Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Sunday Roundup

-By Felicia Sonmez and Emi Kolawole

FOX NEWS SUNDAY

Former Solicitor General Ted Olson, a plaintiffs' attorney in California's Proposition 8 fight, gave a spirited defense of last week's ruling by a federal judge striking down the state's ban on same-sex marriage.

"That's why we have judges. That's why we have an independent judiciary. We do not put the Bill of Rights to a vote," Olson said when asked by host Chris Wallace whether a single judge should be allowed to overrule the opinion of seven million Californians.

Olson argued that "we ask judges to make sure that when we vote for something we're not depriving minorities of their constitutional rights," noting that at in the past, as many as 41 states prohibited interracial marriage.

Asked where the right to same-sex marriage exists in the Constitution, Olson replied, "Where is the right to interracial marriage in the constitution? ... This is what judges are expected to do. It is not judicial activism. It is judicial responsibility in its classic sense."

Olson said that he is "hopeful and reasonably confident" that the Supreme Court will agree with the federal judge's decision.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R), a possible 2012 contender for president, made an appearance on the show as well. Daniels said that "Washington should be doing everything it possibly can" to boost hiring in the private sector.

Daniels said that he opposes an additional economic stimulus because "it's probably not going to help the economy."

Asked about the shift from a $236 billion surplus to a $400 billion deficit during his tenure as budget director in the administration of George W. Bush, Daniels responded, "Fair enough. And you know, recessions do that." He added that "more money was spent than needed to be," but pointed out that previous deficits were "one-sixth the size of the ones we are running now."

Daniels argued in favor of extending the Bush tax cuts for 10 more years. "It's hard for me to understand why you'd raise anybody's taxes in the middle of a recession," he said, adding that the president "should have impoundment power or some sort of an enhanced power to reduce spending."

On the subject of a potential 2012 bid, Daniels said that he has "turned down scads of invitations" to visit the early primary states and has no plans to visit them anytime soon.

Pressed further, Daniels responded, "You know, Chris, you live in a world of secret agendas and code words, but not all of us operate that way." He said that people will step forward to address the vital challenges of the economy and national security, "and maybe I'll be one of them, but there's a lot of ways to contribute to that debate."

ABC: THIS WEEK

Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, said that the U.S. believes that Iraqi forces are ready to assume full control of combat operations in Iraq.

Odierno said that the recent attack in Basra "probably was" a terrorist attack carried out via improvised explosive device, although there are have been "conflicting reports." The attack, he added, is a reflection of the fact that "we have ups and downs here."

He also noted that the bottom line is not about the number of forces on the ground, but rather about continuing to sustain economic, political and military stability. "I think we have a plan to do that beyond 1 September," Odierno said.

Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, the Army's vice chief of staff, said that his recently commissioned report on the emotional health of soldiers revealed that there's been an increase in high-risk behavior in a "very small number of soldiers." He noted that 60 percent of suicides among soldiers take place within the first term of enlistment, and that two-thirds of them are taking place back home.

Chiarelli also said that many soldiers who have been on "two, three, four deployments" continue to go back for additional deployments, even when they're wounded.
"That's one of the issues we have to get through is we try to break down stigma -- to get soldiers to understand that these hidden wounds of war are things that they've got to seek help for when they have problems," Chiarelli said.

NBC: MEET THE PRESS

White House energy and climate adviser Carol Browner discussed the continuing situation off the Gulf Coast, 111 days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig.
"I think the first phase (of the crisis) is over in that the well is not leaking; it has not leaked since July 15th," Browner said. "Obviously the relief well still has to be finished; that's probably another 10 to 14 days away."

On the environmental impact of the spill, Browner said that there has been some oil in sensitive marshes and estuaries that can be cleaned "to some degree," some of which "will have to dissipate naturally." On the whole, government scientists estimate that 4.9 million barrels of oil were spilled, Browner said.

"You can't put this much oil out there and not be concerned, and that's how we responded, with a great deal of concern," she added. She also said that gulf state senators' request for 80 percent of the penalty dollars to be returned directly to the Gulf Coast "makes a lot of sense."
House Minority Leader John Boehner also made an appearance on the show. Boehner said that the private sector needs more "breathing room," arguing that when it came to the spill in the gulf and the financial meltdown, "it's not more regulations; how about we enforce the ones we have now."

On the topic of the Bush tax cuts, Boehner declined to say whether he believed the tax cuts can pay for themselves. Pressed on the matter, he said, "I do believe that we've got to get more money in the hands of small businesses and American families to get our economy going again."

