More to the point, why do you waste your time justifying anything to a brainless twit? Ignore him and maybe he will go away. People of limited intelligence usually have short attention spans.

[/quote]

I'm not feeling tender at all, newbie. Ты понятия не имеешь. Вы родились глупыми?

No, what is destroying this country are brainless, bigoted, morons who claim to be Liberals.

No, they just can't seem to wrap their pointy, brainless little heads around the concept of NO FREE LUNCH.

You know those vagina suits that some progs wear? His isn't a suit.

Nailed it!

For the last time, none of us voted for your boy Slick Willie Clinton.

Why should his spelling be any different from everything else? I have to be careful. He might get all offended and report me. Or even worse, post another stupid ass picture.

Dumb ass called and complained that you are giving it a bad name.

Since when are you his lying POS, Bob? I thought you were your very own lying POS.

I have been walking about the Earth and going to and fro on it. lol

First off, Bill Clinton is not my anything, and why bring him into the discussion?

In point of fact, children born on US soil ARE considered citizens. This is in direct contradiction to the intent of the 39th Congress that wrote the Amendment. Below is a link in which their actual statements are given. The 14th Amendment was to insure full citizenship rights for former slaves and their children. It was considered an extension of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The people who wrote the Amendment specifically stated it was not meant to apply to foreigners, yet this was sort of ignored in US v Wong Kim Ark 1898. They ruled that Wong Kim Ark was a citizen because his parents were permanent legal residents. or the 19th century equivalent. They sort of equivocated around the FACT that the authors of the 14th specifically excluded children born to foreigners here illegally, or legally on a temporary basis. Elk v Wilkins 1884 stated that John Elk was not a birth citizen of the US in part because neither of his parents were citizens.
Granting birth citizenship to the children of wetbacks is a practice that the self-serving liars in Congress could stop at any time, since this does not require a Constitutional Amendment. The problem is that Democrats see future voters, and the RINO's are in the pocket of the US Chamber of Commerce which never saw an amnesty of which it did not approve.

Here is an excerpt from the link I used, and the entire link.

The origins of this language are a bit hazy, but it must be recalled that the purpose of the 14th Amendment was to correct the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford decision (1857) and recognize citizenship for the newly-freed slaves (but not members of Indian tribes living on reservations). The language of the Citizenship Clause derived from the Civil Rights Act of 1866, enacted by the same legislators (the 39th Congress) who framed the 14th Amendment. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 conferred citizenship on “All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed.” (Emphasis added.) Foreign nationals resident in the United States, and children who become citizens of a foreign country at birth (by virtue of their parents’ citizenship) would obviously be excluded from this definition.
Granted, the language of the Citizenship Clause deviates slightly from that of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, but there is no compelling evidence that the 39th Congress intended a different meaning. In fact, the sponsor of the Citizenship Clause, Senator Jacob Howard (R-MI), stated that its language “is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already,” explaining that “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, [or] who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.


http://www.libertylawsite.org/2015/08/21/what-did-the-14th-amendment-congress-think-about-birthright-citizenship/

Because he isn't smart enough to be a Nazi. Or much of anything else.

No, mostly they are pouring over the border to work which is acceptable, or to either sneak in or overstay their visas, and procure false ID to obtain benefits from Uncle Sugar, which is not. Of course, there is always the option of sneaking in or overstaying their visas in the hope that their girlfriends or rent-a-putas will give birth to an anchor baby.