttler have both decided to be evasive, intentionally making claims about stats & such, and seem totally unwilling to back them up. You, along with Buttler, have chosen his option number 1. Refusal to provide source material for your claims puts you both in the crackpot, windbag, category.

About the 14th: The thought occurred to me that citizenship for the child is actually a benefit for the parents that we presently grant. I am totally against ANY benefits to the criminal illegal alien. Therefore, I will be supporting the present congressional effort being made to change that court ruling. Which, by the way, if congress chooses to pass the bill, the previous court decisions in the 1800's attempting to deal with the children of slaves will no longer be valid.


His posts are not competently supported because his evidence remains skewed and flawed.

14th Amendment: apparently you do not understand American law or the Constitution. Congress can't change the 14th Amendment, other than begin an amendment process, which in our current climate is going to go nowhere.

You are right about one thing: if the 14th amendment is eviscerated, the government will have the same power to come after you, podjo, as it does now the immigrants.

Careful what you ask for, hmmm?

The government already has that power by declaring you an enemy combatant!

Iceman wrote:

Let's say I break into your house:

A lady wrote the best letter in the Editorials
in ages!!! It explains things better than all
the baloney you hear on TV.

Her point:

Recently large demonstrations have taken place
across the country protesting the fact that Congress
is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration.

Certain people are angry that
the US might protect its own
borders, might make it harder
to sneak into this country and,
once here, to stay indefinitely.
Let me see if I correctly understand
the thinking behind these protests.
Let's say I break into your house.
Let's say that when you discover
me in your house, you insist that I leave.
But I say, "I've made all
the beds and washed the
dishes and did the laundry
and swept the floors. I've
done all the things you don't
like to do. I'm hard-working
and honest
(except for when I broke into your house).

According to the protesters:
You are Required to let me stay in your house
You are Required to add me to your family's insurance plan
You are Required to Educate my kids
You are Required to Provide other benefits to me & to my family
(my husband will do all of your yard work because
he is also hard-working and honest, except for that
breaking in part).

If you try to call the police or force me out,
I will call my friends who will picket your
house carrying signs that proclaim my
RIGHT to be there.

It's only fair, after all, because you have
a nicer house than I do, and I'm just
trying to better myself. I'm a hard-working
and honest, person, except for well,
you know, I did break into your house
And what a deal it is for me!!!

I live in your house, contributing only a
fraction of the cost of my keep, and
there is nothing you can do about it
without being accused of cold,
uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and
bigoted behavior.

Oh yeah, I DEMAND that you to learn
MY LANGUAGE!!! so you can
communicate with me.

Why can't people see how ridiculous
this is?! Only in America .
if you agree, pass it on (in English).
Share it if you see the value of it.


There's just one fundamental problem. And that is, that our relationship to America is different from a homeowner's relationship to his house. You no more own this country than I do, and all the citizens together are not owners of America. So, toss the analogy--it starts on the wrong foot, and heads in the wrong direction.