Democratic National Convention thread

[Virge_]

So... you're saying that Trump supporters are the types of assholes who would disrupt the Democratic National Convention? How 'bout that. Such well behaved folks.

I don't really know what it means. It's certainly not what you would expect to hear, since you didn't hear people chanting "HILLARY! HILLARY" at the RNC.

Differences matter. I don't presume to be smart enough to figure it out beyond that.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

They weren't stupid enough to not have considered the concept of "anchor baby" back then.

Based on? Not saying you're wrong, if there are written accounts of this then it certainly disproves the idea of anchor babies exploiting a loophole. The American Southwest was largely undeveloped during the Civil War, and Mexico wasn't as poor relative to America back then as compared to now, so I don't see much reason for them to consider it. Additionally, there were virtually zero social benefits (outside of maybe the Homestead Acts if you want to call that welfare) to reap.

 

[Zaap]

It's actually a point of contention that a population can actually rebel in the modern era. As we saw in Egypt and Libya it's not impossible, but had significant parts of the military of both countries not gone over to the rebels we'd almost assuredly have seen the movements in those countries crushed like they were in Iran or currently are being in Syria.

Again, we're talking extremes. Changing things doesn't always involve a literal blood-bath of a revolution. Blacks in this country didn't defeat the segregationist policies against them by mass armed uprisings of a military nature. But it sure as hell wasn't because everyone just turned tail and ran away to Canada either.

It's pathetic and shameful a lot of times that we're sold a bill of goods that all of these immigration issues are civil rights issues- when actually oftentimes it's civil rights issue being AVOIDED in the countries of origin.

 

[brycejones]

So representative of the naive to insult the experienced.

The only thing more amusing is watching them, inevitably with enough time, turn into that which they ridicule.

Try harder next time

 

[Virge_]

Try harder next time

There won't be a next time.

 

[Paratus]

I find it disturbing the number of people losing their shit because they are seeing a large number of speakers who are neither white nor have a penis.

Americans do come in multiple hues and sexes.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yeah, too easy. Where does it say that children have a protected right to have their parents with them?

Barring neglect, abuse or incapacity for care, all other american citizen children have the right for their parents to not be deported. All of them should be equal before the law.

 

[Svnla]

Around 40% (according to Rubio) of illegal immigrants DID enter the US legally. They stayed after their visas expired.


"

They did => LEGALS = all good.

They overstayed their visas => ILLEGALS = bad. Need to be deported.

I do not know why it is so complicated to figure it out.

Put it this way. Billy drives a car and Joe drives a car from X to Y. All good.

Billy gets a few drinks and becomes drunk while driving but Joe does not drink anything but water.

Both of them are stopped at a checkpoint. Billy is in jail while Joe is on his way.

Any questions? The bottom line of my assertion is it does not matter how/where/what/when ILLEGALS become ILLEGALS. Immigration rules and laws need to be enforced.

Once again. Apply immigration rules and laws equally to ALL. Period. No exception to anyone.

One more thing, let take a wild guess the overwhelmingly of ILLEGALS are from where. Hint: they ain't from Asia, Europe, Africa, Australia, or Antarctica or anywhere else.

Take a look at #2 - http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

 

[Paratus]

Bills up

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Loved that funky intro as Bill strutted onto the scene. :awe:

 

[agent00f]

Generally I'd imagine parents don't like the idea of leaving their children alone in another nation with non-family. In the scenario described by Clinton of Trump's policies, there would be no other illegals to live with because Trump kicked them all out and broke those family ties.

You were taking issue with my use of fear-mongering, which I assumed involved the usual exaggeration component of the word. I'm saying that the scenario that people like to lay out with children being split from their parents is unrealistic, because parents have the option of taking their dual-citizenship children with them until they become legal residents themselves.

Put this in perspective of the immigrant mentality which willingly breaks off from everything in the past to forge a better future; if parents can't sustain such a dream themselves they'd do what they must to live vicariously though offspring. That's simply reality of the matter whether natives agree with it or not.

In any case, this has little to do with fear except maybe the dnc inciting fear of foreigners to draw the foreigner vote as explained above.

 

[yllus]

Again, we're talking extremes. Changing things doesn't always involve a literal blood-bath of a revolution. Blacks in this country didn't defeat the segregationist policies against them by mass armed uprisings of a military nature. But it sure as hell wasn't because everyone just turned tail and ran away to Canada either.

It's pathetic and shameful a lot of times that we're sold a bill of goods that all of these immigration issues are civil rights issues- when actually oftentimes it's civil rights issue being AVOIDED in the countries of origin.

I'm not sure why you're using blacks in America as an example here; in that case you had millions of people waiting over two hundred years for anywhere approaching equal rights. Not exactly a success story that Mexicans or Syrians are looking to emulate, I imagine.

I'm the son of immigrants myself and I also wrinkle my nose as pro-illegal immigration activists. But I do understand people wanting to move now and have a better life for their wife, kids and themselves rather than tough it out and risk starvation or death by an oppressive regime.

