Trump Proposes to End Anchor Babies...

The citizenship clause is about BABIES only. Read the 14th Amendment.

Dems are NOT working for noncitizens to be allowed to vote.

Are you making that up? If not, then CITE it.

 

Illegal aliens are already counted in the census which is used to apportion electoral college votes in the states. So, yes, illegals already have an effect on the Presidential election, even if they never pick up a ballot. Further on that, their illegal ass anchor babies vote. The whole thing is a ****ing farce.

 

Meanwhile, in a real legal context, it's unconstitutional.

 

You don't even understand the part you quoted.

That should be weird but on PF, it's perfectly normal.

 

You mean the part where some jackass opines that this would mean the kids of gypsies and chinamen would be citizens, and the response he gets is essentially "Yeah we know." and it passes?

Do tell.

 

Bull. Every town, state and the feds focus on specific segments based on political decisions concerning need or importance.

I sincerely hope NOBODY thinks that our enforcement arms go after all acts equally.

 

Law enforcement, healthcare, and numerous other features are based on how many people are in the state.

Ignoring the size of the population on issues that affect the population, including budget, just isn't logical.

 

This is why you got distracted. You went googly eyed at some 19th Century casual racism and forgot what the issue is about. Yes "Gypsies" and "Chinamen" can be citizens, but that was never the issue.

 

LOL! No worries, no one thinks that!

 

Again: He uses those two groups simply for shock value. He's saying "but you wouldn't let THESE types in would you" and they're saying "Yes, yes we would".

If you believe what I quoted means something different, by all means expound on your argument. Don't keep us all in suspense.

PS: You missed a perfect opportunity for a "THE CHINAMAN IS NOT THE ISSUE HERE DUDE" quote.

 

As do I

I would bet it would be easy to pass if Republicans would give Democrats something they couldn’t refuse that is causing massive budget issues as well as hurting the nation overall.

Like healthcare for US citizens.

 

Yet your posts above suggest that you think a focusing of immigration enforcement is somehow unconstitutional!

 

Well talking about "Gypsies" and "Chinamen" doesn't make your case. But that seems to be all you saw, all you quoted, and all you can think about. You still have not made your case.

 

??? Is that what you think I "suggest?"

I can't account for you thinking that.

 

No, I'm not. a city in California was granting their right to vote in local elections.

 

Not the US, just Democrats.
Of course not, then they couldn't vote.

 

Oh, good lord. Let's be at least a little serious here.

 

True - in a school board election.

We NEED noncitizens to be educated, and they attend our schools. Allowing them a voice certainly makes sense.

Being part of the process and allowing an understanding of social issues really can not be ridiculed.

Not does it mean that state or federal elections are going that direction.

 

that is not authorized by article one section eight-it too would require a constitutional amendment

 

I disagree, not only because congress can write laws as long as they do not conflict with the constitution but due to the general welfare clause.

 

you need to do some more research and studying on the general welfare clause--it doesn't give congress the power you think it does.

 

Perhaps — but congress can still authorize laws based on their broad powers and there is nothing in the constitution that would prevent such.

 

The 10th Amendment does. Always overlooked by every Democrat and RINO alike.

We could afford healthcare for all citizens....if the Democrats hadn't let in 30 million illegal aliens and their 70 million anchor babies.

 

do you know why Obama care managed to survive?

 

Most studies show we could provide universal healthcare at no additional cost to the average taxpayer just through savings on national healthcare costs along with reductions or eliminations in premiums, co-insurance, deductibles, and out of pocket costs.

But it would hurt the bottom lines of hospital CEO’s and insurance companies so it will never happen