What's Next in Arizona? Efforts to Repeal 14th Amendment Rights

by Karen Hatter | May 22, 2010 at 07:44 am
1426 views | 32 Recommendations | 33 comments

Videos

The Tanton Network

see larger video

sourced by Karen Hatter

The Tanton Network

Photos

Phoenix Arizona protest on may 1st 2010 regarding Arizona Sb1070  | Photo 16

Phoenix Arizona protest on may 1st 2010 regarding Arizona Sb1070 | Photo 16

see larger image

uploaded by everchanging

In part, the 14th Amendment, Section 1 reads:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ….

(Read the entire highlighted article here.)  

‘Show Me Your Papers’ proponent sets new goal

Republican Senator Russell Pearce of Arizona, the man who shepherded SB 1070 through the Arizona legislature, dubbed the ‘Show Me Your Papers’ Bill, has set his sights on an effort to gut the portion of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1868, that bestows citizenship to persons born in the United States.

According to a local news report, emails released by State Senator Russell Pearce reveal a rather stunning claim to his supporters: “I intend to push for an Arizona bill that would refuse to accept or issue a birth certificate that recognizes citizenship to those born to illegal aliens …

The senator’s history of controversial ties, statements and actions

Senator Pearce has come under fire for forwarding an e mail to supporters from a neo Nazi group. He later apologized, saying he hadn’t read the entire article before forwarding. The e mail forwarding incident cost him political support during his bid for congressional office in 2006. The senator has ties to reported neo Nazi J.T. Ready.

Senator Pearce has advocated mass deportation of undocumented workers while referencing a program from the 1950s called Operation Wetback.

      Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) linked to contested immigration law

      The most prominent United States organization leading opposition to immigration is the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). The organization has a long, contentious history of advocacy against the immigration of non Whites into the U.S.

      Kris Kobach has claimed credit for helping Senator Pearce draft the language in the Arizona bill, scheduled to go into effect in July 2010.

      Mr. Kobach is:

      …. an attorney for the Immigration Reform Law Institute. That‘s the legal arm of an immigration group that‘s called FAIR, the Federation for American Immigration Reform. FAIR was founded in 1979 by a man named John Tanton.

      (A link to the entire article.)

      After founding FAIR in 1979, Mr. Tanton wrote:

      “To govern is to populate. Will the present majority peaceably hand over its political power to a group that is simply more fertile? As whites see their power and control over their lives declining, will they simply go quietly into the night or will there be an explosion?”

      (The entire highlighted article can be found here.)

      Today, Mr. Tanton serves on the board of directors of FAIR.

      FAIR, whose members have testified frequently before Congress, accepted more than $1 million from the Pioneer Fund, a racist foundation devoted to proving a connection between race and intelligence. FAIR has hired as key officials men who were also active in white supremacist groups …. others who write for anti-immigrant hate sites.

      (Here's a link to the article containing the highlighted excerpt on FAIR.)

      Affiliations with the above named groups and organizations have resulted in the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) listing FAIR as a hate group.

      Nationwide boycotts of Arizona planned by U.S. cities and organizations

      Since the signing into law of the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act, as its known in Arizona, by Governor Jan Brewer on April 24th, 2010, Arizona has lost the potential for millions of dollars in revenue as cities and organizations have cancelled plans travel to venues previously scheduled to be hosted by the state of Arizona.

      Among the cities boycotting Arizona: Austin, TX, Berkeley, CA, Boston, MA and Boulder, CO.
      Among organizations boycotting the state: Service Employees International Union (SEIU), United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and the Asian American Justice Center.


      Advertisement
      recommend This comment thread is now closed
      2
      Karen Hatter

      Good morning, Staff.

      I have labored nearly all morning to get this published to the site.

      I encountered the 'disappearing original links for excerpted highlights' thing.

      I'm too drained to describe the other, less major glitches.

