The ability to be impregnated by a fat guy 30 years older than you who happened to have a rich dad.
Usha Vance, under Trumps law wouldn't have been a citizen
- Thread starter bunsen82
- Start date
At least Trump had white babies. The MAGAs will never warm to Vance for diluting the white race. Which is what so much of the drive behind stopping immigration, legal and illegal, is all about.
It's 1924 again.
They claim its bad . . . yet he is married to her . . . yeah it shows their stupidity. Trump and Melania doesn't fall too far from that tree either.
It's certainly hypocrisy. Just admit you want to pick and choose what illegals get to stay. Otherwise you'd be upset that Usha is a citizen because she came out of her mom's twat when assholes weren't running the country? What makes her different from someone being born here today.
In your opinion why did she deserve birthright citizenship? Why was it OK then but changes now? Because you don't think the law should apply to everyone and only who you and MAGA choose is what makes you a hypocrite.
I will freely admit that I believe that there should be some qualifications for admittance into this country...
In Usha's case, she deserved birthright citizenship because that was the law of the land at the time that she encountered it,.. Things change,.. Should every gay marriage in this country be nullified because that was previously illegal?
The law is what it is until it gets changed.
If Trump wrote an EO nullifying it, would you say that's bullshit or just "law of the land". Hey? Laws change right?
Why is Usha so lucky to stay? Timing only?
Apparently, it's a very principled position...that is dependent not upon the actual issue, but instead the timing of it. How convenient.
I understand how hard it is for you going through the mental gymnastics. It no longer matters what the issue is, its what the law of the land is. So you know, in Germany it was ok to kill, torture and enslave jews, because that was the law of the land. I am so glad we cleared this up.
Agreed. And if the writings and news of the day provides clarity on what the framers had in mind with this clause I am ready to hear it and go with original intent.
Again, while I may, on some basis, disagree with the idea of auto citizenship with US birth, I am willing to defer to the intent of the framers, insomuch as it is possible to know.
I have zero skin in this game. I don't care how it lands honestly. But to put it out there to be interpreted in this context I dont think is a terrible thing. I cant see why anyone would.
Why do many of you care what this amendment allows? Honest question. I actually think it probably has more to do with the author of the EO than anything. Just a wild guess.
No it isn't despite how much you wish it was.
Vance will be the nominee in 2028. I think he is well liked and I dont think the fact he is married to someone of indian heritage has any effect on that at all. You see racism where none exists. Not saying it doesnt exist....to be clear.