 

[Virge_]

I'm not sure why you're using blacks in America as an example here; in that case you had millions of people waiting over two hundred years for anywhere approaching equal rights. Not exactly a success story that Mexicans or Syrians are looking to emulate, I imagine.

I'm the son of immigrants myself and I also wrinkle my nose as pro-illegal immigration activists. But I do understand people wanting to move now and have a better life for their wife, kids and themselves rather than tough it out and risk starvation or death by an oppressive regime.

And if the cost of this better life is subsidized by a native middle class squeezed into serfdom, then you deserve what you get.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Barring neglect, abuse or incapacity for care, all other american citizen children have the right for their parents to not be deported. All of them should be equal before the law.

There's no such thing as that right. If her parents choose to abandon her, she becomes a ward of the state temporarily, and then adopted within a matter of weeks.

 

[Zaap]

I don't think you know how it was originally meant

And you do? The 13th Amendment freed the slaves. But there was a problem in that it said nothing of were they now legal citizens of the US? Or their offspring? So the 14th was ratified to address SPECIFICALLY that. It was not created willy-nilly right after the 13th Amendment to allow for foreigners to just sneak in and have kids that became automatic citizens.

Also, it was never really considered a big issue in this country before somewhere along the way it became the accepted idiocy among a lot of people that our immigration laws are to be ignored as anyone who comes here sees fit.

"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."

It's long been argued that this is the key phrase, as foreigners are not considered subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, therefore not whom was meant. The language of the Amendment is a result of compromise so that it could include the freed slaves and their offspring as citizens of the US.

Many people, myself included, find it absurd that what was intended to settle the question of the citizenship of freed slaves, has since been completely bastardized in order to help cheating businesses create virtually a new and improved slave trade of sorts using exploited illegal labor.

The language of the 14th Amendment truly IS outdated since there are no longer freed slaves and any question of their being US citizens or not- the whole question it was ratified to solve has long BEEN solved, so it should be reworded more logically. It was NEVER intended to mean "Sneak in and have anchor babies, we'll look the other way."

 

[agent00f]

And if the cost of this better life is subsidized by a native middle class squeezed into serfdom, then you deserve what you get.

Most of the middle class aren't subsidizing anyone, but are rather subsidized like everyone else by the top few percent.

They're just told that to get angry and vote the right way.

 

[yllus]

Hillary's done some good work in her lifetime. It's an impressive resume.

 

[brycejones]

There won't be a next time.

Great! Now back to your ranting.

 

[Zaap]

I'm not sure why you're using blacks in America as an example here; in that case you had millions of people waiting over two hundred years for anywhere approaching equal rights. Not exactly a success story that Mexicans or Syrians are looking to emulate, I imagine.

Because it's an example whether it fits your instant gratification Facebook Instagram age expectations or not.

Will it be EASY for Mexicans or Syrians to fight THEIR OWN battles in THEIR OWN countries, just as blacks did in THEIR OWN country in the US?

Probably not.

But running the fuck away and pawning problems off on others (both for those left in the home country, AND in the country you're illegally running to) sure as hell isn't solving things any faster- it's not solving anything AT ALL.

Sorry there isn't always an easy 'there's an app for that' answer to tough problems in this world.

 

[glenn1]

Hillary's done some good work in her lifetime. It's an impressive resume.

Impressive might be overstating it but she's more than qualified. I seriously don't get the people who always cite her time as First Lady as a reason to vote for her for President. If having sexy times with the President makes you qualified then Monica Lewinsky is qualified to run for POTUS also.

 

[Virge_]

Impressive might be overstating it but she's more than qualified. I seriously don't get the people who always cite her time as First Lady as a reason to vote for her for President. If having sexy times with the President makes you qualified then Monica Lewinsky is qualified to run for POTUS also.

She has a vagina, so she has identical functional qualifiers per the current brainwashed Libtards.

 

[yllus]

Impressive might be overstating it but she's more than qualified. I seriously don't get the people who always cite her time as First Lady as a reason to vote for her for President. If having sexy times with the President makes you qualified then Monica Lewinsky is qualified to run for POTUS also.

Being FLOTUS is probably mentally scarring. That she survived it without PTSD is in itself remarkable. But yeah, well qualified and hardly for spending time as FLOTUS.

I would probably vote for Monica over Donald.

Incidentally, is Bill using a teleprompter or is this the famed perfect memory at work?

 

[Jhhnn]

She has a vagina, so she has identical functional qualifiers per the current brainwashed Libtards.

Yeh, it'd be different if she were a man, obviously.

 

[Ns1]

Nm

 

[agent00f]

She has a vagina, so she has identical functional qualifiers per the current brainwashed Libtards.

I suspect you're not as dumb as you sound right now, so try using that intellect to consider the possibility this is a really poor strategy to appear smart.