Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 4 of 4      Prev   1   2   3   4
spazsdad

Registered:
Posts: 4,893
Reply with quote  #91 
CA has always been looney but our current legislators have gone completely off the left end. Couple that with a Dem super majority and they are passing BS laws faster than a junkie shooting up with free stuff. It's getting so bad you can't keep up with the nonsense.
Gotta love his line about Trump ignoring laws he doesn't like. This from the same people that are pushing sanctuary state status and do everything they can to cater to illegals. Yep, just ignore those laws.

__________________
#SCOTUS
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,806
Reply with quote  #92 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabar61


Let me out first please.


Sorry you had the appetizer and entree, you get to stick around for your just deserts.

__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,144
Reply with quote  #93 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spazsdad
CA has always been looney but our current legislators have gone completely off the left end. Couple that with a Dem super majority and they are passing BS laws faster than a junkie shooting up with free stuff. It's getting so bad you can't keep up with the nonsense. Gotta love his line about Trump ignoring laws he doesn't like. This from the same people that are pushing sanctuary state status and do everything they can to cater to illegals. Yep, just ignore those laws.


Where's your concern for "states rights" when it comes to immigrants? Does it only apply when wanting to keep slaves?
spazsdad

Registered:
Posts: 4,893
Reply with quote  #94 
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
__________________
#SCOTUS
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,518
Reply with quote  #95 
Quote:
Originally Posted by woody
Sorry you had the appetizer and entree, you get to stick around for your just deserts.


And the resulting intestinal discomfort.
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #96 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh
Where's your concern for "states rights" when it comes to immigrants? Does it only apply when wanting to keep slaves?

Newsflash for the uneducated - States rights only applies within each state's borders. Feds control interstate issues and international borders. 
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,144
Reply with quote  #97 
How does providing sanctuary for immigrants cross state lines?
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,144
Reply with quote  #98 
Is slavery a states right issue then?
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,518
Reply with quote  #99 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh
How does providing sanctuary for immigrants cross state lines?


Isn't immigration within the purview of the federal government?
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,518
Reply with quote  #100 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh
Is slavery a states right issue then?


Not according to the 13th Amendment.
TheNarrator

Registered:
Posts: 3,557
Reply with quote  #101 
Fresh isn't too big on the constitution
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,144
Reply with quote  #102 
Passed by Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6, 1865, the 13th amendment abolished slavery in the United States.

The amendment was passed after the Civil War started in 1861. Non sequitur. Couldn't affect whether it was a states rights issue.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,518
Reply with quote  #103 
Refer to the 10th Amendment.


Bama_CF

Registered:
Posts: 2,277
Reply with quote  #104 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabar61
Refer to the 10th Amendment.





So I take it that you agree that any states with Sanctuary Cities protecting undocumented immigrants must be left alone by the federal government to do as they wish. Thanks, good to know. 

__________________

 

pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,518
Reply with quote  #105 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bama_CF



So I take it that you agree that any states with Sanctuary Cities protecting undocumented immigrants must be left alone by the federal government to do as they wish. Thanks, good to know. 


Wrong.  You didn't follow the logic.  The 10th Amendment clearly states that any right not enumerated to the Federal Government within the Constitution (as amended) belongs to the states.  Immigration (which the Federal Government oversees as part of its duty to protect its citizens under the Constitution) is under the purview of the Federal Government.  Sanctuary cities are not following the law with regard to immigration so the Federal Government has every right to compel them to do so.

How Fresh got to slavery is beyond me but the 13th Amendment abolished slavery.  Again, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution clearly means that slavery is not a states rights issue.
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #106 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh
How does providing sanctuary for immigrants cross state lines?

Asinine false equivalence. Topic was US-Mexico border.
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 2,144
Reply with quote  #107 
From Pablum:

"Not according to the 13th Amendment."

Now it's the 10th. Which, btw, does address his concerns. 

How is slavery different from sanctuary cities? In either case. Human beings being denied their rights and an effort to right the wrong.
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #108 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fresh
How is slavery different from sanctuary cities? In either case. Human beings being denied their rights and an effort to right the wrong.

You're demonstrating incompetence at thinking things through before you post. Like Dewey did, you wildly fling feces around hoping some stick somewhere.

FTR, illegals are not denied their rights since due process is followed. They've had ample opportunity to right their wrong, however they choose/chose not to pursue it since lawless Dems tell them it isn't necessary.

I expect Fresh sides with Keith Ellison's abhorrent likening of illegals with Jews in Nazi Germany.
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,853
Reply with quote  #109 
First, illegal immigrants are not US citizens.  They have rights, but not the rights of a US citizen.

Second, the way illegal immigrants become a federal problem is that they end up on Federal welfare, in schools funded largely by Federal funds, in hospitals funded largely by Federal funds.  In other words illegal immigrants are dropped into a system where those illegal immigrants can put their hand into my back pocket and start sucking off funds.

