REUTERS: Huck denys advocating ammendment for revoking birthright citizenship

Ethek

Ethek

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
2,524
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS202252+08-Jan-2008+PRN20080108

Just like I expected when Hucks handlers commented on the Washington Times story. Huck is, purportedly, denying everything. It's little different from his attack ad that wasn't. He is trying to play both sides.

Hopefully Ron can emphasizes this false start at his victory speech tonight to get some conversation going. 'Huck has denied his position, but as you can see I have been advocating it for 4 decades'

Huckposer needs to be firm up his positions. I truly believe this was a trial balloon with the aim of muddling a Ron Paul win in NH as the election moves to SC.. which has very strong immigration positions.
 
Last edited:
hucksarmy: although it would of been good, im glad he didnt, that makes him so much more jesus's chosen canidate.
 
Good, now that he's publicly stated that he will not support an amendment, here is why Ron Paul's stance on the issue is a good one.

At first when I heard that he supported an amendment to the Constitution to stop birthright citizenship I thought it was a bit extreme for fighting the runaway immigration that we have right now, but then I heard Ron Paul's reason.

He explained in some interview (I don't recall with whom) that the amendment was not clear on the subject of people being here illegally or not. That originally the Amendment was meant for people who were here as "guests" ie. people working on becoming citizens through the legal process set forth. The illegal alien factor was never considered and Ron Paul has said that that part of the Constitution needs some clarification.

And instead of just passing some laws to clarify it like so many politicians like to do, which ends up changing the Constitution without actually going through the correct procedures to change the Constitution, he wants to end the Amendment so that it can be fixed correctly.

Makes sense, and I agree.
 
Rons position has always been, and where sooo many Huck handlers miss the point on is that the 14th amendment has been grossly misinterpreted.

Key phrase 'under the jurisdiction' Anyone that comes here illegally was, arguably, never under our (U.S.) jurisdiction.

Rons amendment just wanted to spell it out.
 
werdd said:
hucksarmy: although it would of been good, im glad he didnt, that makes him so much more jesus's chosen canidate.
Click to expand...

holy shit, are they retarded, jesus's candidate is a fucking liar that will burn in hell (if it does exist)...

but remember they are the same that thought bush was jesus' candidate, how did that work out for them...
 
I honestly think the author of this article is a hack. This is Ron Paul's position as is getting involved in the plight of the jailed border guards. Also it is Ron Paul that has the endorsement of the Minutemen in Iowa. So if you just replaced all the Mike Huckabees with Ron Pauls it would make much more sense.
I just couldn't see quoting Huckabee as saying all kinds of things if someone else said them. That is shoddy journalism. This guy shouldn't even be in the industry is he is this inept.
 
Maybe Huck's focus group got back to him. If you listen carefully from the other night (I think the forum) he slipped up and almost said "focus group". It went something like

Well, focus...the American People
 
What is really funny is over at huck's army forum, they were all saying that this was good and that they agree with mike that birthright citizenship should be ended. Well guess what, now that Mike denys it, they deleted the threads.
 
Airborn said:
What is really funny is over at huck's army forum, they were all saying that this was good and that they agree with mike that birthright citizenship should be ended. Well guess what, now that Mike denys it, they deleted the threads.
Click to expand...

that is amusing. . .tell them to check RP's campaign site. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top