Why counting illegal aliens in the Census is wrong explained calmly and clearly in a video

[Moonglow]

Lies.

What-evah rube...

 

[Nostra]

It states to count all...The only exception is the untaxed indians.

So you think we should count tourists too, huh?

Idiot.

 

[Nostra]

Why do you people hate the Constitution and what it says?

Show us where it says to count illegals, troll.

 

[Nostra]

What-evah rube...

Show us the clause saying we must count illegals.

GO!

 

[BrokeLoser]

What is that legal issue? Immigrants are not whole people? I mean make it short and sweet, what is the legal issue in question?

They are whole people that Constitution supposedly meant should not be counted...when Constitution said to count all whole people except Indians.

The lenghs these fools go to deny the obvious is mind boggling.

The slaves were counted.

When they titled the Preamble with We The PEOPLE Of The United States of America did they really mean We The People And Alien Enemies Of The United States Of America?
The 2A reads:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Did they really mean…..A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the PEOPLE And Alien Enemies to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Shouldn’t common sense tell us the that “PEOPLE” is synonymous with CITIZENS as used by the Framers in the context of the Constitution?

If PEOPLE and alien enemies are synonymous why can’t alien enemies buy guns and vote?

You America haters have to start thinking…you always claim to be such critical thinkers but you always seem to miss all the easy shit….ie- ‘What is a woman.’

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

How can a census exclude "undocumented" people?

 

[AntonToo]

How can a census exclude "undocumented" people?

Providing false information on the US Census is a federal crime, so it's feasable to formulate Census to scare illegals from participating.

Thats why Trump1 admin tried to add the question of citizenship to the Census - it was ruled unconstitutional, because SCOTUS found it to be pretextual obstruction with the purpose of the Census to simply count people that reside in the state.


Side note - with the current deportation efforts by the administration illegals already seem to be participating in the census at even lower rates.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Do bowels need to be full?

No, but bowels need to be present.

WW

 

[Zincwarrior]

Providing false information on the US Census is a federal crime, so it's feasable to formulate Census to scare illegals from participating.

Thats why Trump1 admin tried to add the question of citizenship to the Census - it was ruled unconstitutional, because SCOTUS found it to be pretextual obstruction with the purpose of the Census to simply count people that reside in the state.

So it was already quasi adjudicated by SCOTUS?

 

[BackAgain]

What is that legal issue? Immigrants are not whole people? I mean make it short and sweet, what is the legal issue in question?

How many times do things have to be repeated for you, Winnie?

“We the People of the United States” are the people (person or persons) being referenced. At the time, that excluded Indians.

It “counted” only a 3/5 fraction of slaves because they weren’t deemed “persons” for such things as the rights being protected or for voting, etc. The compromise was to give them a numeric value so the Slave States could inflate their population numbers for the purpose of representation in Congress.

We the People of the United States, by its very meaning, didn’t include foreigners.

So, once again, the legal issue is one of the meaning of “person” as counted in the decennial Census. Doesn’t mean US citizens. I submit it obviously does. You are free to disagree.

But it still is absurd to assume that we would craft a Constitution delineating apportionment by including aliens.

 

[BackAgain]

The slaves were counted.

3/5ths were. But not for purposes of conceding them any rights. Instead, they were fractionally counted, only as a compromise to secure the Southern (Slave) States’ votes to ratify the Constitution in the first place.

Your weak sauce “argument” still fails to support your claims.

 

[Frankenstein]

The framers thought all people residing in the state, except Indians, should count for House representation.

And they wrote it down in Constitution.

And so it is the law of the land.


What you are saying about "one party use" is just some stupid bullshit in your head. Don't like the law? Change the law instead of pointless bitching about political opposition.

No I get it, you are for using the document when it suits you, even if it the framers had no way of knowing that part of our population, democrats, would allow millions of non citizens criminal invaders, to be counted as citizens, so demonrats could then take power to never be given back and enslave every single one of us to the Government. Your problem is when they don't need you useful idiots anymore you will be the first to ***** about them

 

[AntonToo]

No I get it, you are for using the document when

Nope! I'm always for using the Constitution, as it is the preeminent law of the land.

Why aren't you?

Constitution says all people except Indians count for determining representation in the House of Representatives.

You don't want to use what Constitution says here, while complaining that someone selectively uses Constitution. Seems silly.

 

[Frankenstein]

Nope! I'm always for using the Constitution.

Why aren't you?

I am I am also aware of the difference of now and 250 years ago, it's called common sense. If you use in conjunction with when it was written your argument falls flat because there is no way after fighting for freedom to be separate citizens that we would allow invasion. But you are an idiotic power hungry liberal. You want to force others to think like you or else.

 

[AntonToo]

I am I am also aware of the difference of now and 250 years ago, it's called common sense

You think everyone was documented 250 years ago and only those people were considered "whole people"?

Doesn't seem like you have any common sense at all.

 

[Winston]

Long way of saying you’ve got nothing.

“Whole person” is as distinguished from the 3/5ths fraction from the compromise and “free” as distinguished from “slaves.” What’s left open, of course, is whether “person” was meant to include aliens of any kind.

Are they persons? Of course. But are they the “persons” referenced in the overarching meaning of “We the people?” Which people?

The answer ain’t exactly a locked room mystery, either. Just finish that sentence fragment from the Preamble to the Constitution. “We the People of the United States ….”

Why would the Founders and the Framers want to include aliens (illegal or illegal) in any subsequent clause which involves representation in our republic? That may make sense to you. But it doesn’t make sense to reasonable people who honestly contemplate the question.

You’re completely unpersuasive and not well educated. But at least you can’t defend your position — once again.

Get out of here. I mean you are absolutely delusional. Not once, not one single time did any of the founders even attempt to limit the Census to just "citizens", and for good reason. I mean for real, how many citizens do you think populated this country in 1790, hell, 1800, even more so. I asked the question about how many people in Colonial America even supported the revolution. Dude, 15% is being optimistic. Most people didn't give two shits. Alexander Hamilton, Washington's Aid de Camp, was tasked with going to North Carolina and ascertaining how many volunteers Washington could expect from the population. His answer was short and sweet, NONE. We didn't give two shits.

I mean get real. There were thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of individuals throughout the Colonies that were not citizens. I mean here, in North Carolina, communities were isolated due to the rivers. I be damn if a Scotsman was going to show up at a district court carrying proof that he had lived here for two years and that he was of high moral character. **** that shit. He was too busy scratching out a living.

Citizenship was not even a question on that first Census. Does that not tell you something. I mean this isn't rocket science. And you want to trot out SCOTUS cases. You really got one, Franklin v. Massachusetts, Sandra Day O'Conner wrote the decision. In a nutshell, well the case is right there and you are too stupid to quote it. Trump can go, illegal aliens don't count in California, but Texas and Florida, yeah they count. And you claim I am uneducated.

Honestly, I think you project way to much. You are uneducated, have no clue as to the history of this country, have no concept of jurist prudence. And perhaps worst of all, have no ability to think for yourself.

 

[ColonelAngus]

During a home invasion robbery, the criminals are actually residents of your home.

If a census worker went to a home being robbed by 4 illegals, of course they will be added to the census.

Duh.

Gotta give more representation in Congress because if the illegals doing the home invasion robbery!

 

[BackAgain]

Get out of here. I mean you are absolutely delusional. Not once, not one single time did any of the founders even attempt to limit the Census to just "citizens", and for good reason. I mean for real, how many citizens do you think populated this country in 1790, hell, 1800, even more so. I asked the question about how many people in Colonial America even supported the revolution. Dude, 15% is being optimistic. Most people didn't give two shits. Alexander Hamilton, Washington's Aid de Camp, was tasked with going to North Carolina and ascertaining how many volunteers Washington could expect from the population. His answer was short and sweet, NONE. We didn't give two shits.

I mean get real. There were thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of individuals throughout the Colonies that were not citizens. I mean here, in North Carolina, communities were isolated due to the rivers. I be damn if a Scotsman was going to show up at a district court carrying proof that he had lived here for two years and that he was of high moral character. **** that shit. He was too busy scratching out a living.

Citizenship was not even a question on that first Census. Does that not tell you something. I mean this isn't rocket science. And you want to trot out SCOTUS cases. You really got one, Franklin v. Massachusetts, Sandra Day O'Conner wrote the decision. In a nutshell, well the case is right there and you are too stupid to quote it. Trump can go, illegal aliens don't count in California, but Texas and Florida, yeah they count. And you claim I am uneducated.

Honestly, I think you project way to much. You are uneducated, have no clue as to the history of this country, have no concept of jurist prudence. And perhaps worst of all, have no ability to think for yourself.

Application denied.

As to the balance of your post, you seem blind to how ridiculous you sound when you tell us stuff like what Framers didn’t foresee.

You’re dismissed.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Get out of here. I mean you are absolutely delusional. Not once, not one single time did any of the founders even attempt to limit the Census to just "citizens", and for good reason. I mean for real, how many citizens do you think populated this country in 1790, hell, 1800, even more so. I asked the question about how many people in Colonial America even supported the revolution. Dude, 15% is being optimistic. Most people didn't give two shits. Alexander Hamilton, Washington's Aid de Camp, was tasked with going to North Carolina and ascertaining how many volunteers Washington could expect from the population. His answer was short and sweet, NONE. We didn't give two shits.

I mean get real. There were thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of individuals throughout the Colonies that were not citizens. I mean here, in North Carolina, communities were isolated due to the rivers. I be damn if a Scotsman was going to show up at a district court carrying proof that he had lived here for two years and that he was of high moral character. **** that shit. He was too busy scratching out a living.

Citizenship was not even a question on that first Census. Does that not tell you something. I mean this isn't rocket science. And you want to trot out SCOTUS cases. You really got one, Franklin v. Massachusetts, Sandra Day O'Conner wrote the decision. In a nutshell, well the case is right there and you are too stupid to quote it. Trump can go, illegal aliens don't count in California, but Texas and Florida, yeah they count. And you claim I am uneducated.

Honestly, I think you project way to much. You are uneducated, have no clue as to the history of this country, have no concept of jurist prudence. And perhaps worst of all, have no ability to think for yourself.

Congratulations, you are a
The Framers most likely didn't even think of the concept of ILLEGAL ALIENS.
You just want them to CHEAT FOR POWER.
**** that, and **** YOU, Mr. Smith.

 

[Winston]

When they titled the Preamble with We The PEOPLE Of The United States of America did they really mean We The People And Alien Enemies Of The United States Of America?
The 2A reads:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Did they really mean…..A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the PEOPLE And Alien Enemies to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Shouldn’t common sense tell us the that “PEOPLE” is synonymous with CITIZENS as used by the Framers in the context of the Constitution?

If PEOPLE and alien enemies are synonymous why can’t alien enemies buy guns and vote?

You America haters have to start thinking…you always claim to be such critical thinkers but you always seem to miss all the easy shit….ie- ‘What is a woman.’

How ******* insulting, yes, when the founders said, "We the people" they meant, "We the ******* people? I mean damn, do you know nothing. It was hot as hades in Philadelphia that summer. They wore suits and wigs and there was no damn air-conditioning. But you can damn sure bet, they debated every ******* word. For instance, "all men", did they really mean just all white men that owned property? I mean it is stupid, it is insulting, for any dumbass Yahoo to go, well the founders really meant.

And again, you ******* morons live in a damn fantasy world. Oh yeah, in the late 18th Century America was only populated by "citizens". Hell no, citizens were the exception, not the rule. About 20% of the population were slaves, another huge percentage were indentured servants, and yep, the census counted them. I mean do you really believe that the vast majority of people that came here tapped their savings account to pay for the voyage. Jesus, talk about stupid.

And why in hell do you bring up the second amendment? I mean when the state militia showed up at the local church looking for volunteers, you think they gave a fat rat's ass if the volunteer was a citizen? I mean get real here. You idiots live in a damn fantasy world and your knowledge of American history is surpassed by the average fourth grader.