http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/27/megyn-kellys-immigration-question-presents-a-false-choice/
On her show "The Kelly File," Fox News host Megyn Kelly asked Sen. Ted Cruz, "If you had a husband and a wife who are illegal immigrants and they have two children who are American citizens, would you deport all of them? Would you deport the American citizen children?"

The only choices given Cruz was deport the illegal aliens or allow them to stay, thereby breaking the law.

Third choice is follow the law, deporting the illegals, they can either take the kid with them, or leave the kid with someone else.
The author makes the point,

"If they happen to have a child here who is an American citizen, then the choice is theirs. They can take that child with them when they go back to their home country or leave the child here in the care of friends or legal relatives. This decision is not our government's responsibility because children are not wards of the state, and it's not the state's fault if the parents decide to leave their children behind. It's the parents' responsibility; no one else's."

" In other words, why don't we stop enforcing our immigration laws for the sake of family unity? First, we don't sidestep the law just to keep families together. If we did and were consistent about it, then we would release all parents from prison because enforcing our laws has separated them from their children. How many kids are in foster care because their parents have broken the law and are unable to care for them? Don't these children deserve to have an intact family as much as the children of illegal immigrants? Yet, every day, children are separated from their parents and families are broken apart because the parents have violated the law.

When our nation enforces its immigration laws, "we" are not separating families. That choice must be made by the parents who came here in the first place. These people didn't come to the United States against their will."

Bravo!   
Unfortunately, Kelly didn't give Cruz another (logical) option, just the liberal talking points to box him in...

Kelly didn;t listen to what Cruz told her....he said there had to be an INTERPRETATION of the 14th, that either by law which apparently congress can do or by constitutional Amend.

In other words these anchor babies may not be citizens after all.

Besides that we separate families all the time...look how many families are separated from Mother or father who go to prison.

So the emotional leftist arguement about the morality of separating families doesn;t fly.


Commit a crime, face the consequences....Jail or in this case Deportation.

Quote from: kj4adn on August 27, 2015, 04:53:52 PM
http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/27/megyn-kellys-immigration-question-presents-a-false-choice/
On her show "The Kelly File," Fox News host Megyn Kelly asked Sen. Ted Cruz, "If you had a husband and a wife who are illegal immigrants and they have two children who are American citizens, would you deport all of them? Would you deport the American citizen children?"

The only choices given Cruz was deport the illegal aliens or allow them to stay, thereby breaking the law.

Third choice is follow the law, deporting the illegals, they can either take the kid with them, or leave the kid with someone else.
The author makes the point,

"If they happen to have a child here who is an American citizen, then the choice is theirs. They can take that child with them when they go back to their home country or leave the child here in the care of friends or legal relatives. This decision is not our government's responsibility because children are not wards of the state, and it's not the state's fault if the parents decide to leave their children behind. It's the parents' responsibility; no one else's."

" In other words, why don't we stop enforcing our immigration laws for the sake of family unity? First, we don't sidestep the law just to keep families together. If we did and were consistent about it, then we would release all parents from prison because enforcing our laws has separated them from their children. How many kids are in foster care because their parents have broken the law and are unable to care for them? Don't these children deserve to have an intact family as much as the children of illegal immigrants? Yet, every day, children are separated from their parents and families are broken apart because the parents have violated the law.

When our nation enforces its immigration laws, "we" are not separating families. That choice must be made by the parents who came here in the first place. These people didn't come to the United States against their will."

Bravo!   
Unfortunately, Kelly didn't give Cruz another (logical) option, just the liberal talking points to box him in...

And they say that Kelly is "Fair and Balanced."   

Quote from: walkstall on August 27, 2015, 05:12:38 PM
And they say that Kelly is "Fair and Balanced."   

That question (which I saw) was pure Liberal Emotion, thats the type of BS stuff they ask "WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN" meant to appeal to the "humanity" in all of us....this from a bunch of people who rip unborn children to pieces and sell their body parts.

Quote from: Billy's bayonet on August 27, 2015, 05:09:02 PM
Kelly didn;t listen to what Cruz told her....he said there had to be an INTERPRETATION of the 14th, that either by law which apparently congress can do or by constitutional Amend.

In other words these anchor babies may not be citizens after all.

Besides that we separate families all the time...look how many families are separated from Mother or father who go to prison.

So the emotional leftist arguement about the morality of separating families doesn;t fly.


Commit a crime, face the consequences....Jail or in this case Deportation.

