Page 15 of 21 FirstFirst ...
5
13
14
15
16
17
... LastLast
  1. #281
    Quote Originally Posted by Manabomb View Post
    You really don't get to be surprised when the words "Trump", "rally" and "violence" are in the same sentence. Trump incites violence, on both sides. Don't pretend he hasn't obliterated the Republican party to the point where it isn't just LBGT, minorities or intelligent voters going against him.

    Though I will say, forcing the Republicans to actually try this election cycle is fucking priceless. Every time I hear about Cruz and Kasich newest plan to foil Trump I can't help but think this is Spy vs. Spy vs. hatred infused toupee. There's only one way to describe people like Trump, Kaisch and Cruz. Cartoon Characters.

    Edit: Which is why I guess people like you and the myriad of people like you enjoy them so much. It must be nice to have a favorite Presidential candidate that has your very own childish appeal.
    to set the record straight I'm not a Trump supporter. I am a anyone but Clinton or Sanders supporter

    and I guess you will get away with you personal attack as I would have been infracted for doing the same

  2. #282
    The Lightbringer Waaldo's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,953
    Quote Originally Posted by BuckSparkles View Post
    Illegals. Keep illegals out.

    What is with people. The wall is anti-illegal. Not LEGAL immigrants.
    How is a wall going to keep illegals out? They are called illegals for a reason. they didn't walk past a border checkpoint legally and just stay. they found a way around it, or over it. All walls are climbable.
    These aren't the spoilers you're looking for.

    Move along.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blueobelisk View Post
    Now, Waaldo is prepared to look for this person like Prince Charming testing everyone to see just how bad their psychological disorder is if their foot fits in the glass slipper.

  3. #283
    I am Murloc! Pangean's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Laurasia
    Posts
    5,606
    Quote Originally Posted by battosi08 View Post
    Is there any conformation he said "They're" and not "Their" like his actual speech cause when I 1st heard it I heard it as "They're bringing crime, their rapists"
    Someone added the actual video of him making the statement in the thread. Watch it for yourself. Also I suggest you re-look at the entirety of his statement. It's pretty clear what he meant.
    What are we gonna do now? Taking off his turban, they said, is this man a Jew?
    'Cause they're working for the clampdown
    They put up a poster saying we earn more than you!
    When we're working for the clampdown
    We will teach our twisted speech To the young believers
    We will train our blue-eyed men To be young believers

  4. #284
    Quote Originally Posted by Waaldo View Post
    A fence around a single building to protect the president isn't stupid. A fence going the length of a 2,000 MILE border to keep immigrants out from the country that brags about its freedom and multi-ethnic culture is fucking idiotic.

    How you can even compare them is beyond me.
    they both fill the same purpose to keep uninvited, unwanted, and could be dangerous people from entering

  5. #285
    I am Murloc! Pangean's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Laurasia
    Posts
    5,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Cricket22 View Post
    So? Congress can still clarify it further, to exclude those born of parents here illegally.

    Laws are changed, every day. This will be too.
    When the SCOTUS rules that illegals are covered by the 14th then any law that contradicts it will be struck down. The only way to change this is an amendment to the Constitution that spells out that they are not covered. That is how these things work.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Waaldo View Post
    How is a wall going to keep illegals out? They are called illegals for a reason. they didn't walk past a border checkpoint legally and just stay. they found a way around it, or over it. All walls are climbable.
    And airplanes and ships have extra special powers when it comes to a wall as well.
    What are we gonna do now? Taking off his turban, they said, is this man a Jew?
    'Cause they're working for the clampdown
    They put up a poster saying we earn more than you!
    When we're working for the clampdown
    We will teach our twisted speech To the young believers
    We will train our blue-eyed men To be young believers

  6. #286
    Partying in Valhalla
    Annoying's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Socorro, NM, USA
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Cricket22 View Post
    So? Congress can still clarify it further, to exclude those born of parents here illegally.

    Laws are changed, every day. This will be too.
    It's not a law, it's a constitutional amendment. The legislative branch would have to officially propose a constitutional amendment removing birthright citizenship from illegals. That's a mandatory 2/3's majority vote from both the house and senate. They could do this right now, as a proposed amendment is a "joint resolution" and the president plays no part in it. Then, the Archivist of the US sends each state's governor a letter of notification. Each state then puts the amendment through their legislature. 38 or more of the states have to ratify it for it to become an amendment to the US Constitution.

