Hillary the Mom Candidate

"We've never had a mother who ever ran or was elected president." – Hillary Clinton as a guest on the television show The View on December 20, 2006

With this one quote Hillary Clinton has done it again. She’s rewritten history. It’s unlikely that any living person today remembers Victoria Woodhull. Do an internet search on her name and you’ll see that she ran for president in 1872. There are no indications that she was a mother, but in 1884 Belva Ann Bennet McNall Lockwood ran for the presidency of the United States and she was a mother. Not only was she a mother, but she was also a single mother having been widowed and left to raise her daughter alone after just 7 years of marriage.

Woodhull has several credits in American history. She was a champion of the American suffrage movement, she and her sister, Tennessee Celeste Claflin, became the first female Wall Street brokers on the New York Stock Exchange, she was a newspaper owner & editor, a free love advocate, but above all she was a mother. Not only was she the first woman and mother to run for president, but she ran with Frederick Douglass as her vice-presidential candidate.

Belva Ann Bennet McNall Lockwood was a lawyer, activist and teacher. Unlike Hillary Rodham Clinton, McNall didn’t ride her husband’s coat tails to success. She married a farmer and sawmill operator. After her husband’s death she ended up being one of the first women to graduate from law school, the first woman admitted to the Supreme Court bar and the first woman to argue before the Supreme Court.

One week after John Kerry’s defeat in the presidential election Hillary Clinton delivered this bit of wisdom during a speech at Tufts University on November 12, 2004.

“And now just such a short period of time later, there was a woman on the ballot, running for the presidency in the recent Afghanistan election. A remarkable feat, considering the history, especially the recent past in that country. And one, I might add, that puts Afghanistan’s women ahead of America’s women.”

Again she has ignored the accomplishments of other significant trailblazers to build support for her own ambitions.

Hillary’s infractions against fact and history are nothing new. Recall how she claimed to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary who climbed Mount Everest more than 5 years AFTER Hillary’s mother had already named her. In October 2006 Hillary Clinton’s re-election campaign acknowledged the story was a lie.

Now Hillary Clinton’s previously written book It Takes A Village has been re-released. Is this anything more than an attempt to compete with her closest competitor Barack Obama who has been touring the nation to promote his own recently released book. Hillary’s book was largely written bya ghost-writer. Hillary’s next book Living History reportedly used 3 ghost writers. Neither of Hillary’s books listed any of the ghost writers on the cover and only the second one listed them by name.

It has been suggested by several authors that Hillary Clinton has always had her eye on the Presidency. Indeed she has always been interested in politics beginning with her involvement with drawing up the articles of impeachment against then president Richard Nixon. Her marriage to a future governor and eventual president is well-known.

There are also rumors that Hillary’s pregnancy was not consensual and it has been suggested that “rape” may actually be a better description of the conception. It has long been public knowledge that Hillary announced her pregnancy to local newspapers before sharing the news with her husband who was first informed by reading one of the newspapers.

It has been reported that Bill & Hillary‘s daughter Chelsea was a daddy’s girl that appeared isolated from her mother. In The Truth About Hillary the author, Edward Klein, relays story after story about the coldness of Hillary Clinton towards her own daughter.

Hillary Clinton ran for the U.S. Senate claiming to support single mothers. After she was elected in 2000 she spent the next 6 years avoiding controversial legislation in order to build a respectable record on which to base her presidential run. Hillary Clinton only sponsored legislation that was considered a safe topic. She concentrated on building amicable relationships with other legislators by co-sponsoring “safe “ legislation. She never sponsored any legislation that could eventually come back to haunt her. When she backed off from supporting the Child Care Bill a delegation of New York women rushed to meet with Hillary. When pressed about her reason for no longer supporting a bill that she had initially supported Hillary’s response was “I’m not going to spend my political capital on something that’s doomed before it starts”. Hillary not only turned her back on the single mothers, but also on their children in favor of her own political ambitions.

