Monday, August 31, 2015

Of Dead Lions And Swarming Migrants - Why We Need Get A Handle On Overpopulation NOW!

A Lion's head ready to be packed and dispatched by air to a trophy hunter's 'cave' in the USA
calais, migrant, britain, welfare, economic, immigration, population ...
African migrants congregate near Calais to try to make a break through the "Chunnel" to get to Great Britain

The identification of 71 bodies of Syrian and Afghan migrants stuffed into a Hungarian meat truck with Slovakian licenses - just inside the Austrian border- has raised awareness of the peril of human smuggling, and also the dastardly nature of it  - much of the sordid business conducted by unscrupulous rogues. It also has brought to attention the tidal wave of migrants and refugees flooding into Europe in search of a better life.

It is also doubtful that many people will make the connection between lion trophy heads dispatched to trophy hunters' homes in the U.S. and African migrants pouring into Europe - but there is a connection, and it's overpopulation. Overpopulation in the African continent - which for years has gone unaddressed - especially in making contraception widely available.  Now the 'chickens' have come home to roost, first with humans' expanding numbers encroaching on lion territory and second, national populations now so dense - and with vanishing opportunities - that it drives people to find refuge abroad, mainly in Europe.

In the WSJ piece, 'Humans, Lions Struggle to Co-Exist', Aug. 8-9, p. A7, it was noted:

"Africa's human population is the fastest growing in the world. In roughly the same period as the lion decline (42 percent over 21 years), the number of Africans has doubled to nearly 1.2 billion people. The population will double again to 2.5 billion by 2050 according to the United Nations."

In fact, short of a global catastrophe, it is projected to reach 5.8 billion by 2100. That means nearly 1 of every 2 people on Earth will be African. Where will the resources be to support them? The jobs? The water? The life quality? Fact is, that population growth is unsustainable and means either vast numbers will perish, likely of disease, war or famine - or they will do everything they can to go to places with greater opportunity and resources- like Europe and the U.S.

Already, as the second image shows, European locations are being swarmed by desperate Africans, from Eritrea, Uganda, Somalia, Nigeria and other countries - as well as by Syrians seeking to escape their civil war.

The WSJ piece further emphasizes that while the African population boom "has centered on increasingly crowded cities and migrants risking their lives for better opportunities on other continents" it is also "stressing rural populations".

The consequences are serious and portend that disaster lies ahead unless something is done to slow the population. Because in truth, Africa cannot solve its growth simply by dispatching its surplus population overseas, and  besides those overseas native populations are already chafing at their own austerity-limited resources being consumed by outsiders.

In Africa's case, as the article goes on, more people "has meant more forests being turned into pastures, more locals hunting lions' prey for their own meals - leading to starving lions- and more herders killing lions rather than risking cattle." It also means more stressed African nations, i.e. see those identified below,

allowing trophy hunters to come in and claim their "prizes" for money - ostensibly to support conservation, but more accurately to support assorted African power regimes and bureaucratic kingpins.

How bad is it? As the WSJ article notes, Central and West Africa have already suffered the loss of 66 percent of their lion population. In W. Africa, lions  - because of burgeoning human numbers - are now confined to less than 1 percent of the 4.5 million square miles of sparsely forested land where they used to roam.

In Mozambique alone, human number inside the giant Niassa Reserve have grown from 21,000 in 2001 to 35, 000 in 2012 leading to increasing clashes with the park's lions, and many deaths  - often from hunts, or being caught in snares.

Clearly, Africa's uncontrolled population growth is driving the mass slaughter of lions. It doesn't take a math genius or ecologist to see that.

Then there is the migrant issue, which now has the attention of most European Union nations. How bad is it? According to another WSJ piece by Simon Nixon ('Crisis At EU's Borders Becoming Next Big Threat to Cohesion', Aug. 17, p. A5), Germany alone reckons that 800,000 migrants have arrived this year. These numbers are also testing the level of German hospitality - already stretched by the nearly 1 million Turks in the country, and which we saw nasty evidence of anti-immigrant, pro-Nazi blowback when we visited Munich in May, 2013. See e.g.

