1. Did Joe Biden win the 2020 election?
2. Is everyone born on US soil a citizen of the US?
3. Does the US have a right to secure, guard and protect her borders?
4. Is it a form of socialism when the government partly owns “private” businesses?
5. Should people who beat police officers be arrested, stand trial and, if convicted, serve lengthy jail sentences?
Let’s make it simple.
The price of comment admission is a simple yes or no answer to each of the above.
Then you are free to comment.
I’ll start… I’m a yes on all of these.
You?
31 comments:
YES - On All 5
Dave, I will give it my best answers I can but YOMV
1. Yes, How do I know this is he assumed the seat for four years. Had he have lost he would have just gone directly to the beach
2. No, Only if they choose to be.
3. Yes, That is a simple question after all it is our borders
4. No, "Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems characterized by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership."
There is a difference between investing in and owning. The government invested in GM but made the decision to sell Chrysler therefore the investing in GM was not socialism but making the decision to sell Chrysler means they had taken it over and controlled it enough to sell.
5. Yes, They should stand trial and if convicted be shot at sunrise. The shot at sunrise is debatable, the rest is not.
I love questionnaires. And questions that are hot topics? Oh, yes please.
1. Yes. Nothing more to say although if those who challenged President Biden's win had evidence it would have been presented. Over sixty cases were tossed for various reasons with frivolous being the one most noted.
2. Yes, per the 14th Amendment all persons born on USA land are citizens of the country. There have been many books written on the topic with some "behind the scenes" scenarios based on journals of the time. The topic was fiercely debated is all I'm saying which means there are very good reasons for the wording in the 14th Amendment, too many reasons for this one post but have fun reading that rabbit hole. I spent weeks reading all that history and learned more than just the dry facts, if you know what I mean. Have fun doing your own explorations.
3. Yes. It wasn't always this way but per negotiations with other nations every nation acknowledges each nations right to maintain and defend mutually acknowledged borders.
4. Yes. My yes comes with a but as in yes, but... and there are a ton of reasons why what the USA is doing with Intel and the Automotive industry back in the day is labeled as crony socialism or socialism lite as the actual means of production aren't outright owned by the government but are invested in or have interests in that specific businesses success. For the good of the nation (too many unemployed people hitting the streets at the same time if a business failed in the midst of a dicey economy) it is sometimes necessary for a government to step in for the good of all the people.
5. Yes. A thousand times yes.
Skud... can you provide the Constitutional text that supports your view that citizenship is chosen for the second question?
On number 4, as I stated in the post, I lean towards yes. I can see your argument AND the arguments saying all the auto bailouts since the Carter Admin were not socialism, or socialistic. The GM case in 2009 is closest to being yes since they/we conditioned that aid on firing specific leaders and chose which GM divisions should close.
On 5, I might not shoot them, but I'd let them rot in prison a long time. :-) I wish there were more conservatives who would/could just come out and say this. I'd love your thoughts on why many do not.
Yes AND No on all 5. Meden agan!
I hold all my answers in a quantum state of superposition until Shroedinger opens his box to check on a specific cat.
YES on all 5.
Ah... C'mon Joe. You can do it. Just own it. Don't be nuanced or a squish as some call folks like me.
So I generally see Shaw as more left leaning than I am. I actually have lots of friends further left than me. But Shaw encouraged me with her answer on number three. Because a lot of my more lefty friends are in fact, "open borders" folks.
Those folks are, IMHO, great examples of the far left.
Dave, I have never seen a case where someone is forced to be an American citizen. If a child is born to non citizens and the non citizens decide to not make the case for citizenship and leave the country they are not forced to accept American citizenship. Cant' really see that happening because in the past being an American citizen was a big deal but that may be changing.
Well Dave, are GOCO's "Socialist" (Government Owned, Company Operated)? Private Prisons? Still a hard "Yes"?
If DoJ proves that Georgia was "stolen", did Joe Biden win the 2020 election? A hard "Yes" again?
Did George Bush win in 2000? Another hard "Yes"?
Could you define "on US soil" for me? Is Guam "US soil"? Puerto Rico? A US merchant ship transporting paid passengers between Taiwan and Mainland China? A baby born in the US Embassy in Moscow?
Like I said, give me the "specifics" of your proposed laws. If generalities were enough, America wouldn't need "judges" to supervise legal cases.
Yes on all 5. I would count myself as a bleeding heart liberal and live in a very liberal town. I do not know anyone who is for open borders, not one. That said, our immigration laws are woefully inadequate. We need to take some of the billions of dollars going to ICE and fund thousands more immigration judges (NOT deportation judges as the regime likes to call them.) We NEED immigrants.
What are you talking about Skud? you stated people born here are not citizens unless they "choose" to be. I asked you where that was in the Constitution, because I assumed you had some Constitutional basis for your belief.
But what you are saying is citizenship is not automatic.
Again, can you show all of us where the US Constitution says that? Because once someone is born, they will get a birth certificate to prove their citizenship. From birth. The moment they are are born, they are born a US citizen.
I mean, unless I am reading my pocket copy of the Constitution incorrectly.
Well -FJ... I guess it was just too much to expect a straight answer from you. You know what I'm asking. But I'll play along with your BS, not expecting any decent response from you, but willing to be surprised.
As it relates to socialism and private prisons, first, that was not my question, nor part of my question. Notice what else I left out... Social Security, Farm subsidies and more. So, on prisons, I don't know, I haven't thought about it..
As to your Georgia Q, I'll respond with the same BS you use... it depends on what the evidence is and who "finds" it.
Did George Bush win in 2000? Yes he did. Much to my dismay. Just as JFK did in 1960 much to others dismay.
US Soil includes all our territories, so like Puerto Rico, Guam counts and my friends from there are grateful to be US citizens.
A merchant ship? A US Embassy? Why not the moon? Or in space? How about in an airplane? Check the news bro. We've been through those scenarios already. Sorry you and Trump seem to be too either too stupid or too infantile to understand US Law as it relates to birthright citizenship. Or just angry that the "wrong" people get all the rights you have.
Specifics of my laws?
Show me where I proposed any laws. I'll wait.....................
.................. still waiting. You won't find any because that's not what I did in the post. Like Trump, I just asked questions.
So... you win, I bit, I responded.
But no more on this thread, because just five simple answers were the price of admission. Even Skud got it.
btw - 2020.
And we should be cutting our defense budget by at least 50% and using the savings to fund universal Healthcare for ALL.
It is PAST time to starve the MIC and the American Empire into a state with priorities focused an improving the lives of ALL Americans. Not just the elite capitalist oligarchs of greed.
-FJ wants us to believe Trump's stooges about 2020?
LOL!!!
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. Partially yes and and no depending on context. Or even "crony capitalism" or "socialized capitalism".
Socialism: 1: various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods (The example excludes collective ownership and democratic socialism in which universal healthcare and public services are the duties of government under the provision for the general welfare clause in the Constitution.)
Or it might be a form of fascist Trumpism.
Fascism: A philosophy or system of government that advocates or exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with an ideology of belligerent nationalism.
5. Yes
Dave, Happy to clear this up,
"A person born on U.S. soil does not automatically become a citizen if they are not considered "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States at the time of birth.
-Children of Foreign Diplomats: Children born to foreign diplomatic officers (such as ambassadors or ministers on the State Department's "Blue List") do not acquire citizenship at birth because their parents enjoy diplomatic immunity from U.S. law.Children of Invading Forces:
-Children born to members of an alien enemy force in hostile occupation of U.S. territory are exempt.Foreign Public Vessels:
-Generally, individuals born on foreign public vessels (like warships) while in U.S. waters do not acquire citizenship.
Hope that helps with your confusion
Possum... I love to hear that about your friends border views. My "bleeding heart" liberals are from So Cal which is immigrant heavy, so that could account for what I'm seeing from some friends.
BTW, since you and Shaw both mentioned immigration in your comments, let's remember the Trump Admin has said we are on an extended streak of zero, Hegseth made a zero with his hand to emphasize this, illegal southern border crossings.
We're now seeing in reporting and from ICE reports that in fact, we are not, nor have we ever been at zero, as the Trump Admin has announced. Month after month.
We are at a historically low number with illegal entrys and encounters down over 90% from Biden Admin highs. This reality should be celebrated by everyone who believes we should have a secure border.
But why the Trump Admin lied about the numbers for so many months, is beyond me. Why not just trumpet [no pun intended] the admittedly great factual numbers and say we are still working to get them to zero?
As opposed to lying to the American people once again?
Skud... is your statement... "A person born on U.S. soil does not automatically become a citizen if they are not considered "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States at the time of birth" in the Constitution, or is it an interpretation included in a Trump Admin EO?
I asked for the Constitutional language supporting your view. To date, you've provided none.
Hope this helps with your confusion.
I really can't speak for anyone else and it's not something that I think about on a daily basis. So, I looked at AI to see what are Democrats views on immigration and it wrote this (and I personally agree with all of it):
Comprehensive Reform: Focus on combining smarter, technology-driven border security with a fair, efficient pathway for undocumented immigrants (such as "Dreamers") to earn citizenship.
Humanitarian Approach: Prioritize humane treatment of asylum seekers and migrants, often opposing strict detention policies.
Legal Immigration Support: Advocate for strengthening legal immigration systems and providing resources for processing at the border, rather than simply restricting entry.
Internal Divisions: The party holds a spectrum of views, with progressive members favoring less restrictive immigration policies and more conservative or moderate Democrats emphasizing increased security and deportation of those here illegally.
Regarding the last point. I would stand somewhere between the progressive members and the moderate/conservative members.
I was curious so I looked up the steps, process, cost and timeline to obtain a green card. Here is what I found through the American Immigration Council:
Applying for a U.S. Green Card is generally complex, requiring extensive documentation, strict eligibility criteria, and multiple forms (often I-130 and I-485). Costs typically range from $2,000 to over $5,000, including filing fees, medical exams, and potential legal fees. Processing times vary widely, spanning from roughly 7 months to several years.
Complexity Process: Involves filing an immigrant petition and a "Green Card application" (Form I-485).
Requirements: Requires strict documentation of identity, relationship (if family-based), and financial support.
Medical Exam: Applicants must undergo a medical examination by a government-authorized surgeon.
Difficulty: It is considered challenging, and errors can result in significant delays, financial loss, or removal proceedings.
Costs Filing Fees (USCIS): For an adjustment of status (inside the U.S.), filing fees are often around $1,760.Total Costs: Including medical exams, legal assistance, and translation services, family-based applications often cost $2,500–$3,500, while employment-based can be $2,000–$5,000+.
Other Fees: Optional services like Premium Processing ($2,805) or Filing I-601A Waivers ($795) can add to the total cost.
Timeframe Overall Processing: The time to receive a Green Card can be anywhere from 7 to 33 months.
Employment-Based: First preference categories can take 6–8 months.
Family/Other Categories: These can take much longer, with some categories taking several years.
Final Step: Once approved, the card is often received within 90 days of entering the U.S. or paying the immigrant fee.
Fascists typically are more interested in pushing their propaganda than telling the truth. trump and his regime are facists.
Socialism... Privatized profits + Socialized losses. Oh wait, that's "Democratic Socialism".
We are losing filed workers here in Idaho.
No Dave that came from AI and also carries the statement that persons born in the US are granted citizenship but doesn't say anything about forcing a person to accept. For someone who says they believe in individual rights you want to force citizenship on someone who doesn't choose to become a citizen.
PL, We have needed comprehensive immigration reform for decades. Several democrat administration did nothing except grant a temporary exemption then kicked it down the road. The republicans will not do a thing on advancing reform since GWB tried to get something done and got shot down by his own party.
Two much aggressive opinions to get much done because it is an attack point. Politicians don't like to participate in anything that may cause them to do something because it may affect their wealth. I agree with what you posted especially the first part about comprehensive reform but it will take a strong leader to do that and there doesn't seem to be any candidates to step up.
Possum... there's more. Ppl from India seeking EB Visas, for skilled workers, face an 80 year backlog, effectively making immigration not possible.
Ppl from Mexico wanting to do the right thing and immigrate to get a better life for their family face a Class F/Family Visa backlog of 20+ years.
And those wait times vary all over the world, by country, the whim of a president and many other factors. Applicants from South Africa, Norway, Denmark, and Germany do not face such backlogs because not enough people from those countries wish to immigrate to the US for some reason.
Currently there is also a total suspension on ANY immigration from 75 different countries worldwide. You can guess which countries these encompass.
-FJ just described the corporate bailouts from Wall Street bailouts for their subprime mortgages, massive investment bank failures, weak regulatory oversight, and heavy, debt-financed spending on wars and tax cuts.
It's called CORPORATE WELFARE, not democratic socialism. No wonder the habitual liar ignores it's actual and stated aims.
Maybe he need bold font to see it? Naw, even a bold font can't penetrate the closed authoritarian mind convinced it has all the answers.
Public Healthcare, public education, voter rights, equal justice under law, fair and proportional representation in government, and public services are the duties of government under the provisions for regulation of commerce, fair taxes, and the general welfare clause in the Constitution.
A just and fair Democracy with civil liberties and equal rights is what democratic socialism is about. Of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Conservatism today offers only white, one-party, oligarchic, authoritarian rule by the rich.
-FJ prefers a corrupt Supreme Court, a Criminal president, a derelict Congress, gerrymandering, an antidemocratic Senate, and an antiquated electoral college imposed by SLAVE owners, all of which are now in service of the Criminal president and white supremacy.
So Skud, what you posted as your opinion, was something you found through AI, which itself always contains the caveat that it can be wrong. Couldn't you have just admitted early on that you had no Constitutional or legal basis?
Because that's the point of the current case before SCOTUS from the Trump Admin.
What I described was the Government takeover of their GOCOs (FANNIE/FREDDIE) to publicize the losses of their private operators (who merely followed all the rules and regulations that the government ordered them to do).
Cui bono, Joe?
By destroying the Voting Rights Act and ensuing white-washing of congress, conservatism today offers only white, one-party, oligarchic, authoritarian rule by "corporate persons" and the rich.
The rest of us? "Let them eat cake."
Post a Comment