      I anticipate some issues when I attempt to edit after adding videos and photos. That's SOP.

      Often, the excerpted HIGHLIGHTS disappear after I add photos and videos. 

      When you get an opportunity, Staff, if photos and videos disappear after any edits, please re-add any video or photos that disappear.

      Thanks!

       

      1
      YankeeJim

      Karen, I encounter the problem every time that I hit publish. I have to edit and reinsert each url, then publish again. Usually, but not always, it posts.

      1
      Karen Hatter

      Thanks for sharing, Jim. I usually do that too.

      I can re-insert the urls but, when I do, I'll lose the videos, which I think are relevant and important, providing supplemental information necessary to understanding the real back story behind the anti immigration movement.

      Since I haven't seen Staff around today, and I think we're down to 3, I won't edit until someone can put the videos back for me. 

      0
      Susan Marie Kovalinsky

      Thanks for the great article, Karen.  I too have had this "disappearing links"  problem,  and also keep having bold or italics which I cannot get rid of no matter how I try.  And sometime the tagging will freeze for an hour.  Okie,  thanks once more ;  )

      1
      Karen Hatter

      Thank you, Susan, for giving it a read!

      Re: the glitches, all I can say is ARRGGHHHH!

      4
      Rory Cripps

      LMAO! Have you read SB1070? What is it exactly that you don't like about the federal immigration statutes? SB1070 is completely consistent with the federal immigration statutes. It was passed out of necessity because the federal government refuses to enforce the immigration laws that are currently on the books. Would I be out of line if I said that you just want more people of color here in the U.S.? And if I was out of line, could you explain why?

      I've said it before and I say it again: The federal government's utter refusal to enforce the immigration statutes is going to result in the political pendulum swinging far to the right and staying there for decades. The only thing that will bring the pendulum back toward the middle  is if the American voter demographics change dramatically. The American voters have simply had it and poll after poll indicates that. Even 62 percent of Independent voters have had it with the Fed's failure to enforce immigration statutes. I personally don't think that it's a good thing for the House, Senate, and Administration to be filled with right-wingers. And I feel the same about left-wingers. But unless the government can convince the American voter that it's on the side of the American people when it comes to the immigration issue, there's no turning back and that pendulum is going to be stuck on the right for a long time.

      I expect a lot of politicians to push for Constitutional restrictions as a result of the immigration issue. The left does it any time something comes along that doesn't conform to their ideological view.  So why shouldn't the right do the same thing? The pot can call the kettle black all that it wants. . . . .


      8
      Karen Hatter

      Rory, I agree the federal government has been lax in its handling of the issue of immigration and undocumented workers.

      I also know that since the time of emancipation, 1863, and after the period of Reconstruction, 1860 through 1880, both periods occurring after almost 400 years of the enslavement of people of African descent, a variety of segments within America, from within both the Democratic and Republican Parties, have pondered and worried over THEIR country being overrun by those OTHER people. Just so happens, the OTHER people being scapegoated this time are undocumented workers. 

      The election of the nation's first acknowledged African American president and rough economic times, have provided the Right Wing an opportunity to pull conservatives, those referred to as the Tea Party movement and mainly the Republican Party, into more extreme positions.

      The Right Wing, in modern times for the last 30 years, has tried to stoke and cultivate the fear of many within the White populous, using all of the time honored, racist stereotypes always offered as the reason 'WE', White folks, don't want THOSE people, damned near everyone else, to be among us.

      The Right Wing's goal is to take the country backward to a time when decent White folk felt they had a grip on things, a time when all those pesky critters which you didn't even have to acknowledge, in them good ole days, were safely hidden from their mind's eye.

      It is the duty of all people of good conscience of whatever race to assure that doesn't happen and the odds are good the Right Wing's quest will eventually be brought to a halt.

      5
      Susan Marie Kovalinsky

      Ah yes, Karen,  the good ole days!!  There is no going back to former times.  What must be done with the nostalgia  -  which we do not share -  is for those who are awash in it to alter their view,  see the logical fallacies implicit in their own words, and to learn it is best to inherit and surpass the good things of the past,  while understanding that the worst of it had to be gone beyond.  This is progress.

      2
      Karen Hatter

      So true, Susan.

      3
      Rory Cripps

      Yeah, Susan! So true :) But what the hell does enforcing the immigration laws have to do with the past? They were never enforced for some.  Carlo Gambino and Johhny Roselli can tell you that!

      0
      Susan Marie Kovalinsky

      well, I am radically inclined in this area:  I will not even venture to say what I have in mind by progress....

      1
      sillyrabbit

      i think that people should read the actual bill and stop listening to propaganda

      4
      Karen Hatter
      John Tanton's Network

      The organized anti-immigration "movement" is almost entirely the handiwork of one man, Michigan activist John H. Tanton.
      Here is a list of 13 groups in the loose-knit Tanton network, followed by acronyms if the groups use them, founding dates, and Tanton's role in the groups.

      In this list, "founded" means a group was founded or co-founded by John Tanton. "Funded" means that U.S. Inc., the funding conduit created and still headed by Tanton, has made grants to the group.


      *American Immigration Control Foundation
      AICF, 1983, funded

      *American Patrol/Voice of Citizens Together
      1992, funded

      *California Coalition for Immigration Reform
      CCIR, 1994, funded

      Californians for Population Stabilization
      1996, funded (founded separately in 1986)

      Center for Immigration Studies
      CIS, 1985, founded and funded

      *Federation for American Immigration Reform
      FAIR, 1979, founded and funded

      NumbersUSA
      1996, founded and funded

      Population-Environment Balance
      1973, joined board in 1980

      Pro English
      1994, founded and funded

      ProjectUSA
      1999, funded

      *The Social Contract Press
      1990, founded and funded

      U.S. English
      1983, founded and funded

      U.S. Inc.
      1982, founded and funded
      4
      Miz Sheria

      Karen, good stuff. Thanks for suffering through the technical frustrations to post it.

      Rory, I have read the bill; it's pretty short as legislation goes, and it appears to conflict with division of authority between the states and the federal govenment. Immigration law is within the control of the federal government, not the states.

      Arizona cannot amend the U.S. Constitution; no state can do so. There can be a state by state referendum to amend the constitution, but no single state can simply amend a provison of the U.S. Constitution. Pearce needs to get some better legal staff.

      Why are some white people so worried about becoming a numerical minority? What is the arrogance that makes you presume that a white majorty is to be desired above all else?  Hate to tell you this, but worldwide you are already a minority. With any luck, people of color won't feel a need to subjugate you based on the color of your skin the way so many of your people have over the centuries in Africa, India, Asia, the Americas, Australia...It seems that everywhere Europeans have gone there has been a need to assert a belief in their superiority.

      Who are these American people that you speak of so reverentially? White people? That's the supreme arrogance. You see, I'm an American too, as are millions of other people of color. For the most part, we Do you honestly believe that the only America that counts is the one that you acknowledge, an America of white people?  You do know that not all white people are obsessed with this need to declare your superiority? There are a lot of folks who want to work together towards mutual respect and equality.

      You are not a racist. (Just thought I'd save you the time of saying so.) I really don't know what you are. Perhaps just a prankster who wanted to see what kind of response utter nonsense would receive from others. Perhaps you really believe that being white entitles you to some special privileges. Maybe you believe that more people of color is a really bad, bad thing. Get over it Rory, the revolution has already taken place and we are not goign to allow the clock to be turned back.

      1
      Karen Hatter

      Asante sana, Miz Sheria, for your much appreciated contribution to the thread.

