America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 5 years ago by HuckFinn. 58 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Voting Rights & Fear in one Swoop...
DrafterX Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
The city of San Francisco this week began allowing non-citizens, including illegal immigrants, to register to vote in the November election for the city school board.

The effort follows the city's passage of a 2016 ballot measure that gave the right to vote in school board elections to non-U.S. citizens over age 18 who live in San Francisco and have children under age 19, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

The measure was approved by a majority of San Francisco's eligible voters, but after the first two attempts failed.

“This is no-brainer legislation,” Hillary Ronen, of the city’s Board of Supervisors, told the publication. “Why would we not want our parents invested in the education of their children?”

- Hillary Ronen, Board of Supervisors
“As a parent myself and a former member of the SF Board of Education it is critical that the voices of all parents are at the table, particularly those that have historically been denied a voice in the process,” Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer said.

“We want to give immigrants the right to vote,” Supervisor Norman Yee told KGO.

A similar initiative of giving limited voting rights has also reportedly been approved in Chicago and multiple cities in Maryland and Massachusetts.

But other San Francisco residents are expressing dismay with non-citizens becoming eligible to vote in certain elections.

“The reason I voted against it is that I think the right to vote is something that goes along with citizenship -- and should be,” said Harmeet Dhillon, a member of the Republican National Committee.

"The reason I voted against it is that I think the right to vote is something that goes along with citizenship -- and should be."

- Harmeet Dhillon, who serves on the Republican National Committee
Some supporters of the measure, though celebrating, also expressed reservations that it could be weaponized by the federal government to crack down on illegal immigrants.

"The victory is that San Franciscans voted for this. In the face of what's happening nationwide now, we stand strong. ... But there is also a risk. So we as San Franciscans have set aside a fund to make sure that these immigrant communities are fully educated on their rights, but also their risks in this time and place in our country," Fewer told the Chronicle.

She said it’s not clear whether non-citizens’ voting registry could be hidden from the federal records, because voting records are considered public information.

"I think in this case in particular, what is very risky is that we don't know where this president will go," she added. "Are there risks involved? Absolutely. But quite frankly, there are risks involved for all of us with the Trump administration.”

The measure granting non-citizens the right to vote will expire in 2020, but can be renewed by the Board of Supervisors, reports said.

Film at 11... Mellow
bgz Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
I don't think that's legal.
DrafterX Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
Me neither... Love the way they presented tho.. you can vote even tho your an illegal, but Trump might come get you.... Think
bgz Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Ya, they should have ice hanging around in the parking lots on election day.
Speyside Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Hope SCOTUS becomes involved and ends this BS. Drafter, thanks for being this up. I was unaware of it.
dstieger Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
SF local elections? I'm a long ways from caring atm.


But, it gets me thinking again.....about rights...legal rights...not just voting, but others....

-Who is guaranteed U.S. Constitutional rights?
-US citizens in US? What about US citizens abroad?
-Legal immigrants? Permanent ones, or temporary also?
-Illegals?
-Anyone physically in the US? Maybe...seems part of the reason for keeping Gitmo was to prevent suspected terrorists from getting some rights by being brought to US soil, but I'm far from positive on those details.

-What is defined population that gets Congressional representation? Do US Representative district apportionments count just 'legals'? Leads to the whole Census controversy -- unfortunately, I've been unable to find out exactly what the Census is 'required' to count and exactly to what use the different numbers are applied

-Who is guaranteed right to vote in Federal elections? Citizens? Legal permanent aliens (Green Card holders)? Where is it legally defined? What about felons? Lots of local jurisdictions seem to want to make changes....fine...but what does federal law say?

----I'm pretty sure that all of those questions have fairly clear legal answers. But everybody seems to want to shout stuff about them without ever quoting any laws. I get that local stuff will be different everywhere and I don't care what they do in SF for their school board elections...(I suppose if pressed, I'd say that if they allow the illegal children to attend schools, their parents probably should be afforded the right to vote for the school board....if I decided that I care enough to think about it.)
Speyside Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Dave, good posts and thoughtful questions. I am sure there are legal answers, but are they the best answers?
dstieger Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Valid question. But, might be a bit subjective, no?

