I disagree, considering the many millions of illegal aliens who have entered our country over the past four years. The section of the constitution that includes birthright citizenship was written for ex-slaves, not considering that our current situation would be happening. True, but this doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be changed. Example: we once changed our constitution to prohibit alcohol. Then we changed it back again. I agree with you - we should pursue an amendment. I don't think he meant it as an insult to the constitution. The Amendment process is slow and difficult and the US needs some kind of immediate solution to get control over illegal immigration (or at least try to).
If anyone's interested in jumping head first into the issue, Patty Boyle's YT is pretty fair IMO in his attempts to boil down the economic aspects without picking sides. Almost like the days when financial news analysis was only about the reporting. He spends time going through the talking points / concerns of both sides like inflation, housing, and overall impacts/costs to the economy. I really like his channel. The amount of people deported under Obama makes me think that's what they were talking about during Carter's funeral...an important issue that they have some shared experience in principle. It's a half an hour, so watch it at 1.5x or something.
I agree with you that our politicians (R and D) could have and should have taken better action to curb the illegal immigration over the past four years.
Never left but Expect a great Expansion Like Gov We-Heels - did. . . MAKE AN @SS LOAD OF MONEY on TORT Case. . .then make sure no one else can Seems to be the general concensus of Republicans. . once I got mine . . make sure no one else can get theres This is a general sentiment of the U.S. on all things I was watching DL Hughley talk about how a senator .. . from one of our least productive states one of our TAKER states is trying to dictate how California . . one of our biggest GIVER STATES . .. should use money they receive. A State that receives government money all the time from California. . .. well they got theirs so F*CK CALIFORNIA I guess Rocket River
So the party that refuses to do anything about guns because constitutional rights and stuff wants to get rid of something in the constitution? but how? they told me this was impossible. the constitution is the law of the land!!!
We encourage breaking the law all the time The President talked about .. . if you can get away with it. . . its fine not Paying Taxes is smart remember Rocket River
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-constitution/ Currently this is a 404 page. For reference: https://archive.ph/l7Ez4
A Manifest Destiny kind of guy I see... Dem Greenie eskimos are gonna have one helluva surprise when Donny goes further off the reservation with suspending Constitutional rights by decree.
It's not a flood gate of illegal immigrants here. And it's not free for them - they go through incredible hardship and risk to build a life here. They get portrayed as criminals but they are mostly the hardest working mofos in this country. Definitely more deserving to have their kids have citizenship than a pregnant tourist from another country coming here for a week. We should also just get immigration reform done. Let's fix the problem without wrecking the economy or causing massive inflation please.
Elon and Vivek (before shitcanning) wrote a WSJ editorial explaining their plan for DOGE. One big potential they see is to relax the regulatory environment by pretty much doing nothing and looking the other way. Generally when you trust companies, whose primary goal is to increase profits for shareholders (and C-level bonuses/grants), to act like Boy Scouts, the public has to pay for the externalities in its wake like superfund or (not) capping old leaky gas wells. I get red tape is stifling, but this is not reform. It's turning off the switch and pretending the problem will fix itself. There will still be the blatant grift, but then again, the rich have only become richer regardless of party control.
If terrorist want to cross the border, these type laws won't stop them. These are immigration laws not security. You're pretty reasonable in this discussion but let go of the Trump migrant vilifying
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-constitution/ the constitution has been removed from the whitehouse official website. let's see how long until they put it back up "IF" they decide to put it back up.
Strict enforcement of immigration law would make it a LOT more difficult to execute such an attack. It's like saying "you won't stop the flow of drugs across the border". No, but we should do as much as we can to combat it. ....and, to clarify...although many conservatives like to paint all illegal immigrants as being violent criminals, I believe that the vast majority of them are peace-loving people who are coming to the US to seek a better life for themselves. But I also believe that the quantity and quality of the people we allow to immigrate should be controlled, and that failing to do so is dangerous and destructive to the US.