      0
      Jdelaigle@5dbrand.com

      The old story is that if you repeat a lie over and over eventually it becomes the truth to those who hear it. The real truth is that the Arizona law as I have read it doesn't create a new law but requires enforcement of the federal law as written. I read the post Karen about the "good Ole Days". What generation has not wanted a better day for themselves and their children. I too long for a day of less crime, less drugs, less hatred. It's not the color of the skin or the nation from which they come that concerns most "white" Americans. It the loss or perceived  loss of culture for lack of a better word. Even if we never lived up to it. America was based on certain values. Those values are eroding at a very fast pace. Gangs and drug crimes are out of control. An unsecured boarder with a country that is full of corruption is in no way good for America. White Americans simply want the drug cartels and terrorist who cross our southern boarder to stay out and the crime to stay south of the boarder. As for Hispanic, African Americans, Irish, Chinese or whatever, as long as they come to this country legally and with a "Love" for what this country stands for, then come one come all. We must remain a melting pot and not a salad bowl or we will fail. Raising the Mexican flag and then turning the American flag upside down below it doesn't sound like they are wanting the Melting pot at all. Shouting that the Southwest was taken from them and they will fight for it's return doesn't help either. When pushed into a corner people fight back. When people stop and listen to each others concerns with respect, a bond is created.

      5
      Karen Hatter

      An important fact being avoided when discussing the anti immigration movement, for over 20 years, is the majority influence of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), founded by John Tanton, and all of the affliated arms of the organization.

      The history of John Tanton and his views reveal his White supremacist mindset. His organization and its affiliates coalesce around the doctrine of racial supremacy, in his case and the majority of the organizations, White supremacy.

      America has never been a " .... melting pot".

      America has always been more of a 'stew' with a variety of 'ingredients' thrown in the pot together.

      0
      Jdelaigle@5dbrand.com

      All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.


      If you were born in America ( to legal citizens or persons who had a legal reason for being here, as intended by the writers of the amendment) you were a citizen.  If you were naturalized, then you were a citizen. If you were born hear to a person who is here illegally and who is by being here breaking our laws, then you do not meet the requirements of being a citizen. You can try to reason it any other way, but if doesn't make since to give citizenship to the child of someone who has come here illegally.

      0
      batvette

      There are more racist quotes you need to include to make your case against these extremist bigots:

      There can be no white-latino unity until there is first some white unity.... We cannot think of uniting with others, until after we have first united among ourselves. We cannot think of being acceptable to others until we have first proven acceptable to ourselves.

      We white men have a hard enough time in our own struggle for justice, and already have enough enemies as it is, to make the drastic mistake of attacking each other and adding more weight to an already unbearable load.

      I've never seen a sincere latino man, not when it comes to helping Americans. Usually things like this are done by latino people to benefit themselves.

       The death of over 120 black people is a very beautiful thing.

      John Tanton, you bastard! Oh wait, he didn't say all that- substitute the white with black, and latino for white, and those are quotes from Malcolm X, who the author of this article is celebrating in her most recent other article.

      But we know if you say BLACK POWER it's okay. If you say WHITE POWER you're a racist bigot.

      5
      Karen Hatter

      Batvette, John Tanton and the organizations founded and funded by John Tanton are the major orchestrators of what has come to be known as the anti immigration movement.

      The nature and motivations of the founder of the Federation of American Immigration Reform (FAIR) are highly relevant when considering the tone and direction being shaped by those elements.

      Malcolm X had nothing to do with the formation of any anti immigration movement.

      Your bizarre statements regarding Malcolm X have nothing to do with this topic.

      1
      batvette

      Don't be coy, Karen, you know what I am getting at. You are trying to villainize this Tanton guy as a white supremist and his statements in which he purports to strive for the advancement or preservation of the white race- while in another article you are celebrating Malcolm X, whose role in the civil rights movement included using much of the inflammatory talk you would bash Tanton for.

      You are the one bringing racism to the table, don't now pretend that the issue is limited to immigration. You'd condone Malcolm X's pro black, anti-white rhetoric-the comment about 120 dead whites is just shameful- but use even less hateful words against Tanton.

      I think your arguments are hypocritical. I don't support white supremicist movements but I also am not afraid to say what must be said, that the way of life of Americans is in peril by an invasion of people from Latin America whose culture is irresponsibly overpopulating the planet. That is an "inconvenient truth", as the birth rate in Guatamala, El Salvador, Honduras, and the neighboring countries is over TWICE that of America's, of all races. Even that of Mexico is about 60% higher. It's been that way for decades. Ever hear about global warming? What causes that? Human Industrial Activity.

      Latin America should be forced to live in the desperate conditions they are creating, instead of being allowed to follow their primal urges of procreating at will until their region cannot support this tide of humanity, then stomping over the will and laws of another society who acts more responsibly regarding overpopulation to take what they need.

      This is a curious contradiction of ideologies of the left-and these seem to be your two main issues of your platform, currently- Immigration and AGW.

       Do you wish to save the planet from man's proliferation of people and industry? Or do you wish to coddle the massive populations of third world nations and give them the higher standard of living you enjoy, ignoring their poverty often came through the irresponsibilities of their culture, espousing birth control and admiring the male virility for fathering many children? You cannot have both!

      You can face these realities or simply give centrists like me who lean a bit right in the face of the foolish left, a vehicle in which to ridicule your causes.

      I can't speak for anyone but me but I would seek a mutually beneficial, higher goal than that. You're a black American of unknown position on the socioeconomic scale. I am a white American who has spent most of his life living well below the poverty level. Don't you realize that black Americans now have to compete for entry level jobs with these people, and they have cheapened the labor pool to the point where jobs that used to pay a living wage now just pay enough for 5 immigrants to live together in a one room apartment? You should consider you are not doing black America any favors by siding with these people because they are not white, but side with fellow Americans because they were born in your town, speak your language, went to your school, watched the TV shows you watched as a child- and have a lot more in common with you than someone from 4500 miles south of you .

      Seems to me you think this is about hispanic VS white and black VS white, so you take sides VS a common enemy, when by your own demand to focus the issue, this is an immigration  issue. Americans with Americans.

      If you think it's about the former, Karen, maybe the racist is you.

      Thank you for considering my opinion on this.

       

      6
      Karen Hatter

      Batvette, John Tanton's nativist White nationalist/supremacist views are the focal point around which current anti immigration attitudes and policies, mainly promoted by the Right Wing, have been and are attempting to galvanize.

      The positions and attitudes offered by John Tanton and the organizations with which he is affiliated have been used to support crafting policy decisions on local, state and federal levels in government.

      No local, state or federal policies or programs have been developed using any opinions articulated by Malcolm X.

      Again, there is no relevance to Malcolm X in this context.

      I suggest you familiarize yourself with the Code of Conduct, here at NowPublic and advise that any comments you choose to offer be directed at the topic at hand, not me or who you think I may be personally.

      0
      batvette

      Okay, fair enough, I received your warning via email, the criticism is certainly warranted in my comments toward Scrivener (though I can back up any accusation about what he writes) but anything I said to you certainly wasn't meant to be derogatory.

      This issue is certainly larger than you or I, I don't have anything to gain by attacking you.

      Here is an assessment of the recent national polls on the Arizona Law, from an article at the New Republic:

      According to a CBS/New York Times poll, 65 percent of Americans see illegal immigration as a "very serious problem," 74 percent think it weakens the economy, and 78 percent believe the U.S. should be doing more to stop it. These beliefs help explain why 51 percent of the people think that the new Arizona law is "about right," versus only 36 percent who say it "goes too far." They reach this conclusion despite the fact that 72 percent think it will have disproportionate effects on certain racial and ethnic groups and 78 percent believe it will burden police departments. The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds the same thing: 64 percent of respondents support the Arizona legislation (46 percent strongly) despite the fact that 66 percent believe that it will lead to discrimination against Latino immigrants who are in this country legally.