Boehner also left open the possibility of raising the retirement age to 70. "There are a lot of options about how you solve this, but I don't want to get the cart before the horse. I think it's important to have this conversation," he said.

On the midterms, Boehner said that it remains "a challenge" for Republicans to take back the House, but the party has "better candidates than we ever have." He added that 100 seats are in play around the country, "and 94 of them are held by Democrat members."

Boehner also said that the issue of whether Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) should step down is "for Charlie to decide," and that "it's worth considering" a repeal of the 14th amendment, which provides birthright citizenship.

CNN: STATE OF THE UNION

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D) and Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) discussed the state of the economy. McDonnell said that Virginia is "making some progress" regarding the unemployment situation. "I think the stimulus probably helped a little bit," he said, noting that Virginia had turned some federal stimulus dollars down. Granholm praised the stimulus as "critically important" for Michigan.

Asked about the potential implications of California's Proposition 8 ruling on Virginia, McDonnell replied, "None." He added that the court was "wrong to overturn the will of the people." Granholm argued in favor of the ruling, saying that it "is what the Constitution and the interpretation of the Constitution by the courts is for." On the issue of the midterms, Granholm said that the story Democrats "need to tell" is one that involves asking whether people want to go back to President George W. Bush's policies.

Asked how Republicans will fare in the midterms, McDonnell responded: "I think they're on the right track, and I think they'll be rewarded at the polls in November."

Ret. Adm. Thad Allen discussed the ongoing situation in the Gulf. Allen declined to offer a definitive answer as to whether the well was completely sealed. "If you're sitting in Barataria bay, it's still an environmental disaster," he said. Asked whether he would give BP a failing grade when it came to dealing with the spill's victims, Allen replied: "Much room for improvement."

CSPAN: NEWSMAKERS

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka criticized congressional Republicans, charging that they "stood in the way of every single jobs program." If it hadn't been for the stimulus, Trumka said, "we'd have been in a depression right now." Trumka also turned the focus on former president George W. Bush, blaming him in part for the economic slide.

The conversation turned to the Employee Free Choice Act. Trumka argued that the act is necessary because of the power of consumer spending. "If you're going to have an economy that really grows you have to have aggregate consumer demand," he said. The best way to do that is to allow collective bargaining, he continued. Asked when the bill will make its way through Congress, Trumka replied that he expects it to come before the midterms or during a possible lame duck session.

Trumka said he didn't have any regrets about opposing Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) in her Senate primary. "We think it was a good thing to do," he said. On his outlook for 2010, Trumka said that "mathematically, it's possible for Democrats to lose control of the House, but in actuality it's not going to happen."

He also said it's possible that the AFL-CIO might support Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (I) in his Senate bid.

CBS: FACE THE NATION

Ret. Adm. Thad Allen addressed the oil spill in the Gulf, saying that looking back, "there are some very positive things that have been done, but a lot of this stuff has never been done before." Allen said that at the wellhead, BP could get a passing grade, but their marks, as far as Allen was concerned, took a dive when it came to dealing with the victims of the spill.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins discussed California's Proposition 8 ruling with David Boies, the Democratic lawyer who joined with Republican Ted Olson to represent the plaintiffs in the case. Perkins said that the decision went against popular opinion, charged that the sexuality of the judge was an issue in the ruling, and emphasized that the battle was far from over.

Perkins said that the judge's sexuality was relevant because of a double standard, referring to pastors whose sexuality had been called into question in the past. He argued that if it was relevant in the context of religious practitioners, it should be relevant in discussions of the gay marriage case. "This is a flawed decision and is far from over," Perkins said.

Boies countered that "in a court of law you've got to come in and you've got to support those opinions, but when they come into court ... those opinions just melt away." Perkins shot back that the ruling was an "activist decision by a district-level court."

By Emi Kolawole  |  August 8, 2010; 1:40 PM ET
Categories:  44 The Obama Presidency  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama takes credit for healthier Medicare
Next: President Obama's best basketball moments

Comments

This was taken from another poster that shows why we need to legalize gay marriage. If you don't feel for this person after reading it, you simply aren't human.

