Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 05-15-2009, 09:11 AM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,445
You know that story cites a Democratic Representative who was offended by it, right?
  #202  
Old 05-15-2009, 10:40 AM
stolichnaya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Obamapuram
Posts: 2,562
1) If it is an accurate, good faith report, I don't care who is offended

2) If it is an inaccurate, partisan / bad faith report, it should have been quashed by some review process

3) My guess here, it is a good faith report (and a best guess, as strong as a report like that can be) and the "vetting" she speaks of is purely political, and not related to accuracy per se. Part of her responsibility is to not hang albatrosses around the neck of the administration- that competes with the responsibility to get accurate information to law enforcement. When in competition, useful information should win.

Of course I am biased- this administration strikes me as thoughtful and competent so I view things through that lens. I'll be interested to see what happens with this going forward.
  #203  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:02 PM
SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 14,709
Along with veterans,
Quote:
Whites and blacks, Christians and Jews, Cubans and Mexicans, along with tax objectors, were among several political leanings listed in the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon." Both reports were prepared by the department's Office of Intelligence and Analysis.
Why didn't the report simply say everyone is a potential terrorist? If (and I said IF) this report was so poorly researched and written, then it was useless.


Hmmmm. I'm a white, Catholic veteran. Should I start hiring henchmen, building a secret lair and work on my super villain evil laugh or is it too soon?
  #204  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:12 PM
BrightNShiny is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright View Post
You know that story cites a Democratic Representative who was offended by it, right?
Unfortunately, Dumbocrat politicians often follow the lead of stupid right-wingers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve G1
Why didn't the report simply say everyone is a potential terrorist? If (and I said IF) this report was so poorly researched and written, then it was useless.


Hmmmm. I'm a white, Catholic veteran. Should I start hiring henchmen, building a secret lair and work on my super villain evil laugh or is it too soon?
I can't tell from the article, but it looks like that's from a glossary of terms.
  #205  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:19 PM
SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 14,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrightNShiny View Post
Unfortunately, Dumbocrat politicians often follow the lead of stupid right-wingers.



I can't tell from the article, but it looks like that's from a glossary of terms.
I wonder. Is there a chance the original report is floating around on the web?
  #206  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:20 PM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,445
Here you go: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5410658/...Wing-Extremism

I don't think it's a big secret that right-wing extremists go after veterans or anyone else with military training. I also don't think it's a secret that veterans lean right.

Last edited by Really Not All That Bright; 05-15-2009 at 12:21 PM.
  #207  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:23 PM
Captain Carrot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sophomore at VTech
Posts: 6,039
http://digg.com/politics/Republican_...nt_Obama_s_dog This really seemed like a good idea, guys? Criticizing the money he spent on the dog?

Republicans: Kicking Puppies Since 1994
Republicans: If you thought our last idea was stupid, wait until you see the next one!
DNC's response: "We understand the RNC is frustrated their lack of a coherent message, but going negative on Bo isn't going to help, and neither is blatant hypocrisy."
  #208  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:24 PM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,184
The thing is, he didn't spend anything on buying the dog at all. Bo was a gift from Ted Kennedy. The Obamas spent nothing to adopt him, except for whatever personal donation they made to a shelter in DC to make up for not getting a shelter dog.
  #209  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:27 PM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,445
Okay, I'm not a huge fan of this thread, but there is clearly something utterly bizarre going on here.

Next up: "Obama spends $20 on haircut, enrages Hair Cuttery Dads."
  #210  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:37 PM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright View Post
Okay, I'm not a huge fan of this thread, but there is clearly something utterly bizarre going on here.

Next up: "Obama spends $20 on haircut, enrages Hair Cuttery Dads."
The bizarre thing going on is that the Republican party is losing it. They've got a serious but low-key civil war going on and the party is lurching in all directions as the politicians and the party organization try to keep the Republican coalition together.

They have NO strategy. They have NO internal agreement. They have NO leader who actually cares about the party and not his own interests. The religious faction is running wild while the financial faction is trying to figure out how to cut them loose while surreptitiously increasing their lobbying of "New" Democrats. The party pundits are almost all insane, or at least think that shockjock tactics are the best way to get their voices out there. They've gone from total political control to losing the White House, Capitol Hill and (hopefully) the Supreme Court. They've gone from hero to zero in less than a year.

And the more they talk, the more they lose. They've tiny-tented their way into irrelevancy.
  #211  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:38 PM
SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 14,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright View Post
Here you go: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5410658/...Wing-Extremism

I don't think it's a big secret that right-wing extremists go after veterans or anyone else with military training. I also don't think it's a secret that veterans lean right.
Thanks for the link. I'm relieved it was a short report, too many reports just go on and on and on.

So as far as I can tell, it was saying that "this is the situation and here's how extremists may try to take advantage"

War veterans would be attractive "recruiting targets" I suppose, because they already know how to shoot, or how to hande "demolition". How successful the recruiting effort is, would be an entirely different story. I think (and hope) the success rate would be abysmally low. There are always a few nut jobs out there, but that doesn't mean everyone is one.
  #212  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:39 PM
SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 14,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayjay View Post
The thing is, he didn't spend anything on buying the dog at all. Bo was a gift from Ted Kennedy. The Obamas spent nothing to adopt him, except for whatever personal donation they made to a shelter in DC to make up for not getting a shelter dog.
If this is the hot subject of the day, all I can say is



hahahahahahah gasp hahahahhaahaha sniff hahahahhahaha wheeze hahahahahaha guffaw
  #213  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:46 PM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveG1 View Post
War veterans would be attractive "recruiting targets" I suppose, because they already know how to shoot, or how to hande "demolition". How successful the recruiting effort is, would be an entirely different story. I think (and hope) the success rate would be abysmally low. There are always a few nut jobs out there, but that doesn't mean everyone is one.
War veterans tend to make a large contingent of the really right wing groups anyway.

Bo Gritz is a good example. The problems with the "far right" nomenclature are that (1) it's not always clear whether the crazy person is a right winger- Gritz, for example, worked with liberal groups to force the Reagan Administration to do something about US POWs he believed were still being held in Southeast Asia; and (2) they're so far off the map that they won't support Republicans any more than Democrats.

Some writers use the term "Far Middle" to describe these groups; I think "off the wing" makes more sense.

Last edited by Really Not All That Bright; 05-15-2009 at 12:46 PM.
  #214  
Old 05-15-2009, 12:59 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Carrot View Post
http://digg.com/politics/Republican_...nt_Obama_s_dog This really seemed like a good idea, guys? Criticizing the money he spent on the dog?

It wasn't when they tried it on Fala.
  #215  
Old 05-15-2009, 04:48 PM
Fuzzy Dunlop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayjay View Post
They've gone from hero to zero in less than a year.

And the more they talk, the more they lose. They've tiny-tented their way into irrelevancy.
They fell apart very quickly, but it's taken much longer than a year. Remember that they were gaining power in congress as late as 2004. Jeffords left the GOP in 2001, splitting the Senate 50/50, but the GOP took it back in 2002 and gained more seats in 2004. We, as a nation, were still too scared of terrorism, and not enough people grasped how fucked up Iraq was yet.

Democrats retook congress in 2006, in my recollection primarily because people had enough scaremongering and were furious about Iraq. Nobody was voting based on economic concerns at the time (ok some were but it was low). If you reflect on it or read articles from the time, most Republicans publicly claimed that it was a momentary blip - a reaction to a deeply unpopular president and a terribly waged war. Very few Republicans wanted to talk about fundamental problems with their party.

It wasn't until 2008 elections now that nobody can seriously claim there isn`t a serious problem. As recently as EARLY 2008 a lot of people said, "oh sure, we may not win the presidency because Bush is so unpopular, but the GOP brand isn't all that bad". Even the idiots who want to exclude more moderates and push more extreme versions of the ideals they've proven are so disastrous at least acknowledge that it's a shift to conservative extremes. They actually think the party is too moderate, but they do acknowledge it needs to move to win elections again (in the wrong direction, but whatever)

It's really fast, to be sure. But not a year. Compare to the Democrats losing congress in '94, maintaining the presidency until 2000 and only really having an upward trend as of 2006. The Democratic ideals were never as scorned or (legitimately) repudiated as the GOP's ideals have been.
  #216  
Old 05-15-2009, 07:48 PM
Regallag_The_Axe's Avatar
Regallag_The_Axe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: United States of Leifholm
Posts: 3,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop View Post
They fell apart very quickly, but it's taken much longer than a year.
See, this is what amazes me. Four years ago the Repubs were the party in power, now they're reduced to... well, this. That pendulum swung rather quickly.
__________________
PMA to the grave
  #217  
Old 05-15-2009, 09:30 PM
Squink is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yes
Posts: 20,424
I see the RNC is petitioning Nancy Pelosi to stop federal funding for ACORN.

That should go over real well after this week's attacks on Pelosi.

Maybe the re-education camps will get funding this year.
  #218  
Old 05-15-2009, 09:38 PM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,184
I'm getting a bad feeling with all the talk about Pelosi knowing about torture and all the Bush programs and regulations that Obama is leaving on the table, that the Democratic momentum is slowing down. It's nothing really happening yet, but I just get that feeling. I'm not terribly comfortable with that.
  #219  
Old 05-15-2009, 10:50 PM
Diogenes the Cynic is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 58,797
People view Pelosi separately from Obama. I don't think anybody, left, right or center, has ever really loved Pelosi or Reid. If anything, I think we might see a coup against Pelosi as Speaker, but I don't think that affects Obama.

And when are the Republicans going to stick a sock in it with this totally fabricated, blatantly racist smear against ACORN?
  #220  
Old 05-16-2009, 03:38 AM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
I think the Democratic Congressional leadership is and has been completely lame, especially since Pelosi took impeachment off the table years ago. If it turns out she's been lying, it wouldn't bother me at all to see her go. And if it turns out she's been telling the truth, it wouldn't bother me at all to see her go.
  #221  
Old 05-17-2009, 10:33 AM
gonzomax is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: michigan
Posts: 26,307
How does anybody know what was brought up in the meeting? The claim is that they only waterboarded 3 prisoners. If that is true, it would not have been a subject to inform Congress about at all. The assumption that waterboarding was a big deal in 2002 and the military felt the need to tell about it is unsubstantiated. I will wait until a more complete synopsis of the meetings is released.
The meeting was 7 years ago after all.
  #222  
Old 05-20-2009, 10:19 AM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzomax View Post
How does anybody know what was brought up in the meeting? The claim is that they only waterboarded 3 prisoners. If that is true, it would not have been a subject to inform Congress about at all. The assumption that waterboarding was a big deal in 2002 and the military felt the need to tell about it is unsubstantiated. I will wait until a more complete synopsis of the meetings is released.
The meeting was 7 years ago after all.
Well, they're talking about how the only waterboarded 3 prisoners, as if that's the only thing that could actually count as torture, though of course thay say it isn't. I'm confident that if you include other forms of torture like "stress positions" and sleep deprivation, the number of tortured prisoners will grow to hundreds or even thousands.
  #223  
Old 05-20-2009, 11:02 AM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidw View Post
Has anyone mentioned the special RNC meeting to approve a resolution to rebrand the Democratic Party as the "Democrat Socialist Party?" When even Michael Steele can see that your idea is stupid, it's really stupid.
Today, apparently the Republicans are backing off of this stupid idea. Instead of voting that the Democratic party adopt a new name, they will merely condem its "march toward socialism".

Pitiful that this counts as their smartest move in months.
  #224  
Old 05-20-2009, 11:59 AM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyo Jim View Post
Today, apparently the Republicans are backing off of this stupid idea. Instead of voting that the Democratic party adopt a new name, they will merely condem its "march toward socialism".

