Credit Cards | Car Insurance | Loan | Overtime | Web Advertising
Ron Paul shocker: No more 'anchor babies' [Archive] - FreeConservatives

PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul shocker: No more 'anchor babies'


THEBIRD
01-06-2008, 01:14 PM
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59551

Ron Paul shocker: No more 'anchor babies'
GOP gadfly's 'anti-immigrant' ad irks supporters
Posted: January 4, 2008
11:15 p.m. Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com


Ron Paul
A controversial new anti-illegal-immigration ad by GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul has sent his libertarian supporters into high dudgeon, but it's getting rave reviews from border-security hawks, including some Homeland Security officials.

In a surprise move, the strict constitutionalist has taken aim at the 14th Amendment as part of a proposal to control growing illegal immigration. U.S. Rep. Paul, R-Texas, proposes repealing the provision that gives automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S., even if their parents enter the country illegally.

"Ron Paul wants border security now," his new campaign ad asserts. "Physically secure the border. No amnesty. No welfare to illegal aliens. End birthright citizenship. No more student visas from terrorist nations."

The 30-second TV spot was released last week and is now running in New Hampshire.

"This advertisement makes it clear that, as president, Dr. Paul would oppose amnesty, secure the border, end birthright citizenship, end welfare to illegal aliens, and restore the rule of law," said campaign chairman Kent Snyder from Paul's headquarters in Arlington, Va.

However, many of Paul's supporters – who have donated more than $20 million to his campaign over the past three months alone – are not pleased with the ad. And some have expressed shock at his sudden tough stance against immigration.

Justin Raimondo, editor of AntiWar.com, a blog Paul regularly contributes to, called the ad "disgraceful."

"Rarely has a more ignorant proposal been advanced," he said. "And it is made even worse by the fact that this is Ron Paul we're talking about."

He and other angry fans accused Paul of pandering to the conservative base of the GOP, specifically border-security voters who backed presidential candidate Tom Tancredo before he recently dropped out of the race.

"'No more student visas from terrorist nations' stands against his rhetoric of 'lets talk to people, trade with them, etc.,' as opposed to 'bomb them and interfere with them,'" writes a blogger called "Ali" on Reason.com's blog. "But I think he's trying to appeal to a certain segment of the Republican base. I do not like it though. Otherwise, it is a good ad that has a Tancredo feel to it – despite the fact that I despise Tancredo."

...SNIP...

Others agree with Paul's proposals, including Homeland Security officials, who say the U.S. policy of birthright citizenship is a major incentive for illegal immigration.

So-called anchor babies are automatically conferred American citizenship, and are entitled to government welfare benefits regardless of the legal status of their parents – even if a parent is a foreign terrorist. Parents, in turn, can also obtain citizenship for themselves by using the family reunification features of immigration law.

Officials complain that illegal immigrants from Mexico cross the border to use U.S. emergency rooms as "maternity wards," and their babies are delivered as "public charges."

"On the U.S. southern border, aliens drive around U.S. hospitals until their water breaks, and then they drive up to the emergency room door for admission and 'free' maternity care," said one official who works for U.S. Customs and Border Protection in Texas.

A senior DHS official in Washington says birthright citizenship is a vestige of the 1800s and has outlived its original charter and purpose of assimilating former slaves into U.S. society after Emancipation.

"A major pet peeve of mine is the bastardization of the 14th Amendment, the principle of Jus Solis, an act to accommodate slaves," he said. "We now permit anyone having a child born in the United States or under the rules of international boundaries to attain United States citizenship under this principle. It is wrong."

According to the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, more than 570,000 U.S.-born children under the age of 18 have at least one parent born in the Middle East. That number is expected to grow to 950,000 by 2010.

Homeland Security officials also praised Paul for proposing to deny student visas for Muslims from terror-risk countries.

They say college campuses have become hotbeds of radicalization for terror groups, and a number of terrorists and terrorist suspects – including three of the 9/11 hijackers – have entered the U.S. on student visas.

DHS has identified 35 countries of interest for targeting potential terrorist activities, including 34 from predominantly Muslim countries. Here is the internal list, a copy of which was obtained by WND:

* Afghanistan
* Algeria
* Bahrain
* Bangladesh
* Djibouti
* Egypt
* Eritrea
* Indonesia
* Iran
* Iraq
* Jordan
* Kazakhstan
* Kuwait
* Lebanon
* Libya
* Malaysia
* Morocco
* North Korea
* Oman
* Pakistan
* Philippines
* Qatar
* Saudi Arabia
* Somalia
* Sudan
* Syria
* Tajikistan
* Thailand
* Tunisia
* Turkey
* Turkmenistan
* United Arab Emirates (UAE)
* Uzbekistan
* Yemen
* Territories of Gaza and the West Bank


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/pr...TICLE_ID=59551 (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59551)



This article is meant to be negative against Ron Paul but I think its great. I didn't need another reason to vote for him but I guess I got two. These are common sense issues as far as I'm concerned.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

Riverboat
01-06-2008, 01:31 PM
I knew that sooner or later the Left supporters were going to find out that Paul supports border controls and full-throttle free markets. This has never been a secret. I guess they just never got around to reading the newsletters I've been getting since he was elected here.