Folks, know the candidates. Don’t buy into the media hype. Hillary Clinton has long been a darling of the left-wind media and she’s sure to receive more than her share of publicity. What the mainstream media isn’t willingly going to report is more important and usually more factual than what they do tell us. Despite Senator Clinton’s celebrity she is has very little experience as a politician responsible to the voters. She was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2000. She has only completed one term in the Senate and she’ll have less than 8 years as a Senator when we vote for our next president. Her voice is only 1 of 100 in the Senate and 1 of over 535 in Congress. Her political career has been too short and calculated to reveal her true character. She lacks any experience heading any branch of government and on-the-job training is not a good program when considering the President is the leader of the world’s only remaining superpower.

For those that are inclined to vote for Hillary Clinton merely because they think we need a female president then I encourage you to get involved in politics and encourage your party of choice to support a female candidate that would not be a setback for women’s rights. I fear that a Hillary presidency would turn American voters away from female candidates for decades to come. As a father of two daughters I think a woman president would be wonderful for young women. When I see a female candidate that I want my daughters to emulate then I’ll vote for her. Until that time I will continue to vote for the candidate that I think will damage our country the least.

President Hillary?

I first wrote this entry in July 2006 and posted it on another blog site. Hillary Clinton's recent announcement that she is a candidate for the DNC nomination makes it appropritate to repost here as well.

With no candidate coming out and “admitting” that they want to run for the presidential nomination of their party in 2008 there has been a lot of speculation. One name that continues to emerge for the Democratic Party is Hillary Rodham Clinton. The former First Lady was first elected to the Senate in 2000 to replace Senator Pat Moynihan who declined to run again for health reasons. Hillary’s verbal attack against the current Bush administration rather than her Republican opponent in the 2006 New York Senate race did nothing to discourage speculation of her as a presidential candidate in 2008.

She grew up in Chicago, Illinois. Her father was a military man. Descriptions of her father portray him as emotionally detached. This may help us to understand her personal vendetta against our military. She met Bill Clinton while at college. Her first brush with national politics was working for Congress in researching impeachment against then President Richard Nixon. When her husband failed to win reelection as Arkansas governor she was identified as the most common reason. Her involvement in his campaign had been nearly non-existent, she had not taken his name and she was busy pursuing her own career. Before he ran again for Governor of Arkansas Hillary would undergo a complete makeover. Like a chameleon she would reinvent herself as a traditional wife that voter’s could identify with including finally taking her husband’s name.

Certainly, she has been a lightening rod for controversy. She is a polarizing figure and people tend to either love her or hate her. The American public tends to vote for a candidate that they can relate to and who shares their political beliefs. What are Hillary’s beliefs? By examining her voting record and past comments we can get an idea of where she stands on certain issues.

She missed the very first vote after being elected to the Senate.

IMMIGRATION

Immigration is a hot topic. When the Senate voted on its highly publicized immigration bill Hillary failed to cast a vote. Her position on illegal immigration is unknown.

TERRORISM

She initially agreed with the Bush administration’s position on the Iraq war. She even made comments to build support for military action in Iraq.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapon stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"The intelligence which the president shared with us was in line with what we saw in the White House." -- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, 2003

She voted NO to reauthorizing the Patriot Act.

She voted NO to increasing spending for the armed forces.

TAXES/BUDGET/ECONOMY

Hillary Clinton has voted against tax breaks and reduced Federal spending. She actually called for a tax increase!

Rated 21% by NTU (National Tax Union), indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes.

Voted NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years.

Voted NO on $40B in reducing federal overall spending.

Voted YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates.

Voted YES on increasing tax deductions for college tuition.

“We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society.” –Hillary Clinton

"Since when do we raise taxes in a recession? This is the most irresponsible idea Senator Clinton has come up with since her attempt to nationalize America's health care system in 1993." -- Former New York Republican Rep. Jack Kemp, co-director of Empower America, condemning Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's call for a tax increase on NBC's Meet the Press.

HEALTH CARE

"I can't worry about every under capitalized business" -- Hillary Clinton, testifying before congress on the effects of Nationalized Health Care.