The EU border agency Frontex, Simon Nixon notes, "estimates that more than 100,000 mirgants crossed into the EU in July alone, compared with 270,000 for the whole of last year."

Again, these migrations can't go on, and the Europeans won't accept millions piling onto their shores in the coming years,  when the originating nations can't or won't control their own numbers. In the meantime the EU is desperately trying to establish a quota law for all members of the EU such that each member nation takes in its fair share. However, the eastern European nations are thus far having none of it - demanding their own limits. For example, Hungary right now insists on only 200 migrants, maximum, and all must be Christians- no Muslims. This position is a non-starter for Angela Merkel and the Germans, but the eastern EU members insist they lack the resources of Germany and the UK to support thousands.

In Greece alone, those entering from (mainly) Syria enter a no man's land with precious few supporting resources - even food and water. The existing tent cities housing thousands are almost exclusively dependent on volunteers top assist. Greek austerity is a major component in the lack of assistance, and the migrants currently stuck there only hope they can move on to northern Europe soon.

Meanwhile, if the African continent sports 2.5 billion by 2050 will the Europeans really let 1 billion flood their shores from the Sahel region and equatorial Africa, swarming in rickety boats across the Mediterranean ? If you believe so, you are dreaming.

According to EU law NOW, when the flood is around 100,000 a month max, those migrants claiming refugee status (as most do - according to Nixon, ibid.) are "entitled to be fed and housed while their cases are being investigated".

That is sure to change if the incoming numbers get much higher, again - not out of any innate nastiness - but because in a world of limited resources charity only goes so far. As Nixon points out:

"For a country such as Greece, in the midst of a financial crisis, the drain on resources has been too much, leading to angry scenes at reception centers."

Things will not go much better in other EU nations if they face austerity- and the slowing of the world's economic growth portends this given the ongoing degradation of energy sources.

The solution is clear, and the U.S. and EU know it too. They must collaborate to make artificial contraception widely available and make sure Africans know how to use it. This is not, as some knot heads argue - a device to "control black numbers"  - but rather to control the numbers of humans in the most overpopulated and fastest growing region on the planet. Who will not find salvation outside their places of origin, if they fail to take control of their own numbers.

Saturday, August 29, 2015

Coin Debasement - Began With LBJ

July 23rd passed by this year and it's doubtful many people took notice, or pondered the significance. If you asked 100 people if the date had any special meaning to them- 99 would surely give a blank stare and say 'No' or 'Not sure'.  After all, who but a numismatics freak (coin, currency collector) would be aware it was the 50th anniversary of the Coinage Act of 1965 which stripped  all U.S. coins of silver and made legal tender out of base metal slugs.

Don't believe me? Dig into your pockets and pull out quarters. Check the dates on them. If 1964 or earlier they're the real deal.  If you look at the sides of the coins you won't see any copper rim or core to which the rest of the coin is bonded.  Now, take a quarter from 1965 or later and take a good hard look and that nasty copper band will be seen - all around the coin periphery.

For whatever reason we now know the debasement of our coinage began with LBJ. Perhaps it ought to be fitting that the same asshole who engineered the killing of John F. Kennedy, and launched the Vietnam War under a pretext, should also be responsible for passing the single act that debased our coinage.

JFK half dollar from 1964 - before being debased to  80 % silver on the outside and 19 % on the inside

For those not into numismatics or the history of U.S. coins, the original Coinage Act established the U.S. mint and declared the dollar as "the money of account" for the new Republic. It defined the dollar as 371 ¼ grains of silver or the equivalent in gold.  At the same time, the penalty for debasing coins struck under the law was death  (hmmmmm.....too bad LBJ couldn't have been sent back in a time machine to face the music for debasement that he escaped in the assassination.)

