They truly do not grasp how much entertainment they provide.
What I find truly amusing is when you point out the consequences of what they believe, such as "Anchor Babies" and they say "I don't support that."
Well, yes they do. You cannot separate the one issue from the other. If birth citizenship applies to anyone born here you get "anchor babies" and "birth tourism" as a defacto consequence.
One of my main arguments against the jus soli argument for US Citizenship is the fact that it produces a stupid result, and the founders were anything but stupid, ergo they intended no such result.
If, however, any conservatives following this thread would like an explanation, please PM me. I will be happy to fill you in. Not everyone follows eligibility threads with equal attention, after all, and it would be no trouble for me at all to answer this simple and basic question.
I don't follow them as closely as I once did. The point has become moot in our society and I no longer research the topic as much as I used to do. It is no longer a moral imperative because the bulk of the country has simply accepted an incorrect understanding of the laws and history, and many chose to remain willfully ignorant.
I had NO idea obots claimed not to support anchor babies. Surely not even obots are that inconsistent and irrational? What a shock. I would have expected to see them strutting around on street corners carrying big ‘Anchor Babies R Us’ posters. I would expect them to be chanting:
“What do we want?
Anchor Babies!!
When do we want them?
NOW!!”
Honestly. And Obama, the forteign-born America-hater, would be prancing right alongside them.
Agree that in Obama’s America anything goes. However, my offer was/is on a different topic. The obots are stumped over the fact that no pregnant Stanley Ann was seen in HI. They evidently think this means she wasn’t anywhere. I have offered to explain this embarrassingly simple issue to any conservative who might be interested.