Pitiful that this counts as their smartest move in months.
Perhaps the Democrats could adopt a resolution that congratulates the Republicans for their "march towards irrelevancy"
  #225  
Old 05-20-2009, 12:18 PM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,445
It's more of a drunken meander than a march, really.
  #226  
Old 05-20-2009, 12:21 PM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
Perhaps the Democrats could adopt a resolution that congratulates the Republicans for their "march towards irrelevancy"
I would amend that to "march towards irrelevancy with the occsional side trips to public restrooms for secretive gay sex by public gay bashers".
  #227  
Old 05-20-2009, 03:43 PM
rockle is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Stuck in traffic
Posts: 3,829
As usual, I have absolutely nothing of import or interest to add here, except that I think the RNC Chairman really ought to be referred to as "Michael Steele but not the one who was in The Runaways and The Bangles, the other one" because I keep getting confused.

Yes, I am blonde, why do you ask?
  #228  
Old 05-20-2009, 03:51 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,462
Who the hell knew the names of the members of the Bangles, even when they were popular?
  #229  
Old 05-20-2009, 03:58 PM
Squink is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yes
Posts: 20,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by acsenray View Post
Who the hell knew the names of the members of the Bangles, even when they were popular?
This guy did.
  #230  
Old 05-20-2009, 07:40 PM
Squink is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yes
Posts: 20,424
Passed by the RNC today:
Quote:
RNC RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING
THE DEMOCRATS’ MARCH TOWARD SOCIALISM


WHEREAS, the American Heritage Dictionary defines socialism as a system of social organization in
which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned by a centralized government that often
plans and controls the economy; and

WHEREAS, the Democratic Party has outlined their plans to nationalize the banking, financial and
healthcare industries; and

WHEREAS, the Democratic Party has proposed massive government bailouts for the mortgage and
auto industries; and

WHEREAS, the Democratic Party has passed trillions of dollars in new government spending, all with
strings attached in order to control nearly every aspect of American life; and

WHEREAS, Newsweek reported recently, “Whether we like it or not – or even whether many people
have thought much about it or not – the numbers clearly suggest that we are headed in a more
European direction…As entitlement spending rises over the next decade, we will become even more
French;” and

WHEREAS, The Wall Street Journal reported recently, “But tucked away in the spending bill is a
change that will both reduce work and increase welfare by paying states to increase their welfare
caseloads;” and

WHEREAS, history has demonstrated that free markets and free men are the only way to prosperity
and have been the bedrock of the United States economy; and

WHEREAS, the Democratic Party seeks to expand government control of the daily lives of
Americans; and

WHEREAS, the Democratic Party and its leadership have dedicated themselves to a new taxing
objective of direct income redistribution which takes additional taxes from one group of people and
gives it in direct cash transfers to another group of people who pay no federal income taxes; and

WHEREAS, the American traditions of hard work and free enterprise are at risk as the Democratic
Party pushes our country towards European-style socialism and government control; therefore be it

RESOLVED, that we the members of the Republican National Committee recognize the Democratic
Party’s clear and obvious purpose in proposing, passing, and implementing socialist programs through
federal legislation; and be it further

RESOLVED, that we the members of the Republican National Committee recognize that the
Democratic Party is dedicated to restructuring American society along socialist ideals; and be it further

RESOLVED, that we the members of the Republican National Committee call on the American people
to urge the President, the Congress and the Democratic Party to remember what made our country
great and to stop pushing our country towards socialism and governmental control.


Adopted by the Republican National Committee, May 20, 2009
PDF here

At the end there, where they're urging the President, the Congress and the Democratic Party to remember what made our country great, I think they're talking about 9/11, or maybe torturing people. Whatever it was, I'm sure it was pretty damn great because we are the World's only Super Power! YEAH!!!
  #231  
Old 05-20-2009, 07:47 PM
Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 5,632
"WHEREAS, we the Republican Party are against large government spending, although not so you'd notice,

and WHEREAS the Democratic Party are poopyheads,

be it RESOLVED, lower taxes. Terrorism. America and baby Jesus. Amen."

Makes about as much sense as their budget, really.
  #232  
Old 05-20-2009, 07:53 PM
Captain Carrot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sophomore at VTech
Posts: 6,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish View Post
"WHEREAS, we the Republican Party are against large government spending, although not so you'd notice,

and WHEREAS the Democratic Party are poopyheads,

be it RESOLVED, lower taxes. Terrorism. America and baby Jesus. Amen."

Makes about as much sense as their budget, really.
QFFuckingT
  #233  
Old 05-20-2009, 08:03 PM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish View Post
"WHEREAS, we the Republican Party are against large government spending, although not so you'd notice,

and WHEREAS the Democratic Party are poopyheads,

be it RESOLVED, lower taxes. Terrorism. America and baby Jesus. Amen."

Makes about as much sense as their budget, really.
Dagnabbit - now I'm hearing this in my head as said by Ricky Bobby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyo Jim View Post
I would amend that to "march towards irrelevancy with the occsional side trips to public restrooms for secretive gay sex by public gay bashers".
The GOP: a small tent but a wide stance.
  #234  
Old 05-20-2009, 09:13 PM
Onomatopoeia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 小浜国
Posts: 6,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squink View Post
Passed by the RNC today:

PDF here

At the end there, where they're urging the President, the Congress and the Democratic Party to remember what made our country great, I think they're talking about 9/11, or maybe torturing people. Whatever it was, I'm sure it was pretty damn great because we are the World's only Super Power! YEAH!!!
"What's was that huge booming sound Howard?"
"Why that's the Republican Party careening at super sonic speed into irrelevancy dear, that's all."
"Ohhhhhh. Okay. So we don't have to be ashamed to be Americans anymore?"
"That's right dear."
"Oh, thank God. I think people were beginning to see through the English accent I've been putting on for the last eight years."
"What English accent?"

Last edited by Onomatopoeia; 05-20-2009 at 09:14 PM.
  #235  
Old 05-20-2009, 09:48 PM
SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 14,709
I have this mental image right now, from a long time ago. I was in Panama. Some people had found a fer de lance out in the open and had surrounded it. When the snake couldn't reach and attack them, it started biting itself in some weird sort of self destructive fit.

The Republican party right now is acting just like that snake. Biting itself to death, injecting poison into its own hide.
Chomp chomp.
  #236  
Old 05-26-2009, 08:57 AM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Can it be the Republicans have gone for 5 days without a stupid outbreak?

Last edited by Boyo Jim; 05-26-2009 at 08:57 AM.
  #237  
Old 05-26-2009, 09:00 AM
jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyo Jim View Post
Can it be the Republicans have gone for 5 days without a stupid outbreak?
Of course not. The Cheneys have been talking up torture all weekend, and now there's talk that Liz Cheney may run for office. The stupid never stops!
  #238  
Old 05-26-2009, 09:16 AM
Equipoise's Avatar
Equipoise is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyo Jim View Post
Can it be the Republicans have gone for 5 days without a stupid outbreak?
Oh god no. I started a post last week in a Notebook page and kept adding on to it. I intended to post it but real life got in the way. I might still post it (later) even though much of it is out of date now, replaced by other more current stupid.

Never fear, the stupid is always on the move.
  #239  
Old 05-26-2009, 11:39 AM
E-Sabbath is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Up The River
Posts: 13,944
Ending birthright citizenship count?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_207485.html
Nah, not big enough. C'mon, react to the latina, Mr. Steele. I can't wait.
oh... god, this is like watching a car crash. Except it's a 18 wheeler that just drove into a lamppost, and it's a car carrier, and they're all falling off in slow motion.

