Constitutionalist Rand Paul wants to change the constitution

[OPTIONAL777]

Here is a question for Rand:

"Dr. Rand, you are on record saying that life begins at conception. Does that means if a child was conceived in America with the current law in effect, they are at the point of conception in America entitled to automatically be granted citizenship? By your comments, you seem to say that human life begins not at birth, but at conception. If you had been conceived in America, carried to term in America, but were born across the border by parents who were not US citizens, would that mean you would still eligible for citizenship because life began at conception...not birth?"

Another question:

"Dr. Rand, you are on record saying that life beings at conception. So if life begins at conception, wouldn't ending that life that begins at conception via any means prescribed by a doctor be an act murder? Yet you...who are a doctor...are on record that the abortion pill should be legal in the case of rape, incest, etc. Please tell us why murder should be allowed in the case of rape, incest, etc."

Another question:

"Dr. Rand, you are on record saying that life beings at conception. If human life beings at conception, then abortion is ending that life, which would be murder by any reasonable standard if human life was in fact begun at the moment of conception. You also have stated that the state should decide if abortion is legal. If Kentucky were to pass laws banning abortion, taking a position that it is murder, why would abortion be murder in Kentucky and not murder in Ohio even though the state of Ohio allows abortion? why should murder be a state's rights issues and not a federal issue?"

Another question:

"Dr. Rand, you are on record saying that life beings at conception. If human life beings at conception, then abortion is ending that life, which would be murder by any reasonable standard if human life was in fact begun at the moment of conception. You also have stated that the state should decide if abortion is legal. If Kentucky were to pass laws banning abortion, taking a position that it is murder, why would abortion be murder in Kentucky and not murder in Ohio even though the state of Ohio allows abortion? If murder is murder, if a resident of the state of Kentucky went across the state line to Ohio to get an abortion, would that still be murder according to the laws of Kentucky? Would you arrest the woman coming back over the state line to Kentucky for murder? If the doctor who performed the abortion also be guilty of murder? Would you arrest the doctor from Ohio who performed the abortion for murder if he crossed the state line in Kentucky? Would you pay bounty hunters to cross the state line into Ohio and other states to capture doctors who perform abortion (murder) in other states to be brought to Kentucky to face charges of murder? Would you pay bounty hunters to capture women who had abortions in other states to be brought to Kentucky to face charges of murder? Why should murder be decided by the states as a states rights, and not by the federal government?"

Quote from Free Thinker:

i think its a good idea change that law. the draw has to be irresistible to illegals. sneak in and you get free health care for your baby and you guarantee him a birthwrite. i would risk my life for that if i were a mother.

 

[phenomena]

Here is a question for Optional: "Have you spoken with a mental health professional about your homoerotic fixation on and obsessive stalking of Rand Paul? "

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Here is a question for Rand:

"Dr. Rand, you are on record saying that life begins at conception. Does that means if a child was conceived in America with the current law in effect, they are at the point of conception in America entitled to automatically be granted citizenship? By your comments, you seem to say that human life begins not at birth, but at conception. If you had been conceived in America, carried to term in America, but were born across the border by parents who were not US citizens, would that mean you would still eligible for citizenship because life began at conception...not birth?"

Another question:

"Dr. Rand, you are on record saying that life beings at conception. So if life begins at conception, wouldn't ending that life that begins at conception via any means prescribed by a doctor be an act murder? Yet you...who are a doctor...are on record that the abortion pill should be legal in the case of rape, incest, etc. Please tell us why murder should be allowed in the case of rape, incest, etc."

Another question:

"Dr. Rand, you are on record saying that life beings at conception. If human life beings at conception, then abortion is ending that life, which would be murder by any reasonable standard if human life was in fact begun at the moment of conception. You also have stated that the state should decide if abortion is legal. If Kentucky were to pass laws banning abortion, taking a position that it is murder, why would abortion be murder in Kentucky and not murder in Ohio even though the state of Ohio allows abortion? why should murder be a state's rights issues and not a federal issue?"