    That's extremely unlikely.

    Any law passed without a constitutional amendment that denied birthright citizenship to anyone who's entitled to it would be ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.

  7. #287
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    36,799
    Quote Originally Posted by Pangean View Post
    Someone added the actual video of him making the statement in the thread. Watch it for yourself. Also I suggest you re-look at the entirety of his statement. It's pretty clear what he meant.
    We all know that videos of Trump saying stupid things have a liberal bias. Trump would never say stupid things on camera unless the dirty liberals made him say it!
    2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
    2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"

  8. #288
    The Lightbringer Waaldo's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    they both fill the same purpose to keep uninvited, unwanted, and could be dangerous people from entering
    Of course, although only 1 is practical. And which one could it be?

    Could it be the wall surrounding a solitary building that is under 24/7 surveillance by security cameras, secret service, and only the government knows what else.

    Or could it be the TWO FUCKING THOUSAND MILE WALL that will have the same surveillance as the abandoned warehouse down the street from my home. The one all the homeless people live in with the sign that says "no loitering."

    I would let you choose, but clearly logic isn't your strong suit. So I will give you a hint, it's not the 2,000 mile wall.
    These aren't the spoilers you're looking for.

    Move along.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blueobelisk View Post
    Now, Waaldo is prepared to look for this person like Prince Charming testing everyone to see just how bad their psychological disorder is if their foot fits in the glass slipper.

  9. #289
    Quote Originally Posted by gyrados View Post
    i just love the tolerant left they are so peaceful /s
    The left is the pitbulls of the political world.
    Me thinks Chromie has a whole lot of splaining to do!

  10. #290
    Quote Originally Posted by Pangean View Post
    Someone added the actual video of him making the statement in the thread. Watch it for yourself. Also I suggest you re-look at the entirety of his statement. It's pretty clear what he meant.

  11. #291
    I am Murloc! Pangean's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Laurasia
    Posts
    5,606
    Quote Originally Posted by akris15 View Post
    Thanks Akris15!
    What are we gonna do now? Taking off his turban, they said, is this man a Jew?
    'Cause they're working for the clampdown
    They put up a poster saying we earn more than you!
    When we're working for the clampdown
    We will teach our twisted speech To the young believers
    We will train our blue-eyed men To be young believers

  12. #292
    Quote Originally Posted by akris15 View Post
    don't have to I know it was a selectively edited the title it self proves it
    he was referring to illegal immigrants not immigrants another liberal media tactic lie by omission

  13. #293
    The Lightbringer Waaldo's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Pangean View Post

    And airplanes and ships have extra special powers when it comes to a wall as well.
    Well drats, I guess we better equip our wall with AA turrets and aerial torpedoes. How else will America ever truly be great again!?
    These aren't the spoilers you're looking for.

    Move along.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blueobelisk View Post
    Now, Waaldo is prepared to look for this person like Prince Charming testing everyone to see just how bad their psychological disorder is if their foot fits in the glass slipper.

  14. #294
    @
    Quote Originally Posted by Annoying View Post
    It's not a law, it's a constitutional amendment. The legislative branch would have to officially propose a constitutional amendment removing birthright citizenship from illegals. That's a mandatory 2/3's majority vote from both the house and senate. They could do this right now, as a proposed amendment is a "joint resolution" and the president plays no part in it. Then, the Archivist of the US sends each state's governor a letter of notification. Each state then puts the amendment through their legislature. 38 or more of the states have to ratify it for it to become an amendment to the US Constitution.

    That's extremely unlikely.

    Any law passed without a constitutional amendment that denied birthright citizenship to anyone who's entitled to it would be ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.
    Bsloney. the 14th amendment actually empowers congress to deny birthright citizenship to those who are born to foreign nationals.

    While many erroneously claim that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on American soil, the reality is that is not the law and has never been the law. Current immigration law–found at 8 U.S.C. § 1401(a)–specifies that a baby born on American soil to (1) a foreign ambassador, (2) head of state, or (3) foreign military prisoner is not an American citizen.

    read the rest for yourself. http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...t-citizenship/

  15. #295
    earlier in the thread a made this post

    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    When you perpetrate violence and in the process wave a flag of another country those are acts of invaders
    and I was mocked, laughed at and ridiculed for doing so

    then we have this today




    now who needs to be mocked, laughed at and ridiculed again?
    Last edited by Vyxn; 2016-04-29 at 08:52 PM.

