Immigrants And Politics

[citygator]

Did I say you are a worm who hates America and is willing to vote Bolshevik??????


I should have added that you are fool who knows less than nothing......

Can anyone imagine someone like you who doesn't recognize the United States Constitution and not know it is the law of the land??????????????


Did you write this?

"No. The constitution isn’t the law of the land, it is the framework for self governance. Laws passed by the government are the law of the land unless it violates the framework set forth by the constitution. Your welcome for the tutorial."

I love America. You love white people. You can’t tell the difference.

You’ve descended into name calling which means you have given up your argument.

My comment on the constitution stands. I agree it’s the framework for law making as I clearly stated. I think you may be too old to still debate.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's part of my argument about the influence of the media in partisan political debates that went as far back as the Buchanan election.

There is a very different element here.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I love America. You love white people. You can’t tell the difference.

You’ve descended into name calling which means you have given up your argument.

My comment on the constitution stands. I agree it’s the framework for law making as I clearly stated. I think you may be too old to still debate.

Answer the question, you buffoon:

If the party tells you to vote Stalinist......

......you'll do it, won't you!!!!!!!!

 

[citygator]

Answer the question, you buffoon:

If the party tells you to vote Stalinist......

......you'll do it, won't you!!!!!!!!

I’ve never been told how to vote because I’m not a fictional character from your mind. I take my much better education than yours, look at the issues, and vote. You’re brainwashed with conspiracies, a slave to fear and fantasy.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I’ve never been told how to vote because I’m not a fictional character from your mind. I take my much better education than yours, look at the issues, and vote. You’re brainwashed with conspiracies, a slave to fear and fantasy.

Did I say you are a worm who hates America and is willing to vote Bolshevik??????


I should have added that you are fool who knows less than nothing......

Can anyone imagine someone like you who doesn't recognize the United States Constitution and not know it is the law of the land??????????????


Did you write this?

"No. The constitution isn’t the law of the land, it is the framework for self governance. Laws passed by the government are the law of the land unless it violates the framework set forth by the constitution. Your welcome for the tutorial."

 

[citygator]

Did I say you are a worm who hates America and is willing to vote Bolshevik??????


I should have added that you are fool who knows less than nothing......

Can anyone imagine someone like you who doesn't recognize the United States Constitution and not know it is the law of the land??????????????


Did you write this?

"No. The constitution isn’t the law of the land, it is the framework for self governance. Laws passed by the government are the law of the land unless it violates the framework set forth by the constitution. Your welcome for the tutorial."

Asked and answered. Because I defend my statements. YOU have yet to address the inconsistencies, mistruths, and out right lies I pointed out in your flimsy OP. I bet you do better research next time so you dont look so foolish.

 

[alang1216]

1. When one studies history all sorts of interesting, perhaps amusing, connections occur. The Democrat Party made a decision nearly a centure ago to flood the nation with immigrants....the terms legal and illegal not always a consideration....because they could use welfare to accrue votes.
True story.


2. One of the results was the introduction of a foreign ideology, communism/socialism/progressivism/liberalism into our politics. Here in NYC an openly communist candidate is poised to win the Democrat mayoralty.

3. November 4th, 1856, the man generally recognized as the worst president in our history, James Buchanan, won the office...and precipitated the Civil War. He beat the first Republican candidate for the office, Fremont, because Van Buren was a spoiler in the election.

4. Buchanan (45.4%) defeats Fremont (33 %) as Van Buren siphons off 21.6% of the vote running as the American Party (Know Nothings), which was rabidly anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic.

5.The Know-Nothing Party (formally the American Party), prominent in the 1850s, was primarily a nativist and anti-Catholic political movement. Its platform focused on restricting the political power and influence of immigrants, particularly the large wave of Irish and German Catholics arriving at that time. (Google)
The platform included:

Severe limits on immigration, especially from Catholic countries

Restricting political office to native-born Americans

Mandating a wait of 21 years before an immigrant could gain citizenship

Restricting public school teachers to Protestants

Mandating daily Bible readings in public schools

Restricting the sale of liquor

"Nothing in my post is fake"

Except plenty is fake:

1. The Democrat Party made a decision nearly a centure ago to flood the nation with immigrants...
True story.

Fake story. The U.S. enacted highly restrictive national origin quota systems in the 1920s, which were favored by nativist sentiments prevalent in both parties at the time and designed to limit immigration, particularly from Southern and Eastern Europe and Asia. Presidents from both parties signed these acts into law.

2. One of the results was the introduction of a foreign ideology, communism/socialism/progressivism/liberalism into our politics.

These ideologies were popular in Europe and were imported by European immigration. Dems didn't push it.

3. November 4th, 1856, the man generally recognized as the worst president in our history, James Buchanan, won the office...and precipitated the Civil War. He beat the first Republican candidate for the office, Fremont, because Van Buren was a spoiler in the election.

4. Buchanan (45.4%) defeats Fremont (33 %) as Van Buren siphons off 21.6% of the vote running as the American Party (Know Nothings), which was rabidly anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic.

5.The Know-Nothing Party (formally the American Party), prominent in the 1850s, was primarily a nativist and anti-Catholic political movement. Its platform focused on restricting the political power and influence of immigrants, particularly the large wave of Irish and German Catholics arriving at that time. (Google)
The platform included:

Severe limits on immigration, especially from Catholic countries

Restricting political office to native-born Americans

Mandating a wait of 21 years before an immigrant could gain citizenship

Restricting public school teachers to Protestants

Mandating daily Bible readings in public schools

Restricting the sale of liquor

How were the Dems responsible for any of this?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Asked and answered. Because I defend my statements. YOU have yet to address the inconsistencies, mistruths, and out right lies I pointed out in your flimsy OP. I bet you do better research next time so you dont look so foolish.

Nay, nay.....what you have done is prove what I said about you.
lll
You are incapable of actual thinking, and simply follow the orders of the politburo, the Democrat Party.

Thhe Constitution is the law of the land, not what the party tells you.


I don 't mind schooling one of out lesser posters...........

AI Overview

Yes, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, meaning no other law or government action can contradict it. It is the foundational legal document for the United States, establishing the framework for the federal government and its powers. The Constitution's status as the "supreme law of the land" is established in Article VI of the document, a clause known as the Supremacy Clause.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Nothing in my post is fake"

Except plenty is fake:

Fake story. The U.S. enacted highly restrictive national origin quota systems in the 1920s, which were favored by nativist sentiments prevalent in both parties at the time and designed to limit immigration, particularly from Southern and Eastern Europe and Asia. Presidents from both parties signed these acts into law.


These ideologies were popular in Europe and were imported by European immigration. Dems didn't push it.


How were the Dems responsible for any of this?

Did you say "fake," Herman????


I hope your name is Herman so it rhymes with what you are.



You posted a series of lies about me, all fake......





"That is exactly NOT what you want.



You want to go back to a time when gays couldn't marry and had to hide in the closet.

You want to go back to a time when you got health care only if you could afford it.

You want to go back to a time when the only religions allowed were Jewish and Christian.

You want to go back to a time when racial and sex discrimination was accepted practice.

You want to go back to a time when all charity came from the religion you belonged to.

You want to go back to a time when pollution was an accepted part of business.

I could go on. Get Ready For A One-Party Nation post# 118



If you can't produce any quotes of mine that support your statements, then you are what you always were, a lying sack of offal.

 

[citygator]

Nay, nay.....what you have done is prove what I said about you.
lll
You are incapable of actual thinking, and simply follow the orders of the politburo, the Democrat Party.

Thhe Constitution is the law of the land, not what the party tells you.


I don 't mind schooling one of out lesser posters...........

AI Overview


View attachment 1181117
Yes, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, meaning no other law or government action can contradict it. It is the foundational legal document for the United States, establishing the framework for the federal government and its powers. The Constitution's status as the "supreme law of the land" is established in Article VI of the document, a clause known as the Supremacy Clause.