To me, if an area was willing to say they will forgo Federal funds, I would be a lot more open to them keeping their sanctuary approach.  There is still a problem, in that area would have to take reasonable steps to make sure that illegal is not voting, and when that illegal leaves that area, he goes back to his home country. 

Since they will not do either one of the above, sanctuary cities are disliked by most of America.

__________________
Can always tell when fresh is drunk and tired. Gets low energy and says 'sh1t' a lot,
bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 9,725
Reply with quote  #110 
Fresh said.............
Quote:
 Human beings being denied their rights and an effort to right the wrong.



I'm with you, Fresh, on this one.........

Give 'em their right to be deported............


PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #111 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist
First, illegal immigrants are not US citizens. (true, however Libs view them as undocumented US citizens) They have rights, but not the rights of a US citizen. (Please clarify since they basically have same rights/protections in our legal system.)

Second, the way illegal immigrants become a federal problem is that they end up on Federal welfare (not directly), in schools funded largely by Federal funds (wrong, mainly state/local), in hospitals funded largely by Federal funds (varies).  In other words illegal immigrants are dropped into a system where those illegal immigrants can put their hand into my back pocket and start sucking off funds. (true)

To me, if an area was willing to say they will forgo Federal funds, I would be a lot more open to them keeping their sanctuary approach.  There is still a problem, in that area would have to take reasonable steps to make sure that illegal is not voting, and when that illegal leaves that area, he goes back to his home country. 

Since they will not do either one of the above, sanctuary cities are disliked by most of America.

Sounds like you're okay with sanctuary cities and states as long as their illegals aren't impacting legal residents outside their jurisdiction. I can respect that.
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,853
Reply with quote  #112 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDad

Sounds like you're okay with sanctuary cities and states as long as their illegals aren't impacting legal residents outside their jurisdiction. I can respect that.

The left can try to "redefine" illegal immigrants as undocumented US citizens.  It shows a distinct misunderstanding of how law works in the US, but that is fine.  If they really want to get things changed they need to get it through congress.  Odd judge redefinition will eventually be unwound just like odummers EO's.

Rights that illegal aliens do not enjoy: 
- Right to bear arms (2nd amendment).
- Right to not get deported.  Natural born citizens cannot have their right to citizenship revoked.  Naturalized citizens it is very difficult to denaturalize them.  It does happen but is effectively so rare that it is like it does not happen.


__________________
Can always tell when fresh is drunk and tired. Gets low energy and says 'sh1t' a lot,
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,853
Reply with quote  #113 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDad

Sounds like you're okay with sanctuary cities and states as long as their illegals aren't impacting legal residents outside their jurisdiction. I can respect that.

Yeah, still sceptic it can be done in a way that they are not basically impacting everyone around anyway.  But still if they would at least try a touch, they would find me being a lot more open to working with them on the other issues around illegal immigration.

Obama's eduction budget was $69 Billion.  In 2009 we jammed that up to $97B to keep from laying off any teachers.  No one did anything like that for me in the 09 timeframe, left to fend for myself and pay for this crap on top.

Of course most of that money goes to Pell grant loans.  But there are sizable chunks ~15B that go to school districts with sizable poor populations. (ESEA Title 1) 

Ok, so maybe not as much "federal", but that same complaint flows down to the state level, at least here in Washington.  Here in Washington almost all funding comes from the state.  Poor areas drain from higher tax producing areas.  So the original issue remains. 

https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2016/01/14/federal-education-funding-where-does-the-money-go


__________________
Can always tell when fresh is drunk and tired. Gets low energy and says 'sh1t' a lot,
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #114 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist
Yeah, still sceptic it can be done in a way that they are not basically impacting everyone around anyway.  But still if they would at least try a touch, they would find me being a lot more open to working with them on the other issues around illegal immigration.

Obama's eduction budget was $69 Billion.  In 2009 we jammed that up to $97B to keep from laying off any teachers.  No one did anything like that for me in the 09 timeframe, left to fend for myself and pay for this crap on top.
That was a 1-year spike from the stimulus bill. Spending went back on regular trajectory afterward.

Of course most of that money goes to Pell grant loans.  But there are sizable chunks ~15B that go to school districts with sizable poor populations. (ESEA Title 1) 
Illegals, including DACA recipients are not eligible for federal aid (e.g. Pell grants, loans).

Ok, so maybe not as much "federal", but that same complaint flows down to the state level, at least here in Washington.  Here in Washington almost all funding comes from the state.  Poor areas drain from higher tax producing areas.  So the original issue remains. 

https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2016/01/14/federal-education-funding-where-does-the-money-go

Obviously the original issue can remain for cities and other local jurisdictions in non-sanctuary states because they don't meet your qualifications.

Thanks for the link.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.