NEWS FLASH!! 50 NAT. SEC. GOPERS SAY TRUMP WILL PUT NATION AT RISK - UNFIT TO BE POTUS

[-Olen-]

pg 2 of this thread: Olen
"Legally, American-born children of illegal immigrants are not citizens and stating or implying that American-born children of illegals are citizens is not law and is not accurate, and makes statement 4 misleading at best."

"The treatment of so-called anchor babies (the non-deportation of parent(s) and anchor baby(ies)) is a policy decision that has been made at the regulatory level and that can change."

.....

i have proven my point. you go ahead and post whatever razzle
dazzle you want to post next and i will let you have the last word,
because i realize you cannot afford to concede that there is no
law to back up what you said. only your opinion.

Everything I posted was consistent with my statement that you quoted - the fact that you don't understand says more about your position than mine.

The precise reason why there are two schools of thought on the "subject to the jurisdiction" in the U.S. issue is because it is unsettled in law and precedent. Just because the executive branch takes the policy position that the current view is right does not elevate that view to law. To say I have suggested otherwise misunderstands anything I've posted on the subject.

But go ahead call it razzle dazzle if it makes you feel better.

 

[extragreen]

True, RHF. I haven't said that I think they are or not, and neither did Olen in his argument. The whole point all along is that it is an area that the SCOTUS has never taken up and ruled on. Extra can't understand that the trick is that the democrats do not want a ruling on this and would rather leave it the way it is, accepted through policy. I would like a legally binding ruling from the SCOTUS.

This is olen's statement........"Legally, American-born children of illegal immigrants are not citizens and stating or implying that American-born children of illegals are citizens is not law and is not accurate"

Question: What is the proof of United States citizenship for people born in the U S ?
Answer: A state issued birth certificate.

Question: Are the children of illegal immigrants issued birth certificates by the states?
Answer: Yes

Question: Are the children of illegal immigrants citizens of the United States if born here?
Answer: Yes, and they have proof of it in that they have state issued birth certificates.

 

[extragreen]

See, that's where you just don't get it. Olen presented an argument as to why they aren't, a very compelling one at that. There are also smart attorneys that can equally argue that they are. This is why we have the Supreme Court to make final legal rulings on issues of Constitutionality of issues. I tend to agree with Olen's argument in the case, but that doesn't mean the Court would agree. You don't agree with Olen, but I'm assuming you didn't read all of it, but that doesn't mean the Court would disagree with him.

They are US citizens now, as you correctly state, but that is because the current policy is to grant them that status, not based on a binding finding by the SCOTUS. So, as has been said over and over in this thread, the issue is open to interpretation from a Constitutional standpoint.

Citizenship of children of illegal immigrants is not policy, it is law.
And it shall be unless struck down by the supreme court.
I suppose every issue is open to interpretation from a Constitutional stand point, that doesn't mean it's not law.

 

[raleighherdfan]

Maybe the high school educated cabinetmaker should open up a law office after he lays off the rest of his staff.

 

[beefcake0520]

Fifty of the nation’s most senior Republican national security officials, many of them former top aides or cabinet members for President George W. Bush, have signed a letter declaring that Donald J. Trump “lacks the character, values and experience” to be president and “would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.”

Mr. Trump, the officials warn, “would be the most reckless president in American history.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/u...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

You my misguided friend should be ashamed you advocate the radical leftist ideas and propaganda. If you truly are a part of the MU family and even more, a member of west Virginia, you need to do some soul searching or even more so, leave the herd family. You have no idea how much Obama and the Clintons have screwed our state, our country. They would rather you go without power than invest in clean coal technology, and don't you dare tell me it doesn't exist. It does, I studied environmental science and every damn policy that has been adopted to not use our number one source of energy, is completely misguided. Here is a little factoid to go ahead and shoot down the argument you will have: Humans are not so omnipotent that we can CAUSE such a change on this planet. Climate change is natural, called ice ages and during one volcanic eruption, there is more pollution and gases being expelled to the atmosphere than humans can imagine doing in their existence. So let me guess, you believe Al Gore and his views, got news for you, the guy studied history in college.....not environmental science.

The only reason the GOP and every other real politician is collaborating against trump is because they don't control him, afraid he would get rid of their sorry hides. I am sick of the political correctness in this country, screwing the majority for the minority. People like you are the problem, you have no clue what you are supporting, and if you do I would love to hear you explain to any family member why coal miners in your family had to lose their jobs, over propaganda and nothing more.

