Graham Eyes "Birthright Citizenship"

Lindsey's back with another peculiar idea.

Lindsey Graham recently mentioned that he might be  introducing a constitutional amendment restricting (or banning) citizenship to babies of illegal aliens.  “I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here,” Graham said to Greta Van Susteren of Fox News.  “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake ...  We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”

So, I am curious how he and the others who are interested in collaborating with him will contruct this bill and make the process efficient [if that's what you call it]? What's ironic is that this is coming from the same guy that supports amnesty for illegals. He goes on to say,

People come here to have babies. They come here to drop a child. It's called "drop and leave." To have a child in America, they cross the border, they go to the emergency room, have a child, and that child's automatically an American citizen. That shouldn't be the case. That attracts people here for all the wrong reasons.

Graham goes further and says that he is a "fair" guy.  Why don't we just end the Welfare State, Lindsay? Wouldn't that inevitably end illegal immigration and decrease "anchor babies"?  And where the hell does his support for a national ID card fall on all this? Any thoughts? I know this is getting a mixed reaction.

Lindsey Graham Bows To Climate Change

It's obvious Graham has no principles.

Conservative Republican (sarcasm) Lindsey Graham embraces the entire Climate Change hoax.  He has decided to join Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman to support a bill that would tax heat trapping pollution. Graham claims that he was fully convinced when he listend to the scientists talk about the causes and effects of greenhouse gases in his trip to the Arctic region with John MCcain and Hillary Clinton. He also seemed to show little concern over his highly critical Republican collegues.

You can find the jaw-dropping article and his tedious interview with the AP  here.

10/15/09 Nightly Roundup

• Could the definition of a "hate crime" be extended to nonviolent free speech?
• Also on the PC vein, the yakking of pundits  will keep neocon Rush Limbaugh from minority ownership of the St. Louis Rams NFL franchise.
• But while supposed "progressives" gossip about Rush, Lyndon Baines Obama appears poised for a massively escalating of the War on Afghanistan.
• Yet Barack doesn't seem to understand that bereft of sufficient revenue, only inflation can pay for the carnage of his Imperial legions.
• Meanwhile, Ron Paul defends the pro-peace, pro-market position against the "green" warmonger from South Carolina
• Paul's son, too, is a force to be reckoned with.

The People are beginning to Demand Paul-like Representatives

If there's anything Lindsey Graham does for the Republican party, it's that he reminds his constituents that political principles are more important than winning. 

In these videos, Graham shows no shame as he continues to defy principle for compromise in the name of "winning." Since when did morality become all about winning? Regardless, the last time I checked, Mr. Moderate John McCain didn't exactly excite voters in last year's presidential race other than to vote against Democrats. Honestly, I'd rather have one Republican in office who actually stood behind the Constitution than a super majority made up of two face Graham-clowns.

Nothing puts a bigger smile on my face than watching a gym full of people yelling at a neocon that they demand a congressman like Ron Paul who follows the Constitution. The highlight, however, has to be where one gentlemen asks Senator Graham when he's going to pull an Arlen Specter and switch parties. Caution: watch your volume level, the crowd gets rather rowdy when cheering for Constitutional declarations!