Laws can be changed....even the Constitution can be changed. But until then, we gotta work with the tools we have. Unless anarchy is acceptable
DrafterX Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
They are buying votes.. that's all... Mellow
dstieger Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
ummmm just curious....how much?

I got the Bait Monkey on my back telling me I need a new fishing rod
DrafterX Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
Ram has a bat... Mellow
delta1 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
I'm sure there will be legal challenges...ironic that the woman who did this is named "Hillary"...

since it is a "right" only to vote for school board elections, wouldn't it depend on local and state laws?
DrafterX Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
To start.. but once they're registered there's prolly no way to stop them from voting in other elections.. unless Trump deports them of course... Mellow
Speyside Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I think this is a slippery slope that we need to stop immediately. So, it's real simple, illegal aliens do not have voting rights. None at all.
delta1 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
DrafterX wrote:
To start.. but once they're registered there's prolly no way to stop them from voting in other elections.. unless Trump deports them of course... Mellow


looks like this is a separate registry, only for school board elections...should not apply to other state-wide or Federal elections...
DrafterX Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
Not likely.. Mellow
Speyside Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Delta, Drafter has a very salient point. Here is my take on it.
Drafter if your point was different feel free to correct me. Our country is based on the rule of law, is it not? Illegal aliens by law do not have the right to vote, nor should they. By giving them any voting rights a precedent is being set. This precedent could eventually lead to complete voting rights for illegal aliens. Also as an aside let's get a term straight. They are not illegal immigrants. They are illegal aliens. Voting rights are one of the most important rights American citizens have. I wish SCOTUS becomes involved with even local school voting rights for illegal aliens. They should strictly base their decision on the constitution.
DrafterX Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
And this is just another reason sanctuary cities are so dangerous... Mellow
Speyside Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I totally agree with you.
DrafterX Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
You can't do that.. Not talking
Speyside Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
On sanctuary cities that is. LMAO!
DrafterX Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
OK.. just this once... Mellow
delta1 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
Think
Gene363 Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
I light of Russian election tampering and non citizen voting concerns i'm guessing everyone is ready for voter ID and a return to paper ballots.
DrafterX Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
That's how it's done here... Mellow
HuckFinn Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
Sanctuary policies are legal and protected by the Tenth Amendment.

Amendments, huh, good god y'all
What are they good for
Absolutely nothing, listen to me…

Actually a song Herfing
RMAN4443 Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
HuckFinn wrote:
Sanctuary policies are legal and protected by the Tenth Amendment.

Amendments, huh, good god y'all
What are they good for
Absolutely nothing, listen to me…

Actually a song Herfing


….Again I smell Ka-Ka.....The rules of immigration were reserved to the States through the 10th Amendment until the first Federal law was enacted in 1875. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the following year that immigration regulation was an exclusive Federal responsibility.Congress established the Immigration Service in 1891, which was the first time the Federal government took an active role.

https://www.theamericanview.com/constitution-course-supplemental-assignments/what-authority-does-the-u-s-constitution-give-the-federal-government-regarding-immigration/


HuckFinn Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
RMAN4443 wrote:
….Again I smell Ka-Ka.....The rules of immigration were reserved to the States through the 10th Amendment until the first Federal law was enacted in 1875. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the following year that immigration regulation was an exclusive Federal responsibility.Congress established the Immigration Service in 1891, which was the first time the Federal government took an active role.

https://www.theamericanview.com/constitution-course-supplemental-assignments/what-authority-does-the-u-s-constitution-give-the-federal-government-regarding-immigration/



From the National Review

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/11/sanctuary-cities-states-rights-honot-tenth-amendment/

Excerpt:
That isn’t what Trump or the voters who support him want to hear. But it’s what support for the Constitution demands. Perhaps Bob Dole, the ultimate GOP insider even if he is long retired, is exactly the sort of person the Republican base rejected when it chose Trump in 2016. But his passion for the Tenth Amendment still ought to command their respect — and to compel them to see that a true conservative must grudgingly accept that the court was right to strike down Trump’s executive order.