Deflection. You have yet to defend your OP. Tell us again how Van Buren ran in '56 when he actually ran in '48 and retired well before the Know-nothings moved on the scene. Or tell us how a bipartisan bill that was introduced by a dem and a pub and was voted for by 75% of both parties which kept immigration levels about the same but removed the discriminatory ratios was a "Democratic plot to flood illegals". Or tell us how the civil war wasnt over slavery but Buchanan's election.

You wont do any of it because you have no idea what you are talking about. This whole thread was a soft ball for me to hit out of the park. Do better.

 

[Lockback]

As I wrote, flooding the country with immigrants added communism to the ballot.

Here's proof:



The most groundbreaking results of this poll are found in the cross-tabs. Among American-born New Yorkers, Cuomo leads by a healthy margin, with Mamdani only winning 31% of the vote.

Among foreign-born New Yorkers, Mamdani earns an extraordinary 62% of the vote, far outpacing Cuomo and Sliwa.

In the aftermath of the New York City mayoral debate, Patriot Polling conducted a citywide poll of 715 registered voters between October 18 and 19.

patriotpolling.com

It's all part of the plan, madam. It's always been the long game ... and they're winning.
I'll be dead and gone but my grandkids could well be living under a Communist dictatorship. I've fought against it my entire life. We've got some great fighters on our side but ignorance and, yes, uncontrolled immigration and not teaching history anymore have all contributed to what I see as a future disaster for America.

 

[alang1216]

You posted a series of lies about me, all fake......

You want to go back to a time when gays couldn't marry and had to hide in the closet.

You're a well known conservative/Trump/MAGA supporter so all these policies must be your policies, something you have never denied. So stand up and be counted, ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF GAY MARRIAGE OR NOT? If you're not we all know who the liar is.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's all part of the plan, madam. It's always been the long game ... and they're winning.
I'll be dead and gone but my grandkids could well be living under a Communist dictatorship. I've fought against it my entire life. We've got some great fighters on our side but ignorance and, yes, uncontrolled immigration and not teaching history anymore have all contributed to what I see as a future disaster for America.

I agree....they are winning.
I feel the need to write that in an OP

 

[PoliticalChic]

I agree....they are winning.
I feel the need to write that in an OP

​

​

Posted this morn:​

Perspective Of A Perpetual Pessimist​

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[whitehall]

Jane Fonda and John Kerry organized something they called the "Winter Soldiers project" which was alleged to be for Vietnam Vets but opened to everyone. The intent was to unite racial anger with the anti-war movement and create a revolution. It didn't work because the radicals in the anti-war movement were more interested in drugs. It's important because it shows the agenda of Hollywood and politics as far back as the 70's

 

[DGS49]

Few of the people who post here seem to recognize the distinction between FEDERAL policy and STATE/LOCAL policy.

The Federal government cannot and will not ever embark on an initiative for the Government to take over the "means of production" (farms. factories, mines, mills, etc.), or to eliminate private property. They can regulate the shit out of them, but those two factors are truly the goose that lays the golden eggs, and even Democrats recognize that any attacks on those two would be both unconstitutional and foolish in the extreme. Accordingly, silly talk about the Commies or Socialists taking over the central government are not useful.

Nevertheless, since the storied days of FDR, Democrats in Congress have embarked on a massive campaign to employ the Federal government as a distributor of goodies to needy and select constituencies, despite Congress having ZERO legitimate power to confer benefits on individual citizens, meaning such things as housing, food, medical care, "education," and so forth. Unfortunately each of these unconstitutional programs creates a constituency of needy and greedy VOTERS who scorn any politician who tries to diminish or eliminate these programs, despite the obvious fact that our tax regime does not provide sufficient funding to pay for them. Indeed the beneficiaries are NOT the ones who pay the lion's share of the taxes that pay for them so why would they care about such things as "budget busters"?

State and local governments, on the other hand, have far more latitude to take money from their taxpayers and distribute it in the form of a "social safety net." Mr. Mamdani wants to take money from New York's taxpayers to pay for "free" buses. So what? He wants to "stabilize" New York's horrific rental market; I personally think that this is not possible, but so what? He wants to create and subsidize some City-owned grocery stores. So what? He wants to shift away from policing, apprehension, and incarceration, and into singing Kum Ba Ya. So what? Nobody outside NYC will be impacted in the least.

Take your worst nightmare...a Democrat ticket of AOC and Mamdani in 2028. Who gives a ****? None of the bullshit they espouse can be done on a national level. They could not be any worse than the last two Democrat Presidents, and I am absolutely serious in saying that.

I hope that the new NYC mayor is able to do everything he claims be wants to do. The predicted migration out of the city by high earners will never happen. They do not live in NYC because of its good government - far from it. Trust Fox News to find a few emigrants to interview, claiming that they represent a massive wave, but that will be bullshit.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Few of the people who post here seem to recognize the distinction between FEDERAL policy and STATE/LOCAL policy.

The Federal government cannot and will not ever embark on an initiative for the Government to take over the "means of production" (farms. factories, mines, mills, etc.), or to eliminate private property. They can regulate the shit out of them, but those two factors are truly the goose that lays the golden eggs, and even Democrats recognize that any attacks on those two would be both unconstitutional and foolish in the extreme. Accordingly, silly talk about the Commies or Socialists taking over the central government are not useful.

Nevertheless, since the storied days of FDR, Democrats in Congress have embarked on a massive campaign to employ the Federal government as a distributor of goodies to needy and select constituencies, despite Congress having ZERO legitimate power to confer benefits on individual citizens, meaning such things as housing, food, medical care, "education," and so forth. Unfortunately each of these unconstitutional programs creates a constituency of needy and greedy VOTERS who scorn any politician who tries to diminish or eliminate these programs, despite the obvious fact that our tax regime does not provide sufficient funding to pay for them. Indeed the beneficiaries are NOT the ones who pay the lion's share of the taxes that pay for them so why would they care about such things as "budget busters"?

State and local governments, on the other hand, have far more latitude to take money from their taxpayers and distribute it in the form of a "social safety net." Mr. Mamdani wants to take money from New York's taxpayers to pay for "free" buses. So what? He wants to "stabilize" New York's horrific rental market; I personally think that this is not possible, but so what? He wants to create and subsidize some City-owned grocery stores. So what? He wants to shift away from policing, apprehension, and incarceration, and into singing Kum Ba Ya. So what? Nobody outside NYC will be impacted in the least.

Take your worst nightmare...a Democrat ticket of AOC and Mamdani in 2028. Who gives a ****? None of the bullshit they espouse can be done on a national level. They could not be any worse than the last two Democrat Presidents, and I am absolutely serious in saying that.

I hope that the new NYC mayor is able to do everything he claims be wants to do. The predicted migration out of the city by high earners will never happen. They do not live in NYC because of its good government - far from it. Trust Fox News to find a few emigrants to interview, claiming that they represent a massive wave, but will be bullshit.

The government can institute any and all re-direction of America through regulation.


"There are ample opportunities for corruption in economies where excessive red tape and extensive interactions between private sector actors and regulatory agencies are necessary to get things done. The 20 worst-scoring economies on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index average 8 procedures to start a business and 15 to obtain a building permit. Conversely, the 20 best-performing economies complete the same formalities with 4 and 11 steAps, respectively. Moreover, economies that have adopted electronic means of compliance with regulatory requiremets—such as obtaining licenses and paying taxes—experience a lower incidence of bribery."
Which Nations Have The Least Red Tape?

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[whitehall]

Answer the question, you buffoon:

If the party tells you to vote Stalinist......

......you'll do it, won't you!!!!!!!!

Sadly the democrat party already proved that point in Va. and NYC