Republicans want review of birthright citizenship

[Bearded_Menace]

WASHINGTON – Leading Republicans are joining a push to reconsider the constitutional amendment that grants automatic citizenship to people born in the United States.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said Tuesday he supports holding hearings on the 14th Amendment right, although he emphasized that Washington's immigration focus should remain on border security.

His comments came as other Republicans in recent days have questioned or challenged birthright citizenship, embracing a cause that had largely been confined to the far right.

The senators include Arizona's John McCain, the party's 2008 presidential nominee; Arizona's Jon Kyl, the Republicans' second-ranking senator; Alabama's Jeff Sessions, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a leading negotiator on immigration legislation.

"I'm not sure exactly what the drafters of the (14th) amendment had in mind, but I doubt it was that somebody could fly in from Brazil and have a child and fly back home with that child, and that child is forever an American citizen," Sessions said.

Legal experts say repealing the citizenship right can be done only through constitutional amendment, which would require approval by two-thirds majorities in both chambers of Congress and by three-fourths of the states. Legislation to amend the right, introduced previously in the House, has stalled.

The proposals are sure to appeal to conservative voters as immigration so far is playing a central role in November's elections. They also could carry risks by alienating Hispanic voters and alarming moderates who could view constitutional challenges as extreme. Hispanics have become the largest minority group in the United States, and many are highly driven by the illegal immigrant debate.

McConnell and McCain seemed to recognize the risk by offering guarded statements Tuesday.

McCain, who faces a challenge from the right in his re-election bid, said he supports reviewing citizenship rights. He emphasized, however, that amending the Constitution is a serious matter.

"I believe that the Constitution is a strong, complete and carefully crafted document that has successfully governed our nation for centuries and any proposal to amend the Constitution should receive extensive and thoughtful consideration," he said.

At a news conference, McConnell refused to endorse Graham's suggestion that citizenship rights be repealed for children of illegal immigrants. While refusing to take questions, he suggested instead that he would look narrowly into reports of businesses that help immigrants arrange to have babies in the United States in order to win their children U.S. citizenship.

The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War, granted citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States," including recently freed slaves.

Defenders of the amendment say altering it would weaken a fundamental American value while doing little to deter illegal immigration. They also say it would create bureaucratic hardships for parents giving birth.

Quoting a newspaper columnist, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said Republicans were "either taking leave of their senses or their principles" in advocating repeal.

An estimated 10.8 million illegal immigrants were living in the U.S. as of January 2009, according to the Homeland Security Department. The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that as of 2008, there were 3.8 million illegal immigrants in this country whose children are U.S. citizens.

This should be interesting.

 

[1ManRevolution]

The GOP is taking step to get further and further away from independents and Moderates. If they keep this up they will no longer become relevant in national politics and will be relegated to state/local level.

 

[meesterperfect]

i think most independents and moderates want the amendment repealed or modified considering the extreme abuse of it by so many.
the only ones who would want it to remain as it is are people who intend to abuse it and fools.

 

[1ManRevolution]

I though that according to the Conservatives/teabaggers that the Consitution should be followed at all time to the letter...jusy more hypocrisy from the right.

 

[D-rock]

I agree with an amendment that changes it so at least one biological parent has to be a citizen at the time of birth for a child born in the USA to be given citizenship by birth.

I though that according to the Conservatives/teabaggers that the Consitution should be followed at all time to the letter...jusy more hypocrisy from the right.

They will be following the constitution. It will just legitimately be changed through the amendment process, and not having some judges somewhere twisting it to fit a policy they like.

 

[meesterperfect]

no, thats not true 1man, well actually it is.
it should be followed to the letter, but the letter is sometimes a matter of interpretation.
but i think most know that the constitution should only be changed when there are very extreme circumstances.
millions of people entering the country and having children , anchor babies as the term is aptly called and costing the taxpayers many many millions of dollars each year that they worked for should be viewed as an extreme circumstance............again, unless youre a fool.

Are you a fool sir?
i didn't think so.

Wouldn't you rather see that money go towards something better? Or maybe stay in the pockets of those who earned it, for them and their children and not some illegal resident from another country and their children?
maybe?

 

[Mayhem]

At what point can we call these punk ass racists the punk ass racists that they are? They demonize and demonize hispanics and guess what? There was no shortage of them who fought for the Republic of Texas, who died at the Alamo, who fought to make California a U.S. territory. Their descendents now have to be fucked over by a bunch of dried up old white men and their sycophants. I just explained in another thread why I switched from being a Republican to a Democrat and this is a huge reason why. These fucks need to make people afraid and resentful about eveything except how they are screwing us over.