The reason is that pesky concept of federalism enshrined in the Tenth Amendment.

Maybe you're not wiping right.
Speyside Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
RMAN, you sure know your sh*t. Were you naturally full of it or did it take a while?
RMAN4443 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
HuckFinn wrote:
From the National Review

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/11/sanctuary-cities-states-rights-honot-tenth-amendment/

Excerpt:
That isn’t what Trump or the voters who support him want to hear. But it’s what support for the Constitution demands. Perhaps Bob Dole, the ultimate GOP insider even if he is long retired, is exactly the sort of person the Republican base rejected when it chose Trump in 2016. But his passion for the Tenth Amendment still ought to command their respect — and to compel them to see that a true conservative must grudgingly accept that the court was right to strike down Trump’s executive order.

The reason is that pesky concept of federalism enshrined in the Tenth Amendment.

Maybe you're not wiping right.


Not sure what your issue is Spey???


All excerpts from your link huck...but you go ahead and put your support into those sanctuary cities

Sanctuary cities are wrong to defy federal immigration law

Sanctuary cities are appalling

That a San Francisco court would pull that argument out of its hat is infuriating to both the administration and Republicans who rightly view as outrageous those who would seize on any pretext to defend illegal immigrants from the authorities


The sanctuary-city movement is deplorable, and Republicans rightly sympathize with Trump’s desire to inflict penalties on Democrats who act as if they can disobey laws they don’t like with impunity while still having their collective snouts planted firmly in the federal trough.

The Constitution guarantees the right of the people of the states to rule themselves and to exercise power in areas that are not the province of the national government. That does not give states or cities the right to nullify federal laws they don’t like or to prevent Washington’s agents or the military from enforcing them.




HuckFinn Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
RMAN4443 wrote:



All excerpts from your link huck...but you go ahead and put your support into those sanctuary cities

Sanctuary cities are wrong to defy federal immigration law

Sanctuary cities are appalling







Yeah..I wasn't defending anything.

I was just stating the fact that they're protected by the Tenth Amendment.

I get it. You think they're appalling. Tell Congress. I can't help you.

Here's the link to the National Review article AGAIN:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/11/sanctuary-cities-states-rights-honot-tenth-amendment/
Speyside Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
RMAN, you want to insult people, I think I'll insult back. Your chit comments aren't funny, they are stupid. You seem to think you are funny. I don't. You belong to the conservative tribe here. You insult liberals daily. Why wouldn't you expect insults in kind?
RMAN4443 Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
Speyside wrote:
RMAN, you want to insult people, I think I'll insult back. Your chit comments aren't funny, they are stupid. You seem to think you are funny. I don't. You belong to the conservative tribe here. You insult liberals daily. Why wouldn't you expect insults in kind?

I really don't expect or not expect anything here...

Go check for all the insults huck tosses around.....puhleeze…...huck told me he's not insulted by me at all....I guess he meant "My pal Spey will be along soon to be "mean" to you soon..." I might just start crying myself to sleep now...
I don't insult "liberals"(maybe some liberal people), but what I insult are "stupid' people....

What did,people want from Trump/Putin meeting? Trump to go over and jump on him and go 2 out 3 falls? Or say wait until after the elections and I'll have more flexibility?
Open up the borders for one and all? Whose going to pay? Do Russians and others like the Tsarnev's get to come and go as they please?
Allow states to release criminals rather than report illegals to ICE, so they can go out and commit more crimes,maybe cause a death or two?
After the whole Bill Clinton "Affair" as President, and the outcome and cost, Who cares if Trump got a "little" 12 years before he even thought about running for President? definition of is is Trump?
Ok,you do what you do...maybe you and huck can team up and come up with some EPIC insults working together...as a team, for the good of the Country and all


HuckFinn wrote:
Rick, you want this? I think it's stupid and petty. But this what you want?

This started when you made some bizarre analogy that I thought was nuts and said I'd lost respect for you. Harsh? With all that goes on in this nuthouse?
And anyway, why would you give a chit who or what I respect??

