Ask Me Help Desk - Fillibuster...Jim Crow in a suit?

Quote:

In other words, you have no clue what YOU would do if it were up to you. And you don't even want to think about it. After all, there's nothing in the Bible about us helping foreigners and refugees!

I would build a wall. If not for obstruction from the Democratic party, it would already be at least substantially in place. If Trump was still pres, there would have been no active encouragement for these people to come.

And again, "Why do liberals always want to act noble because they can ask what someone else is going to do about a problem?"

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

If Trump was still pres,

You mean the guy who swore Mexico would pay for it? Then Mexico said Up Yours, pal. So Trump switched to demanding the American taxpayer foot the bill. Then the American taxpayer said Up Yours, dufus. Is that the guy you mean?

I don't mean the guy who basically issued personalized invitations for these people to come across our borders and who is on path to set records for illegal immigration.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I don't mean the guy who basically issued personalized invitations for these people to come across our borders and who is on path to set records for illegal immigration.

Ah, so you did mean dufus Trump - that's what I thought.

Wish we had him back to regain control of our southern border.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Wish we had him back to regain control of our southern border.

You can visit your idol in prison.

Hunter Biden is not my idol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Hunter Biden is not my idol.

Trump is your idol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Wish we had him back to regain control of our southern border.

He never HAD control!

And Biden does???

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

And Biden does???

Trump had four years. How long has Biden been president?

Well, he’s already made things much worse, so the sky’s the limit!

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Well, he’s already made things much worse, so the sky’s the limit!

He's already made giant inroads into straightening out the COVID disaster left by Trump. So give him time to straighten out the immigration problem. Unlike your hero Trump, Biden will approach it from a humanitarian viewpoint.

Give him time the lament of the beaten

The little town of Gila Bend Arizona is being inundated as the failed Quid border polices are overwhelming it's resources . They mayor has declared a state of emergency ,

Gila Bend declares 'state of emergency' as CBP continues to drop loads of migrants in town | Arizona News | azfamily.com

Quote:

Give him time the lament of the beaten

Exactly. If we give him enough time, he can make things even worse than they are now.

No worse than the bully con man elected because the dems stayed home in 2016 allowing the loonies to run the asylum. Now the loonies fringers heads are exploding because they got booted and can only run around in circles hollering and beeching oh woe is them.

All they have is the BIG LIE to change the rules they made that didn't help them the last 4 years. While the elected class of repubs runs from Joe and the dems even repub voters like what he has done so far, and what he is trying to do for everybody.

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

and what he is trying to do for everybody.

what evidence do you have to back that statement?

Quid's DHS Sec Mayorkas told Dept employees that they may resume construction of the border wall as well as increase arrests and criminal prosecutions of illegals AND take on sanctuary cities that do not cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (ICE) . He rejected splitting up ICE which was a big talking point by some of the radical Dems .

Construction of Trump’s border wall may continue under Biden, administration admits | The Independent

Quid made it clear that the wall would be stopped by his rhetoric during the campaign and in EOs . Is this an admission that he was wrong ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

what evidence do you have to back that statement?

Biden’s Agenda Is Very Popular (politicalwire.com)

Why the popularity of Joe Biden's policy agenda matters (msnbc.com)

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Quid's DHS Sec Mayorkas told Dept employees that they may resume construction of the border wall as well as increase arrests and criminal prosecutions of illegals AND take on sanctuary cities that do not cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (ICE) . He rejected splitting up ICE which was a big talking point by some of the radical Dems .

Construction of Trump’s border wall may continue under Biden, administration admits | The Independent

Quid made it clear that the wall would be stopped by his rhetoric during the campaign and in EOs . Is this an admission that he was wrong ?

Naw, he'll nibble around the edges as he deals with actual people but he does have an agenda to ram down Mitch's throat and that's the priority.

Quote:

Naw, he'll nibble around the edges as he deals with actual people but he does have an agenda to ram down Mitch's throat and that's the priority.

Quid or Mayorkas ? Mayorkas is a radical open border advocate . But even he sees how badly Quid's border policies have screwed the pooch . What is happening at the border is the crisis that every new administration faces . Quid is asleep at the wheel . His chosen point person is a no show . In over 2 weeks since Harris was named the immigration tzar ,she has not held a press conference or has even traveled to the border .
Border crossings have skyrocketed and now we learn that the children at the detention centers are being abused.

Unaccompanied migrant children being sexually assaulted, Greg Abbott says | The Texas Tribune

Now the Dems in the Senate ;armed with the decision by the Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough , are planning on pushing all their radical socialist agenda through the Senate through reconciliation maneuvers ,using budget trickery, bypassing the filibuster . Why even have a budget ? Congress never sticks to one anyway .

Good thing all this didn't happen with Trump at the wheel. The liberal dems on this board would have their hair on fire by now. Since it's merely Harris/Biden, they're OK with it. Harris' refusal to go to the border or even hold a news conference concerning her plans, assuming she has any, is really incredible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Quid or Mayorkas ? Mayorkas is a radical open border advocate . But even he sees how badly Quid's border policies have screwed the pooch . What is happening at the border is the crisis that every new administration faces . Quid is asleep at the wheel . His chosen point person is a no show . In over 2 weeks since Harris was named the immigration tzar ,she has not held a press conference or has even traveled to the border .
Border crossings have skyrocketed and now we learn that the children at the detention centers are being abused.

Unaccompanied migrant children being sexually assaulted, Greg Abbott says | The Texas Tribune

Now the Dems in the Senate ;armed with the decision by the Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough , are planning on pushing all their radical socialist agenda through the Senate through reconciliation maneuvers ,using budget trickery, bypassing the filibuster . Why even have a budget ? Congress never sticks to one anyway .

Should be an interesting summer for sure. We'll see what the scenario is in June or so as Joe puts things in order.

add to the list is Quid's "bipartisan Committee " to pack SCOTUS and his gun EOs .The man thinks that he was elected with a Roosevelt mandate .

The man thinks? Not so sure about that.

Justice Breyer is against court packing . So was Ruth Ginsberg .

Justice Stephen Breyer on packing Supreme Court: 'think long and hard' about the risks - The Washington Post

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Chastises 2020 Dems On Court Packing: “Bad Idea,” “Partisan” - YouTube

With 50 democrat senators, we'll find out if there is at least one who has some sense of justice and honor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

add to the list is Quid's "bipartisan Committee " to pack SCOTUS and his gun EOs .The man thinks that he was elected with a Roosevelt mandate .

Everything on the table since gun control/mental health is a non starter despite the need. I know, thoughts and prayers is enough right. Can't come to a mall, work place, school, or church near you...or YOURS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

Can't come to a mall, work place, school, or church near you...or YOURS.

Shootings and killings are now happening in the suburbs I used to work in and live in!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Shootings and killings are now happening in the suburbs I used to work in and live in!

must be dreadful to live in a place like that, those awful people just wont stay in their place

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

must be dreadful to live in a place like that, those awful people just wont stay in their place

Yeah, those white people can be a problem....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Yeah, those white people can be a problem....

only whities eh?

Quote:

gun control/mental health is a non starter despite the need.

oh that pesky bill of rights . A constitution is such an inconvenience when there is a radical agenda to impose.

from Tal (sarcasm font)

Quote:

gun control/mental health is a non starter despite the need.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

oh that pesky bill of rights . A constitution is such an inconvenience when there is a radical agenda to impose.

A Constitution is a living, breathing document. It's been amended 23 times since its inception and the first ten amendments were ratified. No one wants to change it carelessly, but gun control surely needs to be examined in light of the killing taking place, often by children and against children - notably the horror in Newtown.

Quote:

A Constitution is a living, breathing document. It's been amended 23 times since its inception and the first ten amendments were ratified.

It is living and breathing in the sense that it can be amended, but not in the sense of being malleable.

Short of banning all guns, I don't know how you use gun control to stop crazy people from going onto school campuses and shooting the place up. Armed school personnel might be an answer. That's how they do it in Israel and they don't have this problem despite being surrounded by enemies who would love to do just that. Might add that they have secure borders.

Having an honest discussion would be a good first step. Biden told at least two whoppers during his recent speech on the matter.

1. Biden falsely stated that though someone who buys a gun at a gun store has to go through a federal background check, there is an exemption for sales made at gun shows. That is flatly untrue.
2. Another lie Biden told was when he declared that the gun industry has special protection from all liability. No such exemption exists.

https://libertyonenews.com/here-are-...ontrol-speech/

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

It is living and breathing in the sense that it can be amended, but not in the sense of being malleable.

Short of banning all guns, I don't know how you use gun control to stop crazy people from going onto school campuses and shooting the place up. Armed school personnel might be an answer. That's how they do it in Israel and they don't have this problem despite being surrounded by enemies who would love to do just that. Might add that they have secure borders.

Having an honest discussion would be a good first step. Biden told at least two whoppers during his recent speech on the matter.

1. Biden falsely stated that though someone who buys a gun at a gun store has to go through a federal background check, there is an exemption for sales made at gun shows. That is flatly untrue.
2. Another lie Biden told was when he declared that the gun industry has special protection from all liability. No such exemption exists.

https://libertyonenews.com/here-are-...ontrol-speech/

Jl, there are other examples of how to do this without banning all guns or having armed guards all over the place, but your gun lobby doesn't want to hear them, they would rather put business before public safety. The point is; you have a serious problem not contemplated in your constitution, so constitutional arguments are mote, what is needed is common sense and removing the get arounds is a first step. Back when the constitution was framed there were a small number of states, a smaller population and real threats from the indigenous and the British. You cannot compare the right to a single shot weapon to today's killing machines. Everyone who uses a gun should have full liability and the manufacturer and seller should be joined in the action. There is no constitutional right to traffic weapons

Quote:

Constitution is a living, breathing document.

That is one interpretation . Sorta like Humpty Dumpty's version of the meaning of words . I am a textualist .

Quote:

It's been amended 23 times since its inception and the first ten amendments were ratified.

Indeed it has . That is the constitutional way. By all means amend it if you think the people no longer have the right to own guns . I am a strong advocate of the amendment process. I don't think it is used enough ;and only one means of amendment has been used . The framers certainly would not have added the method of amendment by convention of the states if they did not think it would be a useful tool.

Quote:

No one wants to change it carelessly, but gun control surely needs to be examined in light of the killing taking place, often by children and against children - notably the horror in Newtown.

Gun control is a talking point that gets used when politically expedient to do so .

Quid's speech had a couple of critical errors that need to be corrected .
He said the gun industry was the only industry that has law suit exemptions . Not true . They are not exempt ;and other industries have similar limited exemptions . What they can't be held liable for is someone using their product in a crime. It is silly to suggest they should . I own a number of knives that I use for various purposes . Any one of them could kill someone . Should the makers of the knives be sued if I used them for illegal purposes ?
Quid said claimed that "If you walk into a store and you buy a gun, you have a background check. But you go to a gun show, you can buy whatever you want and no background check." Not true . According to Federal law ,the only time you can buy a gun without a back round check is from a private owner ;not looking to turn a profit, and who "only make occasional sales of firearms from (a) personal collection" . Those owners do not maintain booths at gun shows . There are also other state laws with further restrictions . In all cases it is illegal to sell to someone who is not legally permitted to own one .

Either way ;he thinks that he can dictate the issue through EO . This will be challenged in court . SCOTUS in recent gun control cases has sided with the premise that individuals have a right to own guns .

Quid talked about the number of shooting incidents . He has a point .There are too many . But will his EO change that ? Nope . Almost all of the cases ;mostly going unreported ,are the ones where guns were illegally obtained . There is nothing sensational I guess when every weekend in Chitown there are over 2 dozen shooting incidents . It is the sensational ones in white landia that grab the national headlines . Already the incarceration rate for illegal gun use disproportionately falls on Blacks . Do you think more gun control will change that ? Maybe it would reduce the number of shootings in white landia .Then the pols can put the issue back into their pocket to introduce it again when they need an issue to demagogue .

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

Jl, there are other examples of how to do this without banning all guns or having armed guards all over the place, but your gun lobby doesn't want to hear them, they would rather put business before public safety. The point is; you have a serious problem not contemplated in your constitution, so constitutional arguments are mote, what is needed is common sense and removing the get arounds is a first step. Back when the constitution was framed there were a small number of states, a smaller population and real threats from the indigenous and the British. You cannot compare the right to a single shot weapon to today's killing machines. Everyone who uses a gun should have full liability and the manufacturer and seller should be joined in the action. There is no constitutional right to traffic weapons

All good points.

And there's this :

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA, was passed in 2005. The law gave the gun industry immunity. It provided blanket protection from lawsuits alleging harm caused by the very weapons the industry produces.

And this:

Private gun sales are exempt from Federal background checks. Admittedly, Biden did not say this to indicate specifically private sales.

Neither statement is a flat-out lie.

Quote:

Jl, there are other examples of how to do this without banning all guns or having armed guards all over the place,

What are they?

Quote:

your gun lobby doesn't want to hear them, they would rather put business before public

For most of us, it's not a matter of $$.

Quote:

The point is; you have a serious problem not contemplated in your constitution, so constitutional arguments are mote, what is needed is common sense and removing the get arounds is a first step.

You are suggesting we just forget the law. That strikes me as dangerous beyond belief.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

That is one interpretation . Sorta like Humpty Dumpty's version of the meaning of words . I am a textualist

How you can say "a living, breathing document" is a Humpty Dumpty version of the meaning of words is a mind-boggling statement on language. As a textualist, how can you possibly read the Second Amendment as other than requiring a militia.

Quote:

By all means amend it if you think the people no longer have the right to own guns

Please, Tom, don't put words in my mouth that I never said like others here have done. What I think is that the issue needs to be examined so that children, barely out of toddler-dom, can be protected from maniacs with guns.

Quote:

Gun control is a talking point that gets used when politically expedient to do so

It gets brought up when the horror of another massacre takes place. Every time it gets brought up, the Republicans immediately shoot it down.