In 1993,Hillary Clinton was appointed by her husband, then-President Bill Clinton, to head a task force to overhaul national health care. Her final plan received widespread criticism. Congress held more than 30 hearings regarding her new health care plan then eventually dismissed it altogether. The plan became known as “HillaryCare”.

Voted YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D.

Voted YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics.

Voted YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug.

Voted NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit.

Voted YES on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada.

Voted YES on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages.

Voted NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit.

She joined 5 other Senators in sending a letter to local television stations nationwide requesting that they NOT air videos supplied by the government explaining the then new health care benefits. The bill had already passed Congress and been signed into law. The videos were distributed to explain the new benefits to seniors and those that care for them. – www.senate.gov Mar 15, 2004

SOCIAL SECURITY

She opposes privatizing Social Security.

“Social Security is a family protection system.” –Hillary Clinton, “Talking It Over” column Feb 17, 1999

PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Clinton scores 82% by the NEA(The National Education Association) on public education issues

She opposes school vouchers for poor parents.

Twice she has voted NO for private tutors for children that need them.

Voted YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors.

Voted YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors.

Voted YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction.

Voted YES on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education.

Voted YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies.

SENATE CONFIRMATIONS

"When the Senate overwhelmingly confirmed Viet Dinh and Michael Chertoff as assistant attorneys general, Mrs. Clinton cast the only vote against either man. Were her reasons serious, or spiteful? You decide. Both men were lawyers with the Senate Whitewater Committee." -- Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal, 5/29/2001

ABORTION

While in the Senate she has cast a vote in support of abortion as a woman’s right no less than 3 times. She has not voted against abortion 1 single time.

FAMILY VALUES

She has voted against teaching family values in public schools.

GAY/LESBIAN RIGHTS

“We ought to be providing domestic partnership benefits for people who are in homosexual and lesbian relationships.” – Hillary Clinton, Feb 11, 2000

Voted YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes.

WORLD VIEW OF HILLARY CLINTON

"The independent counsel concludes that Mrs. Clinton's sworn testimony that she had no input into [presidential aide David] Watkins' decision or role in the travel-office firings is factually inaccurate." -- Independent Counsel Robert Ray's official assessment of the credibility of Hillary Rodham Clinton's testimony under oath.

"[Hillary Clinton] cannot defend her own rights against her husband. How can she defend the rights of my country?" -- General Suhaila Siddiq, Afghanistan's only woman general, a surgeon, hospital director and heroine to a generation of young women who remained in the country, The [London] Times, WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 28 2001

"I think Elizabeth Moynihan, Senator Moynihan’s wife, had it right when she told me that Hillary is "duplicitous." Hillary acts as though she is chosen by God, and that gives her the right to use any means to justify her ends." -- Edward Klein

"The only real model for a Hillary presidency is that of Richard Nixon. Like Nixon, Hillary hides a personality driven by paranoia, fear, and hatred for enemies, and a willingness to get even and do what it takes to prevail, behind a sincerity and good nature." -- Long time Clinton advisor Dick Morris, Rewriting History

Like Nixon, Hillary is paranoid and has an enemies list.Like Nixon, Hillary has used FBI files against her enemies.Like Nixon, Hillary believes that the ends justify the means.Like Nixon, Hillary has a penchant for doing illegal things. -- Edward Klein

CREDIBILITY

“The American people are tired of liars and people who pretend to be something they're not.” – Hillary Clinton

"This vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for President" -- Hillary Clinton to Matt Lauer

I think we sort of have lost track of the fact this is a government that has to be accountable to the people of our country,” – Hillary Clinton

[On the Today show in Jan. 1998, one week into the Monica Lewinsky scandal] Mrs. Clinton said, “The President has denied these allegations on all counts, unequivocally.... The real story here, for anybody willing to tell it and write about it and explain it, is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president. When all this is put into context... some folks are going to have a lot to answer for.” - Hillary’s Choice by Gail Sheehy, p. 5 & 8 Dec 9, 1999

SCANDALS

She was instrumental in controlling the “Bimbo eruptions”. Two “bimbos” that refused to be controlled by Hillary were Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones. Both would later come back to haunt Bill Clinton.

