Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Trump Challenges the 14th Amendment
Friday, August 21, 2015 4:35 AM
SHINYGOODGUY
Friday, August 21, 2015 11:00 AM
SECOND
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
Friday, August 21, 2015 11:55 AM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Quote:These military interventions were most often carried out by the United States Marine Corps. The Marines were involved so often that they developed a manual, The Strategy and Tactics of Small Wars, in 1921. On occasion, the Navy provided gunfire support and Army troops were also used. With the Treaty of Paris, Spain ceded control of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines to the United States. Thereafter, the United States conducted military interventions in Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic. The series of conflicts only ended with the withdrawal of troops from Haiti in 1934 under President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Friday, August 21, 2015 9:25 PM
ELVISCHRIST
Saturday, August 22, 2015 4:20 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: My reaction is: FINALLY! This is something my liberal friends and I have disagreed abut for many years. Hubby and I have looked to emigrate to someplace that is kinder to disabled adults than the USA, which is a dogpit. Having seriously looked at the immigration and citizenship requirements of many nations I can tell you that without question ... The 14th Amendment is an international aberration. There is NO OTHER nation that I've run across that has anything remotely like it in its legal structure. And to hear Mexico whine about the USA's possible rejection of "birthright" citizenship is just maddening, because 1) They have nothing at all like in their own legal code. 2) In fact, they have pretty stringent requirements for citizenship, and fairly large restrictions on non-citizens. Unlike the USA, Mexico doesn't allow foreigners to buy land. 3) They, in fact, have harsh policy and even worse treatment of illegal immigrants than we do, and... 4) Obviously, they're only trying to protect their OWN economic/political "safety valve", on the back of the USA economy. 5) The only entities which truly benefit from illegal immigration are corporations. But, unlike Trump, I'd make this part of a larger policy change, not just on immigration but also to correct our policies which created this immigration problem to being with. I started out by asking ... WHY is there so much immigration into the USA? Well, it's because of poor economic and social conditions in Central and South America. So, WHY are economic and social conditions so poor? Well, among other things, it is probably because of relentless interference of the USA in its "southern neighbors'" political and economic affairs for- literally- over 100 years. There is not a single nation south of the USA (with the exception of Costa Rica) which has not been directly invaded by the US Marines (or other armed forces) (sometimes more than once) or destabilized with covert funding, arming, and training by USA (sometimes more than once). There is not a single nation which has not seen its social justice, democracy, land reform, education, dignity, or nationalization movements brutally quashed by US troops or paid armed forces in favor of plantations/ rancheros. international corporations, or banks ... starting with the "banana wars" beginning in 1898 ... Quote:These military interventions were most often carried out by the United States Marine Corps. The Marines were involved so often that they developed a manual, The Strategy and Tactics of Small Wars, in 1921. On occasion, the Navy provided gunfire support and Army troops were also used. With the Treaty of Paris, Spain ceded control of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines to the United States. Thereafter, the United States conducted military interventions in Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic. The series of conflicts only ended with the withdrawal of troops from Haiti in 1934 under President Franklin D. Roosevelt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Wars and as late as 2009, when Zelaya was militarily removed from office by US-friendly troops. Needless to say, this interference prevented land and wealth redistribution, better education, democratic change, economic development, the meeting of people's natural aspirations for control over their future and well-being, and lawful governance; and promoted policies of gross inequality and the violent suppression necessary to maintain it. There was a joke going around in my young adult years about the number of revolutions south of the border, which went something like " Did you know that bullfighting is the most popular national sport in south America?" "Isn't that revolting?" "No, that's the second-most popular sport" Then, from our imperial height, the USA twisted arms to get NAFTA and CAFTA signed, which had negative effects on BOTH the Anglo and Hispanic worlds. "Free trade" pushed American (subsidized) agricultural crops onto our "partners", which pushed many small farmers off the land (which BTW make up a large part of our illegal immigrant problem), led to national food insecurity, and relegated many people to low-wage manufacturing jobs dependent on exports to the USA. Clearly, one of the first things we need to do is STOP INTERFERING in politics that are NOT OURS. Second, we should break NAFTA and CAFTA (Instead, Obama is trying to get MORE "free trade" agreements signed, which will reduce internal self-governance even more). Many of my liberal friends sympathize with the illegal immigrants out of a sense of liberal guilt for past sins. But unlike them (and as my over-the-text line says) I don't believe in sharing problems, and I don't believe in treating people like pigeons: Allowing people to roost wherever they can find an unused spot and throwing them crumbs once in a while. Seriously, that's what liberal guilt results in. We should fix the source of the problem. Another point is that it does no nation [OURS] any good to have a significant minority which neither speaks the language nor is committed its place of residence. So, in addition to 1) Eliminating the birthright citizenship, I would 2) Make English the official language. Everyone in the USA on anything other than a (very) temporary visa must learn to speak English. (Perhaps that's why I'm supportive of phonetic English) 3) Make citizenship not only optional, but mandatory. No 30-year residency with one foot half-in. You either become a citizen in 15 years, or you go back to the land of your (or your parents') birth. And that includes learning English. 4) Break NAFTA, CAFTA, and the other "free trade" which bind our trade to their, and put tariffs in place which promote re-industrialization of the USA. -------------- You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
Saturday, August 22, 2015 4:44 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ElvisChrist: You can, of course, eliminate birthright citizenship. The only thing it takes is a constitutional amendment. Think about it. We couldn't pass one for women's equality, but I'm sure more people hate immigrants than hate women (although a substantial portion - a majority, really - of conservatives hate both with a passion). Trump is a dolt. He wouldn't know how to poor piss out of a boot if the directions were on the heel. Saying something in the Constitution is unconstitutional is just one of the dumbest fucking things anyone has ever said, and it should immediately disqualify him for office anywhere. By the way, it's ironic that so many conservatives oppose birthright citizenship. Marco Rubio wouldn't be a citizen if it weren't for birthright citiezenship. Neither would Ted Cruz. Nor Jeb Bush's kids (his wife wasn't a citizen when she had her first two kids). Nor 4 out of 5 of Trump's kids (born to non-citizen immigrants). Maybe it's telling us something about these people and their family values - they don't want their kids and families to live here with them? Birthright citizenship is legal because it's in our Constitution. Kind of like guns and all your stupid religions. Don't like it? Change the Constitution. But stop bitching about how Obama won't uphold the Constitution if you're not willing to.
Saturday, August 22, 2015 9:02 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: Okay, let's say that is a reality, and Congress has the balls to amend the Amendment. Where do we begin? 5, 10, 20 years ago. How about 50 years ago or when the Amendment was ratified!?
Saturday, August 22, 2015 10:22 AM
WHOZIT
Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: Talk about the blind leading the blind. Here we have the super-candidate, Trump, questioning the validity of the 14th Amendment saying it's un-Constitutional. This is a real estate mogul using his superior intellect to comment on the Constitutionality of an amendment that has existed since before the Constitution was written. Plus the birthright issue has been tested in the courts and has, obviously, prevailed. Tried, tested, game, set, match! Commence au festival! SGG
Saturday, August 22, 2015 12:03 PM
Saturday, August 22, 2015 12:54 PM
Quote:Originally posted by ElvisChrist: idiots.
Saturday, August 22, 2015 1:51 PM
Saturday, August 22, 2015 9:19 PM
Saturday, August 22, 2015 9:21 PM
Sunday, August 23, 2015 1:39 AM
Quote:Originally posted by whozit: Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: Talk about the blind leading the blind. Here we have the super-candidate, Trump, questioning the validity of the 14th Amendment saying it's un-Constitutional. This is a real estate mogul using his superior intellect to comment on the Constitutionality of an amendment that has existed since before the Constitution was written. Plus the birthright issue has been tested in the courts and has, obviously, prevailed. Tried, tested, game, set, match! Commence au festival! SGG But YOU and a bunch of lib whores in the media are experts on the 14th amendment? Democrats want illegals here to cut their grass and clean their bathrooms. Republicans want them here for cheap labor in factory's and crush the unions The fact is the far left and right want to use these people, not help them. The Hollywood left wants them here to clean their homes, they have no chance to get jobs at film and TV studios filled with union crews. Do ya think some film producer will stop at a Home Depot parking lot at yell, I need 12 people to work on a film set! Ya think the unions would be OK with that? CEO's want these people to work in factory's and pay them as little as they can get away with. If we send these people home wages will go up because of the demand for workers. I know this because the trucking industry is short drivers and will pay drivers over $20 an hour to start. Meanwhile fast food workers make minimum wage because it's easy to find people to work there and they don't need any experience.
Sunday, August 23, 2015 2:03 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ElvisChrist: Did you hear the people at the Trump/KKK rally shouting "WHITE POWER!" during his speech? That's the Republican base. That's EXACTLY who they are and why they support Trump. And Sig, next time you want to blather on about people needing to speak the language, how's about you do it in fucking Navajo, you asshole.
Sunday, August 23, 2015 2:07 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ElvisChrist: By the way, the claim that birthright citizenship is an American aberration is also quite off the mark. 33 countries do it. We're one of them.
