U.S. citizenship is not an accident of gestational geography. by Billy Roper
(libertarian)
Monday, May 3, 2010
Congressman Duncan Hunter of California is quite correct in saying that U.S. citizenship is not an accident of birth, or merely a question of geography. This is the same discussion which I had recently with Arkansas Democrat Gazette political editor Bill Simmons, who questioned my intent to limit or end access to taxpayer funded education and social services, as well as health care beyond emergency services, for illegal immigrants and their children, if elected governor of Arkansas through my ongoing write-in campaign.
On purely humanitarian grounds, if illegal immigrants should be deported, and by definition they should be, as the majority of American citizens agree, then their children should be deported with them in order to not divide families.
The Fox News article quoting Hunter stated that the 14th amendment granted citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., but I disagree. I'm not alone. As a matter of fact, Senator Howard of Michigan, the author of the Citizenship Clause, stated during the original debate over the amendment that the clause excluded AmerIndians who maintained their tribal ties, and "persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers." Other senators who supported this view included Cowan, Johnson, and Trumbull, who was the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman. Sen. Howard described 'jurisdiction' as "the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now" and if the U. S. possessed a "full and complete jurisdiction" over the child-meaning that the child's parents were both American citizens. By this standard President Obama, even if given the benefit of the doubt that he was born in the U.S., is not a legal citizen of this country.
The Citizenship Clause's meaning was tested regarding whether it meant that anyone born in the United States would be a citizen regardless of the parents' nationality in Elk vs. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that even if they are born in the United States, whether on a reservation or not, the children of AmerIndians are not U.S. citizens.
If the 14th amendment is murky on the issue of citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants, or if subsequent court decisions have made it appear so, then Congress holds the power to exclude anchor babies from the rights of U.S. citizenship through explicit legislation to that effect. Whether it has the will to accompany that power is another question entirely.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 18
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Billy Roper only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Billy Roper is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Apparently, Mr. Roper is yet another American citizen who thinks that the Constitution means what he thinks it means, not what it actually says. Let's go to the 14th Amendment itself:
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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Well, now, that seems pretty straightforward. So where is the part that excludes American Indians from citizenship? It seems to be missing.
Or perhaps it was never there?
I think it's particularly notable that Mr. Roper is quoting an authority, the very same "Senator Howard of Michigan", who was a 19th century senator, not a 21st or even a 20th century senator. Sen. Howard attempted--and failed--to get that very same language to which Roper refers inserted into the same 14th amendment which Roper claims doesn't really say what it actually says. From his Wikipedia entry:
During Reconstruction Howard participated in debate over the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, arguing for including the phrase and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Howard said: [INDENT][The 14th amendment] will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person.
So I guess we should understand that because the late Sen. Howard failed to get his language inserted in the amendment, it therefore governs that same amendment anyway.
If this is the kind of thinking that typifies the Nationalist Party, true patriots should stay well away from it.
Posted By: Billy Roper
Date: May 4, 2010 12:53:14 AM
Elk vs. Wilkins was the U.S. Supreme Court's decision regarding the lack of U.S. citizenship of AmerIndians born in the U.S.. It was based on the amendment as adopted and ratified, not on any additional or different language which might have more explicitly expressed the citizenship clause author's intent.
Quite terrible of Howard to have been born in the 19th century, I know. So outdated and unmodern of him. At least he had the good taste not to have been born in the even more archaic 18th century like that un p.c. Jefferson guy. Obviously, only 20th or better yet, 21st century Senators should be accepted as authoritative.
I understand that many readers here have a lot more respect, justifiably, for the opinion of Mr. Ron Paul, than for my own. So, I'll point out that his campaign agrees with the Nationalist Party of America and myself on the correct interpretation of the 14th amendment as it applies to anchor babies.
"The correct interpretation of the 14th Amendment is that an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby."
You don't have to agree with EACH and EVERY ting Ron Paul preaches. In this particular case of anchor babies, Ron Paul is wrong. In almost everything else, he seems to be right.