Support the Troops (as long as they are white)

 

[1ManRevolution]

no, thats not true 1man, well actually it is.
it should be followed to the letter, but the letter is sometimes a matter of interpretation.
but i think most know that the constitution should only be changed when there are very extreme circumstances.
millions of people entering the country and having children , anchor babies as the term is aptly called and costing the taxpayers many many millions of dollars each year that they worked for should be viewed as an extreme circumstance............again, unless youre a fool.

Are you a fool sir?
i didn't think so.

Wouldn't you rather see that money go towards something better? Or maybe stay in the pockets of those who earned it, for them and their children and not some illegal resident from another country and their children?
maybe?

So Conservatives/teabaggers want to interperate the Constitution...the very thing that they vilfy the left for doing.

Thanks for clearing that up...not hypocriscy at all.:tongue:

No. I for one believe that as one of the richest nation in the world we have a responsbility to take care of our people. Though I do believe that our social programs need a major overhaul to remove the layers of red tape..but they will never go away. Not one Republican will risk his political life on voting to get rid of social programs.

 

[Hot Mega]

"Republicans want review of birthright citizenship"

:Translation: GOPers are demagoguing a hot button issue for elections-sake.

If they felt so strongly about this crises...they had over a decade and 6 years with a president from their party to do something about it.

But of course...it wasn't a crisis (even after 9/11 when "the world changed") until Demos are in control and the issue can be exploited.

If the issue has merit...why patchwork? Just support comprehensive reform and be done with it

 

[1ManRevolution]

"Republicans want review of birthright citizenship"

:Translation: GOPers are demagoguing a hot button issue for elections-sake.

If they felt so strongly about this crises...they had over a decade and 6 years with a president from their party to do something about it.

But of course...it wasn't a crisis (even after 9/11 when "the world changed") until Demos are in control and the issue can be exploited.

If the issue has merit...why patchwork? Just support comprehensive reform and be done with it

The irony is that Reagan, the Conservative God that he is, granted them anmesty.

I firmly believe everyone to the left of Fox News sees that this is just a political tool to help them during the election and if fact they will do little to curb the flow of illegals. Even the 600 mile fence that Bush wanted to build...still is not built 4 years after the fact.

All that the GOP is doing is:horse: and everyone knows it but them.

 

[D-rock]

At what point can we call these punk ass racists the punk ass racists that they are? They demonize and demonize hispanics and guess what? There was no shortage of them who fought for the Republic of Texas, who died at the Alamo, who fought to make California a U.S. territory. Their descendents now have to be fucked over by a bunch of dried up old white men and their sycophants. I just explained in another thread why I switched from being a Republican to a Democrat and this is a huge reason why. These fucks need to make people afraid and resentful about eveything except how they are screwing us over.

Support the Troops (as long as they are white)

I can't see the logic in your post and can barely tell what your talking about. What does any of that have to do with the issue at hand where people are exploiting a provision in our laws and we are letting them. Because the people shamelessly exploiting us tend to be a minority that somehow is supposed to make it alright? Trying to use a straw man argument doesn't show how fixing that is wrong.


Even if the Republicans motivations are not pure and wholesome and they are being hypocritical in this and they are using it for political leverage that doesn't mean they are wrong, just that they are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. I could point out that if the democrats don't like it they should have tried to fix it years ago so it couldn't be used as leverage against them.

 

[Ace Bandage]

I can't see the logic in your post and can barely tell what your talking about. What does any of that have to do with the issue at hand where people are exploiting a provision in our laws and we are letting them. Because the people shamelessly exploiting us tend to be a minority that somehow is supposed to make it alright? Trying to use a straw man argument doesn't show how fixing that is wrong.


Even if the Republicans motivations are not pure and wholesome and they are being hypocritical in this and they are using it for political leverage that doesn't mean they are wrong, just that they are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. I could point out that if the democrats don't like it they should have tried to fix it years ago so it couldn't be used as leverage against them.

:dito:
We don't have a what now, bitches smiley, so I guess this will do. The political motivations of the law aren't relevant. The fact that it will not grant citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants in this country is relevant. You can whine about it being an election ploy, but it does serve a legitimate purpose and is long overdue. If you aren't here legally, you or your children don't deserve any goddamn rights.

 

[Mayhem]

I can't see the logic in your post and can barely tell what your talking about. What does any of that have to do with the issue at hand where people are exploiting a provision in our laws and we are letting them. Because the people shamelessly exploiting us tend to be a minority that somehow is supposed to make it alright? Trying to use a straw man argument doesn't show how fixing that is wrong.


Even if the Republicans motivations are not pure and wholesome and they are being hypocritical in this and they are using it for political leverage that doesn't mean they are wrong, just that they are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. I could point out that if the democrats don't like it they should have tried to fix it years ago so it couldn't be used as leverage against them.

The Republicans are not targeting criminals, they are targeting a race. Around here we call that racism. This particular race has had as much to do with building our country as any other demographic. But, they are not white, and many of them don't speak english which makes their "Americanism" questionable, in the minds of conservatives. The "people shamelessly exploiting us" are the conservatives. Fear is their tactic of exploitation. The current conservative faction is only interested in two things: Making you afraid of it and telling you who is to blame for it (I boosted that from The American President) That is not a straw man. It is, in fact, the exact same tactic used by Nazi Germany to demonize the Jews.

Your stance that

they are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons

is interesting. Firstly, I believe that they are blatantly doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons. Secondly, whether I agree with a given policy or not, I want a government that does the right things for the simple reason that it is right. Is that too much to ask for from any party?

 

[Baill Inneraora]

:dito:
We don't have a what now, bitches smiley, so I guess this will do. The political motivations of the law aren't relevant. The fact that it will not grant citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants in this country is relevant. You can whine about it being an election ploy, but it does serve a legitimate purpose and is long overdue. If you aren't here legally, you or your children don't deserve any goddamn rights.

Who in hell are you to decide that an American citizen born here doesn't have any rights just because of something the parents did?

Sorry dude, they have as much of a right to be here as you do.

 

[Ace Bandage]

Who in hell are you to decide that an American citizen born here doesn't have any rights just because of something the parents did?

Sorry dude, they have as much of a right to be here as you do.

Er... that's the point of the law, dude. They aren't going to be citizens if their parents are illegal aliens.

 

[Hot Mega]

I can't see the logic in your post and can barely tell what your talking about. What does any of that have to do with the issue at hand where people are exploiting a provision in our laws and we are letting them. Because the people shamelessly exploiting us tend to be a minority that somehow is supposed to make it alright? Trying to use a straw man argument doesn't show how fixing that is wrong.


Even if the Republicans motivations are not pure and wholesome and they are being hypocritical in this and they are using it for political leverage that doesn't mean they are wrong, just that they are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. I could point out that if the democrats don't like it they should have tried to fix it years ago so it couldn't be used as leverage against them.

Good policy rarely if ever flows from demagoguing an issue..it's better to leave some things on the table than to allow policy to be demagogued out of it.:2 cents:

When have you ever seen good policy (in some cases any policy) flow from demagoguery? If you get anything it usually amounts to little more than policy of expedience.

In '93 GOPers demagogued among other things in their contract on America...term limits. 17 years later do we have term limits?

They demagogue 'drill momma grizzly drill' but Bush waits til there is a Demo congress to complain or "try" to do something about it.

GOPers have had since '95 to do something about illegal immigration...instead they sicked attack hounds on Clinton from Hope to D.C. and led the charge to bomb and rebuild Iraq.

The list goes on and on...So the question is should we buy the same old con?:horse:

Beyond that, if they're serious..they will support a comprehensive overhaul and not patchwork nonsense just to regain control.

 

[Vertigo Corsa]

I love how this issue is forcing liberals to finally embrace a "literal" interpretation of the Constitution, never thought I'd see the day.

 

[1ManRevolution]

I love how this issue is forcing liberals to finally embrace a "literal" interpretation of the Constitution, never thought I'd see the day.

Conservatives are the ones that have been preaching about the literal interpertation and orginal intent of the Constitution for some time...now they want to change it because it does not fit their view point.

Also considering that Congress needs I believe 2/3rds to enact a Constitutional Amendment...good luck Republicans, it will never get done.

 

[Hot Mega]

I love how this issue is forcing liberals to finally embrace a "literal" interpretation of the Constitution, never thought I'd see the day.

Maybe the point of contention is about fixing all of what's broken at one time on the issue than demagoguing piece by piece for the sake of politics.

I don't think many reasonable people want rampant invasion of our borders to continue but at the same time I for one don't want to see issues exploited this year then nothing ever done about it when it has serve it's political purpose. The best way to do that is put the whole thing on the table and deal with it.

 

[Ace Bandage]

I defy you to find another thread where the word demagogue (or a derivative) appeared eight times. Well, nine now. When did that become a hot button word. It's fun to say though.

Verisimilitude. Indubitably. Enantiodromic...