Sunday, August 23, 2015 2:18 AM
Sunday, August 23, 2015 2:29 AM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: Okay, let's say that is a reality, and Congress has the balls to amend the Amendment. Where do we begin? 5, 10, 20 years ago. How about 50 years ago or when the Amendment was ratified!? Did you know Trump can have what he wants without amending the Constitution? To know that you got to read the footnotes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark#cite_ref-Oforji_167-1 The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals criticized the granting of citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, suggesting that Congress can and should act to change this policy. Oforji v. Ashcroft, 354 F.3d 609 (7th Cir. 2003). "[O]ne rule that Congress should rethink ... is awarding citizenship to everyone born in the United States (... United States v. Wong Kim Ark ...), including the children of illegal immigrants whose sole motive in immigrating was to confer U.S. citizenship on their as yet unborn children.... We should not be encouraging foreigners to come to the United States solely to enable them to confer U.S. citizenship on their future children.... A constitutional amendment may be required to change the rule ... but I doubt it.... Congress would not be flouting the Constitution if it amended the Immigration and Nationality Act to put an end to the nonsense.... Our [judges'] hands, however, are tied. We cannot amend the statutory provisions on citizenship and asylum." http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1423087.html President Trump can do it without breaking the Constitution.
Sunday, August 23, 2015 7:37 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: The 14th Amendment, it is the law of the land, Trump, if he becomes president, can issue an Executive Order (it's okay, he's white, so Congress won't obstruct), but it will still be Un-Constitutional. It would take an act of Congress to change the law.
Sunday, August 23, 2015 10:44 AM
Quote:The Amendment was born out of an English law that existed well before the Constitution was ever writ. So it is not purely American.
Quote:By the way, the claim that birthright citizenship is an American aberration is also quite off the mark.
Quote:And Sig, next time you want to blather on about people needing to speak the language, how's about you do it in fucking Navajo, you asshole.
Sunday, August 23, 2015 12:58 PM
Sunday, August 23, 2015 7:14 PM
Sunday, August 23, 2015 9:19 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Monday, August 24, 2015 1:46 AM
Monday, August 24, 2015 4:05 AM
Monday, August 24, 2015 6:05 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: No other takers? Nobody wants to spend some quality-time thinking about how to solve the problem of immigration, and what mass movements of people mean in a world where there is no "free" land and every place is already occupied by a different group of people who may have their own ideas how to run a society and an economy? Figures.
Monday, August 24, 2015 12:04 PM
Monday, August 24, 2015 12:25 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: You know, I wrote a lengthy and rather brilliant response, but, for some reason I never quite understand with this site, it sent me back to the Log In page. This is totally frustrating................. Anyway, FUCK IT! A whole lot of good it's going to do. SGG
Monday, August 24, 2015 12:47 PM
Monday, August 24, 2015 4:44 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: We had our A/C replaced, and the contractor was clearly using illegal laborers . . .
Monday, August 24, 2015 5:49 PM
Monday, August 24, 2015 6:14 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: The City and County of Los Angeles passed a living wage ordinance. If the whole state would pass a similar ordinance, it would help prevent abuse of illegals by contractors at least in California. That's because every contract drawn up would have to include the living wage calculation, instead of exploitative wages being hidden in the total amount.
Monday, August 24, 2015 6:59 PM
Tuesday, August 25, 2015 3:09 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: At the very least, the living wage ordinance airs out the bids for public institutions, and institutions that get public money. They have to show they're complying with the law in how they award contracts. And all of that information, is, by law, public.
Tuesday, August 25, 2015 4:38 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY: You know, I wrote a lengthy and rather brilliant response, but, for some reason I never quite understand with this site, it sent me back to the Log In page. This is totally frustrating................. Anyway, FUCK IT! A whole lot of good it's going to do. SGG It seems to me that the site logs people off almost at random. It doesn't seem to have to do with time of day because it has logged me off at any time, and it doesn't seem to have to do with how long I've been logged on with "no activity" because it has logged me off after just a few moments of being logged on. Maybe it has to do with the number of people who are logged on or trying to log on, because there's no apparent pattern or trigger. What works for me when I try too "save response" or "update post" and get the "Please log in" message is Before you do anything else, hit the browser "BACK" button. This should bring up the last page that was in PC memory, which should include the post that you just entered. On the same screen, open up a text editor of ANY sort: Word, gedit, emailer... anything that will hold the text you're trying to save. Open up a blank email or a text editing page (new document). Highlight your FFF post by left-mouse-button-hold-and-drag, and then once the text is highlighted, right mouse click on the highlighted text and select "COPY". This puts the text onto a little portion of memory called clipboard. Right mouse-click on the blank text editor page and select "PASTE". This puts your post safely into another application, where it will remain while you ... Log (back) into FFF.net, and open a REPLY TO window. You can try just right-clicking on the open RELY window, and selecting PASTE. If your post is still on the clipboard, it will copy onto the newly opened window. But if the text has been lost from the clipboard for whatever reason, you can still highlight-COPY-PASTE from the copy that you placed in your other application, and the SAVE RESPONSE. If you get a chance to try out this recovery procedure, let me know how it works. I wish that you would re-post your reply. I'm always interested in what you have to say. I may disagree with it, though! -------------- You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
Tuesday, August 25, 2015 5:20 AM
Tuesday, August 25, 2015 1:51 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Brenda: What about the words written on the board carried by the lady with the lamp, "Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses, yearning for freedom" ?