      The Pew Research Center probed more deeply and came to a similar conclusion. Its researchers began by examining public opinion on three key provisions of the Arizona law: requiring people to produce documents verifying legal status (73 percent approval); allowing the police to detain anyone unable to verify legal status (67 percent approval); and giving authorities the right to question anyone they think may be in the country illegally (62 percent approval). Pew then asked whether, "considering everything," respondents endorsed the Arizona bill: 59 percent said yes, versus only 32 percent who disapproved.

       

      http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126971065

      By every polling source and every methodology used, the majority of Americans support the Arizona legislation.

      Are they all "right wing ...  nativist white nationalist/supremists"? Isn't it introducing a red herring by implying that people who support immigration laws do so for reasons of racism or white supremacy?

      I did find this statement in a CNN article, (supported by data in the polls) rather peculiar:

      The survey also indicates a ethnic divide, with more then seven in 10 Hispanics opposed to the law and nearly six in 10 white voters supporting the measure. Fifty-seven percent of Asian voters oppose the law, with African Americans evenly divided.


      Damn, this Tanton guy has REALLY got some influence to pull THAT one off.

      I won't further post an opposing view to your article.

      0
      Karen Hatter

      Batvette, I have not contacted you via private message e mail regarding myself or anyone else. Therefore, I don't know to what you are referring as relates to myself or Scrivener, as mentioned in your comment here in relation to an e mail.

      0
      batvette

      Then apparantly staff saw your posting of the "code of conduct" link and decided to look into my comments elsewhere. As they are fundamentally right it's not a big deal, forget I mentioned it.

      I would offer though that when one chooses to author "political commentary" published publically, they should be prepared to have their own politics face some scrutiny by those they would oppose. If I'm wrong about that then Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter should get down to the courthouse and start filing lawsuits pronto!

      3
      Karen Hatter

      This article is not political commentary or an opinion piece, Batvette.

      Countering another's politics at NowPublic does not include employing personal attacks upon the author of any posts with which one may disagree.

       

      0
      batvette

      Well okay I could see where the "maybe the racist is you" line was over the top and uncalled for, for that I apologize. I was merely trying to counter the message I'm reading out of your article, which I take as "if you support this legislation, it's because you are a racist OR your political will has been guided by a racist and his organization".

      I don't think you can find too many people that haven't quietly held racist thoughts at one time or another, it's a human weakness but expected, like "us vs them" or a fear or dislike of that which is unfamiliar to you.

      You know I went to the link you provided about the  Emmitt Till murder, and spent over an hour reading, particularly the chilling confession of the murderers published in Look magazine at the time. After seeing Milam's assertion he had the right, even the duty, to kill that boy, to preserve the way of life he and his ancestors had established, I could see how you'd get the worst idea when people now use the same language to defend their sentiments on the Arizona legislation.

      However I assure you it's not racism behind it for most of us, though I can't speak for everyone. In fact I do thank you for  providing  that link as it was very educational- that kind of segregation, and hate, is like a foreign language to me.  I was raised in a part of the country that is fundamentally polarized from Mississippi, the SF Bay Area. I entered Kindergarten in '67, especially in the public schools, racism was pretty much taboo, very frowned upon.

      Those jerks actually seemed proud about it. I had no idea...

      4
      Karen Hatter

      Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Batvette.

      The glimpse of times past I've shared here at NowPublic serve as an indicator of the majority of American society's progression from it's ugly past practices. 

      Yet, the last 30 years, especially the past several years, have revealed themselves to be trending toward an uncomfortable allowance for intolerance.

      I grew up during the use of the poll tax and literacy tests, which were used to discriminate against those of African descent trying to exercise their right to vote. Former Colorado Republican Representative Tom Tancredo now advocates a revival of the literacy test, citing what he sees as an unwanted occurrence, a "cult of multiculturalism", acceptance of a trend of diversity he finds disturbing.