That was because since Alexander Hamilton's day our coinage, including dimes, quarters and half dollars, had contained 90 percent silver. When LBJ signed the 1965 Act the value of the dollar was almost the same as it was in 1792, 0.77 ounces of silver.

However, after the 1965 Act, the dimes and quarters would contain no silver - but only be composites: with faces of the same alloy used in nickels but now bonded to a core of pure copper. Debasement! Meanwhile, the new half dollar would have 80 % silver on the outside and 19 % on the inside

What was LBJ's rationale? Clever to say the least! He claimed that on account of "a worldwide silver shortage the only really prudent course was to reduce our dependence on silver to make our coins". He then made more egregious claims such as "silver coins will never disappear or even become rarities".  Really? Then why do so many collect them now?

LBJ insisted the new coins would be used along side the old ones and no one would be any the wiser. Well, not to numismatics freaks, especially as the pre -1965 coins have mostly disappeared from circulation. (Though occasionally, when I check my change, I do pick out an odd 1964 quarter, which I then stow away to save with others- as I want to recall what non-debased coins looked like!)

Meanwhile, those misers who opt to spend silver or gold coins they've hoarded are subject to a capital gains tax.

That's not all. The value of the dollar itself started sinking soon after the 1965 coinage act and by 1980 the dollar - originally valued at 0.77 ounces of silver- had sunk to 0.02 ounces of silver. Today it is valued at just 0.l06 ounces of silver.

Can states go their own way and commence minting their own pre-1965 type coins again? Nope. The U.S. Constitution prohibits states from coining money themselves or making anything but gold or silver coins legal tender. And btw, the coins are taken to be collector's items not the genuine, legit article.

Sadly, LBJ screwed this country in more ways than one. No wonder the Kennedys hated his guts.

Friday, August 28, 2015

Another Study Shows Global Warming "Pause" Never Happened

Yet another climate research paper has disclosed that there really was no global warming "hiatus" or pause. It was a matter of inconsistent data treatment, particularly in processing sea surface temperatures - especially as measured by buoys. First reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2013, the claim resulted from an erroneous interpretation resulting from a disproportionate use of buoys the past several decades. As is now known, these buoys tend to give cooler readings than measurements taken from ships. This was noted by Thomas Karl, Director of the National Centers for Environmental Information of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (NOAA) and lead author of the recent paper which appeared in the journal Science.

This error was likely compounded in conjunction with the misinterpretation of Hadley UK Center future projections on climate that I've already discussed at length, e.g.

I would even venture to say that the preponderance of false judgment by too many (mainly conservatives like George Will eager for a counter poise) resulted from the misinterpretation of data in that cited Nature paper by Noel Keenlyside et al from 2008.  But the new results independently show the warming pause to be bogus.

As Karl noted, quoted in Eos Transactions - Earth & Space Science (July 1):

"The biggest takeaway is there is no slowdown in global warming".

Indeed, he added that warming the past fifteen years is the "strongest it's been since the latter half of the 20th century". Putting an exclamation point on that, July this year has been the hottest July since records were initiated.

A good summary of the paper may be accessed at:

Why the measurement difficulty? Well, because the data gathering and process of analysis are inherently complex.  In order to achieve such a measurement as how Earth's average global temperature is increasing, there's a lot of "sausage making".  First, scientists must combine thousands of measurements from Earth's surface, taken by land instruments, ships. buoys and orbital satellites.

Second, each of these has its own random errors, all of which must be identified. Not only must researchers comb through the data to eliminate these errors, they must also correct for any differences in how each type of instrument measures temperature.

Thus, the authors of the Science paper had to dig into NOAA's global surface temperature analysis data to examine how sea surface temperatures (SSTs) were being measured. SSTs are measured in various ways:

- collecting ocean water in a bucket and measuring its temperature directly

- measuring the temperature of water taken in by a ship engine as a coolant

- using floating buoys moored in the various oceans

Each technique records slightly different temperatures in the same region so scientists have to adjust the data. In the past couple decades the number of buoys has increased - adding 15% more coverage to the ocean. But because buoys tend to read colder temperatures than ships at the same locations, a measurement bias is introduced which must be corrected for. This was the primary task set out by Karl et al.  They corrected for the bias by adding 0.12C to each buoy temperature.