US citizenship should be granted by BIRTH. Otherwise we will all be discriminating against fellow Americans. Just picture children of the slaves sent back to Africa because slavery was abolished. I guess your philosophy is that of the pigs in George Orwell's Animal Farm where "Some animals are MORE EQUALTHAN OTHERS". Any baby born here is a US CITIZEN. Otherwise ALL HUMAS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME HUMANS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.
What is the damage that these anchor babies are doing? If the issue that these anchor babies are generating is the use of the SOCIAL services, then the issue is THE SOCIAL SERVICES which shouldn't be there.
...also, with regards to the jurisdiction argument, that is complete b.s. Anybody that commits a crime or a civil infraction in the US whether that person is illegal, tourist, on a business visa, or whatever status is subject to the US jurisdiction. When you claim that the jurisdiction of an illegal immigrant in the US is their country of origin that implies that if a foreign whether here legally or not commits a murder in the US he should go to trial in their country of origin instead of here. Therefore a person born here, regardless of where their parents are from IS A US CITIZEN UNDER THE US JURISDICTION.
Posted By: Dan Steward
Date: May 5, 2010 02:56:34 AM
This is more proof of gooberment problems being caused by a gooberment solution to them. There is no "immigration problem". There is instead a welfare problem. If you make Big Bother the only game in town when it comes to most charity, as well as make charity a long term (thus making it a very unfixable) fix, then this is what you get. This isn't proof that we don't need immigrants, it's proof we don't need government.
People who either hate or through gross ignorance don't understand the free market, can't claim to be friends of it under any circumstances if they have a problem with people coming here to work. It is downright wrong to interfere with the very basic freedom of people to privately contract for labor at an agreed upon price with anyone they wish, regardless of what side of an imaginary line drawn in the sand they were born on.
It is disgusting to watch what should otherwise be intelligent people, literally foam at the mouth because someone who looks or talks different than them, is trying to keep their very family from starving by working for a living and keeping wages competitive, thereby improving the chance for that job to not be instead filled overseas.
It is equally disgusting because it is an accepted form of racism. You know, the vile credo of control freaks and madmen. Precisely the make up of too many agents of the state. Men & women who would stoop so low as to ever dare infuse bigotry into the argument just to promote their petty rotten agenda.
Posted By: Billy Roper
Date: May 5, 2010 04:39:41 AM
So, are you gentlemen suggesting that the problem is not that illegal immigrants fill up and dumb down classrooms and slow the educational process, but rather that the problem is that public education exists?
Are you suggesting that the disproportionate and burdensomely high number of illegal immigrants who are in our criminal justice system for committing violent crimes, which is very expensive not to mention unwelcome, is not the problem, but rather that the existence of the criminal justice system is the problem?
I understand the free market well enough to understand that when you add a flood of unskilled workers to any economy, the going wage for unskilled labor decreases. That's fine for the bosses, but no so good for the workers who formerly were able to feed their families by getting a living wage for their work, and they are driven out of the job market by the newcomers, who are treated as cheap labor just as the Nubians were when the ancient Egyptians brought them in to help lay some brick, and just as were the Africans who were brought into the antebellum south to pick cotton. Then, of course, the supporters of continued immigration who profit from the cheap labor, whether Egyptian Pharoahs, plantation overseers, or modern day poultry industry executives, whine that noone else is willing to do the job that these immigrants do at the wage they are willing to do it. I guess they have a point, at that.
Of course, the Japanese don't import foreign workers, and yet they don't have to do without hot wings. But then, they seem interested in preserving their cultural identity and national pride, something which I suppose you would find "bigoted, petty, and rotten". Too bad that the majority of Americans on this side of that "imaginary line drawn in the sand" disagree vehemently with you. To them, true patriotism means loving your country, caring about more than the economic implications of a situation, and defending our borders. If citizenship is so cheap, then what is its value?