And each one is packed full of clowns.
  #240  
Old 05-26-2009, 11:48 AM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,445
I don't know if I'd call that one stupid. Jus soli is not used as a basis for citizenship in lots of countries.

Un-American, maybe.
  #241  
Old 05-26-2009, 11:54 AM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
I just read another thread where it was mentioned that federal money can't be spent to assist a foreigner have an abortion in the US.

This is a brilliant solution for ultra-conservatives. The choice used to be, abortion vs. newborn but brown American citizen. Now they can let the baby be born and immediately deport it.
  #242  
Old 05-26-2009, 12:54 PM
elucidator is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,217
Hmmm. Transported over the border by catapult, or drop-kick?
  #243  
Old 05-26-2009, 02:37 PM
E-Sabbath is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Up The River
Posts: 13,944
It's not the Jus Soli that's the stupid part. It's the framing it as 'Well, we need to keep this as a white country, so if we stop them illegals from giving citizenship to their kids, we can stop them from being Democrats!' bit.
  #244  
Old 05-26-2009, 02:42 PM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Sabbath View Post
It's not the Jus Soli that's the stupid part. It's the framing it as 'Well, we need to keep this as a white country, so if we stop them illegals from giving citizenship to their kids, we can stop them from being Democrats!' bit.
I think you may be reading something into the story that isn't there. I mean, it's not wholly unreasonable to assume that his line of thought isn't a million miles away from that, but there's no evidence of this.
  #245  
Old 05-26-2009, 03:22 PM
E-Sabbath is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Up The River
Posts: 13,944
That story, yes. But that pretty much seems to sum up the tactics the man has been taking, if you check him out a bit.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/22/steele-obama-race/
"Steele: Obama ‘Was Not Vetted Because The Press Fell In Love With The Black Man Running For The Office’ "
Mmmmmnooo, not what I wanted to hear from you today.
http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009...alking-points/
Ah, here we go. The talking points.

Hm. Nope, no foot in his mouth. Got a clearly biased and encoded statement out, but it's tolerable.
Rush just wants her to fail. And Obama to fail, too.
  #246  
Old 05-26-2009, 03:25 PM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Sabbath View Post
It's not the Jus Soli that's the stupid part. It's the framing it as 'Well, we need to keep this as a white country, so if we stop them illegals from giving citizenship to their kids, we can stop them from being Democrats!' bit.
Actually, the really stupid part is thinking they can just enact a law to do this.

The 14th Amendment of the Constitution says: "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. "

According to Wiki, the bill's sponsors claim that illegal immigrants (and their spawn) are NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and therefor not protected by the 14th Amendment, and so the 14th Amendment doesn't need amending.
  #247  
Old 05-26-2009, 04:36 PM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,445
Okay, that's stupid.
  #248  
Old 05-26-2009, 05:00 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyo Jim View Post
Actually, the really stupid part is thinking they can just enact a law to do this.

The 14th Amendment of the Constitution says: "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. "

According to Wiki, the bill's sponsors claim that illegal immigrants (and their spawn) are NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and therefor not protected by the 14th Amendment, and so the 14th Amendment doesn't need amending.
"Not subject to the jurisdiction of" - I don't think this means what they think it means.



Of course, if I was an illegal immigrant, I might love such a concept. "Hey, you can't arrest me! I'm not subject to your jurisdiction!!"
  #249  
Old 05-26-2009, 05:14 PM
Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSYoungEsq View Post
"Not subject to the jurisdiction of" - I don't think this means what they think it means.



Of course, if I was an illegal immigrant, I might love such a concept. "Hey, you can't arrest me! I'm not subject to your jurisdiction!!"
IANALawyer, and my first thought was... then how do aliens get arrested and deported?

So, as an ACTUAL twisty-brained attorney, DS, can you construe some interpretation of what they MIGHT mean that could be legally defensible?
  #250  
Old 05-26-2009, 05:52 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,413
Please. I try very hard not to imagine three impossible things before breakfast (or any other time of the day!).
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017