Twice you've ignored my apologies. So, not sure wtf you want.

I don't even comment on your posts. You comment on mine.

You're pissed. But I tried. Twice. So ...what's next? You want to try and piss me off?
You want to see if insults are gonna get to me?
Fluck that man. I'm 68. That ain't happening.
Only people whose opinions of me rile me still are all dead people.
I'm always hopeful that I can fix relationships I have with the living.

So. Don't know how to bridge this gap.
But know that insulting my dad or members of my family is meaningless to me.
I don't know you. Should insults like that matter to anyone? I don't think so.

I say what I think and feel here. Not trying to spew anything.
If I come off as a jerk to you I can't help that. Just doing me.
I'm sure the only one who benefits from my rantings and bs is me anyway..

I'm dont follow any media's fake news agenda or anyones agenda except, well, my own.

But like I said, insulting me is just gonna make me unwilling to ever wanna reconcile.
Of course not a threat. Just the way it is.

Oh well, 3rd try, Rick, I'm sorry I said I'd lost respect for you. Shouldn't have.





RMAN4443 wrote:
Huck, your giving yourself way to much credit....I'm 58 years old myself, and until a few months ago I didn't even know you existed...like I told you when you PM'd me about the respect thing-Don't worry about it- Your respect means very little to me....I don't care if you lost respect gained respect or have any respect for me at all..I haven't been crying myself to sleep since you said it...Not worried about your desire to reconcile

I have a T-shirt that says it better...Fuch You,I Have Enough Friends....

Enough said....have a great day

HuckFinn wrote:

Fair nuff
RMAN4443 Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
,,,and to quell one of the epic tag team insults you will undoubtedly respond with....yes, Trump does and says stupid things
HuckFinn Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
Rick, it's not my intention or even my style to insult anyone here or anywhere.
I do it here sure, but only when someone insults me first. Or tries to get under my skin.
It's not something I personally enjoy.
Believe it or not.

I have strong opinions. I piss people off here.
But, this is a primarily a conservative site, so...

I'm probably not going to be winning the most congenial award.

Anyway. I try to support my opinions with facts. I look to see what conservative sites are saying believing their opinions will carry more weight in a place like this.
Not claiming success, just relating my honest intentions.

I'm still optimistic that one day more people will agree actual facts matter.
Cause I think we've lost that.

I've never summarily stated that your opinions are stupid. I might think they are sometimes but id rather try to change your mind than enrage it.

I was raised to respect everyone. It takes a lot for me to lose respect for someone, but when someone exits the debate to personalize stuff, yeah, it's game on. I'm human.

Given a real choice?, I'd rather advance the dialogue, maybe come to some understanding, even agree to disagree than even win an argument.

These are some bizarre and stressful times. Maybe I'm not helping, I dunno.

To me, it looks like Americans are building this Tower of Babel, and everyone's yelling and no one understands a word being said.




delta1 Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
I vowed to be civil a couple of weeks ago...haven't needed to apologize yet today...
RMAN4443 Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
delta1 wrote:
I vowed to be civil a couple of weeks ago...haven't needed to apologize yet today...

Don't think it hasn't been noticed...your doing a fantastic job...a shining example to the rest of us...Applause Applause
keep up the good work...Beer
delta1 Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
Speyside wrote:
Delta, Drafter has a very salient point. Here is my take on it.
Drafter if your point was different feel free to correct me. Our country is based on the rule of law, is it not? Illegal aliens by law do not have the right to vote, nor should they. By giving them any voting rights a precedent is being set. This precedent could eventually lead to complete voting rights for illegal aliens. Also as an aside let's get a term straight. They are not illegal immigrants. They are illegal aliens. Voting rights are one of the most important rights American citizens have. I wish SCOTUS becomes involved with even local school voting rights for illegal aliens. They should strictly base their decision on the constitution.


I'm not supporting this effort, but it seems to be a local issue there...my guess is that there will be a legal challenge, and maybe all of your points will be raised and the "illegal immigrant voting right" will be repealed.

In CA, illegals have become an important component of the economy, providing a supply of low-cost labor upon which the state's engine, agriculture, depends, as well as the tourism/hospitality industry...that seems to be the root of our bi-polarism over the issue...

undocumented people prolly vote in HOA elections and other private elections...
Speyside Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I still think it is small minded on your part, but if Huck is fine with it who am I to quibble? Carry on.

Disagree with you about Helsinki.
Agree with yo about borders.
Not sure of your point about Tsarnev, please elaborate.
Agree with you about ICE, and would throw sanctuary cities in there as wrong and illegal.
Agree with you about Bill Clinton, and believe the senate should have voted him out of office.
Agree with you about Trumps infidelities.

Helsinki, my problem is 3 fold. I think meeting with Putin was as worthless as meeting with Kim Jung Un. Trump said he believed Putin over our security agencies. Trump said he was considering allowing Russia to question American citizens.

Tsarnev, what do you think could have stopped that?
Mr. Jones Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,421
San Fran is full of ANARCHISTS AND MOHO'S....

IT IS also filled with illegal aliens and homeless dudes who "drop trow" and take a DUMP ON THE SIDE WALKS...

THEY PISS ON EVERYTHING LIKE A DOG MARKING THEIR TERRITORY....

ONLY MORONS would give illegal aliens drivers licenses
And voting rights...
Bunch of bull CRAP if you ask me.
RMAN4443 Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
Speyside wrote:
I still think it is small minded on your part, but if Huck is fine with it who am I to quibble? Carry on.

Disagree with you about Helsinki.
Agree with yo about borders.
Not sure of your point about Tsarnev, please elaborate.
Agree with you about ICE, and would throw sanctuary cities in there as wrong and illegal.
Agree with you about Bill Clinton, and believe the senate should have voted him out of office.
Agree with you about Trumps infidelities.

Helsinki, my problem is 3 fold. I think meeting with Putin was as worthless as meeting with Kim Jung Un. Trump said he believed Putin over our security agencies. Trump said he was considering allowing Russia to question American citizens.

Tsarnev, what do you think could have stopped that?


Good to know your ok with it if huck says it's ok...[-o< ...was that your own idea or did huck tell you it was ok with him for you to be ok with it?


if we open the borders and allow anyone in, do we allow Russians and known terrorists to waltz in too?


If Trump didn't meet with Putin and Un, he would have been derided for that....it was a no win...I think it's called Diplomacy, and Trump says a lot of stupid things, I already gave you that one


I think, had the FBI followed up on the report sent to them by Russia on the Tsarnevs in 2011 it could have been prevented...that's kinda like our intelligence agencies not acting on accurate information...from(I won't say it,I know how you feel), but had our intelligence agencies reacted properly to that tidbit of information,lives would have been saved...But in the words of Hildog..".what difference.at this point does it make'
https://youtu.be/Ka0_nz53CcM

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-explosions-boston-congress/russia-warned-u-s-about-boston-marathon-bomb-suspect-tsarnaev-report-idUSBREA2P02Q20140326

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/boston-bombing-anniversary/russia-warned-u-s-about-tsarnaev-spelling-issue-let-him-n60836

and I still don't get you jumping in to protect huck, and I guess the rest of the "Liberal Tribe",if you agree with most of the points I've been arguing... because huck and I disagree, you decide you need to jump in and say "RMAN, you want to insult people, I think I'll insult back"....I haven't been insulting liberals, just your favorite liberal? Jeez, it's not like I was insulting you....

….and I've read many of your posts insulting people, but never felt the urge to jump in and insult you for them....small minded?...not really sure, I never gave you that much thought
Speyside Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
RMAN, I see a lot of conservative dog piles here on liberals. Basically I am tired of it. Perhaps I have not paid enough attention. If this is a you and Huck thing then I am out of line. It seems Huck gets ganged up on often. I think he deserves the right to be heard and not shouted down. So, I simply will offer you a blanket apology as it appears I have misunderstood your reasoning. You are right, you have not insulted me.
RMAN4443 Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
Speyside wrote:
RMAN, I see a lot of conservative dog piles here on liberals. Basically I am tired of it. Perhaps I have not paid enough attention. If this is a you and Huck thing then I am out of line. It seems Huck gets ganged up on often. I think he deserves the right to be heard and not shouted down. So, I simply will offer you a blanket apology as it appears I have misunderstood your reasoning. You are right, you have not insulted me.

We good?.....I never really had an argument with you until this

Huck doesn't get shouted down....he makes his points known, and he has his backers...a lot of people take offense at some of the ideas he puts forth, and people let him know it...that's what this forum is all about ,right?

There's just as many liberal dog piles as conservative...different points of view
HuckFinn Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
I keep seeing my name!

Here is am, minding my own business and....

.....leave me tf alone!

delta1 Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
I'm actually glad you're here, Huck...I was one of the lib lightning rods who got "shouted down" a lot before your time...I was asked on many occasions why I hate America, told I'd be happier if I left this country, and then "invited" to leave...fun times...all good...

Got some perspective, tho, meeting fellow CBid brothers in person, most of whom are on the opposite side of the political spectrum...we get after it here, but are good friends when we get chances to herf: MACS, Abrignac, opelmanta, Palama ...recently met Drafter and Victor at the Morro Bay FishnHerf...both good dudes whose company I totally enjoyed...
HuckFinn Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
delta1 wrote:
I'm actually glad you're here, Huck...I was one of the lib lightning rods who got "shouted down" a lot before your time...I was asked on many occasions why I hate America, told I'd be happier if I left this country, and then "invited" to leave...fun times...all good...

Got some perspective, tho, meeting fellow CBid brothers in person, most of whom are on the opposite side of the political spectrum...we get after it here, but are good friends when we get chances to herf: MACS, Abrignac, opelmanta, Palama ...recently met Drafter and Victor at the Morro Bay FishnHerf...both good dudes whose company I totally enjoyed...

Will keep what you say in mind.
Thanks Delta
Speyside Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
There is a lot of revisionist history going on here. For as long as I remember liberals have been shouted down and dog piled on here. Now the conservatives are getting bent out of shape if they are called out. Equal treatment seems fair to me. There are a few obvious points, even though liberals usually provide facts they are always accused of making things up. You have seen the level of deflection and bombast when conservatives are either unwilling or unable to back their arguments with facts. Finally there are a few people here who are simply mean spirited and expect people to take their utterances as fact.
frankj1 Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
I thought I was Mr. Congeniality.
WTF?
DrafterX Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
Youse guys... Laugh
DrafterX Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
San Francisco is permitting “undocumented immigrants,” as political correctness demands we label them, to register to vote this November in local school board elections. Who doubts this is the first step by the left and Democrats toward full voting rights in state and eventually in federal elections? The claim by lawyers will be that it is discriminatory to allow undocumented immigrants to vote in local and state elections and not for members of Congress and for president. At bottom this is what the entire immigration debate is about.


The former head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was interviewed last week on Fox News. Thomas Homan had some important things to say about calls by the left to dismantle the agency.

“What's incredible,” Homan said, “is these politicians, members of the legislature, would much rather abolish a law enforcement agency than fix the law. ... ICE is enforcing the laws they enacted.”

That’s because politicians, who often pass laws that exempt themselves, care more about their re-election than they do about having laws they passed enforced.

Homan responded to the narrative promoted by Democrats and the major media that the overwhelming number of people arrested by ICE are innocents seeking a better life in America:

“What's incredible is these politicians, members of the legislature, would much rather abolish a law enforcement agency than fix the law. ... ICE is enforcing the laws they enacted.”

“People want to ignore the data and the fact that ... 89 percent of everybody we arrested last year had a criminal history, either a criminal conviction or pending criminal charges,” Homan said. “We are prioritizing against the criminals. And abolishing ICE, there are going to be (fewer) criminals locked up. Over 100,000 criminal aliens have been arrested this year walking the streets of this country. That wouldn’t happen if ICE wasn’t there.”

Film at 11.... Think
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>