Jus soli versus “just us”. Dana Milbank, at the Washington Post, on Rep. Steve “Pig Muck” King’s latest attempt to roll back the Reconstruction:
The Civil War era’s 14th Amendment, granting automatic citizenship to any baby born on American soil, is a proud achievement of the Party of Lincoln.
But now House Republicans are talking about abolishing birthright citizenship.
A House Judiciary subcommittee took up the question Wednesday afternoon, prompted by legislation sponsored by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) and 22 other lawmakers that, after nearly 150 years, would end automatic citizenship.
The 14th Amendment, King told the panel, “did not contemplate that anyone who would sneak into the United States and have a baby would have automatic citizenship conferred on them.” Added King, “I’d suggest it’s our job here in this Congress to decide who will be citizens, not someone in a foreign country that can sneak into the United States and have a baby and then go home with the birth certificate.”…
Abolishing automatic citizenship for babies born on American soil… probably won’t help Republicans overcome their problems with minorities, who are gradually becoming the majority. Democrats, by happenstance, presented a sharp contrast to the GOP effort Wednesday: Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and others met at Washington’s Carnegie Library with a coalition including immigration and civil rights advocates to launch a new jobs campaign, “Putting Families First.” …
Right Wing Watch has the video of King proudly explaining his ‘reasoning‘:
… King’s bill, which he has introduced a number of times in the House, seeks to end birthright citizenship by statute, since he and his allies claim — despite overwhelming historical evidence — that the 14th Amendment was not meant to apply to the children of immigrants. He calls it part of his strategy to fight the “anchor baby agenda.”
In the hearing, King approvingly cited the Dominican Republic’s repeal of its birthright citizenship law, which has left thousands of Haitian migrants stateless. Saying that the Constitution’s birthright citizenship provision “hands over the immigration policy to everyone except Americans,” King alleged that there’s no argument for it “unless you want to expand your political base by any means necessary.”
Later in the hearing, King asked John Feere of the Center for Immigration Studies “if this practice goes on…can we confer citizenship on people who don’t even want it? And what happens to the demographics of America if this policy is not reversed?”…
For the bigots and xenophobes, it’s always been about Those People, ifyouknowwhatImean:
The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War. The amendment was bitterly contested, particularly by Southern states, which were forced to ratify it in order for them to regain representation in Congress. The Fourteenth Amendment, particularly its first section, is one of the most litigated parts of the Constitution…
***********
Apart from the GOP leadership’s malignant idiocy (same as every night, Pinky!), what’s on the agenda for the evening?
Corner Stone
NFL Draft, fools!
Corner Stone
Plus Clips v Spurs!
Thursday night is mofo’ng on, mofos!
Corner Stone
Probably tweak a few pedants as well, while I’m at it.
This New Era of Pedantry ™ is hard.
Corner Stone
Anybody ever have Spicy Fava Beans (minus the Chianti), and/or Chana Chor Garam from Nuts.com?
Highly recommend both. Still on the fence for Sing Bhujia.
Baud
I think it’s wonderful that the GOP is not only recognizing the coming demographic change in this country but making it something to be greatly desired.
satby
Is there any aspect of this nation that conservatives actually like? They don’t like their fellow citizens, they don’t like our actual Constitution, they don’t like our form of representational government… and on and on. I wish they would just go away.
Gene108
@Corner Stone:
Avengers Age of Ultron!
Can’t stand listening to some of the NFL talking heads, especially Kiper
PsiFighter37
Apparently Jon Stewart took Judith Miller to the woodshed last night on TDS. I need to watch it, but from the comments I’ve been reading, he was about as serious as he ever has been in interviewing a guest. I remember that the Iraqi situation always infuriated him, and I can’t believe she was enough of a fool to accept the interview.
Corner Stone
@Gene108:
Kiper’s just a flat out ass.
But I love watching the draft and I also love the combine. That’s just how I roll.
Baud
I got an email from the DNC highlighting the fact that Bernie was in the race along with Clinton.
I also read something earlier that Bernie is still an independent and plans to remain so. I don’t see how he gets on the Democratic primary ballot unless he joins the party.
Chris
I am really tired of saying “I hate Republicans” or some variation, but even more tired of it being true, and most tired of all of it being warranted.
Corner Stone
@satby:
THA FREEDUM!! Obvs.
