- Messages
- 893
Just adding more to the mountain of evidence that it's NOT a cult.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is so beyond the absurd it’s charting new territory. Can’t begin to wrap my mind around it. Doesn’t seem real. Just![]()
Yep. Each member of the cult is falling over themselves trying to outdo the others in proving their fealty to Dear Leader. Any bets on how long it will be before a Congressional Republican proposes to rename Washington, DC as Trump City? And then another can propose to build a giant statue taller than the Washington Monument in the likeness of Dear Leader. I'm sure that our new plutocrat overlords like Musk and Bezos will gladly pay to build it.Just adding more to the mountain of evidence that it's NOT a cult.
Nothing says you’re serious about rooting out government waste and fraud than firing the government officials responsible for rooting out waste and fraudTrump fires 17 inspectors-general in late night purge.
![]()
Trump Fires at Least 12 Inspectors General in Late-Night Purge
The White House defied a law that requires giving Congress 30 days’ notice and detailed reasons before removing the watchdog officials.www.nytimes.com
Between the end of the 2020 election and some time within the past two years, the prospect of Trump being re-elected didn’t seem real to me. It seemed that we as a country (for the most part) had learned a hard lesson with Trump. But then it started to seem real only because it dawned on me how uninformed, misinformed, disinformed, and sometimes willfully ignorant and obtuse so many people are. But it was still beyond absurd and I couldn’t begin to wrap my head around it.This is so beyond the absurd it’s charting new territory. Can’t begin to wrap my mind around it. Doesn’t seem real. Just![]()
There seems to be confusion here. Your response sounds like you believe I want to get rid of birthright citizenship completely. I definitely don't.I am dogmatic about this the same way I am dogmatic that, in a Euclidean geometry, two parallel lines never intersect. Or that 1+1 = 2 and it never equals three.
The drafters of the 14th extensively debated this exact question. The debate was robust, and it went on for many days, and they addressed all these issues. It was an intentional choice to make birthright citizenship available to everyone on US land. The exceptions are laid out specifically: an invading army, and diplomats. I have read this history. I do not know it, because that's very far from my areas of expertise. But you can easily find information on it. There is no shortage of materials on the internet.
Two things you are missing (among others, perhaps):
1. The drafters of the 14th considered immigration to be a good thing. And even better than immigration was new citizens born on our soil. Because the drafters understood that immigration was the country's greatest strength. It is what made America into the juggernaut of the 20th century. And plenty of people on the right understand this. They bemoan low birth rates, and the aging population . . . and then they turn around and say, "nah, THESE babies, we don't want." Hmm.
2. There are also interactions with other countries that have birthright citizenship. I believe, at the time, Mexico had birthright citizenship available only to persons born in Mexico (this has since changed; and note that I am no historian of Mexico so nobody should rely on my recollection here -- but the general point remains valid). So let's say a person leaves Mexico and comes to the United States (the borders were pretty fluid back then, and they weren't necessarily clearly demarcated), and has a baby. If that baby isn't a citizen of the US, and not a citizen of Mexico, then who? Is the baby a citizen of nowhere?
The Supreme Court has long deemed the lack of nationality among the worst things that can happen to a person. Right or wrong, that's how it has been viewed. Bet you didn't know that exile is the only punishment that the Supreme Court has held to be categorically a violation of the 8th. You can be put to death for crimes; you can be imprisoned; but you can't lose your citizenship. That's cruel and unusual.
So when you are asking, "did they mean to create this 'abuse'"? the answer is unambiguously yes. They did mean to it. They did not see it as an abuse. Nobody important in US history saw it as an abuse (not that I'm aware of) until very recently, when the white folks in the South decided to take their fight against non-white people to the browns as well as the blacks.
And that's all there is to say about this topic. There's a reason why the Reagan appointed judge was so harsh toward the government lawyers. Why he said it was the clearest legal issue he had to adjudicate in 40 years on the bench. Because this law is unusually settled. There are a few questions of law more settled, but not many. This one is foundational.
I think they’re going g to find it pretty boring down there.“Thank you for your service. Any deployments while you were in?”
“Yes, I did two tours in El Paso.”
Stephen Miller doesn't control immigration policy, so he can think whatever he wants.The problem is that Stephen Miller seems to believe that the proper number of legal immigrants to the United States per year should be zero.
I think Super's point is that while you want to nibble around the edges for birthright citizenship, the amendment and its history doesn't allow for nibbling. It leaves no gray area - unless they're the children of invaders or diplomats, they're citizens upon birth.There seems to be confusion here. Your response sounds like you believe I want to get rid of birthright citizenship completely. I definitely don't.
While I realize that The drafters of the 14th amendment discussed and debated most every aspect that they could, it's just not possible for them to be able to see into the future. They don't know what they don't know. There are just simply things that they could not have foreseen. For example, bees with which we are able to travel from continent to continent. If it took weeks or months to get here, there would be no concern about pregnant women coming here to give birth. It would be two time-consuming and probably too dangerous. They probably also couldn't have foreseen our currents relationship with Mexico, Central and South America which compels pregnant women to risk their lives to get a few hundred yards into the US to have a child in the middle of the desert.
The funny thing is if he wanted the manufacturing to come back to the US, he should consider MCare4All. I remember an article about 20 years ago that said 1/4 of the cost of every car made in US was due to healthcare. I don't remember the specifics, but assume that included the cost of covering employees and retirees. MCare4All would shift the cost of healthcare away from employers.U.S. President Donald Trump says his country does not need to import Canadian oil, gas, autos or lumber.![]()
Trump tells World Economic Forum U.S. doesn’t need Canadian oil, gas, autos or lumber
U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday said the United States did not need Canadian oil, gas, autos or lumber and reiterated his suggestion that Canada become the 51st U.S. state.www.cp24.com
“We’re going to be demanding respect from other nations ... Canada has been very tough to deal with over the years,” he told the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday, appearing via video conference before an audience of the world’s most powerful business and political leaders.
“We don’t need them to make our cars, and they make a lot of them. We don’t need their lumber because we have our own forests,” he continued. “We don’t need their oil and gas, we have more than anybody.”
It isn’t their function that was the issue. It’s their independence.Nothing says you’re serious about rooting out government waste and fraud than firing the government officials responsible for rooting out waste and fraud
I hope they do it. And use federal money to do it. Send an invoice to every American with the amount of their money spent on it. Rushmore is a blight on the Black Hills anyway.F no
It will be interesting to see whether she has any meaningful power beyond being a talking head. In hearings, it was clear she didn’t know much about the job and has been told by Trump’s inner circle that all immigration matters will be handled from inside the White House by Homan, Trump and Miller.
I’ve read from colleagues of hers when she was in the House who thought she was capable and dedicated then but don’t even recognize her personality and behavior since she has gone full MAGA.