mspart

Current sources says Kamala. Now there's a real non qualified candidate. Talk about not being able to put coherent sentences together. Kamala - Culture is - it is a reflection of our moment and our time. Right? And present culture is the way we express how we're feeling about the moment, and we should always find times to express how we feel about the moment. That is a reflection of joy. Because, you know, it comes in the morning.' Kamala - We have to find ways to also express the way we feel about the moment in terms of just having language and a connection to how people are experiencing life. And I think about it in that way, too.' She the one next in line. Heaven help us all. mspart

Well, we have a famous lawyer here on these boards that declared this is just too complicated. Since the numbers have come out about entries into TX before the wire and after the wire have come out, no one is talking about it being too complicated anymore. Right on ionel. mspart

Ouch!! mspart

That actually was worth watching. Thank you for posting offthemat. mspart

By the way - Welcome to the show RV. It has been quite a long time since I've seen you post on a forum I was on. They all shut down and I'm glad you found this one. I'm sure we will butt heads like in the glorious times past, but good to see you here. mspart

I love it when a know nothing goes for the full Monty like this. It shows both lack of class, knowledge, temperance, and civility. I'm surprised teen bullying and personal pronouns did not make the list. JRoss responded in a fair minded way that makes this look amateurish. Good job Uncle. You lost the argument by going unhinged. mspart

I notice you are not calling it genocide anymore. That's progress. mspart

Except that they put themselves in that position by their own knowing choices. That is not slavery, that is consequence. mspart

HR 2. This passed the House. Let it pass the Senate. Why is that such a bad thing? We can play that game too. Hey Ds, if you are serious you'll vote for HR2. Come on and show us how serious you are about this issue. Senate Ds say no. We want to have our own bill. Well, the Rs should be making this point very loudly. Put it in the Ds faces. Rs have already taken action. Now it is for the Ds to take action. mspart

Has Haley been dead for decades? mspart

No it is not. What is your point? Is it really a good thing to allow murderers to not be incarcerated? Sex offenders? Robbers? Those that assault with a deadly weapon? I expect you to say close all the prisons. We are not quite there but we do see rising crime rates around the country due to the hamstringing of cops, and prosecutors not prosecuting and judges not following sentencing guidelines and bail guidelines. mspart

So braves121, you are for what exactly? You are for no punishment of offenders whatsoever because they might be required to work? And you call that legitimate slavery? It's not like these people were caught and sold into slavery for the rest of their lives. These are people that know the rules, know what is expected, and decided on their own to not live by those rules and subject themselves to possible incarceration and hard labor. So it was a choice on their part. Whereas a slave does not have a choice. You are trying to equalize a square and a circle. That they have area is true, but that is the end of their similarity. Incarceration is a choice. Pure and simple. mspart

No, you have that wrong. Biden could have not had this situation if he had left the Trump policies in place. It was not too difficult or complicated to leave those in place. It is not too difficult or complicate to put them back in place. He made the conscious decision to remove those policies and we now have the result of his dereliction of duty. And now he wants the Rs to help him fix it? Yeah right. That is cynical politics at the highest level. He does not want it fixed. He wants to put the Rs face in it. Pure and simple. He doesn't care about the border or too many people coming. He only cares that it now is affecting blue states and they are complaining and sounding like Rs. mspart

I still believe you have that wrong. It bans it except for if you are incarcerated and subjected to hard labor. You are talking about slavery like the black slaves of the south but trying to conflate that with prisoners who are required to labor. Two totally different things. You can compare them and make your case, but it will be lacking because there is no comparison. mspart

You might want to read the 13th amendment. It discusses this very thing. mspart

Lipdrag's response is right on. What is this compromise? I have asked how this bill helps curtail illegal immigration. No response. Again, please provide the good things that are in this bill that should turn a NO vote to a YES vote. Why is this better than HR 2? mspart

If only. But I have heard that it is just too complicated to do without a new law. Somehow I think that is overstating the situation to give Biden cover to continue to be derelict in his duty. mspart

We are not a democracy. We are have a Republican form of government with shades of democracy. Remember, Republic is a form of government where the people elect leaders and the leaders do the government's business. In that manner, it is a democracy because the leaders are elected. A Democracy is rule by the people. Period. Now that can be revised to have some sort of representation but then that is moving more towards a Republic. The democracies you tout are really Republics with a bit more citizen input than the US has. mspart

Agree. The object is to remove the criminal from society so no further crime from that individual is perpetrated against innocent civilians. If the criminal can be reformed that is good. A few are, most are not. We could just put to death every criminal and then there would be no mass incarceration. But to let criminals go and put them back into society without paying price for their anti-social behavior guts the criminal justice system. Criminal justice system should be renamed to Victim justice system. When criminals are let go, the victim count increases unnecessarily. We are on the verge of vigilantism. There is a case of this in Houston recently where a person lured a sex offender to have sex with a minor. When the sex offender showed up, the sex offender's life was take from him/her. I personally do not see a need to cry over this, except that government has abdicated their responsibility to keep the citizens safe in favor of social justice which says some perps don't deserve the affects of the law. It is based on skin color or other range of minority-ism rather than on law that is just. You cannot say that a person can shoplift because they have nothing and then turn around and say a person that has something cannot shoplift. That is not just. Theft is theft. https://fee.org/articles/why-walgreens-is-closing-5-san-francisco-stores/ Economics students learn in their 101 classes that basic markets can’t function without a few prerequisites — namely, the protection of private property rights. It’s an introductory concept because it’s almost self-evident: How can people do business if they’re not secure in their property and profits? Yet the furthest-left faction of today’s Democratic Party, which governs in the most liberal bastions such as San Francisco, has abandoned even this most basic lesson. And, just as econ 101 predicted, stores are abandoning the California city in droves. Just this week, the pharmacy chain Walgreens announced that it will close five of its stores in San Francisco, citing theft and retail crime as the main motivator behind its decision. The theft doesn't just hurt the store who is the immediate victim. But allowing the theft, the city has decided that those who use that store to fill prescription are not worthy of a convenient and safe place to do so. Does that sound like justice to you? It is, as the article says, the predictable outcome of not enforcing the law. mspart

It is Constitutionally illegal for slavery to be legal. The Constitution states in the 13th amendment: Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. mspart

Responses in RED above. It looks like what you want is a Supreme Court and Appellate Courts to be stacked with "liberal" justices and you are trying to convince yourself how this could be done in a way that makes sense. Sorry but your wisdom and reasoning is faulty as noted above. How about we pack the court with impartial justices who will look at the Constitution and applicable case law to determine the just course of action to take? Wouldn't that be better that stacking with ideologues? mspart

A bill that duped everyone else? Not likely. They were the only ones to vote NO. https://nypost.com/2024/02/01/news/democratic-reps-rashida-tlaib-and-cori-bush-vote-no-on-bill-banning-hamas-terrorists-from-us/ The bill passed the lower chamber 422-2, with Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) voting present and six members not voting. Your answer and that vote does not square with each other. Let's get one thing straight. Illegal aliens are by law illegal and it is illegal for them to come here. That doesn't seem to be stopping anyone coming across the border. Shows the lie that those two are plying. Apparently their concern for redundant laws was not persuasive to the 422 others who voted for it. mspart

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/02/05/congress/halfway-to-failure-00139746 Those no votes include three Democratic caucus members: Bob Menendez (N.J.); Alex Padilla (Calif.); and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who does not support unconditional aid to Israel. Plus 21 Republican nos or likely nos: Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.), Mike Braun (Ind.), Katie Britt (Ala.), Ted Budd (N.C.), Tom Cotton (Ark.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Steve Daines (Mont.), Deb Fischer (Neb.), Bill Hagerty (Tenn.), Josh Hawley (Mo.), Ron Johnson (Wisc.), Mike Lee (Utah), Roger Marshall (Kan.), Rand Paul (Ky.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Mike Rounds (S.D.), Eric Schmitt (Mo.), Tim Scott (S.C.), Rick Scott (Fla.), Tommy Tuberville (Ala.) and J.D. Vance (Ohio). Sounds like there is bipartisan support for voting no. Just as much as this bill is a bipartisan effort. Now that the language is out, there should be no one supporting the bill. Parts of it are good. Parts are bad. Amendments needs to be allowed, but Schumer and Biden aren't interested in amendments, they are not interested in fixing this mess. They are interested in trying to blame Rs for not supporting this stupid idiotic horrible bill. That's all this is. Cynical politics. If you like the bill, please state the many ways it will solve the crisis at the border. Definition of the crisis: mass quantities of illegal aliens crossing the border illegally and being allowed to stay. How does this bill solve that? mspart

He visibly got worse during that match. You could see it, he wasn't right. I feel bad for him and hope he can come back from that. At the end of the match he was squatting and lost balance going backwards. He needs to follow the protocol to give himself the best chance at success. mspart

Doing what now? This maintains the status quo essentially. The House provided the Senate with HR 2 and the Senate ignored it. Why is their bill more important and getting all the press? The HR 2 is a better bill. Why not give it some traction? This bill barely does more for Ukraine and Israel than it does for the border. And it codifies 5000 illegal immigrants a day before closing things down. That's 1.8 million illegal immigrants a year. That's not border control. mspart