She has been linked to the cover-up of the Vince Foster suicide. While investigators waited to gain entry into Mr. Foster’s office Hillary’s staff removed documents to the She has claimed that she only retrieved her personal documents from his briefcase.

She was the central figure in the White Water land deal. Most investors lost their investments, but Hillary Clinton actually received profits. Some of her cohorts would eventually be convicted and serve prison terms for their involvement.

She was named as the “high ranking official” that fired the White House travel office and attempted to hand over the operation to her personal friends from Arkansas. She changed her position under intense pressure.

She gave the order for the military members carrying the nuclear “football” not to wear their uniforms. Her reasoning is that she didn’t want her husband to be seen with the military. The Secret Service convinced her to change her position when they pointed out that the military uniform made it easier to identify the person they needed to keep with the president.

Hillary Clinton has said that she wasn’t involved in the 11th hour pardons issued by her husband just before his Presidency ended. It was her very own brother who lobbied the President for the pardons and who also represented some of the recipients.

She was the primary figure in the furniture scandal that erupted when the Clinton’s moved out of the White House. Hillary contended that the furniture she took was private property. She later changed her story and blamed the movers for taking things from the White House. Eventually, she relented and returned most of the items.

The six-year, $52 million Whitewater investigation came to a close yesterday, as Independent Counsel Robert Ray announced he had found “insufficient evidence” to bring charges in the widest-reaching special prosecutor inquiry ever. In a short statement, Ray [who took over from Ken Starr last October] concluded there was “inconclusive” evidence that President Clinton and Hillary Clinton participated in, or were aware of, any illegal activity tied to the Whitewater real estate venture in the 1970s and 1980s.

“I’m just glad this is finally over,” Hillary Clinton said. Finally free of the issue that marred her tenure as first lady and the early part of her Senate campaign, Hillary Clinton expressed confidence Whitewater had been a non-issue all along, saying most people had “made up their minds a long time ago.” She said, “I think that taxpayers have a right to ask why was all this money spent, especially since ... the conclusions were readily available five years ago.” - Boston Globe, p. A1 Sep 21, 2000

Two days after the statute of limitations ran out for crimes associated with Whitewater, Hillary Clinton finally produced the damning documents that the Whitewater investigators had subpoenaed several years earlier.

Hillary the Warmonger

I first created this entry in August 2006 for my blog on another website. With her recent anouncement that she intends to run for the presidential nommination of the DNC it seems entirely appropriate to repost it here.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapon stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"The intelligence which the president shared with us was in line with what we saw in the White House." -- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, 2003

Hillary Clinton not only agreed with President Bush about the intelligence regarding Iraq, but she confirmed it! She built support for the war in Iraq by confirming to the world that she saw the very same intelligence as “co-president” in the previous administration. She was so convinced of the correctness of the intelligence that she voted for the invasion of Iraq.

“The long and drawn-out conflict this administration triggered…” --SEN. HILLARY CLINTON'S SPEECH ON JAN. 18, 2006 ON THE MIDDLE EAST AT PRINCETON UNIVERSITY'S WOODROW WILSON SCHOOL. (Unofficial transcript; as provided by the Daily Princetonian newspaper.)

Just three years later she tries to distance herself from the role she played in sending this nation to war. She places blame on the current administration and makes no reference to her own comments that gave credibility to the war in Iraq.

“I do not believe that we should allow this to be an open-ended commitment without limits or end, nor do I believe that we can or should pull out of Iraq immediately. If last December's elections lead to a successful Iraqi government, that should allow us to start drawing down our troops during this year while leaving behind a smaller contingent in safe areas with greater intelligence and quick-strike capabilities. This will help us stabilize that new Iraqi government. It will send a message to Iran that they do not have a free hand in Iraq despite their considerable influence and personal and religious connections there. It will also send a message to Israel and our other allies, like Jordan, that we will continue to do what we can to provide the stability necessary to prevent the terrorists from getting any further foothold than they currently have.” -SEN. HILLARY CLINTON'S SPEECH ON JAN. 18, 2006 ON THE MIDDLE EAST AT PRINCETON UNIVERSITY'S WOODROW WILSON SCHOOL. (Unofficial transcript; as provided by the Daily Princetonian newspaper.)
http://justhillary.com/herwords/princeton.php

Can there be any doubt from her speech that she is seeking re-election? She seems to be searching for a safe position on Iraq. Read her words carefully. She doesn’t want to “pull out of Iraq immediately” and even suggests “leaving behind a smaller contingent in safe areas with greater intelligence and quick-strike capabilities”. Does “safe areas” sound like a synonym for military bases? Our military has been maintaining similar “safe areas” in Germany for over 60 years to send this message to what used to be the Soviet Bloc. We have been maintaining “safe areas” in South Korea for over 50 years to send the very same message to North Korea. The next question is to determine who would be the target of these “quick-strike capabilities”? The answer is in the rest of the paragraph. Her anticipated target is Iran! Unlike the unfounded warmonger allegations of Ronald Reagan in 1980, Hillary Clinton has detailed how she intends to take this nation to war with another country should she become the Commander-in-Chief. Could this speech be her oral rendition of Mein Kampf?

“You did not go into Iraq with enough troops…” -HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON STATEMENT AT SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE HEARING WITH DEFENSE SECRETARY RUMSFELD, Aug. 3, 2006

Not even two weeks ago she publicly scolded Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld for not taking enough troops into Iraq. This suggests that she would use many more troops in Iraq. Obviously, placing more troops in harm’s way equates to more potential American casualties. This is not really an unexpected response since the Clintons have nver held our military in very high esteem.

Begin withdrawing troops from Iraq in 2006. Clinton voted YES. Amendment rejected.

Withdraw all troops from Iraq in 2007. Clinton voted NO. Amendment rejected.

These two votes regarding troop withdrawals are consistent with her speech on August 3, 2006. She wants to withdrawal some troops beginning in 2006, but not all of them out in 2007. Remember, she wants “quick strike capabilities” in Iraq.

Hillary’s position on Iraq is very calculating. She hasn’t given much information regarding her position other than she is not pleased with how the Administration is handling it. What Hillary seems to want is our troops to maintain permanent military bases in Iraq to act as a deterrent to Iran. However, she doesn’t want enough troops left behind to actually repel an attack from Iraq’s traditional enemy. Instead, she only wants enough troops left behind so that an attack on Iraq would be considered an attack on America. This theory is what has kept our troops in foreign lands for over 60 years. Hillary’s foreign policy is designed to tempt our enemies into attacking us. Not only is Iran the world’s 4th largest oil producer, but they are also working on creating nuclear weapons if they haven’t acquired them already.

Hillary Clinton is a scary figure, but not because she is “the world’s most intelligent woman”. She is scary because she would take this nation to war to cement a second term as president. In her own words, “We’ve never unseated an incumbent president during wartime. That’s just a given,”

Hillary Vs. Rummy

I read about their confrontation, but the facts are different than what the newspapers have reported. Does anybody really believe that Rumsfeld who is rumored to be a gruff, old man would actually limit his response to “Wow”?

I found the transcript at JustHillary.com. http://justhillary.com/herwords/hillaryrummy82.php By reading the transcript it’s obvious that Rumsfeld’s response had been severely edited by the newspapers that I had read. So, I decided to tune into C-Span and wait for the replay. Being a junior Senator she is one of the last to get her turn.

When her turn finally came she took full political advantage of the situation as she read a 4-page statement. Rumsfeld appeared to keep up with her and addressed each of her points. She was obviously annoyed at being corrected by Rummy, but she plowed on in her attempt to make him look foolish and incompetent. Again, he corrected her and addressed her concerns. When Rummy finished with his response General Pace asked to be heard and he further supported Rummy. Hillary didn’t stick around to hear the General out. As he began to speak she gathered her purse and appeared to leave in a huff.