"I am not sure what our President thinks of this dicission but coming from a poor family and knowing what discrimination is all about I would assume he would not care if "Gays" have equal rights. The whole reason why they are asking for rights to be considered married is from the same reason why I would be for it. My own life partner commited suicide in our home with a gun to his heart. After a 28 year union I was deprived to even go his funeral. We had two plots next to each other. But because we did not have a marriage cirtificate "(Legal Document)" of our union his mother had him cremated and his ashes taken back to Missouri where we came from. That is only one example how painful it is. His suicide tramatized me so much and her disregard for my feelings only added to my heartach. That happened on March 21 of 2007 and I still cannot type this without crying for the trauma I have to endure each day. Oh did I mention I am in an electric wheelchair for life? Yes I am and it is very diffacult to find another mate when you are 58 and in a wheelchair. "

Posted by: shadow_man | August 9, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

The National Library of Medicine pubs confirm that sexual orientation is natural, biologically induced in the first trimester of pregnancy, morally neutral, immutable, neither contagious nor learned, bearing no relation to an individuals ability to form deep and lasting relationships, to parent children, to work or to contribute to society.

From the American Psychological Association: homosexuality is normal; homosexual relationships are normal.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Asociation and American Psychiatric Asociation have endorsed civil marriage for same-sex couples because marriage strengthens mental and physical health and longevity of couples, and provides greater legal and financial security for children, parents and seniors.

America's premier child/mental health associations endorse marriage equality.

Posted by: shadow_man | August 9, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Homosexuality is not a choice. Just like you don't choose the color of your skin, you cannot choose whom you are sexually attracted to. If you can, sorry, but you are not heterosexual, you are bi-sexual. Virtually all major psychological and medical experts agree that sexual orientation is NOT a choice. Most gay people will tell you its not a choice. Common sense will tell you its not a choice. While science is relatively new to studying homosexuality, studies tend to indicate that its biological.

(Change *** to www)
***-news.uchicago.edu/releases/03/differential-brain-activation.pdf
***.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html
Gay, Straight Men's Brain Responses Differ
***.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155990,00.html
***.livescience.com/health/060224_gay_genes.html
***.springerlink.com/content/w27453600k586276/

Posted by: shadow_man | August 9, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Homosexuality is not a sin according to the Bible. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, prostitution, and rape, not homosexuality.

(Change *** to www)
***.soulfoodministry.org/docs/English/NotASin.htm
***.jesus21.com/content/sex/bible_homosexuality_print.html
***.christchapel.com/reclaiming.html
***.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/BiblicalReferences.php
***.gaychristian101.com/

Posted by: shadow_man | August 9, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Homosexuality is not a sin according to the Bible. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, prostitution, and rape, not homosexuality.

(Change *** to www)
***.soulfoodministry.org/docs/English/NotASin.htm
***.jesus21.com/content/sex/bible_homosexuality_print.html
***.christchapel.com/reclaiming.html
***.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/BiblicalReferences.php
***.gaychristian101.com/

Posted by: shadow_man | August 9, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Agent Orange know darn well the American people aren't going to give the House of Representatives back to the GOP...

That's why he speaks nonsense...Man had too much sun/radiation/booze

WE DON'T WANT A DRUNK WHOM LIKES LOOKING ORANGE AS THE HOUSE SPEAKER!!!!

Posted by: danders5000 | August 8, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

If the 14th amendment was made to help the children of black slaves, consider those latinos (etc.) who "take" away work from the non-latinos. Right, like you'd volunteer to mow lawns, clean houses or pluck chickens for those wages. Yep, the latinos are in fact slaving away, as are most immigrants. I see no harm in allowing children born here to have citizenship.

Posted by: sitspin | August 8, 2010 8:59 PM | Report abuse

How about careful reconsideration, by the voters in John Boner's district, of whom they want representing them in Congress?

Posted by: chuck8 | August 8, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

It matters not how much the illegals, SEIU, Council LaRaza (the one and only RACE), Mexies without Borders, the National Chamber of Commerce, the Catholic and the open borders, pro bilingual, anti American, pro chaos liberal neanderthals whine and moan about their pro invasion, pro amnesty agenda.

The majority of Americans have spoken against them. Their reign is up.

The absolute madness, the anarchy of the foreign national liberals pretending to be US citizens and the Demcratic Party tyranny of the USA ends in November 2010 and 2012.

We Independent voters will ensure that!

Posted by: Patriot12 | August 8, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

LaRaza is bankrupting the USA through free border passage and their tax paid ancwhore baby delivery abuse of the USA's generous provisions for birth certificate issuance. No where on this planet does any nation offer free baby delivery by border jumping criminals and then give those criminals citizenship.

The elite Democrat cretinous creeps would have the USA changed into an overpopulated third world barrio within the next year.... if not for the coming November.

What a bunch of corrupt ahole morons!

