New Minibus Spending Bill Has $5 Billion Earmarked for Refugee Welfare Programs

[ColonelAngus]

The UKRANIAN REFUGEE who was murdered on a train by a black dude will not be getting any of that money.

 

[progressive hunter]

I'm not saying it is, I'm just saying it's the other option.

Nope. Restriction on free speech and right to assemble.

they can assemble all they want,, but the constitution is clear, representatives are there represent the people of their district not a political party,,

jus remove the R and D from all fed political institutions, documents including ballots,,

once in office if they want to talk with other like minded people no one can stop them

 

[martybegan]

they can assemble all they want,, but the constitution is clear, representatives are there represent the people of their district not a political party,,

jus remove the R and D from all fed political institutions, documents including ballots,,

once in office if they want to talk with other like minded people no one can stop them

Again restricting people's right to speech and assemble as a group/associate.

 

[Bitterhook]

Nope. Words have meanings. An asylum seeker is not a refugee.

The only difference is that refugees are determined prior to entering the country, and asylum seekers are determined after they enter the country and the condition of their status, and there are even more conditions that apply in accordance with the previously mentioned United Nations Refugee Convention of 1951 that defines them both.

Yes, words do have meanings.

 

[progressive hunter]

Again restricting people's right to speech and assemble as a group/associate.

government documents and institutions are not about free speech,,

they can call themselves and assemble with whoever they want

they are not there to represent a political party,,
the constitution is very clear on that and its the bedrock of our system,,
in fact we are "GUARANTEED" that system

 

[martybegan]

government documents and institutions are not about free speech,,

they can call themselves and assemble with whoever they want

they are not there to represent a political party,,
the constitution is very clear on that and its the bedrock of our system,,
in fact we are "GUARANTEED" that system

The people running for office aren't government documents and institutions.

Why would people want LESS information on a ballot?

 

[progressive hunter]

The people running for office aren't government documents and institutions.

Why would people want LESS information on a ballot?

so the peoples constitutionally guaranteed right to a republican form of government and representation doesnt mean a ******* think to you cocksucking kool aid drinkers,,

why am I not surprised

 

[martybegan]

so the peoples constitutionally guaranteed right to a republican form of government and representation doesnt mean a ******* think to you cocksucking kool aid drinkers,,

why am I not surprised

LOL, you mad bro?

You think denying 1st amendment rights will protect what you are talking about?

 

[progressive hunter]

LOL, you mad bro?

You think denying 1st amendment rights will protect what you are talking about?

dont give me that 1st A bullshit,,
I dont have a right to force the government to put what I want them to put on any federal document,,


they can say or call themselves anything they want,,

as usual a leftist makes excuses to justify taking away other peoples rights by accusing them of what they are doing,,

 

[martybegan]

dont give me that 1st A bullshit,,
I dont have a right to force the government to put what I want them to put on any federal document,,


they can say or call themselves anything they want,,

as usual a leftist makes excuses to justify taking away other peoples rights by accusing them of what they are doing,,

I'm not a leftist, you ******* moron.

If they are calling themselves part of Party X, why shouldn't that be on the ballot?

 

[progressive hunter]

I'm not a leftist, you ******* moron.

If they are calling themselves part of Party X, why shouldn't that be on the ballot?

the **** youre not,, you may be to the right of dems but you sure the **** arent to the right of the constitution like a conservative should be,,

I gave specific constitutional grounds for why the party system denies americans rights to representation and you just scream 1st amendment and dont explain a ******* thing just like a typical leftist,,

 

[martybegan]

the **** youre not,, you may be to the right of dems but you sure the **** arent to the right of the constitution like a conservative should be,,

I gave specific constitutional grounds for why the party system denies americans rights to representation and you just scream 1st amendment and dont explain a ******* thing just like a typical leftist,,

And who made you lord and ******* master of that determination?

No, you didn't. You just said "**** the first amendment" for something as dumb as removing party names from a ballot for no other reason than 'fuh fuh fuh, me no like parties, fuh fuh fuh"

 

[progressive hunter]

And who made you lord and ******* master of that determination?

No, you didn't. You just said "**** the first amendment" for something as dumb as removing party names from a ballot for no other reason than 'fuh fuh fuh, me no like parties, fuh fuh fuh"

youre not explaining anything,, youre just saying **** my right to representation,,

do you have specifics where the constitution says representation is based on party affiliation??

cause I can show you where it says representation is based on the states and districts that sent them,,

 

[leftwinger]

LOL MAGA is so full of shit.

Correction you dumb OX.

Uniparty Congress is full of it.

 

[martybegan]

youre not explaining anything,, youre just saying **** my right to representation,,

do you have specifics where the constitution says representation is based on party affiliation??

cause I can show you where it says representation is based on the states and districts that sent them,,

How does someone putting their party on the ballot **** any of your rights?

Do you have a part of the Constitution that bans it?

Yep, and that has nothing to do with printing the name of a party on a ballot.

 

[TNHarley]

Correction you dumb OX.

Uniparty Congress is full of it.

Dems dont lie to your face about fiscal responsibility and welfare.
Try again.

 

[leftwinger]

Trump has made the swamp a protected wetland

How does Trump (in one year) get rid of 500 dirty Congress filth you dumb TDS clown?

 

[progressive hunter]

How does someone putting their party on the ballot **** any of your rights?

Do you have a part of the Constitution that bans it?

Yep, and that has nothing to do with printing the name of a party on a ballot.

youre not showing me anything,, youre just making excuses just like a typical leftist,,

do you have specifics where the constitution says representation is based on party affiliation??

cause I can show you where it says representation is based on the states and districts that sent them,,

 

[martybegan]

youre not showing me anything,, youre just making excuses just like a typical leftist,,

do you have specifics where the constitution says representation is based on party affiliation??

cause I can show you where it says representation is based on the states and districts that sent them,,

Do you have specifics on why the Constitution bans it?

I have specifics on free speech and assembly.

And that doesn't mean you can't print party affiliation on a ballot.

I understand you are on the spectrum but try to remember that means you get fixated on things like this.

You are trying to fix a leaking faucet on a sinking Titanic, and then lashing out at people saying what you are doing is ******* pointless.

 

[TNHarley]

How does Trump (in one year) get rid of 500 dirty Congress filth you dumb TDS clown?

DUDE trump is the swamp. He hires the swamp. Get over your TDS and pay attention.
Who do you think is going to sign this BS into law? Olivia newton john?