Yes, the problem is the current social government. The problem is NOT illegal immigration. But YOUR problem is one of RACISM and XENOPHOBIA with your comment that illegal immigrants "dumb down classrooms". I guess we Americans were dumb down by immigrants like Albert Einstein or Nicola Tesla. Or maybe people like Vikram Pandit was also too dumb for our school system that he completed a Bachelor and a Master in Electrical Engineering, an MBA and a PhD in Finance to become today the CEO of Citigroup. Or maybe Segey Brin dumb down classrooms when he came to America from Russia at the age of six and later became one of the founders of Google. Or was it Jerry Yang, born in Taipei too dumb that he has a PhD and founded Yahoo. Or is it that the Hispanics are the dumb ones? Like Roberto Goizueta born in Havana Cuba and as the CEO of Coca Cola in the 80’s and 90’s gave the brand a global vision. Or is it Mexicans the dumb ones? Like Hector Ruiz who crossed the Mexico-US border EVERY DAY to attend high school in Texas from which he graduated valedictorian just three years after learning English to later get a BS, MS and PhD in Electrical Engineering and later become the CEO of Advanced Micro Systems.
Deporting “anchor babies” is un-american. What you propose is sending American citizens to other countries. If you have children and one of them has a baby with an illegal immigrant, I guess you propose deporting your grandchildren. Or maybe you want to prevent your children from engaging in sexual relationships with people of other colors? Even the Bush family has George P Bush the son of Jeb Bush and his Mexican wife.
In a true free society, there would be no barriers to labor like social security, payroll taxes, IRS, workers comp, medicare, etc… Those are the evils and the root of the problems.
With regards to crime, most of it is drug related, which is another government intrusion problem into what people can put in their bodies. The other problem with crime is that the more restrictive you put immigration laws, the less opportunities these immigrants have of becoming legal and the more likely they will be drawn to crime.
When a REAL crime is committed (like theft, rape, murder, assault), regardless of who did it and from where they come from, they must pay for the crime. To single out that ALL crime comes from the illegal immigrants is pure racism and xenophobia.
If given the chance, you probably want to send all black people back to Africa too. Statistically you probably would argue that most black people commit crimes too. You would like some ethnic cleansing like Hitler did in Germany.
There is NOTHING to be afraid of people who want to exchange labor. The big majority of immigrants whether legal or not come here because in their respective countries they don’t have the freedom that we Americans have here even though our Freedoms are also been limited with each day.
Yes, the problem is the current social government. The problem is NOT illegal immigration. But YOUR problem is one of RACISM and XENOPHOBIA with your comment that illegal immigrants "dumb down classrooms". I guess we Americans were dumb down by immigrants like Albert Einstein or Nicola Tesla. Or maybe people like Vikram Pandit was also too dumb for our school system that he completed a Bachelor and a Master in Electrical Engineering, an MBA and a PhD in Finance to become today the CEO of Citigroup. Or maybe Segey Brin dumb down classrooms when he came to America from Russia at the age of six and later became one of the founders of Google. Or was it Jerry Yang, born in Taipei too dumb that he has a PhD and founded Yahoo. Or is it that the Hispanics are the dumb ones? Like Roberto Goizueta born in Havana Cuba and as the CEO of Coca Cola in the 80’s and 90’s gave the brand a global vision. Or is it Mexicans the dumb ones? Like Hector Ruiz who crossed the Mexico-US border EVERY DAY to attend high school in Texas from which he graduated valedictorian just three years after learning English to later get a BS, MS and PhD in Electrical Engineering and later become the CEO of Advanced Micro Systems.
Deporting “anchor babies” is un-american. What you propose is sending American citizens to other countries. If you have children and one of them has a baby with an illegal immigrant, I guess you propose deporting your grandchildren. Or maybe you want to prevent your children from engaging in sexual relationships with people of other colors? Even the Bush family has George P Bush the son of Jeb Bush and his Mexican wife.
In a true free society, there would be no barriers to labor like social security, payroll taxes, IRS, workers comp, medicare, etc… Those are the evils and the root of the problems.
With regards to crime, most of it is drug related, which is another government intrusion problem into what people can put in their bodies. The other problem with crime is that the more restrictive you put immigration laws, the less opportunities these immigrants have of becoming legal and the more likely they will be drawn to crime.
When a REAL crime is committed (like theft, rape, murder, assault), regardless of who did it and from where they come from, they must pay for the crime. To single out that ALL crime comes from the illegal immigrants is pure racism and xenophobia.
If given the chance, you probably want to send all black people back to Africa too. Statistically you probably would argue that most black people commit crimes too. You would like some ethnic cleansing like Hitler did in Germany.
There is NOTHING to be afraid of people who want to exchange labor. The big majority of immigrants whether legal or not come here because in their respective countries they don’t have the freedom that we Americans have here even though our Freedoms are also been limited with each day.
Posted By: Dan Steward
Date: May 5, 2010 10:59:38 AM
Nationalist Party, Billy? As in national socialism? What do we know from history about a "National Socialist Party"? Did there exist such a political party in Germany around 1933-1945 or thereabouts that ruled the roost?
Would you say that this party was better known as the Nazi Party? Are there political organizations out there that refer to themselves as a "Nationalist" party that adhere to the same ideas that the Nazis do? You know, big government, big military presence, fear and hatred of so-called "non-ayrans".
You very wrongly assume way too much when you state with absolutely no proof to back it up, that people simply because they were born on an opposite side of some imaginary line, will make other kids all look stupid in school. Are you kidding me?
Could you tell us a bit about the link below? I'm no fan of the ADL or their pals in the SPLC as they love to wrongfully lump peaceful Libertarian folks that don't agree with big government in the same vein with neo-nazis, The Klan, and all that. Yet, they seem to know about some very disturbing and violent racist organizations they claim you belong or used to belong to.
Your game is that of establishing the scapegoat for all of society's presumed ills. It keeps a person from actually having to ever come up with any real solutions while finding new ways to inflict ever more cruelty on your fellow human beings. Literally a control freak's paradise.
They are you and you are them. They are your fellow human beings and should you ever decide to set aside your unwarranted hate, you can then make the conscious choice to live free and be able to solve problems instead of blame others for them.
Dan:
Wow, thanks for the link. If Mr. Roper is the same Mr. Roper from that link, then at least we now know where he is coming from.
Let’s see from you’re the link that you provided: "Roper, born in 1972, is a onetime skinhead and a former high school history instructor” and from Nolan Chart’s about the Author: “Billy Roper is a 37 year-old former High School history teacher”. So we have a match in the age and his former profession.
Let’s see another one from the link you provided: “Billy Roper, head of Arkansas-based White Revolution" and from an article that he wrote in the Nolan Chart: “Considering Arkansas Gubernatorial Run: http://www.nolanchart.com/article7318.html. We have a match in the state.
Just coincidence? I hope so.
Billy:
If you are the same Billy shown on the link provided by Dan, I fully support your 1st amendment right to be a racist and have hatred towards people who are not white. However, your right ends if your desire is to create a police state that will round up illegal immigrants and deport them because that is the start of ethnic cleaning. You can rant all you want about people with different colors, but you can’t use police force to enforce bigotry or make them criminal just for not being white.
I see you have a step-daughter. It may happen that your step daughter falls in love with a black guy or Mexican guy and have a baby. If it happened to George HW Bush who currently has grandchildren like George P Bush with different colors, it can also happen to you. There is nothing you can do about it once your step-daughter becomes an adult. If that happens, your grandchildren will have some color, you will hate your daughter for having sex with a black guy and you will hate your own grandchildren and if instead of a black guy she hooks up with an illegal immigrant you may even want your own grandchildren deported. Don’t hate, it is bad for your health. We are all humans in this world and all humans need love.
Dan:
Wow, thanks for the link. If Mr. Roper is the same Mr. Roper from that link, then at least we now know where he is coming from.
Let’s see from you’re the link that you provided: "Roper, born in 1972, is a onetime skinhead and a former high school history instructor” and from Nolan Chart’s about the Author: “Billy Roper is a 37 year-old former High School history teacher”. So we have a match in the age and his former profession.
Let’s see another one from the link you provided: “Billy Roper, head of Arkansas-based White Revolution" and from an article that he wrote in the Nolan Chart: “Considering Arkansas Gubernatorial Run: http://www.nolanchart.com/article7318.html. We have a match in the state.
Just coincidence? I hope so.
Billy:
If you are the same Billy shown on the link provided by Dan, I fully support your 1st amendment right to be a racist and have hatred towards people who are not white. However, your right ends if your desire is to create a police state that will round up illegal immigrants and deport them because that is the start of ethnic cleaning. You can rant all you want about people with different colors, but you can’t use police force to enforce bigotry or make them criminal just for not being white.
I see you have a step-daughter. It may happen that your step daughter falls in love with a black guy or Mexican guy and have a baby. If it happened to George HW Bush who currently has grandchildren like George P Bush with different colors, it can also happen to you. There is nothing you can do about it once your step-daughter becomes an adult. If that happens, your grandchildren will have some color, you will hate your daughter for having sex with a black guy and you will hate your own grandchildren and if instead of a black guy she hooks up with an illegal immigrant you may even want your own grandchildren deported. Don’t hate, it is bad for your health. We are all humans in this world and all humans need love.
Posted By: Billy Roper
Date: May 6, 2010 12:00:08 AM
Trying to muddle through the grammar and spelling you use, I cannot with certainty tell whether you are fans of the ADL, or just choose to believe them when they villify people with whom you disagree. I can tell, however, that you promote illegal drug legalization and illegal immigrant legalization, so that makes you more closely associated with illegality than I ever have been. I am not a Supremacist. My views on race are the same as Thomas Jefferson's. But, of course, you are the ones who want to make this discussion about race, for the same reason that some label the Tea Party activists as racists: because you believe that ad hominem attacks are effective. They aren't. The only weapons you have at your disposal are censorship and intimidation. Neither work on me. By the way, I wonder what political organizations, aside from Nolan Chart, you are associated with?
Posted By: Dan Steward
Date: May 6, 2010 01:27:12 AM
Well Mr. Roper, you've got me there. My grammar skills are not great enough to allow me to claim status as an expert scribe, by any measure of the imagination. As for the rest of your post, you've fallen a bit flat, yet you seem to have at least slightly stuck to the subject. The "Dan Steward" you mentioned was not me unless you asked it a question with my name in it. Of course that seems a bit low ball.
That is kind of old school 1980's fascist in my book. Sort of like when a person disagrees with the party line and the traditional nationalist knee-jerk response is "he must be one of those ________ ". That dog won't hunt, Billy. I'm interested in honest debate and I feel I can even learn from someone filled as filled with hate as you. Just keep in mind that if you just want to sling mud at me or stray from topic, I will at my leisure, choose to ignore your posts.
You may even learn something useful from a fellow like me. I appear to have learned quite a lot about you. You like to hold yourself out as a libertarian, although you absolutely love the power of the state and it's military. Your website had flags of the various branches of the U.S. military on it.
From your website: Are We Hateful Racists?
By Billy Roper
The highest law of nature is loyalty to one’s own kind. A race is a group of biologically and genetically related individuals, like an extended family, and just as it’s natural to love your family more than other people’s families, it is also natural to love your race more than other races, even at their expense or to their exclusion. If someone or something threatens to harm your family or your race, it is perfectly right and natural to “hate” that threat, and to attempt to eliminate it.
Every day, both in the U.S. and around the world, Whites are becoming a smaller percentage of the population, and the demographic projections are frightening. Less than eight percent of the world’s population are White, compared to one-third of the world’s population being White a century ago. Only two percent of the world’s population consists of White females of childbearing age or less. By 2050, Whites will be a minority in the United States. Today, less that twenty-three percent of Americans under the age of eighteen are White.
What White Revolution promotes is the survival of the White race. If we have to be “hateful” and “racist” in order to keep from being driven to extinction, then behaving in any other manner would be suicidally stupid. As far as the term “racist” goes, despite the fact that the jews and the controlled media have attempted to turn it into a pejorative, it’s still just a descriptive adjective which means “one who is an advocate of or for one’s own people”, like Jesse Jackson is for his people, or Ariel Sharon was for his people. When people accuse me of being a “racist”, all I can do is smile and say “Historically speaking, what’s the alternative?
Lots of inaccuracies & a few real whoppers there, Billy. Your "bio" here on nolanchart.com seems to omit some awful racist stuff that you truly believe, in favor of making you appear to be some sort of Jeffersonian Liberal. That you just ain't, mister. Your entire philosophy is steeped in big government. And since the military is nothing more than a makework program for thugs, your support of it leadfs me to think that you are an advocate of the welfare state.
You just like to pick and choose which types of welfare queens you like and even then I feel that you tend to base a lot of that, entirely on the skin color of the recipient. I suppose in good conscience you may no longer speak in terms of any fairness, in the future.
When it comes to the ADL, I've been quite clear about my stand on that, you just set it aside and drew your own silly conclusion. I believe my statement was:
I'm no fan of the ADL or their pals in the SPLC as they love to wrongfully lump peaceful Libertarian folks that don't agree with big government in the same vein with neo-nazis, The Klan, and all that. Yet, they seem to know about some very disturbing and violent racist organizations they claim you belong or used to belong to.
No mincing of words there, Mr. Roper. Why cloud the issue with nonsense unless you've got nothing? Let me repeat myself so you understand. I don't like the ADL. I don't like the SPLC. MY reasons are that they lie and say that you are allied with people in the real freedom movement.
Posted By: Dan Steward
Date: May 6, 2010 02:03:28 AM
I can tell, however, that you promote illegal drug legalization and illegal immigrant legalization, so that makes you more closely associated with illegality than I ever have been. I am not a Supremacist. My views on race are the same as Thomas Jefferson's. But, of course, you are the ones who want to make this discussion about race, for the same reason that some label the Tea Party activists as racists: because you believe that ad hominem attacks are effective. They aren't. The only weapons you have at your disposal are censorship and intimidation. Neither work on me. By the way, I wonder what political organizations, aside from Nolan Chart, you are associated with?
Are your views on freedom the same as those of Jefferson?
As for my views on "drug legalization", the drug war is a failure. Every single attempt by every government everywhere in the word, throughout history has failed to end the use any substance by making it illegal. Perhaps if you act as though it doesn't exist, it may yet go away.
You claim a degree in history yet have not even learned such a simple fact.
Laws & illegality, now there's a good one. Who gives a flip if something is legal or not when it comes to it being actually morally right to oppose it's illegality. Laws are just words written on paper anyway. I don't aggress against my neighbor plain and simple and I shall plod along as though that will suffice to make you happy, Billy. If his actions do not pick my pocket nor break my leg, I let him alone. I do not choose to make him a target to satisfy a vile agenda.
If that does not satisfy you, so be it. I choose to live as free as I possibly can in an age of government as nothing more than a vehicle for emptying out the pockets of my fellow human beings while pushing them around.
Looks like you've done some digging on me to counter what is easily available info on you. Sorry you couldn't find enough on me to make me look like a schmuck. If you like you can look up a girl I dated about 27 years ago that I broke up with to go with another girl that liked to feed me and was an excellent cook. She'll tell you I was a schmuck.
I am not affiliated with any political organizations that I am aware of "counting" in your book. I do not feel that there is a political solution to things. Just waiting for Big Bother to topple from it's own weight to be replaced by a 100% voluntary society is what makes my nipples ripple.
Thank you for reading my articles. I hope you found them informative and that you have learned enough from them to give up your poorly disguised racist ways. The leftist orifices at the ADL & SPLC have given up on you, I fear. I disagree and feel that you can be redeemed (those guys are stupid anyway). Please also remember that a degree doesn't make you brilliant. Working for real freedom does.
Posted By: Billy Roper
Date: May 6, 2010 09:55:31 AM
When I registered here, I answered each question in the Nolan Chart survey as truthfully as possible, and have moved forward from there. If I should not be defined as a libertarian, then the failure belongs to the survey, not to myself. In the interests of cordiality, allow me to express that regardless of our obviously vast differences of opinion on most issues, the fact remains that we both feel that this government we currently are subjects of does not have our best interests at heart, and anticipate a time when it might fail. My personal opinion is that what matters so much isn't whether a people have a big government or a small government, but whether they have control of their own destiny as a people, and the power of self-determination and self-rule in whatever manner they see fit, something which I believe Americans of all races lack today, and something which Jefferson endorsed when he said: "Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them."
Censorship: NO WAY!! I fully support your 1st amendment right to be a racist, a bigot, and be hateful in the same way I support peoples right to use drugs. You are the one doing damage to yourself by being hateful.
Intimidation: There is no possible way of intimidating anybody with just texts on a web post. Intimidation will usually involve physical threats or written threats if I know where you live which I don't. So intimidation is almost impossible here.
What you propose is a big military state similar to dictatorships from the Nazi Germany. That is unacceptable. All humans are EQUAL.
Al Shartop and Jesse Jackson racists? YES, they are. I absolutely agree with you there. They probably believe that all white people are bad and they ofter talk with hatred towards white people and that makes them racists. So are you.
ADL? I have no clue what that is.
Affirmative action programs? They are reverse discrimination and those programs are wrong.
White race disappearing from the Earth? Yes. It is happening. Nothing you can do about the recessive gene. It just nature. If you believe in God, that is how God made the white race. If you don't believe in God, that is how nature is. White genes are recessive.
I feel for you if your step-daughert marries a black guy when she becomes an adult. You are going to suffer.
Be as racist and as hateful as you want. You are the one who is going to suffer the consequences.
Posted By: Billy Roper
Date: May 6, 2010 01:09:40 PM
You don't know who the ADL is? Really? That's kind of surprising, for someone who reads and posts on a political site. Wow. Okaaayyy...
The Anti Defamation League of B'nai Brith is a Jewish organization dedicated to promoting Jewish interests. Google them, and you can read a lot of articles about them, both pro and con. I'll let you form your opinion on them and their agenda, just as you have about me and mine.
Posted By: Billy Roper
Date: May 7, 2010 08:14:45 AM
"Our Undocumented White House Resident
By JB Williams
CanadaFreePress "I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country." This quote is taken directly from Vattel's book on the Law of Nations, which has been a world recognized and time honored reference guide to understanding "natural law," and the natural birthrights of national citizenship recognized by all civilized nations for more than two-hundred and fifty years. "
According to Wikipedia on Vattel, "Vattel elucidated the "Golden Rule of Sovereigns": One cannot complain when he is treated as he treats others."
This is especially apropos when discussing, for example, Mexican public officials complaining about how their citizens are treated as illegal immigrants in America, considering the harsh manner in which Mexico routinely treats their illegal immigrants.
Posted By: j r studio
Date: May 9, 2010 08:57:54 PM
If we go by the "Son of Sam" law, wouldn't anchor babies be profiting from their parents' crimes of illegal immigration and therefore deemed as foreign nationals?
I have a question about illegals having babies while in the
US. It seems to me that if a mother is here illegally she is commiting
a crime, and if a baby is born to her while in that commission of a
crime then the baby is illegal. If that is so, then how can the baby
be an automatic citizen of the US? If a citizen is commiting a crime,
and in the process of that crime they commit another one then it adds
to the crime and the prosecution of that person. Should it not be the
same for any crime and any criminal? After all many mothers delibertly
come here just before their baby is born, to have anchor babies, not
for the baby but for themselves. Am I wrong on this?
Posted By: Billy Roper
Date: May 11, 2010 10:04:32 AM
Rene,
I agree with you, and think that you've hit on a major point that liberals masquerading as libertarians often want to ignore. Thank you for your input. A couple of members here have e-mailed me asking me why I didn't respond more quickly to the attacks on me here, so I'll share with everyone what I was up to last weekend:
Over the Mother’s Day weekend, Arkansas write-in gubernatorial candidate Billy Roper campaigned in North-Central Arkansas, where he met with leading activists in the Baxter County Tea Party organization, who had over 3,000 attendees at their meeting there last month in Mountain Home. In Stone County, Roper was invited to stand before the audience at a live folk music concert in Mtn. View and was introduced as the candidate of choice for patriotic Arkansans with traditional conservative values. The candidate, accompanied by his family, toured the areas of Van Buren County hardest hit by recent tornadoes, and pitched in with providing food supplies for some of the affected residents in the Scotland area. Campaigning in Conway County, where Roper enjoys the support of some rising local political stars, an announcement was made that “Roper for Governor” campaign T-shirts will soon be made available to the public.* Overall, the generosity received in terms of monetary campaign donations, pledges to make copies of and distribute campaign fliers, and promised votes provided a very warm welcome, indeed.
This weekend, come out and meet Gubernatorial candidate Billy Roper in Atkins, Pope County, at the annual “Pickle Fest” celebration!
*”Roper For Governor” campaign T-shirts available soon! Size L or XL, multi-color, high quality, $10 each to: P.O. Box 2024, Russellville, AR. 72811
Rene: that argument that if the mother is illegal and the child was born here while the mother was illegal so the child must me illegal is a complete B.S. argument. That implies that if my mom is convicted of drug dealing, or convicted of a murder, then I must be convicted of a murder also. Putting conditions on citizenship restrict freedoms of all Americans. Deporting an anchor babie is kicking Americans out of your own contry.
What Mr. Roper fails to tell you is that he also wants to "deport" out of the country the black people and other non-white races even though they have been born Americans. His agenda is another one. You start with anchor babies, but where does it ends? He REAL GOAL IS that he wants the US citizenship ONLY to those white-men who serve in his military. So if you don't serve your nation as a slave to the state, you are not a US citizen. Don't let him fool you.
Posted By: EJ Moosa
Date: May 11, 2010 03:44:23 PM
Sometimes it seems to become too complex of an issue. I suggest an easy approach. If an illegal act occurs that results in citizenship, then that citizenship should be null and void. Consider it as evidence obtained from an illegal search and seizure.
So, if your parents had to break the law to be here for you to be conceived/born then your citizenship via birth is null and void. There are still other ways for you to obtain citizenship.
This can apply with out regard to anyone's race, color, creed or national origin.
If an illegal immigrant woman is raped by an legal American Citizen or an American woman is raped by an illegal immigrant a horrible crime is commited. If the woman decides to have the child, then why would that child be deported. The child is still an American Citizen. What about an American teenager who is raped by an American 20-year old? A crime was also commited there. So the child is also a criminal and illegal?
You have to remember that every law passed takes freedom away from everyone. It is the law of unintended consequences.
Example of unintended consequences:
A recent state law was passed against public demonstrations at funerals by radical groups (groups similar to Billy Roper's White Supremasits nasty groups). These groups were having demonstrations outside of cemeteries but in public property with racist propaganda and anti-gay propaganda. Many people disliked their protests so they passed a law banning the practice so nobody could bring anything political to within a certain distance from cemeteries while someone was burried. I disliked their message but the law banning their message was wrong. What was the unintended consequence? A married couple was invited to a funeral by the family of the person who died. They had anti-war bumper stickers on their van that they use to go everywhere. The police arrested them and put them in jail under such law even though they were invited by the family to be there.
THERE ARE ALWAYS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES TO THESE LAWS. The baby is AMERICAN regardless. Lets not make any more stupid LAWS.
j. r. studio said: "If we go by the 'Son of Sam' law, wouldn't anchor babies be profiting from their parents' crimes of illegal immigration and therefore deemed as foreign nationals?"
MORE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES: Then in that case, the relatives of the people who profited from the illegal slave trade would also be deemed as foreign nationals. Also, if gives black people reasons for reparations for slavery because they claim that the white people profited from their ancestors and thus the white people owe them. Reparations for slavery is also wrong. Crimes were commited. Some people profited, some people didn't. That does no mean we should have re-dristribution or relocalizations to other countries at any level because if that would be the argument then we will all have to return all the land to the native americans and we should all be sent to our respective places.
We are ALL American. Every one of these stupid laws divide us.
Posted By: Billy Roper
Date: May 12, 2010 02:22:48 AM
It's interesting that you bring up Native Americans. I wonder, based on their experience with the issue, what advice they might offer us on how we should respond to illegal immigration. Maybe you liberaltarians are correct, and they should have been content to declare that their imaginary tribal boundaries and hunting grounds were meaningless, and that Whites coming in looking for a better life were just enriching their cultures and spreading wonderful diversity. They just came here to do the jobs that Native Americans weren't willing to do, right?
The problem with practicing extreme individualism is that you get overwhelmed by those who don't.
