Freshman U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has teamed up with U.S. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) to fulfill a Tea Party dream: denying U.S. citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants. (Right off the bat, let me say that I’m still amazed that Vitter has the nerve to propose laws of any sort, after the big “Family Values” supporter admitted to being a serial adulterer with a serious prostitute habit, who likes for his “ladies” to dress him in diapers. But hey, Louisianans have been known to re-elect some of the seediest politicians in American history, so I guess the rest of us just have to deal with it.)

OK, back to the story. In the past year, a growing chorus of Republicans, including our own Sue Myrick, have campaigned to do whatever it takes to deny U.S. citizenship to undocumented immigrants' children. First, a regular bill was proposed to do away with “birthright citizenship,” but legal experts warned that the law wouldn’t fly because, you know, it directly flouted the 14^th amendment to the Constitution. Then, Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) proposed simply repealing the 14^th amendment, but that didn’t work because most members of Congress didn’t want to be seen as anti-black (the 14^th amendment, passed in 1866, was originally intended to protect the rights of former slaves, although its “birthright citizenship” clause has also been a cornerstone of U.S. immigration policy for over 140 years.)

Rand Paul and Diaper Dave’s proposed amendment would directly target the national “anchor baby” boogeyman by declaring, "a person born in the United States to illegal aliens does not automatically gain citizenship unless at least one parent is a legal citizen, legal immigrant, active member of the Armed Forces or a naturalized legal citizen."

I’ve always found it intriguing, if not exasperating, that it’s usually the same conservatives who continually proclaim the sanctity of the Constitution who always want to change the country's founding document when it suits their agenda (proposed amendments to ban same-sex marriage, for instance).

Sen. Paul said, in introducing the amendment, that "Citizenship is a privilege, and only those who respect our immigration laws should be allowed to enjoy its benefits."  Paul’s declaration makes me wonder where I stand. Since I have very little respect for the nation’s immigration laws, does that make me ineligible for U.S. citizenship? Come to think of it, Paul’s own Tea Partiers seem to have the least respect for American immigration policies, so where does that leave them? (Note: those last two questions were jokes. I know it was obvious to the vast majority of readers, but sometimes it’s a good idea to clarify things, in the interest of avoiding an e-mail tsunami from pinheads).

Amending the Constitution is a long, hard slog, as we supporters of the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s found out. Both houses of Congress must pass a proposed amendment with two-thirds majorities, and then the amendment must be ratified by three-quarters of the states (38 out of 50). Perhaps Paul and Diaper Dave are counting on the sour mood brought on by a sputtering economy to boost their amendment’s chances. Stay tuned.

• Sen. Rand Paul

• Sen. Dave Vitter

Well, we’re screwed.  We wrote recently about budget woes in the state legislature, where the new Republican majorities let it be known that they intended to deal with the $3.7 billion shortfall solely through huge spending cuts.

Our suggestion, as has been made by many others in the state’s press, progressive think tanks, and most Democrats, was that the GOPers should leave the current "temporary" sales tax, and the tax rate on wealthy residents, the same as it is now for the coming year. That one simple decision could reduce the shortfall by more than a billion dollars without raising taxes. It's something that nearly 60 percent of North Carolinians support, according to a recent nonpartisan Elon poll. Granted, leaving the tax rates alone would still leave us in a $2.7 billion hole; but when you're desperately deep in debt, cutting a quick billion is a good place to start, and a sensible way to manage a government.

To our dismay, but certainly not our surprise, the new House Speaker, Thom Tillis, yesterday shot down any talk of making such a sensible, responsible move. According to a Charlotte Observer story by Jim Morrill, even former N.C. governor Jim Martin, A Republican and no slouch in the political-strategies department, told the new GOP leaders that they should at least “hold open” the idea of keeping the temporary taxes on the books to help cut the budget deficit. As Morrill succinctly reported, however, “Tillis said later the decision has already been made to let the taxes expire.”

As we wrote earlier, one thing is for sure: If the $3.7 billion shortfall is handled through spending cuts alone, North Carolina will be left with a second-rate excuse for a state government; many of its people will be worse off; our public schools will be in the crapper; and desperately needed human services will be a mere memory.

So, here’s a big Thanks For Nothin’ to Thom Tillis, the House Speaker and supposed education proponent from Mecklenburg County, for immediately caving in to Tea Party irrationality, right off the bat. At least now we know what we’re dealing with, which is, frankly, a major shit storm that will hit the state for the next two years. It’s not a pretty sight.

• House Speaker Thom Tillis

If, by chance, you’re one of those people who contend our country is in such a mess that it’s driving everyone crazy — or if you simply believe the Apocalypse is upon us — here’s something to boost your argument. Check out Gail Collins’ column in today’s New York Times, about Americans and guns. Collins makes several good points, but what jumps out as proof of (your pick) A. growing national insanity, B. the Apocalypse, or perhaps C. NRA Delusional Syndrome, is this one stark fact: The Utah state legislature is seriously considering a bill to make the Browning M1911 pistol the “official state firearm.” For the moment, forget what this may say about our odd national mindset, and think of this: Within two weeks of a mass slaughter in Arizona that was fostered by another sign of the Apocalypse — i.e., states allowing crazy people to buy dangerous weapons — the wise leaders of Utah want to name an “official state firearm.”

As for the inevitable cry from gun lovers that more gun ownership would lower the crime rate, Collins has an honest, revealing reply: The truth is that no one knows whether that often-repeated, NRA-approved belief is valid. The reason we don't know for sure? “. . . the NRA’s crack lobbyists have managed to stop almost all federal financing for scientific research on gun-related questions.” Hmm, wonder why?

• Browning M1191 Automatic, apparently as important in Utah as keeping the roads paved and the fundamentalist Mormons hidden