By then combining the ocean data with improved calculations of air temperatures over land around the world, Karl and colleagues found that overall global surface warming over 2000-14 was 0.116C per decade or more than twice the estimated 0.039C starting in 1998 that the IPCC had reported.

Over and above all of this, as noted in the Sci-Am link below, from a statistical perspective:

"The pause does not actually exist, since observations over 15 years are not significant enough to be called a climate trend."

But by then the erroneous take had "jumped the shark", as it were, and the conservo media was blind to everything else including the inevitable corrections!

See also:

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Time To Get Control Of The Gun Insanity

"There is evidence that if guns weren't so widely available.... if  we could just put some space - a time out - between the person that's upset  because he got fired, or after the domestic abuse or whatever other motivation may be working on someone who does this...maybe we could prevent this kind of carnage." - Hillary Clinton yesterday

Alison Parker (24)  and Adam Ward  (27)) were two up and coming stars, reporters for their Roanoke, VA station  WDBJ- 7. They were in the middle of an interview of the head of the Chamber of Commerce when an unhinged nut, Lester Flanagan, opened fire at 6:45 a.m. with 14 shots, killing both. Yet another tragedy,  now after Charleston, Newtown, Aurora and Virginia Tech. When does this insanity end?

Of course you can expect the usual chant from the NRA gun lobby and its assorted followers, to wit:

"Guns don't kill people. People kill people".

But they totally ignore the corollary:

"People wouldn't kill as many people if killing with guns wasn't so easy"

That's the core of it: the ease of killing another with a weapon that doesn't even require you get up close and personal, like using a machete or knife.  If gun sales and distributions were as limited in this country as they are in others, Flanagan might not have been able to carry out his foul deed - say if he only had access to a knife. Yes, he'd likely have inflicted damage but there would at least have been time for the two others shot to react - if only to dodge the knife thrust  which, let's face it, is a lot slower than a bullet traveling at hundreds of feet per second.

All this is firmly supported by a new study from the American Sociological Association just out this week which shows:

- Despite only having 5 percent of the world's population the U.S. has had 31 percent of all mass shootings since 1966

- The U.S. is also first in the world for civilian gun ownership with 88.8 firearms per 100 people. (The next highest rate is Yemen at 54.8 per 100 people)

The other canard that the gun nuts will offer  is that well, it's nuts doing most of the shooting and hence all the gun laws in the world won't stop it but will stop law abiding citizens from the freedom to own Glocks, AK-47s and AR-15s as well as Bushmaster .223s.  But this is false.  The unholy truth is that most shootings are  NOT ideological or random but rather domestic (in people's homes) - either suicides or one spouse (usually male) killing the other after a fiery argument.  Again, the availability of guns makes it easier to solve disagreements in the most expedient and catastrophic way.

This was documented last night on Chris Hayes' All In. Melissa Jeltsen of the HuffPo affirmed we are missing the big picture, especially on mass shootings, but also regular shootings.  She noted the reason our perceptions are distorted is because most mass shootings we hear about happen in public. Hence, we believe the greatest risk is in public spaces - whether schools, theaters or malls. But this is false.

Assaying all mass shootings between 2009 and 2015, she found that 70 percent occurred in the home. Of these, 57 percent involved a family member or current or former intimate partner. 81 percent of the victims were women and children. These killings were not done by 'crazies' but usually normal people who simply lost it in the midst of a heated argument and reached for the weapon nearest and dearest - a gun. Maybe the perp was a gun collector or maybe he just owned one for "protection" - but ultimately it was turned not on an intruder but on his own loved one.

This is the lie we need to expunge - that shootings are only 'random' and done by psychos - in order to pass more rigorous gun control laws including demanding a fully 30 day waiting period for detailed NSA, FBI background checks. If we can do it for terrorists, we can do it for potential gun owners whose killings now vastly outnumber those of terrorists.