The end result of the confrontation between Hillary and Rummy is that she was able to read a prepared statement into the record that Rummy wasn’t prepared for. Despite being blindsided by Hillary he addressed each issue she raised by correcting her and stating the facts. If there was a clear winner in this exchange it would have to be Rumsfeld.

Later the same day Hillary told the Associated Press that Rumsfeld should resign. What else could she say after being put in her place in the public eye? She came across as ineffective, uninformed and only out to score political points. Rumsfeld had been interrogated by the entire Armed Services Committee by the time Hillary had her opportunity. He should have been worn down a little bit and maybe even a little irritable. He came across as neither during his exchange with Hillary. Instead, he showed just how sharp his mind really is by being able to keep track of Hillary’s list and addressing each item.

If a resignation needs to be submitted based on Rumsfeld’s appearance then I suggest that it be Hillary’s. Rather than using the time with the Secretary of Defense in the interest of the American people and for fact finding she attempted to use it for her own political gain. Isn’t it time that the American public were rid of the public spectacle of Hillary Clinton?

The day after Rumsfeld’s appearance Hillary released a Senate campaign letter. Her letter ignores the facts of his appearance and attempts to spin things in her favor by portraying him as “the bad guy”. Its unfortunate that few American or more specifically New York voters will actually see the exchange for themselves and they will have to rely on the edited version put forth by the major newspapers that appear to support Hillary Clinton in all of her endeavors.
For further proof of her opportunistic ways you can check out her Senate campaign letter here http://justhillary.com/herwords/rummy84.php

No More Anchor Babies!

A misinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is responsible for the concept now commonly referred to as “anchor babies”. The amendment was one of the solutions enacted by Congress to help heal the post-Civil War United States. It was the Congressional response to the case of U.S Supreme Court decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford of 1857 aka the Dred Scott Decision, which said that those of African descent could never attain U.S. citizenship. The Amendment granted citizenship to blacks and later became the basis for the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Brown v. Board of Education.

Fourteenth Amendment, 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.”

Immigration isn’t mentioned because when the amendment was proposed in 1866 and finally ratified in 1868 it was intended to address the issue of citizenship for former slaves. Slaves didn’t voluntarily show up on our shores. They were forcibly brought here in chains from other countries against their will. This is the exact opposite of today’s illegal immigrant. Today’s illegal immigrant deliberately avoids our immigration laws to enter our country. That places the illegal immigrant in our country illegally and at odds with our law-abiding society.

In 1898 the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which addressed the issue of a U.S. born child of foreigners legally residing in the U.S. The court determined that under such circumstances the child was entitled to U.S. citizenship. Illegal immigration wasn’t at issue in this case.

In 1982 the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case of Plyler v. Doe. This case was decided by a 5-4 vote. It addressed the issue of foreign born parents and children who enter our country illegally. The city of Brownsville, Texas was denying public education to foeriegn born children of illegal immigrants. The Supreme Court determined that the illegal immigrant children were “within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” of Texas and therefore Texas could not deny the children the right of an education. This particluar case is only signiifcant to anchor babies in that there is a small footnote in the decision that states that no plausible distinction regarding jurisdiction can be drawn between legal or illegal resident aliens. This tiny footnote implies that U.S. born children of illegal immigrants are entitled to U.S. citizenship. There is no case law or precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court addressing the specific issue of a U.S. born child of illegal immigrants.

By studying the history of the Fourteenth Amendment it is obvious that it was never intended to protect pregnant mothers sneaking across our borders illegally in the dark of night with the intent of giving birth in our country only to have that child turned into an excuse to circumvent our immigration laws. The Fourteenth Amendment was not intended to reward law-breakers for their criminal behavior. The Fourteenth Amendment is nearly 150 years old. The former slaves it was intended to protect have since passed away. Its time to rescind this amendment just like with prohibition and eliminate the confusion it causes in today’s world. The bottom line is that there is no legal basis for the concept known as “anchor babies” or for an automatic award of citizenship for a child born to illegal immigrants in our country.