Cervantes
And they’re trying to do this without amending the Constitution.
srv
When those anchor babies take your social security check, you’ll always have that Constitution to keep you warm.
Corner Stone
@Baud: I love that Bernie’s officially in. I want to talk about all the things he says he wants to talk about.
I hope media stops being bullshit and actually listens to what he has to say, and report on that.
They won’t, but I hope they do.
Baud
@Corner Stone: Agree. I like watching him on the TV. I hope he brings that same energy to the campaign.
Cervantes
@Baud:
The Democrats do not officially require a candidate to be a member of the party — but some state laws do. In those states Sanders will have to make an explicit choice.
Corner Stone
@srv: I honest to God had forgotten her name so to remind myself I, no bullshit, entered this into the Google search box:
anchor baby crazy conservative cheerleader outfit
Yep, Michelle Malkin. Intertrons, I love you.*
*ETA, not more than I love Sofia Vergera, however. And hell no not more than I love Salma Hayek.
Mike J
Going to throw a pizza on the grill. After that, candying some limes to top my G&T cupcakes.
Howard Beale IV
Oh sure let them try to repeal it. (Yeah, occasionally it does cause some heartburn on folks who were born here by happenstance and have had the unfortunate task of having to jump through hoops to rescind their US citizenship to get out of paying US Income taxes and so on…)
I had to laugh at this, tho:
King’s waaaaay too late to the party here-“that” demographic shifted about twenty years ago where “they” will be the in the majority pretty soon.
Tree With Water
“And all the children are insane”. That lyric sprang to mind after reading this post at Salon.com. Yesterday I joked about Kennedy and Scalia kicking the can about the guillotine, except it turns out I wasn’t joking at all.
From Salon, ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Supremes:
“…Suppose that we said we’re going to burn you at the stake, but before we do, we’re going to use an anesthetic of completely unknown properties and unknown effects,” Kagan argued, suggesting that she would support the use of a barbiturate with a proven record of rendering an inmate suitably unconscious. “Maybe you won’t feel it, maybe you will. We just can’t tell. And you think that would be OK?”
Justice Alito responded by asking the lawyers for the inmates “if an anesthesiologist rendered a person completely unconscious, and then the person was burned alive, would that be cruel and unusual punishment?” He and the lawyers for the condemned Oklahoma inmates then discussed what, exactly, would be required for someone to be burned alive in a matter that didn’t violate the Constitution.
“You think there are circumstances in which burning somebody at the stake would be consistent with the Eighth Amendment?” Alito asked.
“The founders say burning at the stake is unconstitutional. It’s cruel and unusual [punishment],” one of the lawyers replied. “But in your hypothetical, if there was a way to ensure that that was done in a humane way, there could perhaps be [a way to do it consistent with the Eighth Amendment.]”
Justice Antonin Scalia chimed in, stating that the court’s liberals know the reason that reliable barbiturates weren’t being used is “because the abolitionists have rendered it impossible…The states have gone through two different drugs, and those drugs have been rendered unavailable by the abolitionist movement.”
Me again, wondering, “abolitionists”? WTF is he talking about? People like him are sick in soul, and dangerously deranged..
smintheus
“After 150 years…” ?! No. Birthright citizenship was the law in the colonial period because it was English law. When the colonies declared independence, it became the law of the new nation. There was an important 19th century (pre-Civil-War) case revolving around the issue of the birthright citizenship of a baby born in New York during the Revolutionary War.
The 14th Amendment mentions birthright citizenship because it needed to be made clear that many former slaves were now also legally citizens because of birth in the US.
the Conster
@srv:
Actually those anchor babies will be making those social security checks keep coming, so yeah. No.
Mike J
@Cervantes: Why should I vote for somebody who isn’t a member of my party? If he won’t call himself a Democrat, fuck Bernie.
Baud
@Cervantes:
Just some? It seems misleading to have him on a Democratic ballot if he’s not a Democrat.
Scott Peterson
I like the GOP’s new motto:
Conservatives: On the Wrong Side of the Civil War for Over 154 Years and Counting…
Corner Stone
@Mike J:
Gin & Tonic cupcakes? Sir, respectfully, I suggest you may a problem.