Apart from these sociological findings, a historical perspective on the 2nd amendment and gun ownership is also useful.  In a worthwhile book entitled 'Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right To Bear Arms in America', a professor of constitutional law at UCLA - Adam Winkler- has masterfully documented how guns were regulated from the earliest days of our Republic. As an example: laws that banned the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813, in Indiana in 1820 and in Tennessee and Virginia in 1838. Similar laws were later also passed in Texas, Florida and Oklahoma.

The then governor of Texas in 1893 was heard to proclaim:

"The mission of the concealed weapon is murder. To check it is the duty of every self-respecting, law abiding man".

WOW! How times have changed!

Meanwhile, Winkler showed that congress passed the first set of laws regulating, licensing and taxing guns in 1934. Though the law was challenged and wound up in the Supreme Court, in 1939, the crazies lost. FDR's Solicitor General framed the argument correctly to the Court:

"The Second Amendment grants people a right that is not one which may be utilized for private purposes but only exists where the arms are borne in a militia or some other military organization provided by law and intended for protection of the State."

The SC decision was unanimous.

While this sane and sober take prevailed for several more decades, it started to unravel by the 1970s as various Right wing (wouldn't you know?) groups coalesced to challenge gun control based on spurious "private gun ownership" interpretations, and successively overturned laws in state legislatures - much like the abortion opponents are now doing (as in Virginia, where its AG Cuchinelli 'read the riot act' to state health clinic administrators ordering them to cooperate with a new state edict to limit safe abortions, "or else"). But we need to know this is how these vipers succeed.

Undissuaded by the gun crazies' arguments, especially that the 2nd amendment granted every man the right to keep and bear arms on his own, Chief Justice Warren Burger responded that this interpretation was "one of the greatest pieces of fraud on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."

Well, it's good Justice Burger didn't live long enough as to see the arrival of automatic weapons and the claim that the 2nd amendment provided for the ownership of those too!

Finally, kudos to Walmart for formally ending sales of all military-style assault rifles in U.S. stores. You don't need a damned assault rifle to hunt, and if you do need one - you shouldn't be out hunting but strapped down in a psycho ward, on thorazine and lithium.

See also:

Wednesday, August 26, 2015

Union of Concerned Scientists Exposes The Fraudsters On Climate Change

Part of the document retrieved from the fossil fuel doubt merchants on when "victory will be achieved."

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS)  includes thousands of genuine research scientists devoted to educating the public on actual scientific findings and what they portend, and exposing the science charlatans who seek to cloud the public mind to unfolding realities. One of the latter is that the planet is indeed getting hotter with the month of July now in the record books as the hottest ever. This as yet more research (published in Science) shows the warming "pause" never happened and hundreds of fires scorch the West with over seven million acres burning - giving a horrific preview of the world to come in the era of the runaway greenhouse (except in that case the fires will ravage the whole country and last through the year)

Their other achievement has been accessing documents that prove the climate deniers (exposed in the Naomi Oreskes' book The Merchants of Doubt) have been determined to hoodwink the public on climate change - its validity and its peril.

See also:

Readers will recall how I've exposed Willie Soon as one of these merchants of doubt, see e.g.

But as the latest UCS Bulletin noted, Soon is only a small part of a much bigger story, as disclosed in the UCS Report, The Climate Deception Dossiers.  The latter is the product of a year's review and analysis of a wide range of internal corporate and trade group documents.

As with the case of fracking, the perpetrators will never own up to their slimy dishonest tactics themselves, or the damage they're doing. You have to expose them by exposing their actual documents that they themselves wrote and - in essence- wherein they've admitted the havoc they're wreaking.

Like the climate deniers, the frackers were exposed in Naomi Oreskes' book, particularly the PR Departments that serve the frackers and their political backers lot.    As for documents retrieved, in one, from Southwestern Energy, the diagram clearly shows that the gas well has a cement barrier with a casing that prevents gases from migrating upwards. But this isn't a Powerpoint about well casings but rather about how cement and casings fail and allow methane gas and other substances to migrate into aquifers.  Thus, we see from their own documents how cement fails.