Exactly.  I did see that interview.  It isn't up to us to take care of the children.  They knew they were breaking the law coming here.  It is up to them to decide what to do with the children and go home.  And I have said it before too.  We separate incarcerated people from their children all of the time.

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1

All people 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....Whoah, stop the press.

See that bold spot. A resident alien, particularly an uninvited one, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Therefore by extension, neither are their children, whether born here, back in the mother country, or Mars. No bill of rights, dont pass GO, dont collect $200. Go straight to jail, or home, because you are TRESPASSING.

The senator who wrote the amendment even covered all of this in his dissertation on it, and specifically stated that birthright citizenship for aliens was not his intent, as he did not want the children of ambassadors, other visiting dignitaries, or whatever gaining an unearned foot in the door by mere happenstance. It is for all intent and purpose an inverse of our naturalization acts that allow for the children of Americans born abroad to inherit their parents citizenship. It is the same for aliens. American law is supposed to assume that children born to unnaturalized residents inherit whatever legal citizenship their parents hold. 

The ignorance on this matter displayed by those who should know way better continues to astonish and frustrate me to no end.

Quote from: Billy's bayonet on August 27, 2015, 05:09:02 PM
Kelly didn;t listen to what Cruz told her....he said there had to be an INTERPRETATION of the 14th, that either by law which apparently congress can do or by constitutional Amend.

In other words these anchor babies may not be citizens after all.

Besides that we separate families all the time...look how many families are separated from Mother or father who go to prison.

So the emotional leftist arguement about the morality of separating families doesn;t fly.


Commit a crime, face the consequences....Jail or in this case Deportation.

Yep. We need a president who iswilling to force the issue. Just deport the family. Let it work its way thru the courts. Only two would do that. Trump and Cruz (I think).

Quote from: Ulsterking on August 27, 2015, 06:27:55 PM
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1

All people 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....Whoah, stop the press.

See that bold spot. A resident alien, particularly an uninvited one, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Therefore by extension, neither are their children, whether born here, back in the mother country, or Mars. No bill of rights, dont pass GO, dont collect $200. Go straight to jail, or home, because you are TRESPASSING.

The senator who wrote the amendment even covered all of this in his dissertation on it, and specifically stated that birthright citizenship for aliens was not his intent, as he did not want the children of ambassadors, other visiting dignitaries, or whatever gaining an unearned foot in the door by mere happenstance. It is for all intent and purpose an inverse of our naturalization acts that allow for the children of Americans born abroad to inherit their parents citizenship. It is the same for aliens. American law is supposed to assume that children born to unnaturalized residents inherit whatever legal citizenship their parents hold. 

The ignorance on this matter displayed by those who should know way better continues to astonish and frustrate me to no end.

I admit it was easy to get swept up in the emotions of the arguement, because of my ignorance of the law...
But, I'm not a LAWYER like Kelly - who should have already known the law, or looked it up, before perpetuating a falsehood - isn't interpretating the LAW correctly ... kinda important for Lawyers?   ...but, to completely misrepresent the law in front of a national audience, smacks of - "paging Brian Williams, there is an agenda to push!".

Quote from: kj4adn on August 28, 2015, 05:08:37 PM
I admit it was easy to get swept up in the emotions of the arguement, because of my ignorance of the law...
But, I'm not a LAWYER like Kelly - who should have already known the law, or looked it up, before perpetuating a falsehood - isn't interpretating the LAW correctly ... kinda important for Lawyers?   ...but, to completely misrepresent the law in front of a national audience, smacks of - "paging Brian Williams, there is an agenda to push!".

Therein lies the rub. Its not so much how you interpret the law, but getting a jury to buy your version of it. Depending on how law is written, there is often no right or wrong way to read it. When making your case, your focus is tuning the courts understanding to your frequency of interpretation.
In the case of the 14th, a deliberate skewing of the language (typically by reading real fast through the "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" part before anyone has chance to really think about it) has been maintained for the sake of political expediency.

Id also like to clarify that the last part of that post you bolded wasnt directed at those here on the forum, but at the lawmakers and judges who bend themselves so far backwards as to lodge their heads up their rectums to make blatantly absurd rulings on incredibly obtuse interpretations of law.

Quote from: Ulsterking on August 28, 2015, 05:34:19 PM
Id also like to clarify that the last part of that post you bolded wasnt directed at those here on the forum, but at the lawmakers and judges who bend themselves so far backwards as to lodge their heads up their rectums to make blatantly absurd rulings on incredibly obtuse interpretations of law.