Posted by: Patriot12 | August 8, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse

Can you be a Christian AND in favor of Same Sex Marriage?

TV Host RENE SYLER weighs in on this hot button issue and why she’s standing with her gay and lesbian friends…

http://www.goodenoughmother.com/2010/08/proposition-8-good-enough-mothers-take/

Posted by: Allen24 | August 8, 2010 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Amend the 14th? Laughable. Any successful effort would entail 7-10 years while illegal invasion and new anchor babies and family reunification added more tens of millions of eager 3rd Worlders, here. Anyone calling for Amending doesn't understand how hard it is.

The Founders made it difficult to Amend. The great achievement of Special Interest groups in the 1960s onward was discovering the flaw of making Amending too difficult meant that money and great organization meant you owned the functioning of Congress on key issues, a good chunk of the Fed Judiciary their due to your lobbying and payoffs - and could also defeat any Amendment.
Ironically, it was Political Science studies of the Temperance Movement. It passed because advocates were exceptionally well-organized down to grassroots level. Opponents were less organized. Once they saw how the Amending game was played, they played the game and defeated the dry forces. It took 30 years to realize how it could be resurrrected as a routine tactic.
The Founders made it perhaps moderately appropriately to inappropriately difficult back in their ERA before mass communications, single issue organization, and nationally organized issue management" - to bind subsequent generations to their wishes. Good enhancements or updates sometimes happened. Other times not because of the hassle. And binding subsequent generations to peculiar views and institutions gave us the Civil War.
But no Amendment of any controversy has passed since 1962. (Poll Tax) Special interests have achieved gridlock. Best examples are the drawn out defeat of the ERA, line item veto, and balanced budget Amendments. Popular with the public, easily sabotaged.
So when someone in power says we should Amend to modify the 14th on anchor babies, proposes a flag burning Amendment, a continuity of Government Amendment if DC is nuked, or a mariage Amendment....laugh. Because the person in the halls of power saying it's doable is either stupid or demagoguing.

Only three ways exist to Amend the Constitution anymore without special interest groups sabotaging significant measures.

1. Fed Judge Fiat.
2. Constitutional Convention that circumvents all the emplaced Amending obstacles special interests can exploit.
3. Gun point.
(See Note)

Note: The only way the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments passed was Occupying military with rifles ready against the conquered citizenry of several states saying who they had to elect to their state Legislatures and to Congress. With sitting Southern Senators stripped of office and new elections called, and sitting Fed judges who went to the Confederacy stripped of lifetime office.

Gun point Amending is indeed a bloody effective option. And historically endorsed as making for great progessive law, without guns in people's faces and blood shed - no 13th, 14th, 15th Amendment or the US Constitution itself.

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | August 8, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

So if you are not a citizen by birth how are you supposed to be a citizen? This is why illiterate republicans ought not to vote.

Posted by: orange31 | August 8, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

It is clear that the jobs along with the social benefits being in the USA makes it a draw for all across the world. It is not wrong to think of ways to stop it and obviously our borders cannot be plugged. I think that we should look at these options, but continue to work to seal the borders. I also want to see all government (local, state, and Federal) work at identifying any illegal aliens using government services and then work to deport. I know this is not an Obama method, but it is the only way we will help to eliminate government costs and open jobs.

Posted by: jguy19571 | August 8, 2010 7:20 PM | Report abuse


I love it: Mahogany John Boinger is lecturing the rest of us! They are always SO eager to accuse and punish others, aren't they? John also wanted us to kill Iraqis, too, didn't he?

Mahogany John told us everything would be peachy if we just invaded Iraq, found them WMD, pumped out all their oil to pay for the destruction of their country, then use it as a huge military base from which to push our weight around.

Now, of course, those who hid in the Congress while Real Americans did their dirty, filthy, killing for them, don't want to actually PAY FOR THEIR TERRIBLE WARS, THEIR TERRIBLE WAR CRIMES!

Let's drop Mahogany John into Kabul or Baghdad, and let him straighten those guys out. When he gets back, he and Mitch McConnell can tell us how they are going to pay off their Bad Debts.

Posted by: gkam | August 8, 2010 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Why does John Boehner look so orange? Maybe, it's his birthright that we need to be questioning. I have never in my whole 48 years of life seen a person on the planet earth look so orange. Could it be Boehner is from another planet. Looking orange and spewing non-sense from his face sure does make one seem very strange in deed.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | August 8, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Clearly, the birthright is not "worth reconsidering" for children of people we dragged to the United States in chains.

I think it is worth reconsidering for 11 million people who have entered or stayed in the United States illegally.

There are 11 million unemployed and legal people in the country, after all.

Posted by: paul65 | August 8, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Yes, lets follow the lead of Arizona and send the police to chase Jose the gardener and Rosa the babysitter.

Maybe some more real criminals can escape and kill people while the police pretend they are immigration officials:

_______________

Two Murders Linked to Arizona Prison Escapee

One of two men who escaped from an Arizona prison in July has been linked to two murders near Santa Rosa, New Mexico last Wednesday.

New Mexico State Police say John McCluskey was linked through forensic evidence to charred remains found in a trailer near Santa Rosa on Wednesday.

Las Cruces Police spokesman Dan Trujillo says they are watching for the suspects but aren’t assigning extra officers to the case.

Authorities would not comment on specifics but they do believe McCluskey is still traveling with Tracy Province, who has ties and relatives in Las Cruces. Police couldn’t say if Province was involved in the murders.

McCluskey’s mother, Claudia, was arrested Sunday morning. She is behind bars accused of providing financial and other types of support to help her son.

Posted by: awofw | August 8, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

People come here and stay, because they want their children to become citizens. The 14th Amendment needs to be amended.

Posted by: moebius22 | August 8, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

INDISPUTABLE FACT: The ORIGINAL INTENT of the 14th Amendment, by its author, was NOT to allow ILLEGALS birthright citizenship, but that they should retain citizenship according to their parents' country:

Senator Jacob M. Howard of Michigan - the author of the Citizenship Clause in the amendment - described the clause as excluding American Indians who maintain their tribal ties, and "persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers." Howard was supported in this view by many other senators.

As they've done countless times, lunatic-left activist judges, particularly Justice William J. Brennan in his absurd, baseless footnote in his 5-4 opinion in Plyler v. Doe, have ignored the original intent of the clause and have instead re-defined it to reflect their ideological perversions. American patriots must now correct this perversion of the 14th Amendment as we Take Back Our Country.

Posted by: TeaPartyPatriot | August 8, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

So Congressman Boner wants to repeal the 14th Amendment, does he? Maybe we should repeal Congressman Boner. But, not before he gives back the bribe money he took from Jack Abramoff.

Posted by: sameolddoc | August 8, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

I sincerely hope that the Republicans do not blow this election and vote for a change to the 14th Amendment. The reason being: The entire amendment was provided so that BLACKS and freed slaves could gain US citizenship.without interference from the southern states. If black America only realized that they were being used and continue to be used by the left, they might realize how important they are to our country - both then and now. Again, Republicans: Do not do this - it's irrational. Just shut the border down and keep it shut down until a thoughtful immigration bill can get the job done.

Posted by: snoocks2 | August 8, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

"Agent Orange..."

I love that. Very good.

Even though I think he is a creep and lightweight, he hit the nail on the head with Social Security. We need to raise the retirement (collection) age in some pretty aggressive steps up to age 70.

Posted by: SwellLevel5 | August 8, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Birth right citizenship should be terminated immediately. At least one parent should be a U.S. citizen and provide proof. We have got to get rid of the anchor babies.
One issue that should be addressed is "quickie" marriages to skirt this issue. Perhaps testing to confirm it...paid by the parental units. It will make people think twice about having children here. Harsh, yes, however, I am seeing my country sucked dry by the leaks from south of the border.
We now need our legislature to act. What is sad is that they don't...

In response to tinyjab40...My mother was completing her citizenship waiting period when I was born in 1965. She had come from Canada legally to the U.S. in 1960. She was sworn in as a U.S. citizen in April 1967. My dad was a U.S. citizen by birth, of American parents. I hold U.S. citizenship by virtue of being boren here, as the 14th Amendment has allowed. I would still be "OK" as my dad was a citizen. Your father's situation was commonplace at that time in history. Your parents didn't "sneak" into the country. What I am talking about are the women who come here illegally, either already pregnant or get pregnant here and that child by virtue of it's birth on American soil, has become a citizen. I live in San Diego, CA and its crawling with illegals, most are Mexican and/or from Central America. You don't see many Canadians "sneaking" across to the U.S. or Australians swimming across the Pacific. What the U.S. needs to do is seal our borders, eliminate instant citizenship and deport permanently those who do not belong here. Any new amendment regarding citizenship would grandfather in a certain amount of people. Your dad, would be in that category, I am sure.

I just hope our legislature acts and very, very soon.

Posted by: kodonivan | August 8, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

After witnessing Agent Orange's embarrassing performance on 'Meet The Press' this morning, the only possible conclusion is that the goobers who support or vote for Boehner must be even dumber than he is.

His IQ is smaller than his shoe size.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | August 8, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Every once and a while Boehner emerges from the tanning salon, says something stupid and then heads back in for more rays. How can anyone take Boehner seriously when he spends more time on his tan than a teenage girl? He couldn't remember that he voted for Bush's tax cuts. Now he wants to remove part of the constitution because it is likely to produce more Democratic voters in the future. Forgeting the fundamentals of this country as a nation of immigrants must have also slipped Boehner's mind. Has anyone investigated how Boehner became a American citizen? With that orange glow of his he could be an illegal alien .... from Kypton.

Posted by: merrylees | August 8, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Birth right citizenship as it now stands should be discontinued immediately.
The Mexicans and others from the South American countries who enter our country illegally through Mexico have been using it for years in a way it was not intended to be used. The birth right citizenship should only be allowed if at least one parent is a legal citizen of this country.


Posted by: nychap44 | August 8, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

I suppose you do not know your history or have much knowledge of the constitution. Yes, while some amendments have been passed in law quicker then others, ceratin amendments take much longer. The 27th amendment was proposed in 1789, only to be ratified in 1992. And the country could not get the equal rights amendment ratified after 10 years.

Nothing will happen immediately.

As to providing citizenship only if at least one parent is a citizen, the 14th amendment provides nothing of the sort. Or do you want some "activist judge" to insert words on his/her own?

Finally, why is your post limited only to Mexicans and South America? What about Centrel America? Europe? Asia? Australia, etc.

Posted by: misfit614 | August 8, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Birth right citizenship as it now stands should be discontinued immediately.
The Mexicans and others from the South American countries who enter our country illegally through Mexico have been using it for years in a way it was not intended to be used. The birth right citizenship should only be allowed if at least one parent is a legal citizen of this country.


Posted by: nychap44 | August 8, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

I suppose you do not know your history or have much knowledge of the constitution. Yes, while some amendments have been passed in law quicker then others, ceratin amendments take much longer. The 27th amendment was proposed in 1789, only to be ratified in 1992. And the country could not get the equal rights amendment ratified after 10 years.

Nothing will happen immediately.

As to providing citizenship only if at least one parent is a citizen, the 14th amendment provides nothing of the sort. Or do you want some "activist judge" to insert words on his/her own?

Finally, why is your post limited only to Mexicans and South America? What about Centrel America? Europe? Asia? Australia, etc.

Posted by: misfit614 | August 8, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Birth right citizenship as it now stands should be discontinued immediately.
The Mexicans and others from the South American countries who enter our country illegally through Mexico have been using it for years in a way it was not intended to be used. The birth right citizenship should only be allowed if at least one parent is a legal citizen of this country.


Posted by: nychap44 | August 8, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

I suppose you do not know your history or have much knowledge of the constitution. Yes, while some amendments have been passed in law quicker then others, ceratin amendments take much longer. The 27th amendment was proposed in 1789, only to be ratified in 1992. And the country could not get the equal rights amendment ratified after 10 years.

Nothing will happen immediately.

As toy providing citizenship only if at least one parent is a citizen, the 14th amendment provides nothing of the sort. Or do you want some "activist judge" to insert words on his/her own?

Finally, why is your post limited only to Mexicans and South America? What about Centrel America? Europe? Asia? Australia, etc.

Posted by: misfit614 | August 8, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

I have strong feelings about this. My father was born soon after his mother and father got off the boat from Italy. He was a citizen by virtue of his birth in the U.S. He became a medical doctor and served underprivileged people all of his working life, especially the mentally ill.

I followed him as a productive citizen serving as a Christian minister, and now our son is doing productive work which is helpful to society.

Now I've got the GOP somehow saying there needs to be another test (other than just having been born in the U.S.) for citizenship. They need to investigate people like my father to make sure they "qualify" for citizenship. And I know without a doubt the GOP is doing it for political reasons, pandering to the Tea Party types. The GOP wants to investigate everyone and be sure they are "qualified."

Baloney! Leave things as they are.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | August 8, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Bollywood Boehner - a fitting leader for the party of creeps.

Posted by: LABC | August 8, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Birth right citizenship as it now stands should be discontinued immediately.
The Mexicans and others from the South American countries who enter our country illegally through Mexico have been using it for years in a way it was not intended to be used. The birth right citizenship should only be allowed if at least one parent is a legal citizen of this country.

Posted by: nychap44 | August 8, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company