Some people still have moral and ethical views in this country and the likes of you do not have the right to take those away. If you think gays marrying, parading around, transgender restroom policies, illegal immigrants, pissing on the constitution is a good thing, then you obviously have no kids you worry about. If someone wants to be gay, fine, be gay, but I don't have to accept their lifestyle and no one can force me to. If you believe illegal immigrants is a good thing and should have the same rights as a citizen, again you are part of the problem. Clint Eastwood put is best, there has been a pussification of this country backed up by ass kissers. We now celebrate hand holding homosexuals parading down the street, like their some kind of hero for going all public on their personal lives. We prop up a guy who thinks he's a girl instead of getting them mental help. This is not the country I grew up in and was raised to love, I don't recognize it anymore, and not in a good way.

Trump is not a saint but he just says what most of us think and feel. The working class Joe is sick of the losers in this country getting their way while we get the short end of the stick. Your Mr. Obama has single handily revived racism and created civil unrest in this country. Hillary is just continuing what he began, and taking it up a notch.

So the term liberal really should be taken away from far left wing. Liberal means you are accepting of all views and peaceful but so called liberal certainly aren't. Quite the contrary, you have proven to be violent of anyone who doesn't agree with you and willing to take away freedoms that the constitution protects. You can't tell Christians to shut the hell up and alter laws to conform to muslims

 

[GreenDuke]

^^^ B O O M^^^. The tard is hiding in the closet tonight.

 

[extragreen]

^^^^^^^vegetable

 

[GreenDuke]

Ok, I like squash and a little zucchini.

 

[dherd]

WOW! i think i hit a nerve with the old beefcaker. easy there fella
your going to blow a gasket.

gonna have a lot of fun with this guy, gonna put him on the coach and
set him straight, but not tonight, not enough time. gonna take a major
mental overhaul to get this cat thinking politically correctly.

later beef - stay tuned.

 

[extragreen]

Ok, I like squash and a little zucchini.

I was referring to puffcake who posted before you.

 

[beefcake0520]

No thanks guys. You have your point of view, I have mine. There is nothing you can correct with what I said unless you want to argue environmental facts, because unless you studied environmental science and geology and meteorology, then you have no basis to argue from. If puffcake is the best you can come up with extra, just stop trying so hard.

You aren't going to change my view the same as I cant stop you guys from rubbing your peckers together. Olen gave you as good an argument backed by facts and you still argue. I will say again, liberals need to be called something else, because you two certainly do not conform to the definition of the term, same as the rest of the so called libs. Someone disagrees with you and you cant handle it. Someone provides you facts and you still cant handle it. Nuff said.

 

[extragreen]

No thanks guys. You have your point of view, I have mine. There is nothing you can correct with what I said unless you want to argue environmental facts, because unless you studied environmental science and geology and meteorology, then you have no basis to argue from. If puffcake is the best you can come up with extra, just stop trying so hard.

You aren't going to change my view the same as I cant stop you guys from rubbing your peckers together. Olen gave you as good an argument backed by facts and you still argue. I will say again, liberals need to be called something else, because you two certainly do not conform to the definition of the term, same as the rest of the so called libs. Someone disagrees with you and you cant handle it. Someone provides you facts and you still cant handle it. Nuff said.

During your several hundred years of studying environmental science, did you learn to post a link? If you did, maybe you could come up with one that backs up your statement of "during one volcanic eruption, there is more pollution and gases being expelled to the atmosphere than humans can imagine doing in their existence", because what I read is this:

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 MILLION tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 BILLION tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide.

 

[raleighherdfan]

During your several hundred years of studying environmental science, did you learn to post a link? If you did, maybe you could come up with one that backs up your statement of "during one volcanic eruption, there is more pollution and gases being expelled to the atmosphere than humans can imagine doing in their existence", because what I read is this:

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 MILLION tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 BILLION tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide.

Billions of years of volcanoes vs. 100 years of industrial revolution. yep.....that's close.

