Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[JoshuaFH]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100803/ap_on_go_co/us_republicans_birthright_citizenship

Enjoy.

[Africa]

Holy christ that's terrifying

[Aqizzar]

I was going to make this thread myself actually.  Oh well, no giant ass OP from me then.

STRICT.  CONSTITUTIONAL.  CONSTRUCTION.  Oh lordy lordy.

[C4lv1n]

What is the point of doing this?

Or, in the words of Jean-Luc Picard

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[RedKing]

My guess is that they'd like to try to somehow make it retroactive so that Obama really won't be eligible to be President. They are clever, like piece of wood.

But yeah...good luck with that. There hasn't been a new Amendment passed since 1992, and that one was just to prohibit Congress from raising its own salary in the same session. A divisive amendment like this would never get ratified, IMHO. (Of course, I didn't think there'd be wide support for Arizona's immigration law either, but polls seem to reflect otherwise).

Who knows...maybe Dennis Miller was right when he suggested we should change the plaque on the Statue of Liberty from "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free" to "Go the fuck back to Fuckitania".

[Jackrabbit]

Obviously the future-parents of America are crying out to be strangled in red-tape the moment they give birth because bureaucratic asphyxiation is hot as hell.

You see, it makes sense.

[Renault]

It sounds like they're just trying to cozy up to the right-wing constituencies who are pretty paranoid about immigration lately. I doubt it'll see any real traction, but its an election year and you have to do something to pull in voters. Especially McCain--he's getting hammered for not being conservative enough and could lose his seat to some tea-party candidate. It's not surprising he's desperate to court the hyper-conservative at the moment.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Given how the other members of the union have reacted to Arizona's new laws, I doubt this has a hope in hell of getting ratified by even ten states, much less a 2/3rd's majority.

[Aqizzar]

The repeal of Constitutional amendments seems to be a hot topic on the Right lately.  There's a whole lobby building to repeal the 17th Amendment, so senators don't have to be elected anymore.

But yeah...good luck with that. There hasn't been a new Amendment passed since 1992, and that one was just to prohibit Congress from raising its own salary in the same session.

The best part about that amendment?  It was among the original 30ish proposed during the first session of Congress, in 1789.  Those 30ish were eventually streamlined down to twelve, and that was one of them.  It lost, and was continuously renominated by somebody for 202 years.  (The other one that lost became the 12th Amendment after a decade.)

[MetalSlimeHunt]

One of the ones they took out of the Bill of Rights would have been an anti-slavery law, if I remember correctly. Damn, so close to becoming one of the first modern nations to abolish slavery instead of one of the last.

[Josephus]

What the fucking hell is this shit. Man I used to have respect for John McCain. Now, I don't. At all.

[Aqizzar]

One of the ones they took out of the Bill of Rights would have been an anti-slavery law, if I remember correctly. Damn, so close to becoming one of the first modern nations to abolish slavery instead of one of the last.

You heard wrong from revisionists who like beating up on the past.  It was the ten you know, the pay one, and clarification on executive office holding and elections.  There were plenty of people talking about slavery during the original drafting and every ten years or so afterwards, but nothing in the Bill of Rights.  Long story short, war was the only way that shit was going to be settled.

[RedKing]

Given how the other members of the union have reacted to Arizona's new laws, I doubt this has a hope in hell of getting ratified by even ten states, much less a 2/3rd's majority.

Don't be so sure. Most poll data I've seen puts popular support at anywhere from 51-70%. I think the median number is around 55 or so. What I haven't seen, and can't find anywhere, is how those numbers break down geographically. I would assume border and Western states would be more likely to support (with the possible exception of New Mexico, which tends to be much more immigration-friendly than its neighbors) Arizona's law, while northern "blue" states would be more opposed. California is probably close to a 50-50 split. I think you could get at least a dozen states onboard.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Still nowhere near what they need. The reactionaries will give up on this sooner or later.

[Zangi]

We are far too liberal for conservative 'merica!