Exit poll data...

You'll see from my opening line that I was keeping the topic in focus- rather than letting you run off with it in some torturous tirade of personal pique.

My post to which you responded was to someone making a claim unrelated to the topic. It was a claim about me personally and you want to try and turn it into something it isn't. Please pay attention or continue to look stupid. Your choice.
 
14th amendment creates the 14th amendment.....to the extent it states a person born in the US is a US citizen it totally eliminates immigration law, since the person born here is not an immigrant.......


/shrugs.....constitutional amendments aren't that simple.......needs to be ratified by a certain number of states

I am not talking about a Constitutional Amendment.

I am saying we can pass an immigration law that restricts immigration from X country and Y country and not run afoul of any constitutional arguments. Because if we can't do that, then essentially we have ZERO immigration laws whatsoever and we have signed a suicide pact as a nation
 
Trump has proposed not letting them return if they leave for vacation.


cite

I propose making all muslimes pay a tax and closing mosques. But that is me. You love muslimes. When are you converting.

What is funny is that with all of the love you lefties have for muslimes, you get very touchy when people say Obummer is a muslime. You act like it is an insult or something.
 
I am not talking about a Constitutional Amendment.

I am saying we can pass an immigration law that restricts immigration from X country and Y country and not run afoul of any constitutional arguments. Because if we can't do that, then essentially we have ZERO immigration laws whatsoever and we have signed a suicide pact as a nation

That would be Constitutional, but the Religious Right would have a freak out because they have programs to bring Christian refugees here (rightfully so) from those Countries.

What you have to do is develop a robust program that objectively identifies people (not based on membership in a religion) who are risks and rejects them when they apply.
 
I am saying we can pass an immigration law that restricts immigration from X country and Y country and not run afoul of any constitutional arguments. Because if we can't do that, then essentially we have ZERO immigration laws whatsoever and we have signed a suicide pact as a nation

what does that have to do with anchor babies?......
 
cite

I propose making all muslimes pay a tax and closing mosques. But that is me. You love muslimes. When are you converting.

What is funny is that with all of the love you lefties have for muslimes, you get very touchy when people say Obummer is a muslime. You act like it is an insult or something.

Nothing like destroying American principles to "save" America.

I hope you're not serious. I mean, you probably are - but I just hope not.
 
That would be Constitutional, but the Religious Right would have a freak out because they have programs to bring Christian refugees here (rightfully so) from those Countries.

What you have to do is develop a robust program that objectively identifies people (not based on membership in a religion) who are risks and rejects them when they apply.

You can't objectively identify people that way. Just easier to ban immigration all together.
 
There is a lot more to the 14th than to allow citizenship of children born to slaves, wow, what do they teach in the Public Schools where you are from? WOW... Are you saying it only implies to former slaves? Really?

Had trump rattled off a number of countries he would ban it would have been a Constitutional proposal, but the Christians would have had a shit fit because they are desperate to get some groups of Christians out of those countries for safety reasons (rightfully so).
What part of "Wasn't part of it to ensure the citizenship of children born to slaves?"do you not understand? And I haven't heard ANYTHING from Christians against this proposal. It's easier for them to get into Europe anyway.
 
I wrote post after post saying what I thought. All you did was deny what the author said in plain English because you don't agree with it. And that is pathetic.

You're a huge hack who can't accept a position opposite your own without resorting to ad homs.

LMAO... no christie, you did no such thing. You pretended that the author's intent should have been to discuss political positions of Hillary. The author was clearly trying to drum up support for Clinton by pretending she was being unfairly attacked.

You continue to run away from that by posting nonsense like your above post.
 
Back
Top