 

[herdfan429]

Beef just so you know unless your link is from factcheck.org extra ignores them

 

[dherd]

the problem with coal is that it's 19th century energy. we're in the 21st.
beef's problem is that he wants the 21st century to adapt to him.
it doesn't work that way. time and progress stops for no one - not even the
beefster, no matter how big a tantrum he throws.
https://www.duke-energy.com/about-us/natural-gas-overview.asp

 

[beefcake0520]

During your several hundred years of studying environmental science, did you learn to post a link? If you did, maybe you could come up with one that backs up your statement of "during one volcanic eruption, there is more pollution and gases being expelled to the atmosphere than humans can imagine doing in their existence", because what I read is this:

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 MILLION tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 BILLION tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide.

You know very little. If you believe everything you read on the net to be ALL of the truth, hmmm interesting. You know what they didn't tell you? The ocean is a sponge for CO2.............ewww, CO2 has many origins. Why don't you research ice ages if you really want to understand climate change. There is a reason we burn all this BAD fossil fuel and not much change in atmospheric CO2, not enough to cause climate shift. Again, humans are no where near that omnipotent.

 

[beefcake0520]

the problem with coal is that it's 19th century energy. we're in the 21st.
beef's problem is that he wants the 21st century to adapt to him.
it doesn't work that way. time and progress stops for no man.
https://www.duke-energy.com/about-us/natural-gas-overview.asp

............natural gas doesn't provide long term power output without burning 100times the amount, sorry, try again. Solar, wind, nuclear, everything has its drawbacks, the first two is not ready for the mass demand, and will not be ready for a long time. If you hug that tree tight enough, think you will hear what it thinks??

 

[beefcake0520]

Natural gas doesn't burn clean either BTW. It gives off the number 1 greenhouse gas, wait for it...............wait for it.............water vapor, oh you didn't learn that on a specific link?? hmmmmm

 

[GreenDuke]

I was referring to puffcake who posted before you.

Got it, but I still like squash and a little zucchini.

 

[extragreen]

You know very little. If you believe everything you read on the net to be ALL of the truth, hmmm interesting. You know what they didn't tell you? The ocean is a sponge for CO2.............ewww, CO2 has many origins. Why don't you research ice ages if you really want to understand climate change. There is a reason we burn all this BAD fossil fuel and not much change in atmospheric CO2, not enough to cause climate shift. Again, humans are no where near that omnipotent.

I don't believe everything I read on the net, which is why I don't believe this guy who stated "during one volcanic eruption, there is more pollution and gases being expelled to the atmosphere than humans can imagine doing in their existence"

 

[extragreen]

Beef just so you know unless your link is from factcheck.org extra ignores them

Link?........

 

[beefcake0520]

Doesn't matter to me what you believe. I read the same thing you did. If you would read the included clause in the wording, they go on about "estimations", they admitted they have no idea how much CO2 or SO2 is emitted during a massive eruption. They also didn't divulge how they gathered that information, again citing estimation. Do you know how far the ash cloud went during the Mt. St. Helens went?? Look it up.

So lets say that article is 100% the facts.............yet we aren't seeing 100% of what should happen if we are so omnipotent, this earth should have been scorching hot by now. Matter of fact CO2 isn't the big greenhouse gas that they go on about, water vapor is by a large margin. Fact is they have no idea what controls climate change, all they know is ice ages do happen, over and over. Based on the ice core samples they happen in 100-110,000 year intervals. You probably don't want to hear this, as many libs surely don't, but based on the core sample we are nearing the end of the warm of phase in this current ice age. So what are you going to blame when things start cooling off, assuming humanity is around that long?? I'm sorry to burst anyone's bubble on that issue. Again, if we are releasing that much gas into the atmosphere and that is the worst thing possible, why isn't the gas levels dramatically increasing, we are so omnipotent, right? Earth doesn't stand a chance against us, correct? Nature is laughing right now.

 

[extragreen]

"they admitted they have no idea how much CO2 or SO2 is emitted during a massive eruption."

Yet, you seem to know how much is emitted since you stated ""during one volcanic eruption, there is more pollution and gases being expelled to the atmosphere than humans can imagine doing in their existence". So, I'm still waiting on a link from you backing what you said......

 

[beefcake0520]

http://www.history.com/topics/ice-age

read closely

 

[extragreen]

http://www.history.com/topics/ice-age

read closely

Is it a link to back your statement of "during one volcanic eruption, there is more pollution and gases being expelled to the atmosphere than humans can imagine doing in their existence" ?

 

[beefcake0520]

Volcanoes also warm the climateWhile volcanoes cool the climate on time scales of 1 - 2 years, they act to warm the climate over longer time scales, since they are an important source of natural CO2 to the atmosphere. Reviews of the scientific literature done by Kerrick (2001) and other authors estimate that volcanoes emit between 0.132 and 0.319 gigatons (Gt) of CO2 to the atmosphere each year, which is about 100 to 300 times less than the 36.3 Gt emitted by humans into the atmosphere in 2008 (Le Quere et al., 2009). According to the USGS, with 50 - 60 volcanoes active on the Earth at any one time, it would take about 11,700 extra volcanoes like Hawaii's Kilauea to scale up volcanic emissions of CO2 to match what humans do. Despite the relatively meager amount of CO2 they put in the air, volcanoes are largely responsible for the natural CO2 in the atmosphere, and helped make life possible on Earth. Why, then, haven't CO2 levels continuously risen over geologic time, turning Earth into a steamy hothouse? In fact, CO2 levels have fallen considerably since the time of the dinosaurs--how can this be? Well, volcano-emitted CO2 is removed from the atmosphere by chemical weathering. This occurs when rain and snow fall on rocks containing silicates. The moisture and silicates react with CO2, pulling it out of the air. The carbon removed from the air is then washed into the sea, where it ends up in ocean sediments that gradually harden into rock. Rates of chemical weathering on Earth have accelerated since the time of the dinosaurs, largely due to the recent uplift of the Himalaya Mountains and Tibetan Plateau. These highlands undergo a tremendous amount of weathering, thanks to their lofty heights and the rains of the Asian Monsoon that they capture. Unfortunately, chemical weathering cannot help us with our current high levels of greenhouse gases, since chemical weathering takes thousands of years to remove significant amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere. It takes about 100,000 years for silicate weathering to remove 63% of the CO2 in the atmosphere. Thus, climate models predict that chemical weathering will solve our greenhouse gas problem in about 100,000 - 200,000 years.


https://www.wunderground.com/climate/volcanoes.asp

for your reading pleasure since you require a link.

 

[beefcake0520]

Over time, before humans is the thing. No not one eruption but again, they really have no way of measuring it, or measuring exactly how much humans produce. People once thought the earth was flat until they proved it wasn't. Proving has always been the absolute with us and this is something that has been estimations to this day. We do not know how much we produce or how much a volcano produces. It is assumed that volcanoes created our current atmosphere, and it has been ever changing during Earth's history. Again, if what we have done, or are doing is to the scale they say it is, the effects would back up their findings.........and it simply doesn't.

 

[extragreen]

For your reading pleasure, from YOUR link:

According to the USGS, with 50 - 60 volcanoes active on the Earth at any one time, it would take about 11,700 extra volcanoes like Hawaii's Kilauea to scale up volcanic emissions of CO2 to match what humans do.

 

[Rock98Dog]

Citizenship of children of illegal immigrants is not policy, it is law.
And it shall be unless struck down by the supreme court.
I suppose every issue is open to interpretation from a Constitutional stand point, that doesn't mean it's not law.

I know this is very hard for you, and it's not easy concepts like you usually do okay on, but it is not a law, or maybe it is a law. Current policy and practices are based on the interpretation of language in a law, but the language is open to debate. A debate is occurring on that language. Until the SCOTUS is presented the case and issues a final ruling, neither side can be right, they can only hold an opinion.

I hope that if, by some miracle, Trump is elected one of the first things he does is pass an executive order barring states from issuing birth certificates to the children of illegal aliens. That will rapidly bring this whole matter to head and settle it once and for all.

 

[Rock98Dog]

For your reading pleasure, from YOUR link:

According to the USGS, with 50 - 60 volcanoes active on the Earth at any one time, it would take about 11,700 extra volcanoes like Hawaii's Kilauea to scale up volcanic emissions of CO2 to match what humans do.

or one event like Mt. St. Helens.

And if you want to be mad, be mad at cows.

"A United Nations report has identified the world's rapidly growing herds of cattle as the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife. And they are blamed for a host of other environmental crimes, from acid rain to the introduction of alien species, from producing deserts to creating dead zones in the oceans, from poisoning rivers and drinking water to destroying coral reefs.

The 400-page report by the Food and Agricultural Organisation, entitled Livestock's Long Shadow, also surveys the damage done by sheep, chickens, pigs and goats. But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together."

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...ging-to-planet-than-co2-from-cars-427843.html

 

[extragreen]

I know this is very hard for you, and it's not easy concepts like you usually do okay on, but it is not a law, or maybe it is a law. Current policy and practices are based on the interpretation of language in a law, but the language is open to debate. A debate is occurring on that language. Until the SCOTUS is presented the case and issues a final ruling, neither side can be right, they can only hold an opinion.

I hope that if, by some miracle, Trump is elected one of the first things he does is pass an executive order barring states from issuing birth certificates to the children of illegal aliens. That will rapidly bring this whole matter to head and settle it once and for all.

It must be even more difficult for you. Until the 14th Amendment is either amended or reinterpreted by the Supreme Court, citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants IS the law.

 

[Rock98Dog]

No, it is the interpretation of the language, some belief incorrectly, that is guiding current actions. Maybe you need an example. Abortion was "against the law" for a long time, then the Supreme Court ruled that it really wasn't against the law. There was no new Constitutional Amendment written, no new law passed giving the right to abortion, just a ruling by the SCOTUS on the existing language that had been there for 200 years.

 

[Rock98Dog]

Here's another one, the "law" is that I can own a gun, I can own an assault rifle. If this is the law and my Constitutional Right, why is the left even still discussing it? Oh, it's because they take a different view on what the language in the 2nd Amendment actually means.

 

[beefcake0520]

or one event like Mt. St. Helens.

And if you want to be mad, be mad at cows.

"A United Nations report has identified the world's rapidly growing herds of cattle as the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife. And they are blamed for a host of other environmental crimes, from acid rain to the introduction of alien species, from producing deserts to creating dead zones in the oceans, from poisoning rivers and drinking water to destroying coral reefs.

The 400-page report by the Food and Agricultural Organisation, entitled Livestock's Long Shadow, also surveys the damage done by sheep, chickens, pigs and goats. But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together."

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...ging-to-planet-than-co2-from-cars-427843.html

He doesn't grasp the concept Rock, they have no idea how much Mt. St. Helens threw into the atmosphere or Pompeye or whatever big event. There is no way to measure it but the grasping concept with them is they threw enough crap into the atmosphere in one eruption to effectively cause a year or two without a summer. Hell there was a mini ice age across Europe and parts of NA that lasted 10 years, no one knows why or how. Its idiotic to continue an argument of this nature with a close minded liberal, especially one who hasn't studied this stuff enough to know anything more than what they read on the internet.

 

[extragreen]

Here's another one, the "law" is that I can own a gun, I can own an assault rifle. If this is the law and my Constitutional Right, why is the left even still discussing it? Oh, it's because they take a different view on what the language in the 2nd Amendment actually means.

So, you're saying that until the law is amended or reinterpreted, your right to own a gun is not law, but simply a policy.

 

[Rock98Dog]

So, you're saying that until the law is amended or reinterpreted, your right to own a gun is not law, but simply a policy.

To an extent, yes. I am intellectually honest enough to admit that those that argue the militia angle certainly have some points. The court has issued many more rulings in this area though, so we have much more definitive guidance.

Why did you skip the abortion example and focus on this one?

 

[extragreen]

To an extent, yes. I am intellectually honest enough to admit that those that argue the militia angle certainly have some points. The court has issued many more rulings in this area though, so we have much more definitive guidance.

Why did you skip the abortion example and focus on this one?

So the Constitution is not the supreme law of the land, it's the supreme policy of the land.

 

[Rock98Dog]

No, it's open to interpretation because it is written by man. Notice that you don't have ambiguity in the Ten Commandments. For Heaven's sake, we had a President that asked what the meaning of "is" is. If the Amendments were black and white, we wouldn't need a Supreme Court to make rulings.

 

[extragreen]

No, it's open to interpretation because it is written by man. Notice that you don't have ambiguity in the Ten Commandments. For Heaven's sake, we had a President that asked what the meaning of "is" is. If the Amendments were black and white, we wouldn't need a Supreme Court to make rulings.

By your logic, we never have laws, only policies. And while the author of the ten commandments knew exactly what he meant, there are plenty of interpretations of the ten commandments.