20 Replies to “Enjoy”

  1. It amazes me that some (many?) people believe that whenever governments bring in a law, regulation, rule, or loophole, people won’t game the system. Gutfield realizes this, sadly many don’t.

    Alternatively there are politicians who deliberately create legistation etc. so that it can be gamed.

  4. Tarlov is a nobody with a screeching harpy voice, getting paid a few million a year to be the designated lefty twit on Fox panels, along with a guy named Ford, who is actually petty moderate, and Jessica Harf (Barf), a CNN alumni and designated blond bimbo leftard.
    They are the Washington Generals on Fox’ Globetrotters games.

    1. She’s had so much plastic surgery that the CIA’s facial recognition program registers her as an unknown, unrecognizable security THREAT to America

    2. Harold Ford Junior is the most practical democrat I have ever seen. Far too centrist for the majority f the party, he could have been a fine candidate for high office in either party.
      Too centrist to be considered a proper democrat, unfortunately.

  5. Watched that as it took place and it was a thing of beauty. I shall savour it again shortly.
    Sure would like to see Gutfield take on that vacuous Episcopalian “bishop” some time. If I was an Episcopalian this past Monday, by Yesterday evening, I would have exited that faith!
    How idiotic of someone of her stature to dive that deep into politics. What an idiot!!

  6. Regarding the citizenship of anchor babies, the 14th amendment says this…

    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.

    What the hell does it mean for a baby (not the parents, mind, but their baby) to be “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”? Scholars have killed entire forests of trees arguing the point. It’s time for the SCOTUS to settle the issue.

      1. President Trump does not get to interpret the constitution. Only the courts can do that. Trump’s executive order concerning the citizenship of babies born to illegal migrants may well instigate a legal challenge, as he almost certainly realizes.

        If you want play in this field, you’d better bring something better than ignorance and insults.

        1. We can all interpret the Constitution. Where it says “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means legal resident. Illegal aliens are by definition not allowing themselves to be subject to jurisdiction.

          1. You’re playing rhetorical games. You know full well that I mean “the courts have the final say on the meaning of the constitution”.

            And your interpretation is not the only one. There are many legal scholars who argue the opposite. My guess is that Trump knows that the executive order will be challenged in court — perhaps even hopes for it — and is relying on a conservative-loaded Supreme Court to rule in his favour. That would settle the question, possibly for good.

          2. No rodent you are the one playing the games. Illegals have zero rights under the constitution.

          3. “Illegals have zero rights under the constitution.”

            The courts have ruled otherwise. The constitution often uses the word “person” rather than “citizen”, and thus applies to anyone within U.S. borders. In the Supreme Court case Reno vs. Flores (1993), Antonin Scalia wrote “it is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings.”

        2. The word “interpret” doesn’t appear anywhere in the Constitution. Everybody gets to interpret the Constitution. The President, Congress, the states, the people, the bureaucracy, and yes, the courts, but until an interpretation is challenged in the courts and is fully adjudicated, there is no reason to summarily discard the interpretations of other entities. In the end, the State is coercion and force. Elections have consequences. Right now, it appears that Trump has control of that coercion and force. I guess we’ll see what happens next.

          1. “until an interpretation is challenged in the courts and is fully adjudicated, there is no reason to summarily discard the interpretations of other entities.”

            Congratulations. You pretty much said what I said. I did not “summarily discard” Trump’s executive order. I did say his executive order touched on a highly disputed legal point, and will likely face a legal challenge.

            Amazing how touchy people get over anything Trump does. You can analyze his actions without taking sides.

    2. As Jefferson essentially said, the laws of the USA are for a moral and ethical people and are meaningless w/out same. The sullied vector was launched long ago.

      Components of Canadian Population Change (from worldpopulationreview.com)
      One birth every 1.45 minutes
      One death every 1.63 minutes
      One immigrant every 1.43 minutes
      Net gain of one person every 1.28 minutes

      We are nearly 1:1 on new births vs new arrivals from what they will forever call “home,” and many of those new births are from the new or recent arrivals.

      Alas, “Canada,” the country that officially never was (since 1931), is not even that anymore.

    3. Yes, rodent, that’s the entire point of the EO. Trump is forcing the issue rather than allowing both Democrats and RINOs to continue to interpret the Constitution in a way that benefits their agenda. He might lose at the SCOTUS, but at least at that point there will be no more grey areas to be gamed.

  8. Forget the US, their adults have it in hand. Our problem is we are the nearest country with a government stupid enough to still have birth right citizenship. Our immigrant gravy train just added another station.
    Revising the Citizenship Act just got added to PP’s To Do list.

    And how come I keep seeing Trudeau in this clip?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkoPq5AOCOA

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation