THE TRUE HISTORY OF MILLSTONE BABIES
October 31, 2018
Having mastered fake news, now the media are trying out a little fake history.
In the news business, new topics are always popping up, from the Logan Act and the emoluments clause to North Korea. The all-star panels rush to Wikipedia, so they can pretend to be experts on things they knew nothing about an hour earlier.
Such is the case today with "anchor babies" and "birthright citizenship." People who know zilch about the history of the 14th Amendment are pontificating magnificently and completely falsely on the issue du jour.
If you'd like to be the smartest person at your next cocktail party by knowing the truth about the 14th Amendment, this is the column for you!
Of course the president can end the citizenship of "anchor babies" by executive order -- for the simple reason that no Supreme Court or U.S. Congress has ever conferred such a right.
It's just something everyone believes to be true.
How could anyone -- even a not-very-bright person -- imagine that granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens is actually in our Constitution?
The first question would be: Why would they do that? It's like being accused of robbing a homeless person. WHY WOULD I?
The Supreme Court has stated -- repeatedly! -- that the "main object" of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment "was to settle the question ... as to the citizenship of free negroes," making them "citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside."
Democrats, the entire media and House Speaker Paul Ryan seem to have forgotten the Civil War. They believe that, immediately after a war that ended slavery, Americans rose up as one and demanded that the children of illegals be granted citizenship!
You know what's really bothering me? If someone comes into the country illegally and has a kid, that kid should be an American citizen!
YOU MEAN THAT'S NOT ALREADY IN THE CONSTITUTION?
Give me a scenario -- just one scenario -- where the post-Civil War amendments would be intended to grant citizenship to the kids of Chinese ladies flying to birthing hospitals in California, or pregnant Latin Americans sneaking across the border in the back of flatbed trucks.
You can make it up. It doesn't have to be a true scenario. Any scenario!
As the court has explained again and again and again:
COPYRIGHT 2018 ANN COULTER
Quote from: Belenus on November 02, 2018, 04:19:48 PM
THE TRUE HISTORY OF MILLSTONE BABIES
October 31, 2018
Having mastered fake news, now the media are trying out a little fake history.
In the news business, new topics are always popping up, from the Logan Act and the emoluments clause to North Korea. The all-star panels rush to Wikipedia, so they can pretend to be experts on things they knew nothing about an hour earlier.
Such is the case today with "anchor babies" and "birthright citizenship." People who know zilch about the history of the 14th Amendment are pontificating magnificently and completely falsely on the issue du jour.
If you'd like to be the smartest person at your next cocktail party by knowing the truth about the 14th Amendment, this is the column for you!
Of course the president can end the citizenship of "anchor babies" by executive order -- for the simple reason that no Supreme Court or U.S. Congress has ever conferred such a right.
It's just something everyone believes to be true.
COPYRIGHT 2018 ANN COULTER
Two things, one, you need to link to the originating source, and two, it's a violation of copyright laws to post an entire article without the permission of the author.
14th Amendment
QuoteAll 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.
So if an illegal alien enters the USA and has some kids, the constitution says they are American citizens seeing as how the document says they are and places no conditions other than being subject to our jurisdiction.
The OP says in part;
QuoteOf course the president can end the citizenship of "anchor babies" by executive order -- for the simple reason that no Supreme Court or U.S. Congress has ever conferred such a right.
I think any EO might be in conflict with the constitution.
In United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) the Supreme Court decided that a Chinese man born of
legal residents in the USA was a citizen. The case was a matter of allowing a Chinese-American back to the USA in the face of Chinese exclusion laws.
The OP also says;
QuoteThe Supreme Court has stated -- repeatedly! -- that the "main object" of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment "was to settle the question ... as to the citizenship of free negroes," making them "citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside." .... As the court has explained again and again and again:
Anyone familiar with these rulings?
How would anyone here word an EO to prevent the children of illegal aliens born in the USA from being natural born?
Quote from: Ranb on November 04, 2018, 04:14:20 PM
14th Amendment
So if an illegal alien enters the USA and has some kids, the constitution says they are American citizens seeing as how the document says they are and places no conditions other than being subject to our jurisdiction.
The OP says in part;I think any EO might be in conflict with the constitution.
In United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) the Supreme Court decided that a Chinese man born of legal residents in the USA was a citizen. The case was a matter of allowing a Chinese-American back to the USA in the face of Chinese exclusion laws.
The OP also says;Anyone familiar with these rulings?
How would anyone here word an EO to prevent the children of illegal aliens born in the USA from being natural born?
Difference being, Chinese were invited by the US Govt, Illegals sneaking across the border are law breakers. Any more questions?
Exclusion laws are not invitations. Try again.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The above was posted for the sole purpose of avoiding another suspension of posting privileges.
Quote from: Ranb on November 04, 2018, 04:41:02 PM
Exclusion laws are not invitations. Try again.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The above was posted for the sole purpose of avoiding another suspension of posting privileges.
The US Federal govt had an agreement with the Chinese people that they were welcome to come and work.
Now tell me, how is this different from someone "ILLEGALLY" Entering The US?
Go ahead, I'll wait.
Quote from: Solar on November 04, 2018, 04:58:18 PM
The US Federal govt had an agreement with the Chinese people that they were welcome to come and work.
Now tell me, how is this different from someone "ILLEGALLY" Entering The US?
Go ahead, I'll wait.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.gettyimages.com%2Fphotos%2Ffoot-about-to-step-on-rake-picture-id129300888%3Fs%3D170667a&hash=6479475e4ea4d2fcccbe1541148fba20eddc09b9)
Quote from: taxed on November 04, 2018, 05:01:32 PM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.gettyimages.com%2Fphotos%2Ffoot-about-to-step-on-rake-picture-id129300888%3Fs%3D170667a&hash=6479475e4ea4d2fcccbe1541148fba20eddc09b9)
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: Solar on November 04, 2018, 04:58:18 PM
The US Federal govt had an agreement with the Chinese people that they were welcome to come and work.
Yeah, so?
QuoteNow tell me, how is this different from someone "ILLEGALLY" Entering The US?
Go ahead, I'll wait.
Because if there was an invitation, then they aren't in the country illegally.
I already said in my above post that the court decision was about parents who were in the country legally but that their son, a US citizen was blocked from entering by exclusion laws.
You're going to injure yourself by repeatedly stepping on the rake.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The above was posted for the sole purpose of avoiding another suspension of posting privileges.
Quote from: Ranb on November 04, 2018, 05:46:16 PM
Yeah, so?
Because if there was an invitation, then they aren't in the country illegally.
I already said in my above post that the court decision was about parents who were in the country legally but that their son, a US citizen was blocked from entering by exclusion laws.
You're going to injure yourself by repeatedly stepping on the rake.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The above was posted for the sole purpose of avoiding another suspension of posting privileges.
Don't make me tell you again. Acting or being a petulant child will end your guest privileges.
I see your disconnect, you don't understand the Constitution.(https://i1.wp.com/thepoliticalinsider.com/content/uploads/2015/09/14thamend.jpg?w=800&ssl=1)
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/man-who-wrote-14th-amendment-explains-it-liberals-are-furious/
Quote from: Solar on November 04, 2018, 07:54:59 PM
Don't make me tell you again. Acting or being a petulant child will end your guest privileges.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davetyner.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F12%2Ffaceplant.jpg&hash=df61891e0a34237a0fcfa8b0fd9e913a9578070e)
The True History of Millstone Babies
Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 31, 2018 4:06 PM
https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2018/10/31/the-true-history-of-millstone-babies-n2533765
Ann Coulter's article makes the point that
President Trump CAN "abolish"
birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants
by issuing an Executive Order.
Such "citizenship" does not need to be abolished
because it never lawfully existed to begin with!
A President absolutely DOES have the power to order federal agencies
to stop treating such persons as citizens
because they never were citizens to begin with!
Such an Executive Order would NOT change the law,
it would only order federal agencies to
stop breaking the law that's been in place for 150 years!
Quote from: je_freedom on November 05, 2018, 03:34:04 PM
The True History of Millstone Babies
Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 31, 2018 4:06 PM
https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2018/10/31/the-true-history-of-millstone-babies-n2533765
Ann Coulter's article makes the point that
President Trump CAN "abolish"
birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants
by issuing an Executive Order.
Such "citizenship" does not need to be abolished
because it never lawfully existed to begin with!
A President absolutely DOES have the power to order federal agencies
to stop treating such persons as citizens
because they never were citizens to begin with!
Such an Executive Order would NOT change the law,
it would only order federal agencies to
stop breaking the law that's been in place for 150 years!
Such an Executive Order would NOT change the law,
it would only order federal agencies to
stop breaking the law that's been in place for 150 years! --- Excellent point. I fear it may be too logical, too reasonable for our confused lefties to fathom, though.
The case with Wong Kim Ark, was that his parents were PERMANENT LEGAL RESIDENTS of the US, when he was born. Since they were permanent legal residents before the Chinese Exclusion Act, their son was a US citizen by birth. Note the difference between LEGAL and ILLEGAL residents. BTW, the clause of the 14th Amendment which refers to: "not subject to the jurisdiction of"; was explained as owing no loyalty to any other jurisdiction other than the US. People marching toward the US carrying the flags of foreign countries, can hardly claim singular loyalty to the US. The more resemble an invading army, and should be treated as such.
EDIT: One further thing. If simply being born upon American soil conferred citizenship, why was it felt necessary for a Congressional act to confer citizenship upon Native American tribes.
Quote from: Solar on November 04, 2018, 07:54:59 PM
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/man-who-wrote-14th-amendment-explains-it-liberals-are-furious/
Your link is rather one sided. I think that Thomas (the author of the article in your link) needs an English lesson or two.
Senator Howard was describing the children born of ambassadors, who are also foreigners and aliens. He was describing one class of people, not three.
Quote from: je_freedom on November 05, 2018, 03:34:04 PM
Ann Coulter's article makes the point that....
That article is jsut a bunch of fluff.
QuotePresident Trump CAN "abolish"
birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants
by issuing an Executive Order.
I say Trump will not do any such thing. Trump is mostly talk. If he had half a brain he would think be before he talked.
Quote from: mdgiles on November 07, 2018, 09:11:32 AM
The case with Wong Kim Ark, was that his parents were PERMANENT LEGAL RESIDENTS of the US, when he was born.
Yes I said that in my post above.
QuoteBTW, the clause of the 14th Amendment which refers to: "not subject to the jurisdiction of";
There are four clauses in the 14th amendment. Nowhere does it contain the words "not subject to the jurisdiction of". The 14th actually says in part;
"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." Quotewas explained as owing no loyalty to any other jurisdiction other than the US.
Actually since that part was made up by you, it was not explained at all.
QuotePeople marching toward the US carrying the flags of foreign countries, can hardly claim singular loyalty to the US. The more resemble an invading army, and should be treated as such.
I think you do not understand the meanings of "loyalty" and "subject to the jurisdiction". Until you do, then your post really doesn't make any sense at all.
QuoteEDIT: One further thing. If simply being born upon American soil conferred citizenship, why was it felt necessary for a Congressional act to confer citizenship upon Native American tribes.
Because they were treated like foreign nations that were defeated by the United Sates.
Quote from: Ranb on November 10, 2018, 10:58:58 PM
Your link is rather one sided. I think that Thomas (the author of the article in your link) needs an English lesson or two.
Senator Howard was describing the children born of ambassadors, who are also foreigners and aliens. He was describing one class of people, not three.
So once again you leftists fight to let anyone in the country, regardless, and wonder why we have so much division, never once acknowledging it is the left fueling the hatred.
The MEME was the focal point and the reason for using it was so that you idiot leftists could more easily understand, I know how you love soundbites and pictures.
Here's what the author said, and note, he was clarifying illegal, so let's break it down, shall we?
This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
What part is so hard to understand? He clearly stated, "foreigners, aliens".
Note the use of a comma here, then he continues to include Ambassadors, and why do you suppose that is?
I'll wait once again while you get stitches for that rake smack.
Quote from: Solar on November 11, 2018, 07:06:02 AM
So once again you leftists fight to let anyone in the country, regardless, and wonder why we have so much division, never once acknowledging it is the left fueling the hatred.
The MEME was the focal point and the reason for using it was so that you idiot leftists could more easily understand, I know how you love soundbites and pictures.
Here's what the author said, and note, he was clarifying illegal, so let's break it down, shall we?
This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
What part is so hard to understand? He clearly stated, "foreigners, aliens".
Note the use of a comma here, then he continues to include Ambassadors, and why do you suppose that is?
I'll wait once again while you get stitches for that rake smack.
"So once again you leftists fight to let anyone in the country, regardless, and wonder why we have so much division, never once acknowledging it is the left fueling the hatred."That is an excellent symptom of the fatal illness- mental illness- all modern "liberals" suffer. They are fed, housed, given all sorts of extra stuff because the capitalist society before them worked hard to accomplish it all, and they turn like petulant babes and bite the hand feeding them.
Today's "liberals" are forever children; Ungrateful, unworthy, angry, anti-American in their views. Why we do not round them up and ship them out is truly a great mystery. (Maybe we should re-institute RE-Education camps where these free-falling morons can experience reality?)
If those petulant babes were adults unhappy with where they are, they'd move, right? No, today's "liberals" want to destroy what made their lives so comfortable.. they want to 'Burn Down The House' because they have brain rot. Terminal brain rot.
Quote from: Belenus on November 11, 2018, 09:33:17 AM
"So once again you leftists fight to let anyone in the country, regardless, and wonder why we have so much division, never once acknowledging it is the left fueling the hatred."
That is an excellent symptom of the fatal illness- mental illness- all modern "liberals" suffer. They are fed, housed, given all sorts of extra stuff because the capitalist society before them worked hard to accomplish it all, and they turn like petulant babes and bite the hand feeding them.
Today's "liberals" are forever children; Ungrateful, unworthy, angry, anti-American in their views. Why we do not round them up and ship them out is truly a great mystery. (Maybe we should re-institute RE-Education camps where these free-falling morons can experience reality?)
If those petulant babes were adults unhappy with where they are, they'd move, right? No, today's "liberals" want to destroy what made their lives so comfortable.. they want to 'Burn Down The House' because they have brain rot. Terminal brain rot.
Yep, the left despise the idea of "Rule of Law", they want to breakdown the rule of law, create anarchy, blame it all on capitalism, and all related documents supporting individual freedoms, such as the Constitution, and the main one that keeps Govt in check, the Bill of Rights.
These people are downright Fucking Stupid!
Quote from: Ranb on November 10, 2018, 11:08:13 PM
That article is jsut a bunch of fluff.
I say Trump will not do any such thing. Trump is mostly talk. If he had half a brain he would think be before he talked.
Then why TF do you and your little gal pals whine and bitch and moan about every last word the guy says ?
Surely you can all just giggle and guffaw in your infinite brilliance, and STFU already ?
Can't have it both ways, dumbass. Grow TF up, or at least stay consistent with your infantile thrashing and screeching.
Quote from: Solar on November 11, 2018, 11:41:34 AM
Yep, the left despise the idea of "Rule of Law", they want to breakdown the rule of law, create anarchy, blame it all on capitalism, and all related documents supporting individual freedoms, such as the Constitution, and the main one that keeps Govt in check, the Bill of Rights.
These people are downright Fucking Stupid!
Exactly. They are so stupid they do not they are so stupid.
See? It's like ignorance.. people can be so damned ignorant they have no idea they are ignorant. And they laugh at and scorn others who know more than they.
Quote from: Belenus on November 11, 2018, 01:03:18 PM
Exactly. They are so stupid they do not they are so stupid.
See? It's like ignorance.. people can be so damned ignorant they have no idea they are ignorant. And they laugh at and scorn others who know more than they.
That really is it. I remember saying to my parents, "I'm 18, I know all there is I need to know".
Yeah, I couldn't stop the idiocy pouring out of my mouth, but I knew what I was saying was absolutely stupid. That's where libs are today, they only know what they've been told by a leftist school system and parroted by a leftist media, so they see no reason to qualify their statements, because in their minds they're right and there is no need for dialogue, which is why the leftist social media tries to shut us down, they know we might just educate and elucidate their flock into seeing the truth.
Quote from: Ranb on November 10, 2018, 11:21:17 PM
Yes I said that in my post above.
There are four clauses in the 14th amendment. Nowhere does it contain the words "not subject to the jurisdiction of". The 14th actually says in part; "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."
Actually since that part was made up by you, it was not explained at all.
I think you do not understand the meanings of "loyalty" and "subject to the jurisdiction". Until you do, then your post really doesn't make any sense at all.
Because they were treated like foreign nations that were defeated by the United Sates.
I think his point is that if being born on US soil is all it takes to be a citizen, then how come the children of ambassadors aren't automatically citizens.
Quote from: Wan on November 11, 2018, 02:05:44 PM
I think his point is that if being born on US soil is all it takes to be a citizen, then how come the children of ambassadors aren't automatically citizens.
Exactly the point Wan, and welcome to the forum.
Thank you Solar.
Quote from: Wan on November 11, 2018, 03:33:11 PM
Thank you Solar.
I wonder if Ranb will ever make the connection about ambassadors or foreign ministers being exempt from American laws.
I had a friend that was the son of an ambassador from Japan decades ago, he told me he could get away with murder, drive with impunity/immunity, get all tickets erased, assuming he was even ticketed.
Sadly, this is why the clarifying statement by the author having to make clear, but the left seems to know nothing of our laws, so stuff like this goes right over their heads.
And there's more.. for those who need/want it-- like how come democrats were 180 degrees on this issue but a few years ago? How can an entire mob of 'bettern you' elected persons change their minds so drastically almost over night??
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/case-against-birthright-citizenship/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=criticalimpact&utm_campaign=TPI_breaking_newsletter3_11_12_2018&utm_content=e5252b460855fe7fa6473c7b9fa19141&source=CI
Quote from: AndyJackson on November 11, 2018, 12:33:52 PM
Then why TF do you and your little gal pals whine and bitch and moan about every last word the guy says ?
I have no pals here.
Quote from: Wan on November 11, 2018, 02:05:44 PM
I think his point is that if being born on US soil is all it takes to be a citizen, then how come the children of ambassadors aren't automatically citizens.
Actually mdgiles was making up a "fact" that did not actually exist.
Being born on American soil is not all it takes. Birthright citizenship has limits. If you read what I posted of the 14th amendment; "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." This would show you that in addition to being born in the USA, one has to be subject to the jurisdiction of the USA. This is also why people like the children of diplomats are not birthright citizens in the USA.
Quote from: Solar on November 11, 2018, 03:42:53 PM
I wonder if Ranb will ever make the connection about ambassadors or foreign ministers being exempt from American laws.
I think you're generally uninfomed about diplomatic immunity.
QuoteI had a friend that was the son of an ambassador from Japan decades ago, he told me he could get away with murder, drive with impunity/immunity, get all tickets erased, assuming he was even ticketed.
I think your friend was lying to you. I think if the son of an ambassador murdered someone, the USA would try to obtain a waiver of immunity then prosecute. It's been done before. Seeing as how Japan is one of our allies, I think that even if they didn't waive immunity the person would be held accountable back home in Japan.
Quote from: Ranb on November 18, 2018, 05:27:26 PM
I think you're generally uninfomed about diplomatic immunity.
I think your friend was lying to you. I think if the son of an ambassador murdered someone, the USA would try to obtain a waiver of immunity then prosecute. It's been done before. Seeing as how Japan is one of our allies, I think that even if they didn't waive immunity the person would be held accountable back home in Japan.
I think you do a lot of thinking with no facts. But that just my way of thinking.
Quote from: Ranb on November 18, 2018, 05:27:26 PM
I think you're generally uninfomed about diplomatic immunity.
I think your friend was lying to you. I think if the son of an ambassador murdered someone, the USA would try to obtain a waiver of immunity then prosecute. It's been done before. Seeing as how Japan is one of our allies, I think that even if they didn't waive immunity the person would be held accountable back home in Japan.
I'm uninformed? Even Slate knows you're wrong.
Top
diplomatic officers have full immunity, as do their deputies and families. That means ambassadors
can commit just about any crime—from jaywalking to murder—and still be immune from prosecution.https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/04/how-far-does-diplomatic-immunity-go.html
Quote from: Solar on November 18, 2018, 06:13:05 PM
I'm uninformed? Even Slate knows you're wrong.
Top diplomatic officers have full immunity, as do their deputies and families. That means ambassadors can commit just about any crime—from jaywalking to murder—and still be immune from prosecution.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/04/how-far-does-diplomatic-immunity-go.html
Anyone can be right when they cherry pick the parts of the website they quote. From your link.
QuoteThere are limits, of course: Diplomats can't go around shooting people without consequences. The United States has the right to declare someone a persona non grata and to send him home for any reason. The official's home country can also try him at a local court. In the most egregious cases, the home country can waive the official's immunity privilege, in which case the offending diplomat can face prosecution in the United States. In 1997, for example, the Republic of Georgia waived the immunity of its No. 2 diplomat after he killed a 16-year-old girl from Maryland while driving drunk. He was prosecuted, convicted of manslaughter, and served three years in a North Carolina prison before returning to Georgia, where he was paroled after two more years in prison.
This is like when you asked me about the platform of the party I support. I posted a portion of the GOP platform. You thought it was part of the Green party platform and mocked me for it. Why don't you know the GOP when you read it?
Quote from: Ranb on November 18, 2018, 06:20:47 PM
Anyone can be right when they cherry pick the parts of the website they quote. From your link.
QuoteOf course there are limits, but the law is the law, they cannot be arrested once Diplomacy is proven,, they literally leave the country quietly.
This is like when you asked me about the platform of the party I support. I posted a portion of the GOP platform. You thought it was part of the Green party platform and mocked me for it. Why don't you know the GOP when you read it?
Funny, when I pasted it in google, it took me to the Green party website, not the GOP.
Try it yourself and see what happens.
Quote from: Solar on November 18, 2018, 06:34:49 PM
Funny, when I pasted it in google, it took me to the Green party website, not the GOP.
Try it yourself and see what happens.
You're being evasive again. Why don't you know the GOP when you read it?
Quote from: Ranb on November 25, 2018, 02:20:01 PM
You're being evasive again. Why don't you know the GOP when you read it?
Evasive? I told you quite clearly, when I searched it, it came back verbatim from the Green party.
Prove me wrong.
Quote from: Solar on November 25, 2018, 02:39:08 PM
Evasive? I told you quite clearly, when I searched it, it came back verbatim from the Green party.
Prove me wrong.
I'm not questioning your ability to search for something. I claimed that you have no idea what the GOP platform is, especially when you confuse it for the green party.
Quote from: Ranb on November 25, 2018, 03:27:58 PM
I'm not questioning your ability to search for something. I claimed that you have no idea what the GOP platform is, especially when you confuse it for the green party.
I said when I put it in search, the Green party came up. Now you're trying to tell me you're a Republican? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
In the meantime, thousands of illegal invaders are trying the patience of the USA security forces.
Think: All those untrained, low-IQ (Honduran IQ avg. = 81), potential democrat thieves, rapists, murderers, welfare seeking, *loads* are trying to rush the guard. Will the babies be Americans if both parents are illegals?
Those who are involved in encouraging and funding this invasion need to be identified and ostracized... or worse.
Quote from: Solar on November 25, 2018, 03:53:40 PM
I said when I put it in search, the Green party came up. Now you're trying to tell me you're a Republican? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I'm not a Republican or a Democrat. Both parties are to compromising for my taste. I can't really abide either.
Quote from: Ranb on December 01, 2018, 11:27:30 AM
I'm not a Republican or a Democrat. Both parties are to compromising for my taste. I can't really abide either.
Did you not state what you posted was your party? So, when it doesn't fit your narrative, you simply lie and claim otherwise. So based on this alone, it's obvious you're a hardcore leftist.
Quote from: Solar on December 01, 2018, 11:32:20 AM
Did you not state what you posted was your party? So, when it doesn't fit your narrative, you simply lie and claim otherwise. So based on this alone, it's obvious you're a hardcore leftist.
Not quite. You asked about a party I support. I do support various parties by voting for their candidates and speaking in committee about their bills. If I vote GOP at times; then they are getting my support. But no party is good enough for me to call them my own.
Def: MUGWUMP
An undecided individual on the fence with his MUG on one side and his WUMP hanging over the other.
Quote from: Ranb on December 01, 2018, 11:40:07 AM
Not quite. You asked about a party I support. I do support various parties by voting for their candidates and speaking in committee about their bills. If I vote GOP at times; then they are getting my support. But no party is good enough for me to call them my own.
No, stop lying, you posted an excerpt from the party platform you support. Stop lying, everyone here knows you're a liar, why keep enforcing your irrelevance?
Quote from: Solar on December 01, 2018, 11:54:41 AM
No, stop lying, you posted an excerpt from the party platform you support. Stop lying, everyone here knows you're a liar, why keep enforcing your irrelevance?
I support portions of the GOP, Dem and other party platforms. They do tend to overlap you know. Or do you not know that? How does this make me a liar? What am I lying about this time?
Quote from: Ranb on December 01, 2018, 12:04:36 PM
I support portions of the GOP, Dem and other party platforms. They do tend to overlap you know. Or do you not know that? How does this make me a liar? What am I lying about this time?
Now you're starting to irritate me with your bullshit obfuscations, and I will not repeat what was just said.
Here's the thing, if you continue to lie, you're out of here, so I suggest you be very careful when posting, the forum would do better without your bull shit!
Quote from: Solar on December 01, 2018, 12:11:45 PM
Now you're starting to irritate me with your bullshit obfuscations, and I will not repeat what was just said.
Here's the thing, if you continue to lie, you're out of here, so I suggest you be very careful when posting, the forum would do better without your bull shit!
I was not being unclear at all when I said I supported various portions of platforms. Perhaps you can quote one of my lies?