The 14th Amendment... Course Number "Intro 101"

I'm content to simply leave it to Ann Coulter to demolish the morons at Fox News... and the half-wits within the RINO Ruling Class.

(*HEADACHE*)

*  *  *

Based on the hysterical flailing at Donald Trump — He’s a buffoon! He’s a clown! He calls people names! He’s too conservative! He’s not conservative enough! He won’t give details! His details won’t work! — I gather certain Republicans are determined to drive him from the race.

These same Republicans never object to other candidates who lack traditional presidential resumes — Carly Fiorina, Ben Carson, Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain, to name a few. 

I’m beginning to suspect it’s all about Trump’s opposition to mass immigration from the Third World.

(*GRIN*)

Amid the hysteria, Trump is the only one speaking clearly and logically, while his detractors keep making utter asses of themselves.

* CRUZ IS DOING OK...

(*SHRUG*)

By my count — so far — Fiorina, Chris Christie, Rick Perry and the entire Fox News commentariat are unfamiliar with a period of the nation’s history known as “the Civil War.” They seem to believe that the post-Civil War amendments were designed to ensure that the children of illegal aliens would be citizens, “anchor babies,” who can then bring in the whole family. (You wouldn’t want to break up families, would you?)

* ET TU, FIORINA...? (OH, WELL... AT LEAST - HOPEFULLY - SHE'S EDUCABLE.)

As FNC’s Bill O’Reilly "authoritatively" informed Donald Trump on Tuesday night: “The 14th Amendment says if you’re born here, you’re an American!”

I cover anchor babies in about five pages of my book, Adios, America, but apparently Bill O’Reilly and the rest of the scholars on Fox News aren’t what we call “readers.”

(*SNORT*)

* SERIOUSLY... I BELIEVE SHE'S CORRECT ON THIS. I HAVE NEVER SEEN A LICK'S WORTH OF EVEN CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT O'REILLY READS... er... BOOKS. (SERIOUS BOOKS...)

* FOLKS... THIS IS WHY WHILE I USED TO WATCH O'REILLY... I NO LONGER DO. MY HEAD WOULD EXPLODE LISTENING TO THE STUPID THINGS THE MAN WOULD SAY! "HARVARD EDUCATED...?!?!" SERIOUSLY...?!?!

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*) 

Still, how could anyone — even a not-very-bright person — imagine that granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens is actually in our Constitution? I know the country was exuberant after the war, but I really don’t think our plate was so clear that Americans were consumed with passing a constitutional amendment to make illegal aliens’ kids citizens.

Put differently: Give me a scenario — just one scenario — where guaranteeing the citizenship of children born to illegals would be important to Americans in 1868. You can make it up. It doesn’t have to be a true scenario. Any scenario!

You know what’s really bothering me? If someone comes into the country illegally and has a kid, that kid should be an American citizen!

Damn straight they should!

We’ve got to codify that.

YOU MEAN IT’S NOT ALREADY IN THE CONSTITUTION?

No, it isn’t, but that amendment will pass like wildfire!

* GOTTA FRIGGIN' LOVE COULTER!

It’s like being accused of robbing a homeless person. (1) I didn’t; (2) WHY WOULD I DO THAT?

“Luckily,” as FNC’s Shannon Bream put it Monday night, Fox had an “expert” to explain the details: Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox’s senior judicial analyst.

Napolitano at least got the century right. He mentioned the Civil War — and then went on to inform Bream that the purpose of the 14th Amendment was to — I quote — “make certain that the former slaves and the native Americans would be recognized as American citizens no matter what kind of prejudice there might be against them.”

Huh. In 1884, 16 years after the 14th Amendment was ratified, John Elk, who — as you may have surmised by his name — was an Indian, had to go to the Supreme Court to argue that he was an American citizen because he was born in the United States.

He lost. In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not grant Indians citizenship.

The “main object of the opening sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment,” the court explained — and not for the first or last time — “was to settle the question, upon which there had been a difference of opinion throughout the country and in this court, as to the citizenship of free negroes and to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black … should be citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside.”

American Indians were not made citizens until 1924. Lo those 56 years after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, Indians were not American citizens, despite the considered opinion of Judge Napolitano.

Of course it’s easy for "legal experts" to miss the welter of rulings on Indian citizenship inasmuch as they obtained citizenship in a law perplexingly titled: “THE INDIAN CITIZENSHIP ACT OF 1924.”

(*ROFLMAO*)

Yeah, Trump’s the idiot.

(*SNORT*)

Or as Bream said to Napolitano after his completely insane analysis, “I feel smarter just having been in your presence.”

* AGAIN...

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

The only reason the 14th Amendment doesn’t just come out and say “black people” is that — despite our Constitution being the product of vicious racists, who were dedicated to promoting white privilege and keeping down the black man (Hat tip: Ta-Nehisi Coates) — the Constitution never, ever mentions race.

Nonetheless, until Fox News’ "scholars" weighed in, there was little confusion about the purpose of the 14th Amendment. It was to “correct” — as Jack Nicholson said in “The Shining” — the Democrats, who refused to acknowledge that they lost the Civil War and had to start treating black people like citizens.

On one hand, we have noted legal expert Bill O’Reilly haranguing Donald Trump: “YOU WANT ME TO QUOTE YOU THE AMENDMENT??? IF YOU’RE BORN HERE YOU’RE AN AMERICAN. PERIOD! PERIOD!” (No, Bill — there’s no period. More like: “comma,” to parents born “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States “and of the state wherein they reside.”)

But on the other hand, we have Justice John Marshall Harlan II, who despite not being a Fox News legal expert, was no slouch. He wrote in the 1967 case, Afroyim v. Rusk, that the sponsors of the 14th Amendment feared that:

“Unless citizenship were defined, freedmen might, under the reasoning of the Dred Scott decision, be excluded by the courts from the scope of the amendment. It was agreed that, since the ‘courts have stumbled on the subject,’ it would be prudent to remove the ‘doubt thrown over’ it. The clause would essentially overrule Dred Scott and place beyond question the freedmen’s right of citizenship because of birth.”

It is true that in a divided 1898 case, U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court granted citizenship to the children born to legal immigrants, with certain exceptions, such as for diplomats. But that decision was so obviously wrong, even the Yale Law Journal ridiculed it.

* I RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING, FOLKS.

The majority opinion relied on feudal law regarding citizenship in a monarchy, rather than the Roman law pertaining to a republic — the illogic of which should be immediately apparent to American history buffs, who will recall an incident in our nation’s history known as “the American Revolution.”

Citizenship in a monarchy was all about geography — as it is in countries bristling with lords and vassals, which should not be confused with this country. Thus, under the majority’s logic in Wong Kim Ark, children born to American parents traveling in England would not be American citizens, but British subjects.

As ridiculous as it was to grant citizenship to the children born to legal immigrants under the 14th Amendment (which was about what again? That’s right: slaves freed by the Civil War), that’s a whole order of business different from allowing illegal aliens to sneak across the border, drop a baby and say, Ha-ha! You didn’t catch me! My kid’s a citizen — while Americans curse impotently under their breath.

As the Supreme Court said in Elk: “[N]o one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent.”

The anchor baby scam was invented 30 years ago by a liberal zealot, Justice William Brennan, who slipped a footnote into a 1982 Supreme Court opinion announcing that the kids born to illegals on U.S. soil are citizens. Fox News is treating Brennan’s crayon scratchings on the Constitution as part of our precious national inheritance.

Judge Richard Posner of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals is America’s most-cited federal judge — and, by the way, no friend to conservatives. In 2003, he wrote a concurrence simply in order to demand that Congress pass a law to stop “awarding citizenship to everyone born in the United States.”

The purpose of the 14th Amendment, he said, was “to grant citizenship to the recently freed slaves,” adding that “Congress would not be flouting the Constitution” if it passed a law “to put an end to the nonsense.”

In a statement so sane that Posner is NEVER going to be invited on Fox News, he wrote: “We should not be encouraging foreigners to come to the United States solely to enable them to confer U.S. citizenship on their future children. But the way to stop that abuse of hospitality is to remove the incentive by changing the rule on citizenship.”

Forget the intricate jurisprudential dispute between Fox News blowhards and the most-cited federal judge. How about basic common sense? Citizenship in our nation is not a game of Red Rover with the Border Patrol! The Constitution does not say otherwise.

Our history and our Constitution are being perverted for the sole purpose of dumping immigrants on the country to take American jobs. So far, only Donald Trump is defending black history on the issue of the 14th Amendment. Fox News is using black people as a false flag to keep cheap Third World labor flowing.

The Inmates are Already Running the Asylum; Must We Allow Them To Burn It Down?

...with us trapped inside?

*  *  *

Officers arrested at least nine people and deployed tear gas amid protests in St. Louis over the death of a black 18-year-old who was fatally shot by police after he pointed a gun at them, the city’s police chief said.

* Er... "...AFTER HE POINTED A GUN AT THEM..."

Chief Sam Dotson said at a news conference late Wednesday night that a group of protesters who had blocked an intersection threw glass bottles and bricks at officers...

* THIS IS WHEN YOU BUST HEADS.

(*SHRUG*)

* SERIOUSLY. NO SNARK. NO "JUST SHOOT THE BASTARDS." BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? THIS IS WHEN YOU "BUST HEADS." THIS IS WHEN POLICE MAKE AN EXAMPLE THAT WILL RESONATE AND ACT AS A "TEACHABLE MOMENT." WE SIMPLY CAN'T HAVE ANARCHY. WE CAN'T HAVE THESE ANIMALS ATTACKING POLICE. PERIOD.

...and refused orders to clear the roadway.

Inert gas was used and when that didn’t have any effect on the crowd, police turned to tear gas to clear the intersection, Mr. Dotson said. Those arrested face charges of impeding the flow of traffic and resisting arrest, he said.

The demonstration was one of several Wednesday after the killing of 18-year-old Mansur Ball-Bey of St. Louis.

* CITIZEN? (JUST CURIOUS...)

It comes with tensions already high in the area after violence erupted during several events marking the anniversary of the death of Michael Brown, the 18-year-old fatally shot last year by a police officer in nearby Ferguson.

* AND THE WORLD IS A SAFER PLACE WITH MICHAEL BROWN DEAD. THAT'S JUST... THE REALITY.

(*SHRUG*)

Two police officers serving a search warrant Wednesday afternoon at a home in a crime-troubled section of the city’s north side encountered two suspects, one of which was Mr. Ball-Bey, the chief said. The suspects were fleeing the home as Mr. Ball-Bey turned and pointed a handgun at the officers, who shot him, Mr. Dotson said. He died at the scene.

* GOOD! SERIOUSLY... GOOD! ONE LESS RABID ANIMAL AROUND TO ENDANGER AT WORST, BURDEN AT BEST, SOCIETY.

Both officers, who are white, were unharmed, according to a police report.

* THANK GOD!

Police are searching for the second suspect, who they said is believed to be in his mid- to late teens.

Mr. Dotson said four guns, including the handgun wielded by the dead suspect, and crack cocaine were recovered at or near the home, which last year yielded illegal guns during a police search.

A man and woman who were also inside the home were arrested, Mr. Dotson said.

Roughly 150 people gathered Wednesday afternoon near the scene of the shooting, questioning the use of deadly force. Some chanted “Black Lives Matter,” a mantra used after Mr. Brown’s death.

(*SIGH*)

As police removed their yellow tape that cordoned off the scene, dozens of people converged on the home’s front yard, many chanting insults and gesturing obscenely at officers. Several onlookers surrounded individual officers, yelling at them.

“Another youth down by the hands of police,” Dex Dockett, 42, who lives nearby, told a reporter. “What could have been done different to de-escalate rather than escalate? They [police] come in with an us-against-them mentality. You’ve got to have the right kind of cops to engage in these types of neighborhoods.”

* I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH MR. DOCKETT - THOUGH PERHAPS NOT IN THE SENSE HE WOULD APPRECIATE. WE NEED COPS WHO ARE READY, WILLING, AND ABLE TO MAINTAIN CIVILIZATION EVEN IN THE POOREST OF NEIGHBORHOODS. THE GOOD PEOPLE OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS DESERVE NOTHING LESS. OUR SOCIETY DESERVES NOTHING LESS!

Another neighborhood resident, Fred Price, said he was skeptical about Mr. Dotson’s account that the suspect pointed a gun at officers before being mortally wounded.

“They provoked the situation,” Mr. Price, 33, said. “Situations like this make us want to keep the police out of the neighborhood. They’re shooting first, then asking questions.”

* MR. PRICE IS OBVIOUSLY PART OF THE PROBLEM - NOT PART OF THE SOLUTION.

In addition to the nine arrests at the Wednesday night demonstration, officers responded to reports of burglaries in the area and the fire department was called after a car was set ablaze, according to Mr. Dotson.

* "...AFTER A CAR WAS SET ABLAZE..."

* FOLKS... WE CAN'T ALLOW AMERICA TO DESCEND INTO THIRD-WORLD STANDARDS OF CONDUCT. WE MUST DEMAND BETTER. WE MUST ENFORCE BETTER!

He blamed the crimes on people seeking “notoriety” in a neighborhood “plagued by violence.”

The area is near where a 93-year-old veteran who was part of the famed Tuskegee Airmen — the U.S. military’s first black aviators — was the victim of crimes twice within a few minutes Sunday, being robbed and then having his car stolen. The veteran was unhurt, and his car was found Tuesday blocks from where it was taken.

* WHAT... IS... WRONG... WITH... THESE... ANIMALS...?!?!

Protests have become a familiar scene across the St. Louis region since Brown, who was black and unarmed, was fatally shot by Ferguson officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9, 2014. A St. Louis County grand jury and the U.S. Justice Department declined to charge Mr. Wilson, who resigned in November.

* WHO WAS FORCED TO RESIGN... (LET'S HAVE JUST THE BAREST DEGREE OF HONESTY HERE...)

(*SHAKING MY HEAD IN DISGUST*)

Some of those who protested Mr. Ball-Bey’s killing had already spent the morning in downtown St. Louis, marching to mark the anniversary of the fatal police shooting of Kajieme Powell. He was fatally shot by two St. Louis officers after police said he approached them with a knife. Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce is still reviewing the case to determine whether lethal force was justified.

* AND WE WONDER WHY JUST RECENTLY A COP "ALLOWED" HIMSELF TO BE DISARMED AND BEATEN HALF TO DEATH (WITH HIS OWN SERVICE WEAPON) BY A CRIMINAL?

* FOLKS... HOW LONG WILL WE ALLOW THE INMATES TO RUN THE ASYLUM?