      When I was a child, interstate travel by bus or train required any Colored people, what African Americans were called in those days, to relinquish their seats in the front of the conveyance and take seats in the back when traveling in southern U.S. states.

      This custom was adhered to by my husband as a young boy when he traveled from Missouri to Mississippi every summer to visit family members.

      Kentucky Republican candidate for the United States' Senate Rand Paul and his father, former Texas Republican Representative Ron Paul's vocal support for freedom of speech, while trying to clothe discrimination as a FORM of speech/expression, as well as a private property concern, therefore, in private property matters, discrimination should be allowed, is troubling.

      Candidate Rand Paul's veiled indication that legislation enacted over the past 80 years, in matters contrary to his interpretation of Libertarianism, may need to be fixed, should minimally raise cautionary concern within both bodies of the Congress. No list has been provided by Rand Paul to reveal which laws have been deemed, to his way of thinking, governmental infringement upon the American citizenry.   

      I agree with you, Batvette, that discrimination will never return in the form and with all of trappings of the past.

      However, only vigilance and determination can stem the tide of those seeking to win over converts to thought processes that have been slowly opening the door for the re-emergence of openly blatant bigotry.

      I have advised/cautioned elsewhere that any who seek to understand more than one perspective on immigration policy within the United States, beginning in 1790, seek additional resources to augment those facts and thoughts provided by John Tanton's network of organizations.

      Historically, 14 years after the founding of the United States, the Naturalization Act of 1790 allowed only White people the opportunity to become American citizens.

      That specific restriction wasn't lifted until 1954, relatively recent history in the scheme of historic events.      

      2
      Karen Hatter

      An opinion offered by former entertainment reviewer turned Right Wing conservative pundit, Michael Medved, noting the incongruity of ideological practice of the Tea Party and Tea Party favorite Rand Paul, as revealed by their desire not to adhere to the U.S. Constitution:

      Within a week of his landslide primary victory, tea party favorite Rand Paul told a reporter for English-language Russian TV that "we're the only country I know that allows people to come in illegally, have a baby, and then that baby becomes a citizen. And I think that should stop also."

      Many Americans might agree with Paul and tea party activists that "birthright citizenship" damages the national interest. The problem is that this view doesn't conform to the clear, concise language of the Constitution's 14th Amendment (adopted in 1868), which states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are Citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

      .... with Mr. Medved further stating:

      Attempts to deny citizenship to the native born, regardless of their parentage, make no sense constitutionally, politically, practically or ethically. They will also contribute to the ongoing marginalization of the Republican Party at precisely the time that conservatives struggle for a much-needed comeback.

      Of course, as there are those that take issue with all Constitutional amendments enacted after the first ten amendments, a.k.a. the Bill of Rights, I guess there's always that line of logic for them to offer as a defense for their position.

      1
      simplygeorge

      Sean Thibodeau at SusPack - Arizona Republicans Seek To Tear Down Statue of Liberty. suspiciouspackaging.blogspot.com/2010/08/arizona-republicans-seek-to-tear-down.html In a shocking move (well from Arizona these days, maybe not so shocking), the same Arizona Republicans that want to further enslave Mexicans and deny person born on United States soil (despite this being the law of the United States for 150 years) have asked that the Statue of Liberty be torn down.  Announcing that they detest the pagan symbol of a Roman goddess and detest freedom, the Arizonians want to have a  "pure" race so we need to rid the US of unwanteds.

      This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

      NowPublic on Facebook

      What is NowPublic?

      NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

      Find out more

      Crowd Power

      Anonymous
      First Flagged at 8:27 AM, May 22, 2010 by Anonymous (not verified)
      These members have powered this story:

      Related Stories

      Recommendations (32)

      Most recently recommended by:
       

      closeSign in to NowPublic

      is reporting from