Re: Lefturds at D.C. Comics Force Superman To Renounce His U.S. Citizenship

You're being silly.

Where in the constitution does it say government has the power to
regulate food and drugs?

The very reason for the US Code (laws) is to pick up where the
constitution leaves off, AND to limit where it doesn't

On Apr 30, 3:50 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> That Government has AGAIN usurped Power nowhere provided it notwithstanding, your claim makes no sense.
> What about all those seeking to exercise their right to migrate who have ZERO interest in Naturalization? Oh well.
> Here is the Constitution:http://www.constitution.org/cons/constitu.txtNowhere is Congress empowered to make any laws/rules or otherwise concerning Immigration.
> It is a necessity for the Nanny State to infringe rather than secure this right which is why we see this usurpation occurring at the outset of the (unconstitutional) Nanny State.
> Regard$,
> --MJ"Bryan Caplan has a damn good argument against the welfare state: Its existence will always be raised as a reason why free immigration cannot be permitted. Thus the theory of human rights is set against itself. The winner is power." -- Sheldon RichmanAt 12:26 PM 4/30/2011, you wrote:Oh for christ's sake MJ, controlling how people can become citizens
> once they get here certainly includes whether or not then can get
> here, and what we can do when they do.
> Here is the US Code, as constitutionally enacted by Congress.http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/usc_sec_08_00001227----000-.html
> You're not very good at playing bullshitsemantics, and thats a
> compliment.
> On Apr 30, 12:09 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Only Congressmen and federal reps are given the right to "Travel" between or
> > within States of which they are not citizens.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 9:10 AM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Naturalization, of course, is the acquisition of citizenship and
> > > nationality by somebody who was not a citizen or national of that country
> > > when he or she was born and has absolutely NOTHING to do with Immigration.
> > > You actually PROVE the point as such would have been the ideal place to
> > > provide such a power.
> >
> > > Regard$,
> > > --MJ
> >
> > > Modern nationalism and collectivism have, by the restriction of migration,
> > > perhaps come nearest to the "servile state." …Man can hardly be reduced more
> > > to a mere wheel in the clockwork of the national collectivist state that
> > > being deprived of his freedom to move.... Feeling that he belongs now to his
> > > nation, body and soul, he will be more easily subdued to the obedient state
> > > serf which nationalist and collectivist governments demand. -- Wilhelm Röpke
> >
> > > At 10:35 AM 4/30/2011, you wrote:
> >
> > > The Constitution does not authorize the federal government to control
> > > immigration.
> > > ------------------------------------
> >
> > > Uhm, yes it does:
> >
> > > The Congress shall have Power  ...
> >
> > > To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,  Article 1, section 8
> >
> > > Next
> >
> > > On Apr 30, 9:02 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > > At 07:38 AM 4/30/2011, you wrote:Just another illegal alien waiting to be
> > > deported by Republitards.
> > > > ----
> > > > at it should ... our law says illegal aliens are to be deported
> > > > they are criminals/parasites
> > > > Actually, the Law of the Land provides no authority to the Congress to
> > > make such laws in the first place.
> > > > Regard$,
> > > > --MJThe Constitution does not authorize the federal government to control
> > > immigration. Nor does it say anything about illegal aliens. ... Sadly,
> > > lawmakers have repeatedly interpreted this silence as license for
> > > ill-conceived legislation. Congress began barring entry to the nation in
> > > 1875 with prostitutes and convicts. Soon, all sorts of people fell short of
> > > congressional glory: ex-convicts in 1882, along with Chinese citizens,
> > > lunatics, and idiots. Paupers, polygamists, and people suffering from
> > > infectious diseases or insanity made the list in 1891, while the illiterate
> > > were banned in 1917. -- Becky Akers
> >
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> >
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > <http://www.politicalforum.com/%A0>
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
> >
> > >  --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> >
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
> >
> > --
> > *Mark M. Kahle H.*
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.