In the case of the climate deceivers, the UCS team drew on evidence culled from 85 documents pried loose by leaks, lawsuits and FOIA requests. It almost reminds one of the extraordinary efforts that had to be invested to pry loose the JFK assassination documents (after the JFK Records Act) that showed the fell hand of the CIA and NSA in the assassination. 

What the UCS team unearthed is absolutely appalling. Spanning three decades, the documents reveal a mammoth cover up on a par with the cover up and disinformation in the Kennedy assassination. The UCS obtained documents expose that the world's largest fossil fuel companies: BP, Chevron, Conoco Phillips, Exxon Mobil, Shell  and Peabody Energy - were fully aware of the reality of climate change but continued to spend tens of millions of dollars to sow doubt and promote contrarian arguments they knew to be wrong.

Taken together, the documents show that the six companies, in conjunction with the American Petroleum Institute (API), the oil and gas industry's premier trade association - and a host of front groups - colluded to intentionally deceive the public.

One eye -opening formerly secret document revealed that scientific experts commissioned by the fraudulent "Global Climate Coalition" - had actually warned that heat-trapping gases were indeed causing global warming. But as the segment of attached document shows, these charlatans didn't want to hear it. It was more important to bamboozle the gullible public - who'd then be set against those of us with the scientific facts.

Thus, the GCC ignominiously ignored its own scientists and continued to conduct a public relations campaign to undermine national and international efforts to address global warming in a serious fashion. Among the chestnuts used by these fraudsters:

"the role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood."

Another tactic was to attribute the main cause of global warming to "solar activity" - a canard that's long since been dismissed in the astrophysics, solar physics and climate science communities. See e.g.

Those who want to access all 340 pages of the 'Climate Deception Dossiers' can go here:

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

The Ashley Madison Hack: Please Tell Me Gov't Workers Can't Be THIS Dumb!

The news of the hack at Ashley Madison, an internet cheat site, must have 37 million prospective marital cheats biting their nails - given the self-righteous hackers (only out to expose moral perfidy) have all their email addresses.  But the people who must really be shaking in their boots are all the federal workers who actually delivered their real email accounts to the site.

An investigation by the AP discovered many with sensitive jobs in the White House as well as law enforcement agencies according to a report in the Denver Post ('Government Employees Used Work Internet to Access Cheating Website', Aug. 21, p. 9 A) "used Internet connections in their federal offices to access and pay membership fees to the cheating website Ashley Madison"

The results included (ibid.) "at least two U.S. assistant district attorneys, an information technology administrator in the Executive Office, a division chief, an investigator and a trial attorney in the Justice Department and a government hacker at the Homeland Security Department"

While few actually used their government email accounts to pay for services, "the AP traced their government connections - logged by the website over 5 years - and reviewed their credit card transactions to identify them. They included workers at more than two dozen Obama administration  agencies, including the departments of State, Defense, Justice, Energy, Treasury, Transportation and Homeland Security. Others came from House or Senate computer networks".

Fortunately, the Associated Press has had the good sense not to identify any of the government workers because none are elected officials or have been accused of a crime.

At first I couldn't believe what I was reading. Did gov't workers really have that much time on their hands, to fool around? Did they not know or understand how the Repukes have been on the warpath for donkey's years to cut Government down to the size of "being able to drown it in a bathtub" (words of Grover Norquist)

Didn't they know that the 'pukes and their collaborators - mainly in the conservative extremist media - would now be going hammer and tongue to justify reducing government even further, given the AP's exposure of such frivolous nonsense?

Those of us who've vigorously defended government as a counterforce to the expansion of wealth and corporate power - to be in defense of citizens - now look like we have egg on our faces.  We look like we've defended slackers and n'er do wells.