Another question:

"Dr. Rand, you are on record saying that life beings at conception. If human life beings at conception, then abortion is ending that life, which would be murder by any reasonable standard if human life was in fact begun at the moment of conception. You also have stated that the state should decide if abortion is legal. If Kentucky were to pass laws banning abortion, taking a position that it is murder, why would abortion be murder in Kentucky and not murder in Ohio even though the state of Ohio allows abortion? If murder is murder, if a resident of the state of Kentucky went across the state line to Ohio to get an abortion, would that still be murder according to the laws of Kentucky? Would you arrest the woman coming back over the state line to Kentucky for murder? If the doctor who performed the abortion also be guilty of murder? Would you arrest the doctor from Ohio who performed the abortion for murder if he crossed the state line in Kentucky? Would you pay bounty hunters to cross the state line into Ohio and other states to capture doctors who perform abortion (murder) in other states to be brought to Kentucky to face charges of murder? Would you pay bounty hunters to capture women who had abortions in other states to be brought to Kentucky to face charges of murder? Why should murder be decided by the states as a states rights, and not by the federal government?"

 

[phenomena]

Oh, so by the way the answer is no, black people by deffinition are not red necks. Thanks for confirming your racist views.

 

[fhl]

Quote from ..........:

GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul opposes US citzenship for children born to illegal immigrants
By ROGER ALFORD , Associated Press

Last update: May 28, 2010 - 4:40 PM


<b> the 14th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees citizenship to everyone born in the U.S.</b>

That's a bald faced lie. The associated press prints it, and libtards run with it.


What the fourteenth amendment actually says is: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

If anyone would like to know what 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' means, and i know that nary a libtard would, we can see what the author of the ammendment said it meant.

Sen. Lyman Trumbull of Illinois was,... one of two "principal authors of the citizenship clauses in 1866 act and the 14th Amendment." He said that "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" meant subject to its "complete" jurisdiction, meaning "not owing allegiance to anybody else."
http://townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2010/03/28/a_birthright__maybe_not

 

[CaptainObvious]

Mr. Paul just wants the constitution to be adhered to as it's intended. The 14th Amendment is currently being violated by allowing anchor babies to become citizens.

The Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment actually has two components: 1) “All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” and 2) “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, . . . are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The claim of birthright citizenship is particularly troubling in the context of illegal immigrants, for it permits those who have not followed our law, who have not adopted the United States as their own country and sworn their allegiance to it, to nevertheless demand that the United States confer the privilege of citizenship upon their children (and derivatively upon them as well). The original intent of the 14th Amendment was to mandate that those born on U.S. soil and who were subject to the full and complete, allegiance-owing, can-be-prosecuted-for treason jurisdiction of the United States, would be citizens.

Breaking it down for the nitwits of the radical left:

In essence, there can be no citizenship without allegiance. Birthright is insufficient to establish citizenship without subjugation to the laws of the United States of America. Having arrived illegally there first, and perhaps preemptive and primary, birthright is their illegal status. Illegal residents can not become citizens. Since their parents are illegal so are their offspring. Without their parents meeting the criteria for citizenship (which includes entering the county legally) and swearing allegiance to the United States before their native country neither they or their children are eligible for citizenship.

 

[Optional]

Like his Dad's medical practice, Rand's medical practice doesn't accept Medicare, so nice try.

Quote from fkbsuhites:

Apparently he appears to be ok with the natural born citizenship issue if they actually voted republican.

Ge's obviously pandering to his base.

No one running for political office can be this stupid unless he knows he's dealing with neanderthal type brains and really wants the message to be clear to his voter base.

Note he is also for "smaller govt." except for Medicare.

you see, his doctors practice depends on medicare.

So the truth is he is just another regular corrupt republican politician.

This guy is McCains "Joe the plumber" with some education.

I wonder if he faked his doctors licensing certificate. Would not put it past these people.

 

[..........]

Quote from Optional:

Like his Dad's medical practice, Rand's medical practice doesn't accept Medicare, so nice try.