Baud
@Tree With Water:
I read about that argument. I thought it was ghoulish.
trollhattan
@Tree With Water:
They missed the best part, where he added, “Because that would be cool!” in a Chris Farley voice.
Wonder what Pope Frank thinks of our Catholic Supreme Court? Guessing something along the line of, “Well, I like that nice Jewish lady.”
Corner Stone
@smintheus:
Somehow I think you may have hit on something there.
Arm The Homeless
Jameis “Crabby McRapey” Winston of Free Shoes University fame, will be sold off like a prize bull tonight. Sorta, darkly ironic.
Maybe he will let Tebow baptise him in Boca Ciega Bay.
The eventual slut shaming and rally-round-the-meathead once the civil suit starts will be another opportunity to marvel at the Id of Floriduh.
Percysowner
Look Republicans, Birthright Citizenship is in the CONSTITUTION. You can’t just legislate it away! I know Justice Scalia will find a way to support just about ANY attack on minority rights, but I think even HE can’t find a way to say the Constitution is Unconstitutional.
Cervantes
@Mike J:
I guess you will (and should) vote for the candidate who matches your goals best.
The party does not require formal membership but just a commitment to congenial values.
RSA
Similarly, the 2nd Amendment did not contemplate [sic] handheld weapons that could fire more than one bullet without needing to be reloaded. Article 1, Section 2, requiring a census by “actual enumeration,” was written before the term “statistic” was coined in English. These arguments have not been persuasive to Republicans; they have explicitly taken the other side.
Cervantes
@srv:
Maybe think it through again?
Laertes
@Mike J: You’ve got it backwards. Who cares if a Liberal won’t call himself a Democrat? It’s Democrats who won’t call themselves Liberals that you ought to be worried about.
Cart before the horse, man. Are you a Democrat because you’re a Liberal, or are you a Liberal because you’re a Democrat?
trollhattan
@Corner Stone:
If this is a follow-on to yesterday’s pair of 25-YO lesbians distribution, then I demand the addition of Penelope Cruz to your list.
Hal
On the other hand, if you’re someone with a steadily declining older white voter base you have no chance of replacing, this might be your only solution.
Germy Shoemangler
A horde of anchor babies swarming through the streets, waving social security cards and bottles of EBT infant formula. “Maw!” I yell. “Git back in the house!” I try to run, but they are like locusts, and they overpower me…
Pogonip
I am looking for a shape-up partner and can’t find one in real life. Is anyone here interested? I was thinking of a weekly check-in on one of Anne’s Open Threads. If interested please respond in this thread. If more than one person is interested, a shape-up group would be fine.
Howard Beale IV
@Tree With Water:
Scalia doth protest too much.
Abolitionists didn’t render it impossible; the few trans-national pharmaceutical companies (AFAIK, there isn’t a single US firm that manufacturers the first drug in the standard three-drug cocktail) who make the drugs made a business decision not to sell the drugs to a state Department of Correction whose sole use of the drug is to put a condemned man to death. It is extremely unlikely that the BOP would be ordering the barbiturate in such a larger quantity unless they had a prison population of hundreds or thousands of prisoners with refractive seizures for which the barbiturate is the only treatment. And the reason wny they don’t want to sell the drug is two-fold: (1) it’s inhumane, and (2) There could be a remote possibility of a potential treaty issue between the US and Country XY over knowing that Country XY is directly providing a substance this is explicitly being used solely to put a condemned individual to death.
The Dangerman
@Corner Stone:
Not sure if I qualify as a fan, but I enjoy watching the Clippers; their brand of basketball can be really quite watchable (not just because of Lob City)….
…but, put a fork in them, they’re done. Crawford isn’t healthy, Reddick lost his confidence at a bad time, Hack-A-Jordan (a rule that HAS to change this off-season) is killing them, and Barnes is just a hack.
I’ll watch but I’ll have the remote control close.
I think the Bucks are taking it to Game 7, however, and the Bulls will have a Balls check.
Roger Moore
@satby:
They like the white supremacy, the history of imperialism, and the fact that they’re in charge of the government in large parts of the country.
trollhattan
@Pogonip:
What is that? I can only think of dad advising me to “shape up!” and frankly, one childhood was enough.
Corner Stone
@The Dangerman: Bulls putting it on them early. Still a ways to go.