THEBIRD
01-06-2008, 04:56 PM
The majority of RP's support is from ticked off Conservatives like me who are sick and tired of Country Club liberal RINO's running this country.

Check out any number of gun forums, survival forums, anti-immigration forums and you will see that most are conservative, Christian based and support RP.

Timberwolf
01-06-2008, 05:27 PM
...and they are suicidal idjits because they are supporting bringing the War on Terror over HERE. We are gonna fight the muzzie fanatics whether we like it or not because THEY declared war on civilization about 40 years ago.

Talking to them has done nothing but allowed their barbarism to grow unchecked for four friggin' DECADES. That this hasn't sunk in yet makes me think you guys WANT us to fight this war over here and that you're clueless buffoons or willfully blinding yourselves to the reality of the situation.

Whatever...we ain't bringin' their crap over here.

Naturalized-Texan
01-06-2008, 05:50 PM
...and they are suicidal idjits because they are supporting bringing the War on Terror over HERE. We are gonna fight the muzzie fanatics whether we like it or not because THEY declared war on civilization about 40 years ago.
I thought it was more like 14 centuries ago.

Timberwolf
01-06-2008, 05:53 PM
Well...Okay, ya got me...:biggrin:

jayson
01-06-2008, 06:36 PM
They shouldn't be surprised... in the end Ron Paul is still a conservative Republican with libertarian roots. These people just haven't looked into Ron's positions enough to realize that he has stood for these things the whole time.

The_Elucidator
01-07-2008, 04:43 AM
The majority of RP's support is from ticked off Conservatives like me who are sick and tired of Country Club liberal RINO's running this country.

Check out any number of gun forums, survival forums, anti-immigration forums and you will see that most are conservative, Christian based and support RP.

And don't forget:

Area 51 Forums
UFO Forums
Truther Forums
Sci-Fi channel blog
Islamofascist for Paul blogs
Farmers for Moonshine
Jerry Springer crowd

Rhino
01-07-2008, 08:44 AM
Check out any number of gun forums, survival forums, anti-immigration forums and you will see that most are conservative, Christian based and support RP.Not true for the gun forums I frequent, though I don't doubt the survivalists, since they're very prone to flights of fantasy.

Dowple
01-07-2008, 09:02 AM
Ron Paul is a mixed bag on immigration. He is for "border security," whatever that means these days, as even McCain claims to be for it, but he is shifty about deportation and obeying the laws as they currently exist. He also favors more legal immigration, like all the Repubs, which is the first cousin of amnesty. Banning the anchor babies is good, however. I think Thompson also supports ridding us of anchor babies, too. If I had to choose b/w Thompson and Paul on immigration, I do think I'd choose Thompson. He sees the cultural damage done by illegals and Paul is almost Marxist in viewing man as the agent of the economy and culture a mere plank on the superstructure of "the relationship between the means of production."

jayson
01-07-2008, 04:09 PM
He sees the cultural damage done by illegals and Paul is almost Marxist in viewing man as the agent of the economy and culture a mere plank on the superstructure of "the relationship between the means of production."

I think you need to spend a few more dozen hours reading Ron Paul's own speeches and writings at www.RonPaulLibrary.org, because you couldn't be further from the truth about that.

SmellyFed
01-07-2008, 04:13 PM
Ron Paul is a nut-job. He had the audacity to criticize Abraham Lincoln for not "purchasing the slaves" - as if that would have worked, and all but called Ronald Reagan a traitor.

That girl that sings the Ron Paul song on Youtube is really cute though. I'd vote for her before I'd vote for him.

Maggie_T
01-07-2008, 04:30 PM
And don't forget:

Area 51 Forums
UFO Forums
Truther Forums
Sci-Fi channel blog
Islamofascist for Paul blogs
Farmers for Moonshine
Jerry Springer crowd


http://freeconservatives.com/smilies/doggie.gif

Maggie_T
01-07-2008, 04:37 PM
Ron Paul is a mixed bag on immigration.

Yeah. Pretty much like Hillary is a mixed bag on the War on Terror. :whistle:

Their, er, "stand" is also known as flip-flopping.


He is for "border security," whatever that means these days ...

It means exactly the same as "I support the troops," when said by a demunist.


... as even McCain claims to be for it, but he is shifty about deportation and obeying the laws as they currently exist. He also favors more legal immigration, like all the Repubs, which is the first cousin of amnesty.

There, I knew it. A flip-flopper.

Banning the anchor babies is good, however.

And saying it is awfully easy. But will Rupaul actually walk the walk? Doubt it.

Paul is almost Marxist in viewing man as the agent of the economy and culture a mere plank on the superstructure of "the relationship between the means of production."

Rupaul is pretty much on the same level as Kucinich where immigration is concerned. With the Huckster a close second.