Immigration....Who To Invite In?

[watchingfromafar]

Trump needs to visit the Statue of Liberty

STATUE OF LIBERTY
“Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free/The wretched refuse of your teeming shore/Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me/I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

"The Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World" was a gift of friendship from the people of France to the United States and is recognized as a universal symbol of freedom and democracy. The Statue of Liberty was dedicated on October 28, 1886.(just after the civil war) It was designated as a National Monument in 1924. Employees of the National Park Service have been caring for the colossal copper statue since 1933.

-

 

[danielpalos]

we should be upgrading Ellis Island and as much surrounding infrastructure as we can. port cities could also be a priority.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You need some new material. Are you so ignorant that you think that only the left has all the answers? You should try to explain your positions. Come up with some new words. Explain what in the Hell you are peddling.

why bother alleging to be credible, when incredible is the best the right wing can do?

Our welfare clause is General not limited in any way. We have a Commerce Clause. We should not be losing money on border policy if we are alleging to subscribe to Capitalism.

There is no such thing as credibility in the right wing, danielpalos.

In the left wing, credibility only means your commitment to socialism, communism and other failed philosophies.

BTW, please refer me to the Capitalism Clause in the Constitution. I forgot where that one is.

We have a Commerce Clause.

Think new material, dannyboy

Our Constitution is express not implied every time we need to quibble in more serious venues.

Don't you know anybody that can help you come up with some new material?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Bigotry is all the right wing has.

We should have no illegals or illegal underclass with a naturalization clause. And, tourism if the first, second, or third largest employer in twenty-nine States.

There are no illegal humans? That's what you are saying. But on introspection, what do you know about this? That sounds nice and stuff. But our Constitution says :Nobody is above the law. Not people that violate immigration law, not those that employ them, either. Hitler was as human as illegal alien from Chihuahua Mexico. But it doesn't let them off the hook or give them gravitas either way.

I'm glad that you are addressing the topic. Thank you.

The problem with federal immigration laws is that the Constitution does NOT give the feds any authority to pass such laws. That lies within the purview of the state.

If you think we're being invaded, that is not an "illegal" problem, that is a National Security issue requiring Trump to get a Declaration of War from Congress and use a military solution. Petition your congresscritters. A war would give you a better shot at what you're after.

States have no basis to care whether someone is from out of State or from out of state since 1808.

Was that a hiccup?

That part of the Constitution outlawed the importation of slaves after 1808. The Constitution gave the slavers a full decade to get the memo, find another line of work, and cycle out of hauling people.

 

[danielpalos]

why bother alleging to be credible, when incredible is the best the right wing can do?

Our welfare clause is General not limited in any way. We have a Commerce Clause. We should not be losing money on border policy if we are alleging to subscribe to Capitalism.

There is no such thing as credibility in the right wing, danielpalos.

In the left wing, credibility only means your commitment to socialism, communism and other failed philosophies.

BTW, please refer me to the Capitalism Clause in the Constitution. I forgot where that one is.

We have a Commerce Clause.

Think new material, dannyboy

Our Constitution is express not implied every time we need to quibble in more serious venues.

Don't you know anybody that can help you come up with some new material?

You are the one who needs a superior argument.

 

[danielpalos]

Bigotry is all the right wing has.

We should have no illegals or illegal underclass with a naturalization clause. And, tourism if the first, second, or third largest employer in twenty-nine States.

There are no illegal humans? That's what you are saying. But on introspection, what do you know about this? That sounds nice and stuff. But our Constitution says :Nobody is above the law. Not people that violate immigration law, not those that employ them, either. Hitler was as human as illegal alien from Chihuahua Mexico. But it doesn't let them off the hook or give them gravitas either way.

I'm glad that you are addressing the topic. Thank you.

The problem with federal immigration laws is that the Constitution does NOT give the feds any authority to pass such laws. That lies within the purview of the state.

If you think we're being invaded, that is not an "illegal" problem, that is a National Security issue requiring Trump to get a Declaration of War from Congress and use a military solution. Petition your congresscritters. A war would give you a better shot at what you're after.

States have no basis to care whether someone is from out of State or from out of state since 1808.

Was that a hiccup?

That part of the Constitution outlawed the importation of slaves after 1808. The Constitution gave the slavers a full decade to get the memo, find another line of work, and cycle out of hauling people.

It is about entry into the Union, after 1808. States have no jurisdiction.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

There is no such thing as credibility in the right wing, danielpalos.

In the left wing, credibility only means your commitment to socialism, communism and other failed philosophies.

BTW, please refer me to the Capitalism Clause in the Constitution. I forgot where that one is.

We have a Commerce Clause.

Think new material, dannyboy

Our Constitution is express not implied every time we need to quibble in more serious venues.

Don't you know anybody that can help you come up with some new material?

You are the one who needs a superior argument.

Any argument beats a non-responsive argument which most people on this board agree that's all you make.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Bigotry is all the right wing has.

We should have no illegals or illegal underclass with a naturalization clause. And, tourism if the first, second, or third largest employer in twenty-nine States.

There are no illegal humans? That's what you are saying. But on introspection, what do you know about this? That sounds nice and stuff. But our Constitution says :Nobody is above the law. Not people that violate immigration law, not those that employ them, either. Hitler was as human as illegal alien from Chihuahua Mexico. But it doesn't let them off the hook or give them gravitas either way.

I'm glad that you are addressing the topic. Thank you.

The problem with federal immigration laws is that the Constitution does NOT give the feds any authority to pass such laws. That lies within the purview of the state.

If you think we're being invaded, that is not an "illegal" problem, that is a National Security issue requiring Trump to get a Declaration of War from Congress and use a military solution. Petition your congresscritters. A war would give you a better shot at what you're after.

States have no basis to care whether someone is from out of State or from out of state since 1808.

Was that a hiccup?

That part of the Constitution outlawed the importation of slaves after 1808. The Constitution gave the slavers a full decade to get the memo, find another line of work, and cycle out of hauling people.

It is about entry into the Union, after 1808. States have no jurisdiction.

Of course they do. The governor of any state has the sole discretion to call out the National Guard to protect the safety of a state.

 

[MaryL]

Trump needs to visit the Statue of Liberty

STATUE OF LIBERTY
“Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free/The wretched refuse of your teeming shore/Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me/I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

"The Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World" was a gift of friendship from the people of France to the United States and is recognized as a universal symbol of freedom and democracy. The Statue of Liberty was dedicated on October 28, 1886.(just after the civil war) It was designated as a National Monument in 1924. Employees of the National Park Service have been caring for the colossal copper statue since 1933.

-

E. Lazarus' poem never said anything about; " Give us your criminals, your diseases, those products of overpopulation you can't deal with and then let them displace our own underclass and then exploit them cynically because they are cheap laborers" stuff. Nope, not in that poem. It isn't artistic or flattering. But that's what we are getting.

 

[MaryL]

View attachment 115358

And lets go to the deepest darkest regions: Lets go to the next realm: Umm: Sanctuary cities, was that ever on a ballot? No. Because this is a democracy ...Ok, it's a democratic republic. Was it ever say, on a referendum? No. Did our noble leaders actually ask us if we want making Mexican illegal aliens out of bounds for INS? Despite the fact it negatively impacts on middle or lower class American workers? No. So how is this even an issue?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

View attachment 115358

And lets go to the deepest darkest regions: Lets go to the next realm: Umm: Sanctuary cities, was that ever on a ballot? No. Because this is a democracy ...Ok, it's a democratic republic. Was it ever say, on a referendum? No. Did our noble leaders actually ask us if we want making Mexican illegal aliens out of bounds for INS? Despite the fact it negatively impacts on middle or lower class American workers? No. So how is this even an issue?

1) The Constitution guarantees to all states in this union a "Republican Form of Government" (Article 4 Section 4 of the United States Constitution)

2) It was the right wing, anti-immigrant lobby that protected Sanctuary Cities. Let me explain it to you:

Back in the 1990s various Sheriff's across the country didn't want to enforce the Brady Bill and do background checks. They reasoned that they were elected by local and state citizens and could not be forced to enforce federal laws. Doing the federal government's work would cost manpower and taxes that states and local governments didn't have. We have state and federal laws for a reason.

The United States Supreme Court rolled all the cases into one case it ended up on the docket for the United States Supreme Court to rule on. Here is what they said:

"The Government had argued that the anti-commandeering doctrine established in New York v. United States (1992), which held that Congress could not command state legislatures to either pass a law or take ownership of nuclear waste, did not apply to state officials.[6] Rejecting the Government's argument, the Court held that the Tenth Amendment categorically forbids the Federal Government from commanding state officials directly.[6]As such, the Brady Act's mandate on the Sheriffs to perform background checks was unconstitutional."

Printz v. United States - Wikipedia

Did you catch that bolded part? That is a legal principle, called a precedent. Put in understandable terminology, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The local and state governments that support Sanctuary Cities argued that the federal government could not command the cities and states as they had no constitutional authority based upon Printz v. United States.

Fresh Printz: Why Trump and Sessions Can't Stop the Sanctuary Movement

Sorry, but the feds have no authority over state officials. It's too bad that Americans don't understand this fundamental principle. But, if the government were pursuing YOUR Rights and your state government refused to participate (i.e. gun control, Martial Law, forced euthanasia for older people, or any number of tyrannical over-reach by the government) you would accept the principle.

3) We have a problem with foreigners coming here. However, the economic arguments the right makes are total B.S. Every non-partisan study refutes the position you took. Furthermore, you're kind of stuck with an inconsistent position:

Without a wall; without any actual immigration laws being passed, Trump is touting the economy and the low unemployment rate. Unfortunately, you cannot argue both positions. Well you can, but the psychological term for that is called cognitive dissonance.

 

[danielpalos]

We have a Commerce Clause.

Think new material, dannyboy

Our Constitution is express not implied every time we need to quibble in more serious venues.

Don't you know anybody that can help you come up with some new material?

You are the one who needs a superior argument.

Any argument beats a non-responsive argument which most people on this board agree that's all you make.

you need something that actually refutes my simple and repetitive, one liners. mere rejection is a fallacy not refutation.

 

[danielpalos]

There are no illegal humans? That's what you are saying. But on introspection, what do you know about this? That sounds nice and stuff. But our Constitution says :Nobody is above the law. Not people that violate immigration law, not those that employ them, either. Hitler was as human as illegal alien from Chihuahua Mexico. But it doesn't let them off the hook or give them gravitas either way.

I'm glad that you are addressing the topic. Thank you.

The problem with federal immigration laws is that the Constitution does NOT give the feds any authority to pass such laws. That lies within the purview of the state.

If you think we're being invaded, that is not an "illegal" problem, that is a National Security issue requiring Trump to get a Declaration of War from Congress and use a military solution. Petition your congresscritters. A war would give you a better shot at what you're after.

States have no basis to care whether someone is from out of State or from out of state since 1808.

Was that a hiccup?

That part of the Constitution outlawed the importation of slaves after 1808. The Constitution gave the slavers a full decade to get the memo, find another line of work, and cycle out of hauling people.

It is about entry into the Union, after 1808. States have no jurisdiction.

Of course they do. The governor of any state has the sole discretion to call out the National Guard to protect the safety of a state.

not about entry into the Union. it has to be about the security of our free States. our welfare clause is General not common.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Think new material, dannyboy

Our Constitution is express not implied every time we need to quibble in more serious venues.

Don't you know anybody that can help you come up with some new material?

You are the one who needs a superior argument.

Any argument beats a non-responsive argument which most people on this board agree that's all you make.

you need something that actually refutes my simple and repetitive, one liners. mere rejection is a fallacy not refutation.

dannyboy, you come here every day to troll. You've had your ass beat by so many people that if I were you, my self esteem would cause me to commit suicide.

I have kicked your nonsensical one liners with so many facts that you should be embarrassed to make such a post as you just did. You call everything you disagree with a fallacy. It's not and your limited vocabulary tells me that you would benefit off of buying a dictionary.

Virtually every statement you've made on this board has been refuted. I refute your total and absolute bullshit with indisputable and irrefutable facts. That you fail to acknowledge that truth shows that you are either a full time troll or someone who simply doesn't understand much. You keep making up those zingers and they only have relevance to you. You aren't entertaining; you are not educational; what you post means nothing - except maybe to you.

The biggest differences between you and I is that I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is left wing (as you think that anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.) In all honesty, dannyboy, have you seen a single, solitary swinging dick on this board say ANYTHING positive about my immigration posts? It hasn't dawned on you that both the left and the right don't like what I have to say because I see both the left and right going to the same destination, just by different routes.

We aren't alike because I spell out my position in plain English and give citations so that people can look it up. You don't. AND no matter how many times you post the lies. The states do not secure your Rights; they don't create them; they don't grant them. They have said so in court rulings - which are more authoritative than anything you have to the contrary.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

I'm glad that you are addressing the topic. Thank you.

The problem with federal immigration laws is that the Constitution does NOT give the feds any authority to pass such laws. That lies within the purview of the state.

If you think we're being invaded, that is not an "illegal" problem, that is a National Security issue requiring Trump to get a Declaration of War from Congress and use a military solution. Petition your congresscritters. A war would give you a better shot at what you're after.

States have no basis to care whether someone is from out of State or from out of state since 1808.

Was that a hiccup?

That part of the Constitution outlawed the importation of slaves after 1808. The Constitution gave the slavers a full decade to get the memo, find another line of work, and cycle out of hauling people.

It is about entry into the Union, after 1808. States have no jurisdiction.

Of course they do. The governor of any state has the sole discretion to call out the National Guard to protect the safety of a state.

not about entry into the Union. it has to be about the security of our free States. our welfare clause is General not common.

Try communicating in English, dannyboy. That shit-salad sentence has no meaning.

 

[danielpalos]

Our Constitution is express not implied every time we need to quibble in more serious venues.

Don't you know anybody that can help you come up with some new material?

You are the one who needs a superior argument.

Any argument beats a non-responsive argument which most people on this board agree that's all you make.

you need something that actually refutes my simple and repetitive, one liners. mere rejection is a fallacy not refutation.

dannyboy, you come here every day to troll. You've had your ass beat by so many people that if I were you, my self esteem would cause me to commit suicide.

I have kicked your nonsensical one liners with so many facts that you should be embarrassed to make such a post as you just did. You call everything you disagree with a fallacy. It's not and your limited vocabulary tells me that you would benefit off of buying a dictionary.

Virtually every statement you've made on this board has been refuted. I refute your total and absolute bullshit with indisputable and irrefutable facts. That you fail to acknowledge that truth shows that you are either a full time troll or someone who simply doesn't understand much. You keep making up those zingers and they only have relevance to you. You aren't entertaining; you are not educational; what you post means nothing - except maybe to you.

The biggest differences between you and I is that I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is left wing (as you think that anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.) In all honesty, dannyboy, have you seen a single, solitary swinging dick on this board say ANYTHING positive about my immigration posts? It hasn't dawned on you that both the left and the right don't like what I have to say because I see both the left and right going to the same destination, just by different routes.

We aren't alike because I spell out my position in plain English and give citations so that people can look it up. You don't. AND no matter how many times you post the lies. The states do not secure your Rights; they don't create them; they don't grant them. They have said so in court rulings - which are more authoritative than anything you have to the contrary.

in right wing fantasy, You are Always right.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Don't you know anybody that can help you come up with some new material?

You are the one who needs a superior argument.

Any argument beats a non-responsive argument which most people on this board agree that's all you make.

you need something that actually refutes my simple and repetitive, one liners. mere rejection is a fallacy not refutation.

dannyboy, you come here every day to troll. You've had your ass beat by so many people that if I were you, my self esteem would cause me to commit suicide.

I have kicked your nonsensical one liners with so many facts that you should be embarrassed to make such a post as you just did. You call everything you disagree with a fallacy. It's not and your limited vocabulary tells me that you would benefit off of buying a dictionary.

Virtually every statement you've made on this board has been refuted. I refute your total and absolute bullshit with indisputable and irrefutable facts. That you fail to acknowledge that truth shows that you are either a full time troll or someone who simply doesn't understand much. You keep making up those zingers and they only have relevance to you. You aren't entertaining; you are not educational; what you post means nothing - except maybe to you.

The biggest differences between you and I is that I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is left wing (as you think that anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.) In all honesty, dannyboy, have you seen a single, solitary swinging dick on this board say ANYTHING positive about my immigration posts? It hasn't dawned on you that both the left and the right don't like what I have to say because I see both the left and right going to the same destination, just by different routes.

We aren't alike because I spell out my position in plain English and give citations so that people can look it up. You don't. AND no matter how many times you post the lies. The states do not secure your Rights; they don't create them; they don't grant them. They have said so in court rulings - which are more authoritative than anything you have to the contrary.

in right wing fantasy, You are Always right.

That is what I mean, dannyboy. How many people on the right have you witnessed agreeing with me on immigration? They're calling me left; you're calling me right. WHO do you think supports my views and give an example???

 

[danielpalos]

You are the one who needs a superior argument.

Any argument beats a non-responsive argument which most people on this board agree that's all you make.

you need something that actually refutes my simple and repetitive, one liners. mere rejection is a fallacy not refutation.

dannyboy, you come here every day to troll. You've had your ass beat by so many people that if I were you, my self esteem would cause me to commit suicide.

I have kicked your nonsensical one liners with so many facts that you should be embarrassed to make such a post as you just did. You call everything you disagree with a fallacy. It's not and your limited vocabulary tells me that you would benefit off of buying a dictionary.

Virtually every statement you've made on this board has been refuted. I refute your total and absolute bullshit with indisputable and irrefutable facts. That you fail to acknowledge that truth shows that you are either a full time troll or someone who simply doesn't understand much. You keep making up those zingers and they only have relevance to you. You aren't entertaining; you are not educational; what you post means nothing - except maybe to you.

The biggest differences between you and I is that I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is left wing (as you think that anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.) In all honesty, dannyboy, have you seen a single, solitary swinging dick on this board say ANYTHING positive about my immigration posts? It hasn't dawned on you that both the left and the right don't like what I have to say because I see both the left and right going to the same destination, just by different routes.

We aren't alike because I spell out my position in plain English and give citations so that people can look it up. You don't. AND no matter how many times you post the lies. The states do not secure your Rights; they don't create them; they don't grant them. They have said so in court rulings - which are more authoritative than anything you have to the contrary.

in right wing fantasy, You are Always right.

That is what I mean, dannyboy. How many people on the right have you witnessed agreeing with me on immigration? They're calling me left; you're calling me right. WHO do you think supports my views and give an example???

the right wing has nothing but appeals to ignorance. there is no express immigration clause if we have to quibble in a supreme venue.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Any argument beats a non-responsive argument which most people on this board agree that's all you make.

you need something that actually refutes my simple and repetitive, one liners. mere rejection is a fallacy not refutation.

dannyboy, you come here every day to troll. You've had your ass beat by so many people that if I were you, my self esteem would cause me to commit suicide.

I have kicked your nonsensical one liners with so many facts that you should be embarrassed to make such a post as you just did. You call everything you disagree with a fallacy. It's not and your limited vocabulary tells me that you would benefit off of buying a dictionary.

Virtually every statement you've made on this board has been refuted. I refute your total and absolute bullshit with indisputable and irrefutable facts. That you fail to acknowledge that truth shows that you are either a full time troll or someone who simply doesn't understand much. You keep making up those zingers and they only have relevance to you. You aren't entertaining; you are not educational; what you post means nothing - except maybe to you.

The biggest differences between you and I is that I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is left wing (as you think that anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.) In all honesty, dannyboy, have you seen a single, solitary swinging dick on this board say ANYTHING positive about my immigration posts? It hasn't dawned on you that both the left and the right don't like what I have to say because I see both the left and right going to the same destination, just by different routes.

We aren't alike because I spell out my position in plain English and give citations so that people can look it up. You don't. AND no matter how many times you post the lies. The states do not secure your Rights; they don't create them; they don't grant them. They have said so in court rulings - which are more authoritative than anything you have to the contrary.

in right wing fantasy, You are Always right.

That is what I mean, dannyboy. How many people on the right have you witnessed agreeing with me on immigration? They're calling me left; you're calling me right. WHO do you think supports my views and give an example???

the right wing has nothing but appeals to ignorance. there is no express immigration clause if we have to quibble in a supreme venue.

You need to some new material. I apologize for having appealed to your ignorance. But, if ignorance is bliss, you're the happiest man in America.

 

[danielpalos]

you need something that actually refutes my simple and repetitive, one liners. mere rejection is a fallacy not refutation.

dannyboy, you come here every day to troll. You've had your ass beat by so many people that if I were you, my self esteem would cause me to commit suicide.

I have kicked your nonsensical one liners with so many facts that you should be embarrassed to make such a post as you just did. You call everything you disagree with a fallacy. It's not and your limited vocabulary tells me that you would benefit off of buying a dictionary.

Virtually every statement you've made on this board has been refuted. I refute your total and absolute bullshit with indisputable and irrefutable facts. That you fail to acknowledge that truth shows that you are either a full time troll or someone who simply doesn't understand much. You keep making up those zingers and they only have relevance to you. You aren't entertaining; you are not educational; what you post means nothing - except maybe to you.

The biggest differences between you and I is that I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is left wing (as you think that anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.) In all honesty, dannyboy, have you seen a single, solitary swinging dick on this board say ANYTHING positive about my immigration posts? It hasn't dawned on you that both the left and the right don't like what I have to say because I see both the left and right going to the same destination, just by different routes.

We aren't alike because I spell out my position in plain English and give citations so that people can look it up. You don't. AND no matter how many times you post the lies. The states do not secure your Rights; they don't create them; they don't grant them. They have said so in court rulings - which are more authoritative than anything you have to the contrary.

in right wing fantasy, You are Always right.

That is what I mean, dannyboy. How many people on the right have you witnessed agreeing with me on immigration? They're calling me left; you're calling me right. WHO do you think supports my views and give an example???

the right wing has nothing but appeals to ignorance. there is no express immigration clause if we have to quibble in a supreme venue.

You need to some new material. I apologize for having appealed to your ignorance. But, if ignorance is bliss, you're the happiest man in America.

show us the express Immigration clause, right wingers; don't be illegal to Constitutional law.