  16. #296
    Quote Originally Posted by Cricket22 View Post
    @

    Bsloney. the 14th amendment actually empowers congress to deny birthright citizenship to those who are born to foreign nationals.

    While many erroneously claim that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on American soil, the reality is that is not the law and has never been the law. Current immigration law–found at 8 U.S.C. § 1401(a)–specifies that a baby born on American soil to (1) a foreign ambassador, (2) head of state, or (3) foreign military prisoner is not an American citizen.

    read the rest for yourself. http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...t-citizenship/
    Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    Pretty cut and dry to me

  17. #297
    I am Murloc! Pangean's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Laurasia
    Posts
    5,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Cricket22 View Post
    @

    Bsloney. the 14th amendment actually empowers congress to deny birthright citizenship to those who are born to foreign nationals.

    While many erroneously claim that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on American soil, the reality is that is not the law and has never been the law. Current immigration law–found at 8 U.S.C. § 1401(a)–specifies that a baby born on American soil to (1) a foreign ambassador, (2) head of state, or (3) foreign military prisoner is not an American citizen.

    read the rest for yourself. http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...t-citizenship/
    The reason that children of these folks cannot claim birthright citizenship is the parents are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US given their positions. Illegals are subject and hence their children gain birth right citizenship. Any law challenging this will fail given the ruling of the SCOTUS. You want it changed an amendment to the Constitution will be needed.
    What are we gonna do now? Taking off his turban, they said, is this man a Jew?
    'Cause they're working for the clampdown
    They put up a poster saying we earn more than you!
    When we're working for the clampdown
    We will teach our twisted speech To the young believers
    We will train our blue-eyed men To be young believers

  18. #298
    Quote Originally Posted by akris15 View Post
    Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    Pretty cut and dry to me
    No, because you are ignoring the further clarification. The 14th amendment actually gives congress the right to deny birthright citizens to children born of foreign nationals.

    Don't be lazy. Read the rest of the article.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Pangean View Post
    The reason that children of these folks cannot claim birthright citizenship is the parents are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US given their positions. Illegals are subject and hence their children gain birth right citizenship. Any law challenging this will fail given the ruling of the SCOTUS. You want it changed an amendment to the Constitution will be needed.

    No, they're subject to the jurisdiction of their own country. There is no "given their positions" either in the constitution or otherwise.

    I don't think it's going to fail. You didn't bother reading the rest of the article, did you?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Waaldo View Post
    Well drats, I guess we better equip our wall with AA turrets and aerial torpedoes. How else will America ever truly be great again!?
    I don't think we're going to need to. Once they find they can't get jobs, govt. assistance, or automatic citizenship for their children, I think they'll go home on their own.

  19. #299
    Quote Originally Posted by Cricket22 View Post
    No, because you are ignoring the further clarification. The 14th amendment actually gives congress the right to deny birthright citizens to children born of foreign nationals.

    Don't be lazy. Read the rest of the article.

    - - - Updated - - -




    No, they're subject to the jurisdiction of their own country. There is no "given their positions" either in the constitution or otherwise.

    I don't think it's going to fail. You didn't bother reading the rest of the article, did you?

    - - - Updated - - -



    I don't think we're going to need to. Once they find they can't get jobs, govt. assistance, or automatic citizenship for their children, I think they'll go home on their own.
    1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


    2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

    3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

    4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

    5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

    Notes for this amendment:
    Proposed 6/13/1866
    Ratified 7/9/1868

  20. #300
    I am Murloc! Pangean's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Laurasia
    Posts
    5,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Cricket22 View Post

    No, they're subject to the jurisdiction of their own country. There is no "given their positions" either in the constitution or otherwise.

    I don't think it's going to fail. You didn't bother reading the rest of the article, did you?
    No they aren't. The emigrated to another country where they are subject to it's jurisdiction. If they weren't they wouldn't be worried about being caught and kicked out.

    "Given their positions" is explained in the SCOTUS ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. Suggest you actually read it as opposed to regurgitating the nonsense of others.

    Any attempt at a law will fail given that ruling. I gather given your posts you do not understand how this whole law-SCOTUS thing works. Using a Brietbart article does not change that.
    What are we gonna do now? Taking off his turban, they said, is this man a Jew?
    'Cause they're working for the clampdown
    They put up a poster saying we earn more than you!
    When we're working for the clampdown
    We will teach our twisted speech To the young believers
    We will train our blue-eyed men To be young believers

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •