Don't be surprised if it's not a wall

bottlebass

Main Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
15,234
Reaction score
110
Points
63
My argument
legalize drugs - destroy the cartels
eliminate foreign aid
eliminate minimum wages
eliminate federal welfare

open borders
I like the first 2... the last 3 suck though.
 

diehard

Active member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
31,545
Reaction score
12
Points
38
Very stupid response. Driven by binary thinking.

1. a border wall does nothing to cut off the benefits so no this is a horrible argument on your part

Less illegals, less benefits. So simple.


2. a 6 billion dollar difference on a number beeg reported (not mine) ok what is your argument

We get $156B in benefits and pay $16B in to the treasury. Less illegals, less needless money out of the treasury. Pretty simple.


3. It won't stop any, very little is carried across the border. the narcotics are coming through the ports. If you honestly cared you'd spend the money there but you don't honestly care.

Already said that money goes to improve drug interdiction at the border crossings. To say little or none is being smuggled across by the cartels in the open areas is simply untrue. Won't say dishonest because I assume you don't know better.


4. no it won't, the majority of people getting addicted to opioids are getting addicted by legal pharmaceuticals

Should have differentiated between addicted and supplied. It is you and your hospital that is responsible for the addiction. You deserve prison time for the deaths you cause.


5. They can claim asylum from across the border they don't need to cross.
Those with a legitimate claim to asylum and use formal legal channels deserve a full and complete hearing on their petition.

You are not stupid. Get your act together.
 

bottlebass

Main Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
15,234
Reaction score
110
Points
63
Very stupid response. Driven by binary thinking.



Those with a legitimate claim to asylum and use formal legal channels deserve a full and complete hearing on their petition.

You are not stupid. Get your act together.
Good job with the bolded in your post old man. Talk about binary thinking "we have to have a wall it solves everything nothing else will solve anything"...
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,934
Reaction score
678
Points
113
I do consider these provisions of the eminent domain law to be one of the stains of the Depression-era programs - an outgrowth of the zeal and urgency to implement the WPA, CCC and TVA. I'm actually kind of surprised it's been kept on the books and/or has survived any constitutional challenges.

When it comes to property rights I'm practically a right winger. My personal conviction is that the property tax is wrong - probably not explicitly unconstitutional but goes against the founding principles of the country. The eminent domain law is a necessary evil but an evil nevertheless.
+1. Eminent domain I can live with if the property owner is given fair market value for what is taken. This is not that, apparently.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,934
Reaction score
678
Points
113
My argument
legalize drugs - destroy the cartels
eliminate foreign aid
eliminate minimum wages
eliminate federal welfare

open borders
Sweet. Get the R's to agree to this list first. Good luck!
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
37,658
Reaction score
484
Points
83
My argument
legalize drugs - destroy the cartels
eliminate foreign aid
eliminate minimum wages
eliminate federal welfare

open borders
Define no federal welfare. I am not complaining about your post- I think it might make some sense but it requires a definition.

My belief is that a government safety net of any kind can only be afforded with a secure border (if even then).
 

Sportsfan24

Active member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
12,686
Reaction score
4
Points
36
Sure, give them the 5.7 billion. That would be a much better use of the money and actually solve one of the listed crises.
The $5.7 billion would be better spent paying illegals to leave the country or not to enter the country in the first place. Building $5.7 billion in walls is just stupid.

But not to worry; Nancy has already told Putin’s bit** ch she isn’t giving him $1 for a wall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Sportsfan24

Active member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
12,686
Reaction score
4
Points
36
are awesome?

Forgot the biggest: eliminate private discrimination laws.
Really? That’s the biggest? People dying left and right of drug overdoses but that’s the biggest?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,934
Reaction score
678
Points
113
Really? That’s the biggest? People dying left and right of drug overdoses but that’s the biggest?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The thought of folks being allowed to deny "others" service gets 2 more excited than AOC.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,388
Reaction score
338
Points
83
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
41,425
Reaction score
197
Points
63
Really? That’s the biggest? People dying left and right of drug overdoses but that’s the biggest?
My post was in regard to immigration as an issue. Yes, people should be free to discriminate against immigrants. It's one of the best natural ways to control immigration without walls or laws. Now, that's not a progressive goal, natural control. You guys want someone with a bullhorn and a gun shouting instructions to everyone, I know.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
7,977
Reaction score
112
Points
63
My post was in regard to immigration as an issue. Yes, people should be free to discriminate against immigrants. It's one of the best natural ways to control immigration without walls or laws. Now, that's not a progressive goal, natural control. You guys want someone with a bullhorn and a gun shouting instructions to everyone, I know.
I assume you'll be voting Know-Nothing in 2020.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,934
Reaction score
678
Points
113
Yes, people should be free to discriminate against immigrants. It's one of the best natural ways to control immigration without walls or laws. Now, that's not a progressive goal, natural control. .
We should keep immigration down by mistreating the ones who are already here? Wow. Even for you that's a new low.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
41,425
Reaction score
197
Points
63
We should keep immigration down by mistreating the ones who are already here? Wow. Even for you that's a new low.
Who said we should mistreat immigrants? Man, your straw men get more and more creative.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
41,425
Reaction score
197
Points
63
Straw man? What exactly do you mean by:
Discriminate does not mean mistreat.

Discrimination is social pressure on: behavior, assimilation, employment, society. Hard working immigrants, who want to be a part of American society, who want to assimilate, probably welcomed with open arms. Those that don't probably won't.

How the word "discriminate" became such a dirty word by the progs is a mystery. Every single one of us discriminates every day, multiple times a day.

I'm interested in non violent means to solving problems, but I know that is anathema to you. Howie likes the gun and the bullhorn! Enjoy Trump deciding who gets to come and who doesn't Howie!
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,934
Reaction score
678
Points
113
Discriminate does not mean mistreat.

How the word "discriminate" became such a dirty word by the progs is a mystery. Every single one of us discriminates every day, multiple times a day.
Those darn Progs not letting you make up your own definitions to words. Making you feel bad for pro-discrimination and a proud racist. It ain't easy being 2.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
41,425
Reaction score
197
Points
63
Those darn Progs not letting you make up your own definitions to words. Making you feel bad for pro-discrimination and a proud racist. It ain't easy being 2.
dis·crim·i·nate
/dəˈskriməˌnāt/Submit
verb
1.
recognize a distinction; differentiate.

I don't feel bad for being pro discrimination. I let people use their own definitions. My winning arguments isn't dependent on controlling definitions. That's a lazy man's approach to arguing. Which is why you use it. And based on many progs definition of racism, there is no doubt I am a racist. I'm not ashamed. The word means nothing to me.
 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
20,023
Reaction score
94
Points
48
$400M diverted from disaster relief.

Humbles and his fellas have assured us for years that Mexico was paying for trump's wall.
 
Top Bottom