"The ignorance on this matter displayed by those who should know way better continues to astonish and frustrate me to no end."

Of course - how could anyone read it any other way!  I someone took time to write why the electorate is so frustrated with congress, your summary would be near the top of the list!

Close to the top is blatant media bias (and denial of it).   When talking heads slip and admit they're biased (throwing  the public a bone),  we're content with that...?  huh?   Alternatives to the media party line are called extremists to the point the word extreme has lost it's meaning!   How did we get from "Who, What,Where, When, Why" to agenda driven media???   

I'm not surprised when a media person gets busted and the first words out of their mouth is, "Don't you know who I am!?"
Would it be "news" if one of them said, "News?  news!? - I am the NEWS!  I make it, shake it, and you're gonna love it - or my plunging neckline, bare thigh...   How dare you ignore ME!!!"  ...and that's why we don't have a TV. 

Quote from: kj4adn on August 30, 2015, 05:49:03 AM
I'm not surprised when a media person gets busted and the first words out of their mouth is, "Don't you know who I am!?"
Would it be "news" if one of them said, "News?  news!? - I am the NEWS!  I make it, shake it, and you're gonna love it - or my plunging neckline, bare thigh...   How dare you ignore ME!!!"  ...and that's why we don't have a TV.

I feel you there. Ive already got a spin cycle on my washing machine. Dont need it for the news, and while I do have a tv, its just for watching dvds. No cable, no satellite, no pc hooked up to the "inter (your data for us to pirate) net". Just a radio and a smart phone.

Quote from: Ulsterking on August 30, 2015, 06:08:56 AM
I feel you there. Ive already got a spin cycle on my washing machine. Dont need it for the news, and while I do have a tv, its just for watching dvds. No cable, no satellite, no pc hooked up to the "inter (your data for us to pirate) net". Just a radio and a smart phone.

"This" is our weather computer, which logs & uploads for NWS, Weather Underground, etc.  If the kids want to get on the internet, this is it.  One at a time ... this isn't internet stuff isn't suppose to occupy their lives.

Quote from: Ulsterking on August 27, 2015, 06:27:55 PM
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1

All people 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....Whoah, stop the press.

See that bold spot. A resident alien, particularly an uninvited one, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Therefore by extension, neither are their children, whether born here, back in the mother country, or Mars. No bill of rights, dont pass GO, dont collect $200. Go straight to jail, or home, because you are TRESPASSING.

The senator who wrote the amendment even covered all of this in his dissertation on it, and specifically stated that birthright citizenship for aliens was not his intent, as he did not want the children of ambassadors, other visiting dignitaries, or whatever gaining an unearned foot in the door by mere happenstance. It is for all intent and purpose an inverse of our naturalization acts that allow for the children of Americans born abroad to inherit their parents citizenship. It is the same for aliens. American law is supposed to assume that children born to unnaturalized residents inherit whatever legal citizenship their parents hold. 

The ignorance on this matter displayed by those who should know way better continues to astonish and frustrate me to no end.

It seem so simple to me.  If any foreign country pregnant woman is visiting the United States and gives birth while here is their child an American citizen?  Would they receive dual citizenship because of her unplanned birth in the United States?  These women that come here illegally are not even visitors.  They are criminals.

If this was the case every woman from any country could get a passport and fly to America and hang out until the child was born.

Quote from: Chosen Daughter on August 30, 2015, 09:25:58 AM
If this was the case every woman from any country could get a passport and fly to America and hang out until the child was born.

A lot of women are doing just that.  There is a whole industry of maternity hotels for women (mostly Chinese) to come here to have their babies and get citizenship.  Most do it so they can send the kid back here to go to college.

Quote from: Dori on August 30, 2015, 10:50:27 AM
A lot of women are doing just that.  There is a whole industry of maternity hotels for women (mostly Chinese) to come here to have their babies and get citizenship.  Most do it so they can send the kid back here to go to college.

Considering how many aliens come to the US on student visas, that hardly seems necessary. Its terrible and comical to realize that we educate most of those who end up working against us. Many Chinese IT marauders have degrees from MIT, and the like. Middle and Near Eastern magnates, and elite jihadists hold degrees from the most prestigious schools that the US and Europe have to offer. Sergei, son of Nikita, Kruschev is a Senior Fellow at Brown University where has lectured on socialism/communism for many years now. This strange phenomenon goes back to at least WWII, with many elite Axis officers and dignitaries holding Ivy League degrees.