John Kyl (R-racist) and that "moderate" Lindsey Graham (R-two faced) have publicly called for the repeal of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. You know, this one:
Section 1. 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.
"The 14th Amendment [has been] interpreted to provide that if you are born in the United States, you are a citizen no matter what," Kyl said. "So the question is, if both parents are here illegally, should there be a reward for their illegal behavior?"
Kyl said Congress should hold hearings and invite constitutional experts to look at the state of the 14th Amendment....
So, equal protection. That needs to go in Republican land. Also the idea that African-Americans are actually one person rather than 3/5ths. Buh-bye. That should help the Republicans with the next few elections and with the census-based Congressional redistricting coming up. But check out section 4 of the Amendment:
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Anyone think that there might be some slave-owners in the family history of the modern GOP? They might like the idea of getting a government windfall for the loss of their "property" back in the late 1880s. They may not notice that the repeal of the first section might let the government relieve them of property without due process until it's too late, but that seems typical of Republican (non)thinking.
So, other than the stated immigrant target of this push against the 14th, who else stands to lose more than all of us? Loss of equal protection seems to target the LGBT community. The loss of African American representation and even voting rights might just be a slap at the guy in the White House. (pssst....he's.....black, you know)
Mr. Kyl cries crocodile tears:
..the illegal immigrants who are brought to Phoenix for distribution throughout the country are held in drop houses. They are mistreated, horribly treated.
But does Mr. Kyl want to actually stem the flow of illegals into the US by going after the employers who break the law by hiring them? Uh, no. They're ok because they're Americans (meaning white Republicans). But the people who jump fences, brave deserts and swim rivers in search of a better life? They're criminals. Those people should be denied the protection of our laws, rounded up and sent back where they came from. And along the way, if the Republican party (the 'party of freedom') could benefit from removing some freedom from the people, well, I'm sure he never thought of that.
I know this will never happen. It's so impossible to amend the Constitution (and that's a good thing) that a repeal of the 14th would never get anywhere. But what makes my blood run cold is the lack of civic knowledge in this country; people in the states of these two nutballs hear "no more illegal citizen kids", nod their heads, moo and agree without any independent thought of their own. Thinking of consequences (beyond winning elections) just doesn't happen in the Republican party or its supporters anymore. (See Iraq war, Bush tax cuts, Sara Palin) Teh Stoopid, it burns. But it also scares me.