Do you people know anything about the politicians you vote for ?

Idiots need representation too I guess,so theres Sarah Palin and Rand Paul


http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/05/14/rand-paul-cut-spending-but-not-medicare-doctor-payments/



Rand Paul: Cut Spending But Not Medicare Doctor Payments


LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Tea party favorite Rand Paul has rocketed to the lead ahead of Tuesday’s Republican Senate primary here on a resolute pledge to balance the federal budget and slash the size of government.

But on Thursday evening, the ophthalmologist from Bowling Green said there was one thing he would not cut: Medicare physician payments.

In fact, Paul — who says 50% of his patients are on Medicare — wants to end cuts to physician payments under a program now in place called the sustained growth rate, or SGR. “Physicians should be allowed to make a comfortable living,” he told a gathering of neighbors in the back yard of Chris and Linda Wakild, just behind the 10th hole of a golf course.



------------------------




http://spectator.org/blog/2010/05/17/rand-paul-and-medicare-physici



Rand Paul and Medicare Physician Payments
By W. James Antle, III on 5.17.10 @ 12:08PM

David Frum hits Rand Paul for opposing cuts to Medicare physician payments, based on a short item in the Wall Street Journal. Paul is an ophthalmologist who treats Medicare patients. Therefore, says Frum, "Rand Paul's libertarianism stops where his pocketbook starts." He calls this "Rand Paul's personal special interest" and elsewhere describes it as a "small government for everybody except me personally" philosophy. Frum concludes, "I guess this is what the original Rand meant by the morality of selfishness."

 

[..........]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

Mr. Paul just wants the constitution to be adhered to as it's intended. The 14th Amendment is currently being violated by allowing anchor babies to become citizens.

The Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment actually has two components: 1) “All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” and 2) “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, . . . are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The claim of birthright citizenship is particularly troubling in the context of illegal immigrants, for it permits those who have not followed our law, who have not adopted the United States as their own country and sworn their allegiance to it, to nevertheless demand that the United States confer the privilege of citizenship upon their children (and derivatively upon them as well). The original intent of the 14th Amendment was to mandate that those born on U.S. soil and who were subject to the full and complete, allegiance-owing, can-be-prosecuted-for treason jurisdiction of the United States, would be citizens.

Breaking it down for the nitwits of the radical left:

In essence, there can be no citizenship without allegiance. Birthright is insufficient to establish citizenship without subjugation to the laws of the United States of America. Having arrived illegally there first, and perhaps preemptive and primary, birthright is their illegal status. Illegal residents can not become citizens. Since their parents are illegal so are their offspring. Without their parents meeting the criteria for citizenship (which includes entering the county legally) and swearing allegiance to the United States before their native country neither they or their children are eligible for citizenship.

Breaking it down for the nitwits of the radical right:

If you're born here,you're a citizen.I know all those future democratic voters scare the hell out of you but thats the constitution pal

 

[CaptainObvious]

Quote from ..........:

Breaking it down for the nitwits of the radical right:

If you're born here,you're a citizen.I know all those future democratic voters scare the hell out of you but thats the constitution pal

I disagree, but even if that's the case, like you radical lefties say, the constitution is a living, ever evolving document. That means the amendment can be changed. One way or another, the anchor baby scam has got to go.

 

[..........]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

One way or another, the anchor baby scam has got to go.

With the Hispanic population growing and voting for democrats that wont happen

Democrats are taking a strong stand now to lock in the Hispanic vote like the 90-95 % black vote they currently have

Old white racist people dieing,minorities who vote Democrat growing,the future doesn't look good for the GOP

Personally I know that amnesty and illegal immigration is bad for the country ,I don't support the kids of illegal aliens being citizens,I don't support gay marriage or repeal of don't ask don't tell. I disagree with all those things but due to the fact that these people vote Democrat by a 3-1 margin or more I support amnesty , letting more Mexicans in and the Gay agenda.Anything to keep racist hateful hypocrite Republicans out I support even if i don't agree with it