And the fallout for the cheat site users isn't over. Defense Secretary Ash Carter noted (ibid.)  those who used military emails are in jeopardy given adultery can be a criminal offense according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Meanwhile, one anonymous investigator quoted in the DPost piece, vowed he would not be a victim of blackmail so, if prompted, he'd reveal his actions to family and employer.

In his words (ibid.):

"I've worked too hard all my life to be a victim of blackmail. That wouldn't happen"

Fair enough, but why risk your lifetime of work achievements in the first place? And over a stupid cheaters' website.

Such questions will be asked a lot in the coming weeks, and hopefully these federal workers will have decent answers including why so many used actual email account addresses as opposed to dummy accounts.

Monday, August 24, 2015

The Wall Street Journal Exposes The Nonsense Regarding Birthright Citizenship

Who would have believed the Editors of the WSJ would for once write an editorial with which I could agree? But they did. No bloviating about the evils of Obanacare, the scourge of entitlements, the wrong-headedness of the Iran nuclear deal or the folly of Obama's student loan solution. For once the WSJ editors and I were in agreement ('Born in the USA', Aug. 21, p. A14).

This was regarding the matter of "anchor babies" and birthright citizenship that several GOP candidates, especially Donald Trump, have been sowing nonsense about. Trump, in a recent bombastic tirade deplored that fact that "300 Mexican babies were being born each day" in the U.S. and he wanted to stop it.  These :anchor babies" were growing up to take American college spots, as well as jobs.

As the WSJ put it, regarding Trump's gibberish on the 14th amendment:

"Donald Trump fomented the mayhem when he told Bill O'Reilly on Fox News that the Fourteenth Amendment is unconstitutional . 'It's not going to hold up in court, it's going to have to be tested' e said. The distinguished legal scholar added that 'I don't think they have American citizenship, and if you speak to some very, very good lawyers some would disagree - but many of them would agree with me- you;re going to find they do not have American citizenship"

And, of course, this is exactly what those 20,000 Trump turkeys at the stadium in Mobile, as the WSJ noted "nearly half the GOP field apparently believes Mr. Trump has found a winning political message."

The WSJ Editors then proceed to educate these turkeys:

"The Fourteenth Amendment begins, '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'. This is the common law doctrine of juris soli, and the meaning of the language is straightforward..


"'Jurisdiction' defines the territory where the force of law applies and to whom - and this principle is well settled to include almost everyone within U.S.  borders, regardless of their home country or the circumstances of their birth....By the circular restrictionist logic, illegal immigrants could not be prosecuted for committing crimes because they are not U.S. citizens."

This is a crucial point and shows  the nuttiness of the Trump et al "restrictionist" position. Because clearly, if they are not under jurisdiction according to the 14th amendment, then they would not be technically under the force of law  where born or residing, so could not be prosecuted for crimes - since they would not be citizens. Only U.S. citizens can be so prosecuted.

The WSJ editorial notes that "in 1898 the Supreme Court confirmed the Amendment's original meaning ...and it reaffirmed it as recently in 1982 in Plyler vs Doe."

The WSJ then hoists all these bozos on their own petards:

"If the candidates are as  committed to the Constitution and the rule of law as they say they are, then they should propose a constitutional amendment on birthright citizenship. Refresher: This requires a two -thirds majority vote of both houses of congress and ratification by 38 states. Getting Mexico to pay for a wall along its border is more plausible."

One can almost sense in the sarcasm the ridicule the Journal holds for all the wacko GOP candidates who hold this sappy position. Confirmed with this send off:

"The futility of ending birthright citizenship is part of the cheap political appeal. Republicans can pose as MacGruff the Border Crime Dog, signal that they are also mad as hell and slipstream on Mr. Trump's poll numbers....The immigration hawks are correct that birthright citizenship is unusual among nations - but since when did Republicans dump their belief in American exceptionalism?"

Damn! I just knew there had to be a situation where the American exceptionalist rot would come back to haunt the 'pukes - and the WSJ exposed it!