Rand Paul Has Reneged On Birthright Citizenship Too
Print Friendly and PDF
McCain Paul

McCain and Paul: Two Peas in a Treason Lobby Pod

Tuesday was a bad day for those patriots who had hopes for Rand Paul – a group which has not included me for some time

He effectively endorsed Amnesty:

In a conference call that Paul held with reporters later in the day, it became clear that differences between the senator’s plan and the conventional definition of a path to citizenship were few, if they existed at all.
Rand Paul to ‘find a place’ for illegal immigrants By Kevin Robillard Politico 3/19/13

indicated hostility to E-Verify

The other major difference would be the lack of a mandatory E-Verify program, which business owners can use to check workers’ employment status. Paul argued it could lead to business owners discriminating against Hispanic workers.

"...I don’t like the idea of making every business owner a policeman.”

Paul also said his plan would not have a national identification card

and, incredibly, blundered into supporting a bilingual America.

It gets even worse!

Politico gloatingly uncovered

The endorsement of any sort of legal status for illegal immigrants amounts to a remarkable reversal for Paul, who in his first month in the Senate proposed a constitutional amendment to end birthright citizenship. (On Tuesday’s conference call, Paul said a secure border would make the amendment unnecessary.)
(My emphasis.)

Of course this is utterly untrue. The well-documented business of birth tourism would continue to flourish. (One Old Vet had a fresh example this week) The “Anchor baby” phenomenon amongst the illegal population already here would continue give those families stronger access to financial and legal benefits. And the peculiar situation where the children of women quite legitimately living in America for short periods – on company overseas postings for example – get the windfall asset of U.S. citizenship, now very rare with other  countries, would also continue. As would the catastrophic political consequences.

It could be that Paul simply does not grasp the technicalities, an idea put forward by Peter Brimelow and by Federale.

Or it could simply be that he has been bought, which is what I think.


Print Friendly and PDF