Skip to comments.
Thompson angers state Hispanics
Orlando Sentinel ^
| September 29, 2007
| Jim Stratton
Posted on 09/29/2007 6:12:59 AM PDT by Josh Painter
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-171 next last
To: Sturm Ruger
Thompson angers state HispanicsAll of them, huh?
Snort.
2
posted on
09/29/2007 6:14:26 AM PDT
by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: Sturm Ruger
Citizenship by birth has been prescribed by the Constitution since 1868 -- and upheld for 109 years by the Supreme Court -- but the Republican presidential candidate made it sound anachronistic.Not the whole story.
3
posted on
09/29/2007 6:15:33 AM PDT
by
ikka
To: Sturm Ruger
I am guessing the hispanics that are angered are non-voting illegal aliens who want the anchor baby amendment to stand. Any immigrant(that means aliens here legally)would not care a whit about the anchor baby clause(if it really is such)because since they are here legally their babies are all citizens. I do not think that people who break our laws should be rewarded by having their children made citizens simply because they are born here, this is not law in most other nations, most notably Mexico, why should it be law here?
4
posted on
09/29/2007 6:18:40 AM PDT
by
calex59
To: Sturm Ruger
I’m not sure why you make such a thing an issue when you know there ain’t no way in hell you’re ever going to be able to change the Constitution anyway.
5
posted on
09/29/2007 6:18:48 AM PDT
by
Brilliant
To: ikka
Liberal media. The Sentinel is owned by The Tribune Co., which also owns the Chicago Trib, LA Times, Baltimore Sun, and various other left-leaning media outlets.
6
posted on
09/29/2007 6:20:58 AM PDT
by
Josh Painter
( "Our government must be limited by the powers delegated to it by the Constitution." - Fred Thompson)
To: Sturm Ruger
Another leftist rag heard from.
Don’t wrap your fish in this rag, you will never get the smell out of the fish.
7
posted on
09/29/2007 6:21:44 AM PDT
by
bill1952
(The 10 most important words for change: "If it is to be, it is up to me")
To: Sturm Ruger
Thompson's comments have angered
illegal's Hispanic leaders --
many nearly all of them
Republicans democrats.
Okay, now the statement is correct......
8
posted on
09/29/2007 6:21:56 AM PDT
by
From One - Many
(Trust the Old Media At Your Own Risk. I Will Be Voting for Mr. Duncan Hunter, fellow FReepers.)
To: Sturm Ruger
The Irish tripped to this problem in 2004 when they passed a referendum requiring that at least one parent of a child born after enactment had to be Irish or eligible to be Irish in order for a child born in their country to have birth citizenship. The vote was not even close. It became the Twenty-seventh Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland by an 80% majority.
http://www.ireland.com/focus/referendum2004/guide.html
9
posted on
09/29/2007 6:22:06 AM PDT
by
RKV
(He who has the guns makes the rules)
To: Sturm Ruger
I agree with Fred.
A kitten born in a stable should not be called a colt.
10
posted on
09/29/2007 6:22:31 AM PDT
by
Cracker Jack
(If it weren't for the democrats, republicans would be the worst thing in Washington.)
To: Brilliant
11
posted on
09/29/2007 6:22:42 AM PDT
by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: Sturm Ruger
When Fred Thompson said it might be time to review the practice of granting citizenship to every child born on American soil, he didn't acknowledge the seismic shift such an idea represents.
Good to see a politician who doesn't consult a pollster to find where his convictions lie.
To: Sturm Ruger
“It’s not just ramping up the rhetoric,” said Alex Villalobos, a Republican state senator from Miami. “It’s pandering to extremists.”
Oh?
Let’s conduct an unbiased poll to see which position is the “extreme one.”
13
posted on
09/29/2007 6:23:27 AM PDT
by
Atlas Sneezed
("We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them, I won't chip away at them" -Mitt Romney)
To: RKV
That is an interesting why of handling it. It would also solve many other problems.
To: ikka
To: Sturm Ruger
No, the Constitution does NOT require that "anchor babies" are automatically American citizens. The 14th Amendment refers to parents who are "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. And the last clause of the Amendment, like most amendments, gives Congress the power to enforce it by "appropriate legislation."
So the plain language of the 14th Amendment means that Congress CAN, by legislation, define who is "subject to the jurisdiction," which in turn could end the practice of granting automatic citizenship to anchor babies. Lord, I hate it, when reporters who haven't bothered to read the document assert falsely what is in the Constitution.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article, "Dan Rather, CBS, Plus Duke"
To: mewzilla
[Thompson angers state Hispanics] All of them, huh? Snort. My thoughts exactly. Half of modern news stories are like this though - their headlines purport to be telling us how some group thinks/reacts about something. The rest of us are supposed to find this significant, apparently. Of course, you dig into the article and they have quotes from like 2-3 people, mostly professional grievance mongers and/or political hacks, from that group justifying the headline. Meaning, of course, that this is really an article telling you what the news reporter thinks, and the news reporter decided to use the group as a prop/sock-puppet in which to cloak his opinion.
It's gotten so that I expect it. Interestingly, my immediate reaction to seeing "Group X Angered by Y's Statement" headlines is that my opinion of Y increases. He must have really ticked off the propagandist news reporter, after all.
Another thing that always comes to mind: if I were a member of the group that is supposedly "angered" (or whatever), I'd feel offended and patronized by this propaganda approach. Because the subtext is that this group is a monolithic blob, of one mind about everything.
To: Sturm Ruger
"Citizenship by birth has been prescribed by the Constitution since 1868..."
B.S.
Read the Preamble. See that part about "to ourselves and our Posterity".
It didn't say, "to ourselves, our Posterity, and the children of illegal aliens"
18
posted on
09/29/2007 6:27:22 AM PDT
by
joseph20
(...to ourselves and our Posterity...)
To: Brilliant
Im not sure why you make such a thing an issue when you know there aint no way in hell youre ever going to be able to change the Constitution anyway. This WAS a change to the Constitution. The problem is that it has not been interpreted by the courts the way the enactors intended. It was NEVER intended to give Citizenship to the children of foreigners, whether here legally or not. And, the question of whether children of ILLEGAL aliens are citizens has never been taken to the Supreme Court, let alone ruled on.
To: Brilliant
It doesn’t require changing the Constitution. See my post. The reporter is either incompetent or dishonest. Either way, he is wrong. See my earlier post for the details.
John / Billybob
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-171 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson