Ok, I am officially mad as hell this evening. So as a public service announcement for all you leftards… You can impeach Bush now, and I am not going to say boo.

The President of the United States is pandering to a bunch of fucking third world assholes who are illegally coming into the US and demanding equal rights… I would call that high crimes and misdemeanors.

President Bush, We don’t want your fucking Amnesty plan. Don’t Do It. It’s WRONG for America.

Fuck it, your not going to listen to those of us who have been screaming about the borders for over a year now. You’ve been consistently in Mexico’s pocket.

You can just lick this gringo’s hairy ass crack.

Also Posting:

Technorati tags: ,

Sphere: Related Content


Filed Under: Dumbass!, Global War On Terror, Homeland Security

Trackback URL


Comments

3 Comments so far

  1. MOMinuteman on March 14, 2007 22:44

    “Ok, I am officially mad as hell this evening. So as a public service announcement for all you leftards… You can impeach Bush now, and I am not going to say boo.”

    Same goes for me…

  2. Bob Thom on March 15, 2007 10:38

    Anchor Babies

    I recently received a letter from Senator Ted Stevens(R-AK) in response to a concern of mine relating to immigration policy. His letter ends with “the associated problem with children born in the United States with illegal immigrant parents-children who are U.S. citizens!” I would like to call his and your attention to the U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, Article I: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.” I wish to be enlightened as to how persons or children of persons who broke into this country can be considered “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States in regard to the right of Citizenship.

    I believe that should the writers of this XIV Amendment, Article I, have meant this Article to be interpreted and read as “all persons born within the limits of the United States regardless of the legal status of parents” it would have been so written.

    Should his support for the “Anchor Baby” interpretation of the XIV Amendment be based upon the opinion rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court, and he is thus duty bound to its support, I would like to point out several U.S. Supreme Court opinions he would also have been bound to support by this reasoning:

    Dred Scott
    Fugitive Slave Act

    I would like to leave you with these words-

    To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is “good justice is broad jurisdiction”, and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.”
    –Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:277

    Robert Thom
    Sitka
    747-5455

  3. Kristopher on March 15, 2007 15:46

    Anchor babies are easy to deal with.

    The parents are felons. The local CDC takes the children, and adopts them out.

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind

If your comment/trackback doesn't show up, please refer to the Comment & Trackback Policy Page.

Bad Behavior has blocked 3618 access attempts in the last 7 days.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License.

This site is created and edited using Dreamweaver 8.
Posts are created using Windows Live Writer.
We suggest viewing this site using Firefox at 1280 x 1024.