ETA, I went to bed before the end of the last Clips-Spurs game as it was bullshit. The first half was balls out beautiful, but the end of the third made me want to choke somebody.
I don’t know how they can change hack a who, as it’s been on the books for 20 years, but I hope something reasonable comes out of it.
The Dangerman
@Corner Stone:
Huh. Thought it was a 5pm local tip.
Germy Shoemangler
@Roger Moore: they like all the privileges and comforts that liberals have worked hard for on their behalf.
But somehow they can’t comprehend that fact.
cmorenc
In relevant part, the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:
PERIOD.
There is no qualification in either the 14th Amendment or any other provision or amendment to the US Constitution to the effect that Congress may, by legislation, alter birthright citizenship eligibility to only include certain defined subclasses of people born in the U.S. but exclude others. However, that’s not all – the explicit language of the 14th Amendment does not merely create birthright federal citizenship, but automatically creates state citizenship wherever a birthright citizen momentarily resides, thus denying any arguable basis for the hardest dead-ender states rights true believers to deny birthright citizens state citizenship, even if they were to grudgingly concede they can do nothing about federal birthright citizenship absent constitutional amendment. Which of course they’d be glad to create such an amendment, if only they could successfully get it passed.
But Steven King is simply pissing into the winds of his own xenophobic ignorance to think there’s any chance of a House measure restricting birthright citizenship becoming effective law, even with a conservative majority on the US Supreme Court. Not even Anton Scalia in his most grandiose reactionary flourishes would vote to hold a measure like that constitutional, not even close.
Corner Stone
@The Dangerman: 32-16 Bulls at about the end of the 1st.
smintheus
@Corner Stone: The text makes that clear:
The 14th does not say ‘shall be citizens of the U.S.’, it simply states what the existing law is (they “are citizens”) and then goes on to create new law based upon that fact.
Tree With Water
One fair question: how many of their seed have Canadians intentionally birthed on U.S. soil, to best prepare a third column to strike from within, come the day we march north to claim the water and mineral rights of our northern provinces?
Howard Beale IV
@Tree With Water:
So, Fat Tony, riddle me this-why hasn’t the Free Market stepped in to fill that void? All the barbiturates are off-patent and are ripe for someone to come up with a new process to make them so dirt-cheap to kill off all of the European suppliers who have thrown up the barriers which prevents us from offing our condemned.
Cacti
@The Dangerman:
Rubbish.
The rules don’t need to be changed because DeAndre Jordan can’t perform a fundamental part of the game that he’s paid $10.08 million per year to play.
Sending the other team’s weak free throw shooter to the line is basketball strategy 101.
Tiago Splitter used get hacked all the time because he was a 54% FT shooter. So he worked on that part of his game and made himself a 70% FT shooter with the end result of getting hacked a lot less.
Roger Moore
@Percysowner:
What they’re going to do is to pass a resolution saying that illegal immigrants (and possibly tourists) don’t qualify because they don’t meet the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause in the 14th Amendment. That would theoretically eliminate the possibility of “anchor babies” and birth tourism.
Mandalay
@PsiFighter37:
Sadly no (IMO), bearing in mind that Miller is a highly accomplished liar. He certainly did his homework, knew his facts cold, and he got the better of her, but probably not enough to sway anyone’s existing opinion. But he was way better than Chris Hayes the other day.
She was there to push her book and make money, and she is surely way past giving a flying fuck what anyone thinks about her. She’s gone to the slammer, her reputation has been shredded, and she lives in a bubble. What could Stewart possibly do to her?
smintheus
@cmorenc:
But it didn’t do that. Birthright citizenship was well established law from the founding of the new nation, even before the Constitution was written.
bemused
@Hal:
Projection, projection, projection!
Hal
Let’s also remember this is the Steve King who wants to:
http://crooksandliars.com/2015/04/steve-king-wants-bar-supreme-court-hearing
Germy Shoemangler
@Mandalay:
I assume she got a HUGE payoff from the publisher, but I’m wondering how the sales will be. Who the hell wants to read her book?
Corner Stone
@Germy Shoemangler:
Huh. You’d think that loaded down with all that gubmint cheese, junk food and lobster meat that one could outlast their furious, if shortlived, onslaught.
Howard Beale IV
@Hal: Sounds like he has a major case of butthurt.
Emma
@trollhattan: Wonder what Pope Frank thinks of our Catholic Supreme Court? Guessing something along the line of, “Well, I like that nice Jewish lady.”
They certainly don’t like him! The guy is too Christian for their liking.
jl
@smintheus: Thanks. I was wondering about that. Seemed to me that from the post and link that Hog Slop King was as sloppy as hog slop. Birthright citizenship goes back before the Constitution and as far as I can tell (for IANAL) is assumed in the Constitution itself.
I guess we should be thankful that these reactionaries are such miserable fools, since they are likely to mess up their attempts to mess things up. Fiddling with the 14th amendment will not do it, at least in a rational world (hey there SCOTUS reactionary hacks!, you are becoming a real obstacle between us and a rational world)
Karen in GA
@Pogonip: I’ll join. What does it entail?
Germy Shoemangler
@Corner Stone:
It was their calves. The size of cantaloupes, from what I could see.
the Conster
@Germy Shoemangler:
Neil Lewis’ takedown of her lying bullshit is complete and devastating. Not that it matters, but it’s satisying to read and is a historical record of how we got here from there.
Tree With Water
@Howard Beale IV: As I surmise, Scalia was particularly grumpy because the country hasn’t run out of rope, and he had better things to do with his time.
Mike E
My older sister born months after my mom and her 1st child (oldest sister) arrived in the US is now drawing social security benefits…just as the founders intended! Heh.
WereBear
Me too. I’d give them first colonization rights on Mars, but they won’t go.
jl
I like:
” And what happens to the demographics of America if this policy is not reversed? ”
I gotta run and write that gem down in annals of GOP outreach. Sounds like a good line for a campaign ad sometime in the next 2 years.
But King has a point. Look what’s happened already. They let the those damn Krauts and leek eaters and the effing Micks in. Wrecked the country. Maybe Steve Hog Slop King and his buddy Pete can talk about what ‘those people’ had done to the fine ethnic stock of this country.
Germy Shoemangler
@the Conster: Thanks for that link.
I found this interesting:
SiubhanDuinne
@Corner Stone:
I think it’s terrific that Bernie is in the race. Just from a practical, technical point of view, having him in the debates will sharpen Hillary’s skills, which may be a bit rusty. He will make her a better campaigner, and he will force the conversation leftward, which can only be a good thing.
My fear, of course, is that our media, if they pay any attention to him at all, will focus on inconsequential things (his age, his self-identification as a SociaIist, or at least Democratic-SociaIist — and I’m sure they’ll find other irrelevancies to report). But good for him. I don’t think he has a snowball’s prayer in hell of getting the nomination, but I plan to send him some coin and if he lasts until the primaries in Georgia, I’ll work for him.
jl
@Tree With Water: Scalia’s comments were funny. Nice to see that finely honed brilliant legal mind finding time to whine about perfectly legal efforts by advocates and professional medical groups to influence public policy. And that is relevant, how? But Scalia will cook up a brilliant new school of Constitutional interpretation soon to make it so.
smintheus
@jl: King and the rest aren’t just ignorant fools, they seem proud of their ignorance and stupidity. What kind of a dolt would not be ashamed to propose changing the law on citizenship without first making some attempt to figure out what the law on citizenship is and has been?
Two seconds of thought would have suggested that if birthright citizenship really were introduced only after the Civil War as they assume, then what was the law previously?
Keith G
@Cervantes: Yeah in most states, one needs to file the completed paperwork to have a name placed on a primary or caucus ballot. On that paperwork is where the applicant states which party’s ballot one wishes to be placed on.
Howard Beale IV
@Mike E: Either that, or his mortification device wasn’t working that day.
princess leia
@Pogonip: I’m in, too.
the Conster
@Germy Shoemangler:
Yeah, Lewis has her number. This was right on:
I would say it’s not what she appeared to do, it’s clear that’s exactly what she did, and which has become the model of modern “journalism”.
Peale
Yeah. But of course what King means by anchor baby is probably not what we think it means. My guess is that it includes lots of children of Hispanics who are here with work permits and green cards who might think that they aren’t restricted from starting a family. Those “not illegals” worry him just as much since they aren’t planning on going anywhere.
I kind of feel sorry for the kids of these people. They obviously have a tough time imagining that someone would have kids for reasons other than a welfare check. Must be projection.
chopper
@SiubhanDuinne:
my worry is that hills will try to distance herself from “bernie the soshalist” and his agenda instead of embracing some of the more usable populist ideas he’ll bring to the campaign.
guess it depends in part on who has her ear this time.
jl
JFC, it’s like the skies are opening up and the GOP’s inner thoughts are raining down today. I’ll need to get a another notebook for my annals of GOP outreach.
Can’t Unring That Bell: Jeb Bush Says He’s A Fan Of Charles Murray’s Books
TPM blog
“I like Charles Murray books to be honest with you, which means I’m a total nerd I guess,” Bush said.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jeb-bush-charles-murray-the-bell-curve
My guess is some campaign hack told Jeb! this was a safe dogwhistle so Jeb! went out and said it right away.
I think the chances that Jeb! has the slightest idea was he is talking about are pretty low.
I am not categorical Murry hater. In a couple of his books he did some good intuitive analysis of summary statistics and time trends, and made a few good points. He made the case, that I think needs making to understand white panic, that the average white working class person has been hit very hard recently (at least in terms of changes from recent baseline, if not in absolute levels). But really that is just about all the good I can say about Murray. Murray surely cannot think clearly enough to make anything useful from what little good work he has done. And why bother with him, when people like Elizabeth Warren have done a much better, more literate and numerate job, and know how to go on to intelligent policy analysis (rather than wallowing in confused bigotry as Murray does)?
Edit: Oh Lord save me. And go look at TPM front page right now and see Cruz’s wisdom on Hispanic and African-American sense of shame.
SiubhanDuinne
@Germy Shoemangler:
Her prose can’t possibly be more compelling than that of her erstwhile pen-pal, Scooter Libby. Who can forget
?
GHayduke (formerly lojasmo)
@Pogonip:
email lojasmo@ geemail dot com
the Conster
Todd Bartlem, Carly Fiorina’s ex-husband to Melinda Hennenberger from Bloomberg:
OUCH.
gelfling545
@Baud: in elections here there are often candidates who have been endorsed by more than one party or even all of them. They don’t change their party affiliation to do so.
jl
@the Conster: Doesn’t sound like it was a friendly break-up, does it?
SiubhanDuinne
@the Conster:
Yikes!
Also, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
CONGRATULATIONS!
Democrats are just lucky.
Seriously, it may not seem like it but we are.
We’re going to war in 2016 with a genuine socia1ist and the queen of neoliberalism in the fray so far.
But we get in response not only the current GOP helping of utter unelectables, but legislation like this. I mean, what a gift. This is like showing up at a duel and having your opponent calmly, with intent and certainty, shoot himself in the head.
Keep up that legislatin’ GOP! This country wants more of what you’re offering, not less!
Roger Moore
@Peale:
I don’t think it’s that at all. I think they just don’t care. They want to demonize immigrants, and “anchor babies” and “birth tourism” are convenient things to shout about them. This isn’t about policy as much as it is about whipping up the base and proving that they hate Those People more than anyone.
Mandalay
@the Conster: That’s a great link.
Miller had a path to redemption: after being released from jail she could have written a blockbuster post mortem analysis on how she had been set up to spew lies to the American public. But she took the low road, and steadfastly continues to insist that she, and the Bush Administration, were simply reacting to faulty intelligence which was supplied in good faith by our security services. It’s as plausible as insisting that the moon is made of cheese.
Her bank account might look good for doing that, but her reputation and integrity….not so much.
Cervantes
@CONGRATULATIONS!:
So far, it seems you’re right.
Roger Moore
@Mandalay:
It depends on what reputation and integrity you’re talking about. She has now proven that she’s a reliable proxy who won’t turn on the people feeding her information. You can’t do better than that in the Washington insider game.
Anne Laurie
@Germy Shoemangler:
Every Very Serious Person who got mentioned in it, however briefly, plus those of their staff members looking to stay on their boss’s good side. And, of course, staffers doing oppo research on those VSPs!
It’s not about the sales, it’s about getting her self-serving excuses — I mean, her side of the story — into the archives. For history. So that 40 years from now, RW professors (assuming there are still professors) can tell their students that Miller was a brave truth-teller targeted by moonbat jackals.
Josie
@Pogonip: I would be interested.
Peale
@jl: yep. Not that I wouldn’t expect that chamber to be full of republicans anyway, but I’d kind of like to get him on record as to his opinion of these “special” groups and whether they’re needed. I mean, since every Blow Hard type republican I’ve met gets huffy about how there’s no White History Month or White Chamber of Commerce or NAAWP, I’ve just always assumed that the Republican platform made getting rid of those hyphen groups a priority.
the Conster
@Mandalay:
Like most conservatives and journalistic hacks, she seems to not understand anything outside of the RW bubble. I honestly think she thinks she’s pulling something off. Why anyone not on the Morning Joe set would care about Judith Miller is beyond me to understand, but then I’m not delusional.
Mandalay
@Roger Moore:
I don’t think Scooter Libby would agree with you.
Omnes Omnibus
@Peale:
When I was a kid, I once asked my parents why there was a Mothers’ Day and Fathers’ Day, but no Children’s Day. The response was that all the other day are Children’s Days.
ms_canadada
@Tree With Water: Holy Fuck! America is a backward nation. With apologies to my family & friends who live in that godforsaken country.
ms_canadada
@Tree With Water: All I can say, is fuck off! (As a descendant of United Empire Loyalists who got the hell out of the U.S during the so-called revolution.)
SiubhanDuinne
@Omnes Omnibus:
And here I thought I was the only one who asked that question (and got the identical answer).
Tree With Water
It’s come to this:
“The app — which captures video and audio — works like this: Users can open the app, called Mobile Justice CA, hit a record button and start rolling a potential incident. Once the recording is stopped, the video goes directly to the local ACLU branch and is preserved. The app is key, Bibring said, because it allows the videos to be preserved on the organization’s servers even if the phone is destroyed or seized by law enforcement”.
“Even if..”. Another writer could have fairly written instead, “even if/when”.
SiubhanDuinne
Aaaaand, again tonight, CNN has as BREAKING NEWS: “Less Than One Hour Until Baltimore Curfew.”
They just don’t seem to grasp the meaning of “Breaking News,” do they?
The Dangerman
Hmm. It would appear the Bulls came to play tonight. Good for them.
ETA: …and, for whomever said “rubbish” above for the hack-a-player, FT shooting may be fundamental, but intentional fouls off the ball aren’t part of the game (which is why I like the college rule on intentionals, albeit barely enforced).
Cervantes
@Omnes Omnibus:
Children’s Day is celebrated around the world.
In the US over the years, we’ve had various Children’s Days but none of them have stuck.
fuckwit
@Pogonip: Pogonip Park is in Santa Cruz, IIRC. If you’re in Santa Cruz, then there must be millions of people running around jogging, surfing, swimming, hiking, mountain biking, playing volleyball, etc…. should be pretty easy to find someone to work out with there.
Pogonip
Shaper-uppers, suggest we “meet” in Anne’s Sunday Garden topic, which she puts up faithfully. Would that work for everybody? If so, suggest we begin on 10 May? I plan to start shaping up tomorrow and will report back 10 May unless the majority prefers a different day.
Pogonip
@fuckwit: Nowhere near California. It sure was nice of Santa Cruz to name a park after me!
Pogonip
Seems to me that IAW a cherished American principle, you should have to BUY citizenship. I swear the entire rulership watched Deep Space 9 and thought the Farengi episodes were civics lessons. I like the Farengi, they’re always funny, but I don’t want to live among them!
Deep Space 9 is one of my son’s favorite shows, he has the whole set, and every now and then I watch them. My favorites were Nerise, Garack, Quark, Leeta, Rom, and Martok. Didn’t care for Worf or for Mary Sue Dax. I liked that the show had lots of aliens. Did anyone else besides Captain Ben Cisco like that show? (Of course, for all I know he hated it and just found it a handy source for a pseudonym.)
Right now we are raising the cultural tone at our house by watching Batman. All 3 seasons are available, finally.
Lurking Canadian
@Percysowner:
Sure he can. That sentence is written in the present tense. Clearly the Original Intent of the Framers was that it applied to people alive in 1865, but it was never intended to apply into the future.
I mean, this guy holds the opinion that the first clause of the Second Amendment doesn’t count because he said so. He’s not above bullshit if it serves his needs.
princess leia
Sunday the 10th it is. I just enjoyed a last handful of onion rings in preparation for the healthy meals to come!
cmorenc
@smintheus:
That was decidedly NOT so for millions of citizens of color who resided in the states of the newly defeated Confederacy at the time the Fourteenth Amendment was passed. And never would have been recognized within those states but-for the Fourteenth Amendment, notwithstanding that birthright citizenship was something white folks took for granted from the outset of the republic. And even despite the Fourteenth Amendment nominally forcing ex-Confederate states (and others) to recognize the birthright citizenship of citizens of color, Jim Crow laws and violent intimidation prevailed in those states to effectively create a separate and unequal second-class of citizenship, until Brown v Board of Education and the Civil Rights revolution and legislation of the 1960s.
Marc McKenzie
In other news, water is wet.
Seriously people…there is no surprise here. It’s what the GOP is all about now, and we’ve seen it on full display for years. They have tossed the country over the fence and have been giving it the business for years with no Vaseline.
But please, keep telling me how awful President Obama and Hillary Clinton are.
Bonnie
You would think the 14th amendment would have helped American Indians, too. But, official citizenship for American Indians did not occur until 1934. Additionally, every state during the beginning of each state put laws on the books that made the religions of American Indians illegal, which is so illogical (to quote Mr. Spock) coming from people who came to this country for religious freedom.
smintheus
@cmorenc: Yeah, I said that in my first comment on this thread.
Karen in GA
@Pogonip: Worth a shot. I’ve got some nasty bad habits to break.
Ryan
Maybe as a compromise, King could suggest that Congress create a pathway where some born in this country be granted partial citizenship. After all, why stop at rolling back Reconstruction when we can go all the way back to the original Constitution as written!
Emily68
Since birthright citizenship is conferred on infants, I bet most of them are indifferent on the subject.
boatboy_srq
Standard Tenther argument to deny that rights are anything except permission for the Right Kind of People to do as they please.
boatboy_srq
@cmorenc:
In an earlier thread it was mentioned (several times IIRC) that to most racists, the idea that Those People are genetically inferior isn’t racism but simple fact, and that “racism” is (for them) an overt attack and not a basic attitude while perpetuating a belief that Those People “just can’t help [insert bad behavior here]” is not. To that sort of volk, birthright citizenship would naturally only apply to the white residents, but it would not to anyone else, simply for that reason – and to them that would not be racism but reality.
Emily68
@jl:
Scalia’s comments were funny. Nice to see that finely honed brilliant legal mind finding time to whine about perfectly legal efforts by advocates and professional medical groups to influence public policy. And that is relevant, how? But Scalia will cook up a brilliant new school of Constitutional interpretation soon to make it so.
Anti-abortion people murder doctors and bomb clinics. When the anti-capital punishment people start doing that, then I’ll worry about it.
Interrobang
This is another strategy to destroy the American social contract, among other things. Top priority, of course, is making sure that the brown people can’t vote, but it’s also going to create a huge underclass of resident non-citizens, who have no stake in US society. I’m convinced a lot of certain European countries’ problems with their resident minorities is in part because those countries don’t have birthright citizenship, so they have got large minority populations who are effectively cut off from civil participation. We know how this story goes, and it’s really not pretty. But according to the Republicans, that’s apparently a feature, not a bug.
sukabi
@Tree With Water: seriously, that’s the ‘legal’ discussion the supreme court is having wrt death penalty? How to humanely burn someone at the stake? Makes me wonder how many folks have ended up in Alitos furnace.
sukabi
@jl: first people they need to ask about immigration and demographic shift should be the Native Americans, sure they’d be happy to weigh in.
Nylund
“did not contemplate that anyone who would sneak into the United States and have a baby would have automatic citizenship conferred on them.”
Well, he’s right in one sense. They never imagined anyone having to sneak in. There wasn’t really any such thing as “illegal immigration” until a few decades after the 14th amendment was passed. Granted, only “free white” immigrants could become citizens, but that did include Mexicans at the time (who I assume he’s mostly referring to when he talks about anchor babies).
So no, they weren’t worried about immigrants sneaking in to have babies. There was no need for them to sneak in at all. Back in 1868, they could just move here, live here, and get citizenship after a couples of years of residence (provided they were of “good moral character” and not African, Asian, or Native American.)