Tuesday, August 25, 2015 10:06 PM
Wednesday, August 26, 2015 12:11 AM
Wednesday, August 26, 2015 12:56 AM
Wednesday, August 26, 2015 9:52 AM
Wednesday, August 26, 2015 11:52 PM
Thursday, August 27, 2015 8:15 AM
Thursday, August 27, 2015 9:16 AM
Thursday, August 27, 2015 10:41 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: The problem is JOBS. To drive a point home, if you want to see an example of who paid for uncontrolled immigration, all you have to do is look at ...
Friday, August 28, 2015 1:56 AM
Friday, August 28, 2015 4:45 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Polls show him to be the preferred candidate among not just all Republican voters but also the party’s vocal evangelical subset. Personally, I find the teachings of Christ have very little to do with Christianity. Some people see Ted Cruz as the inheritor of the religious republican wing if/ when Trump falls from grace. http://www.salon.com/2015/08/26/ted_cruz_is_the_true_gop_dark_horse_how_hes_winning_over_the_fanatical_right_at_exactly_the_right_time/
Friday, August 28, 2015 5:02 AM
Quote:Originally posted by second: The Christians ought to notice Trump is un-presidential in tone and character. Example: Trump opened a conference by yelling at Univision anchor Jorge Ramos, who he claimed asked a question without being called on. He continued to yell at Ramos at some length about being out of turn, then turned to one of his campaign staffers, nodded, and pointed at Ramos, whereupon the staffer removed Ramos from the conference. The next reporter’s question, naturally, was, “Why did you have him thrown out?” Amazingly, Trump responded to this question, I’m not kidding, by answering, “I didn’t have him thrown out, you’ll have to ask security, whoever they are.” When reporters pressed him with the obvious fact that the person who had him removed was on his staff, he immediately changed his tune to say that it was because the reporter was a “highly emotional person,” with no mention of the fact that 30 seconds earlier he had been denying that he had Ramos thrown out at all. When Trump is faced with someone willing to be as much of a bully as he is, he couldn't handle it, so he had the guy thrown out and then lied about doing it. www.redstate.com/2015/08/25/awesome-terrible-majesty-donald-trump-press-conference/ "Psychopaths often cover up their deficiencies with a ready and engaging charm, so it can take time to realize what you are dealing with. Kent A. Kiehl used to ask inexperienced graduate students to interview a particularly appealing inmate before acquainting themselves with his criminal history. These budding psychologists would emerge quite certain that such a well-spoken, trustworthy person must have been wrongly imprisoned. Until, that is, they read his file and went back to reinterview him, at which point he would say offhandedly, 'Oh, yeah, I didn't want to tell you about all that stuff. That's the old me.'... www.delanceyplace.com/view-archives.php?p=2878
Friday, August 28, 2015 5:10 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: The problem is JOBS. Illegal immigrants are seen as taking jobs away from Americans ... and, they do! Illegals are an easy way of finding cheap exploitable foreign labor without the muss and fuss of transporting raw materials and products, all in the convenience of your own backyard! People are stupid if they think Trump ... one of the mega-wealthy ... has a solution to spread the wealth. But EVEN IF ... no, ESPECIALLY IF .... you have an economic plan that involves creating meaningful jobs for everyone who can and wants to work, you can't absorb a huge amount of incoming labor. And what if you want to be ecologically sustainable? Do you think, for example, that the southwest with its chronic water shortage can absorb a few ten million more? Once upon a time, when "the west" was free for the taking ... once the Indians were gotten rid of, of course ... and forty acres and a mule could be gotten for the price of being willing to work the land ... there was a place for everyone. To drive a point home, if you want to see an example of who paid for uncontrolled immigration, all you have to do is look at natives in any land settled by Europeans, whether is was north and south America, Australia, or New Zealand. But, all of this for later. -------------- You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
Friday, August 28, 2015 5:19 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: So, the reason to keep illegal immigrants in the USA is because they're cheap labor, and it's too expensive to deport them? Sounds pretty corporatist to me! -------------- You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL