Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 12:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 9:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 9:28:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 9:26:00 AM (view original):

Conservative Bill Kristol:

The shrinking caravan of refugees isn't a threat to the country or the constitutional order. A president who tries to end birthright citizenship by executive order is.

Bill Kristol is a never trumper weirdo. The voters will speak on Nov. 6th.

So you agree with Trump’s idea to end birthright citizenship?

?

I do. Works in Switzerland.

So if someone is born here and they aren’t a citizen here, are they a citizen anywhere?

United States is one of only two developed countries to maintain birthright citizenship (the other is Canada). Maybe its time to change those laws? I am neither a lawmaker nor a politician but to me I don't think it makes any sense that illegals are allowed to have kids here and give them automatic citizenship. Their citizenship should be the same as their parents.

Not true. Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and Peru are others. Something like 30 countries have it.

DEVELOPED!! Not 3rd world where people try to flee.

Mexico is considered a developed country.

And anyway, what other countries do isn’t terribly relevant. The 14th Amendment grants birthright citizenship. No self-respecting conservative would argue that an executive order should overrule a constitutional amendment.

Then why do Mexican people want to come to the US vs. staying in Mexico?

Why do people in the US want to go to Canada and Europe?

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 12:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rsp777 on 10/30/2018 11:53:00 AM (view original):
You process them as quickly as possible. You house them temporarily and humanely until our Country can get its **** together and address the problem without rampant paranoia. You cut through bureaucratic red tape. You send an assload of soldiers and humanitarian workers and lawyers and judges to the border IMMEDIATELY and you treat it like what it is. A humanitarian crisis. You don't rape away one of the founding tenets of our country because processing refugees might be an extraordinary and difficult task.

No no no...and I'll use ethnic names since you're confused. Raul, Raula, Raul Jr. and Raula Jr. are at the border what specifically do you do with this family? Where do they sleep, where do they get their meals, their medicine, education, etc. I would like specifics not generalities and who pays for all of this please?

Thank you

Waiting....rsp....?

Try scrolling up once in a while...

Seriously???

How about this.

You put that family in line with those waiting to be processed for legal immigration. You speed the process as much as possible by using military and civilian resources. Maybe finance humane shelters and temporary food and care programs by spending a billion less on weaponry.

The U.S. outpaces all other nations in military expenditures. World military spending totaled more than $1.6 trillion in 2015. The U.S. accounted for 37 percent of the total. U.S. military expenditures are roughly the size of the next seven largest military budgets around the world, combined.

You really don't think there's a bit of fat that can be trimmed to facilitate HUMANITARIAN relief as expeditiously as possible?

And these people chose to come here. They should know you can't just walk in. Maybe worrying about education and anything other than keeping people safe, alive and together can wait until another time. Like when they've begun their assimilation into the US. Why do I need to draw you a roadmap? This is all VERY common-sense, non-political stuff here.

Posted by strikeout26 on 10/30/2018 12:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rsp777 on 10/30/2018 12:26:00 PM (view original):
You just spent a whole post bashing his and my religion. That is bigotry to a T. Bigotry is being intolerant of other's beliefs. How is making fun of someone's religion not being intolerant? Come on. You're smarter than this.

I don't try and deny anyone the right to worship as they please the way religious conservatives do. I just point out that your worship, whatever it is, is based on MYTHOLOGY. Not any kind of science or factual information. Have morals, have values, have faith, use faith as a guide. But don't deny the faith, or lack thereof, of another human being when YOU DON'T KNOW.

If that's bigotry I really think you should look up bigotry. What I have done is simply "not agree with you and still respect your right to believe how you wish." I don't have to like it. You don't have to like it. NO ONE KNOWS.

I don't need to look up bigotry. I already gave you the definition and you are a bigot.

I'm not intolerant. I'm just pointing out your belief in things that are not proveable. I respect your freedom to religion. I just think it's blind obedience. That doesn't make me a bigot.

No rsp. You answered in a concept. I gave you a specific example. Raul, Raula, Raul Jr. and Raula Jr. are at the border. What SPECIFICALLY do you do with the four of them? The kids are 5 and 6. Don't deal in concepts. Specifically what do you do with the family. Lay out your plan for me.

Posted by rsp777 on 10/30/2018 12:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 10/30/2018 12:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rsp777 on 10/30/2018 12:26:00 PM (view original):
You just spent a whole post bashing his and my religion. That is bigotry to a T. Bigotry is being intolerant of other's beliefs. How is making fun of someone's religion not being intolerant? Come on. You're smarter than this.

I don't try and deny anyone the right to worship as they please the way religious conservatives do. I just point out that your worship, whatever it is, is based on MYTHOLOGY. Not any kind of science or factual information. Have morals, have values, have faith, use faith as a guide. But don't deny the faith, or lack thereof, of another human being when YOU DON'T KNOW.

If that's bigotry I really think you should look up bigotry. What I have done is simply "not agree with you and still respect your right to believe how you wish." I don't have to like it. You don't have to like it. NO ONE KNOWS.

I don't need to look up bigotry. I already gave you the definition and you are a bigot.

I'm not intolerant. I'm just pointing out your belief in things that are not proveable. I respect your freedom to religion. I just think it's blind obedience. That doesn't make me a bigot.

I am an Atheist as well. I want to believe but logically I cannot. Doesn't mean I know for a fact that I am right. Also, doesn't mean I don't support Jews and their causes and their culture. If I were to believe it would certainly be Judaism. But alas I am an atheist.

"unlike yours, which is filled to the brim with theology"

So, you meant this as a compliment towards Christians? What if I made that same comment in the same context and replaced "theology" with "blackness"? "You are filled to the brim with blackness". Would you consider that statement bigoted? (No need to answer. I already know your answer). Sounds pretty intolerant to me. I'm sorry if it's not what you want to hear, but you are a bigot.

Not at all. Believe what you want. Believe in the big myth, the long con, the spaghetti monster or what the hell ever. I’m not telling you what to believe. I’m just laughing at theology. And I’m sorry that you have ZERO clue as to what an ACTUAL bigot is. Grab a mirror. There’s one now.

DISMISSED

YES!!! rsp meltdown on its way.

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 12:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 12:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 9:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 9:28:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 9:26:00 AM (view original):

Conservative Bill Kristol:

The shrinking caravan of refugees isn't a threat to the country or the constitutional order. A president who tries to end birthright citizenship by executive order is.

Bill Kristol is a never trumper weirdo. The voters will speak on Nov. 6th.

So you agree with Trump’s idea to end birthright citizenship?

?

I do. Works in Switzerland.

So if someone is born here and they aren’t a citizen here, are they a citizen anywhere?

United States is one of only two developed countries to maintain birthright citizenship (the other is Canada). Maybe its time to change those laws? I am neither a lawmaker nor a politician but to me I don't think it makes any sense that illegals are allowed to have kids here and give them automatic citizenship. Their citizenship should be the same as their parents.

Not true. Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and Peru are others. Something like 30 countries have it.

DEVELOPED!! Not 3rd world where people try to flee.

Mexico is considered a developed country.

And anyway, what other countries do isn’t terribly relevant. The 14th Amendment grants birthright citizenship. No self-respecting conservative would argue that an executive order should overrule a constitutional amendment.

Then why do Mexican people want to come to the US vs. staying in Mexico?

Just noticed you ignored the “this isn’t conservative” argument.

Another reminder that Trump’s base is motivated by race, not conservative principles, not the economy. Race.

Posted by rsp777 on 10/30/2018 1:18:00 PM (view original):
Not at all. Believe what you want. Believe in the big myth, the long con, the spaghetti monster or what the hell ever. I’m not telling you what to believe. I’m just laughing at theology. And I’m sorry that you have ZERO clue as to what an ACTUAL bigot is. Grab a mirror. There’s one now.

DISMISSED

Wow, you live a life of denial. I feel sorry for you. I also assume that you are probably a closet racist. Usually if you're bigoted in one area, you are bigoted in many more. Very sad, bro. You should be ashamed.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 12:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 12:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 12:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 11:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 9:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 9:28:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 9:26:00 AM (view original):

Conservative Bill Kristol:

The shrinking caravan of refugees isn't a threat to the country or the constitutional order. A president who tries to end birthright citizenship by executive order is.

Bill Kristol is a never trumper weirdo. The voters will speak on Nov. 6th.

So you agree with Trump’s idea to end birthright citizenship?

?

I do. Works in Switzerland.

So if someone is born here and they aren’t a citizen here, are they a citizen anywhere?

United States is one of only two developed countries to maintain birthright citizenship (the other is Canada). Maybe its time to change those laws? I am neither a lawmaker nor a politician but to me I don't think it makes any sense that illegals are allowed to have kids here and give them automatic citizenship. Their citizenship should be the same as their parents.

Not true. Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and Peru are others. Something like 30 countries have it.

DEVELOPED!! Not 3rd world where people try to flee.

Mexico is considered a developed country.

And anyway, what other countries do isn’t terribly relevant. The 14th Amendment grants birthright citizenship. No self-respecting conservative would argue that an executive order should overrule a constitutional amendment.

Then why do Mexican people want to come to the US vs. staying in Mexico?

Just noticed you ignored the “this isn’t conservative” argument.

Another reminder that Trump’s base is motivated by race, not conservative principles, not the economy. Race.

I agree with this. Whether it is a conservative, liberal, communist or dothraki argument.

Because you don’t actually care about the constitution or the rule of law. You just care about supporting Trump.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 1:50:00 PM (view original):
Because you don’t actually care about the constitution or the rule of law. You just care about supporting Trump.

Because I am logical. I also support redefining the 2nd amendment. IDC if it were Trump or Kasich or Clinton who proposed this. Our current immigration and path to citizenship system is not optimal IMO so I would like it modified. Doesn't make me right. It is just my opinion. Same opinion shared by the majority of first world Western nations.

Posted by cccp1014 on 10/30/2018 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2018 1:50:00 PM (view original):
Because you don’t actually care about the constitution or the rule of law. You just care about supporting Trump.

Because I am logical. I also support redefining the 2nd amendment. IDC if it were Trump or Kasich or Clinton who proposed this. Our current immigration and path to citizenship system is not optimal IMO so I would like it modified. Doesn't make me right. It is just my opinion. Same opinion shared by the majority of first world Western nations.

But you would support redefining the 2nd amendment legally. Not through executive order. If Obama has just declared guns illegal, that wouldn’t have been right, agree?