Husker Red Til Dead
-
Posts
197 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Media Demo
Posts posted by Husker Red Til Dead
-
-
So say muslim cab owners wont let drunks in their cab ( happens in Minn a lot) or gay print shop owners wont print westboro baptist posters. Should they be forced to provide those services? I don't think so.
That court ruling was and is out of their bounds, they say what the law is, not make law. A problem we've had for sometime now.
The 1st protects flag burning. It's disrespectful to those that have bled and died in service of that flag. Disrespectful yes, illegal no.
Same with refusing service on religious beliefs. I see it as authoritarian govt overreach when the state tells private business to whom and when they can conduct business.
-
Okay, here goes:
NOTE: I should have initially qualified what I said here to mean members of Congress, both the House and Senate.
The Republican Utopia
* "Dangerous" non-whites are completely removed from America.
Black people are exterminated out-right.
Brown people are killed and/or rounded up and shipped back to their country of origin.
* Non-christians are either forced to convert or are jailed or killed.
* People who are gay, transgender, queer, non-binary, etc are forced to become straight or are killed.
* No minimum wage. It'll be completely up to corporations and companies what to pay their employees.
* No ethics committees to oversee them and make it impossible to get any information on what they do.
* Remove all regulations governing safety of employees, abolish vacation time, over-time pay.
* Legalize discrimination against anyone non-white and non-Christian and call it "religious freedom."
* Deny people of non-Christian faiths the right to practice their religion. (Mostly this refers to Islam.)
* Abolish science as a subject taught in schools and completely forbid teaching evolution.
* Make studying the bible, praying in public schools, and teaching creationism a part of the core learning.
* Outlaw protests against them and make obtaining permits for any protest nearly impossible to get.
* Revoke citizenship or jail anyone who burns the American flag.
I'm sure there are more, but those are what I can think of, off the top of my head because those subjects have all come up recently.
Well...I'm conservative and at one time was a Republican. I believe the Republican party has lost it's way and isn't something I can vote for.
But...your post is out in la la land on the subject.
This would be akin to me claiming Obama is Muslim and wants install Sharia law in the US and Democrats have been planning this for 40 years when they first brought him from Kenya as a child prodigy to ultimately destroy America.
Except, there are stories from CNN and other sites where Republicans are actually talking about doing many of the things I mentioned.
Legalizing religious based discrimination: https://www.texastribune.org/2016/02/17/senate-republicans-zeroing-religious-freedom-bills/
Burn the American flag, go to jail: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/29/politics/donald-trump-flag-burning-penalty-proposal/index.html
So you are for the first amendment ..but not really?
The first article is pro-14th amendment and the second is pro-1st amendment. I don't see your point.
I guess I see the texas tribune article and the cnn piece both as 1st amendment issues. How is it a 14th issue?
-
Okay, here goes:
NOTE: I should have initially qualified what I said here to mean members of Congress, both the House and Senate.
The Republican Utopia
* "Dangerous" non-whites are completely removed from America.
Black people are exterminated out-right.
Brown people are killed and/or rounded up and shipped back to their country of origin.
* Non-christians are either forced to convert or are jailed or killed.
* People who are gay, transgender, queer, non-binary, etc are forced to become straight or are killed.
* No minimum wage. It'll be completely up to corporations and companies what to pay their employees.
* No ethics committees to oversee them and make it impossible to get any information on what they do.
* Remove all regulations governing safety of employees, abolish vacation time, over-time pay.
* Legalize discrimination against anyone non-white and non-Christian and call it "religious freedom."
* Deny people of non-Christian faiths the right to practice their religion. (Mostly this refers to Islam.)
* Abolish science as a subject taught in schools and completely forbid teaching evolution.
* Make studying the bible, praying in public schools, and teaching creationism a part of the core learning.
* Outlaw protests against them and make obtaining permits for any protest nearly impossible to get.
* Revoke citizenship or jail anyone who burns the American flag.
I'm sure there are more, but those are what I can think of, off the top of my head because those subjects have all come up recently.
Well...I'm conservative and at one time was a Republican. I believe the Republican party has lost it's way and isn't something I can vote for.
But...your post is out in la la land on the subject.
This would be akin to me claiming Obama is Muslim and wants install Sharia law in the US and Democrats have been planning this for 40 years when they first brought him from Kenya as a child prodigy to ultimately destroy America.
Except, there are stories from CNN and other sites where Republicans are actually talking about doing many of the things I mentioned.
Legalizing religious based discrimination: https://www.texastribune.org/2016/02/17/senate-republicans-zeroing-religious-freedom-bills/
Burn the American flag, go to jail: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/29/politics/donald-trump-flag-burning-penalty-proposal/index.html
So you are for the first amendment ..but not really?
-
I agree with my man Ron on this one.
-
1
-
-
Mnuchin lied too, for those still in "give him a chance" mode. He stated very clearly his bank did NOT use robo-signing of foreclosures to exploit people. Well guess what...
Speak of the devil....
Bunch of slimy liars, IMO, from the top on down.
I remember Trumps attacks on Cruz for being bought by the "banks" in the primaries. Now ,this guy is a possible cabinet member...smdh
-
Good on him for doing that.
-
1
-
-
Where do I get one of them "ostrich rides" ya'll been talkin bout?
-
1
-
-
-
I have no idea, but I personally don't like that question either. How is it relevant?Can anyone enlighten me on whether or not in previous detentions/interviews a refuge/immigrant was asked specifically "what their feelings were on Obamas' America"? Seems odd to me that one of the questions being asked of these folks is what they think of Trumps leadership.
Seems cult-like, and knowing him as we do at this point, he doesn't exactly have a positive bias toward anyone who disagrees with him.
It seems downright fascist.
We are rapidly approaching a world in which fealty to the Executive is a requirement. All of us can choose to tolerate this, or not. We cannot be so dense so as not to recognize the erosion of liberty when we see it.
The fact that there have been protests at these levels since November, without military/executive punishments for protesting, proves we are not even remotely close to a fascist level.
Good point as well!
-
I have no idea, but I personally don't like that question either. How is it relevant?Can anyone enlighten me on whether or not in previous detentions/interviews a refuge/immigrant was asked specifically "what their feelings were on Obamas' America"? Seems odd to me that one of the questions being asked of these folks is what they think of Trumps leadership.
Seems cult-like, and knowing him as we do at this point, he doesn't exactly have a positive bias toward anyone who disagrees with him.
We are rapidly approaching a world in which fealty to the Executive is a requirement. All of us can choose to tolerate this, or not. We cannot be so dense so as not to recognize the erosion of liberty when we see it.
Spot on sir!
-
And I'M not trying to be difficult, but Husker Red Til Dead and ColoNoCoHusker, one of you has to get a new avatar. I'll even make it for you if you know what you want.
Mine's better lol
-
1
-
-
So my turn to stir the pot. Has anyone bothered checking to see if any other presidents have banned immigration? FDR is a gimme, so that doesn't count.
Immigration really wasn't halted under FDR inasmuch as international travel was not really possible. The Bracero program basically removed the border with Mexico to increase non-immigrant laborers to replace agricultural workers lost to the war effort.
Off the top of my head, there was the Chinese exclusion act, I believe in the 1800s there was something to limit Southern Europeans (might just be quota system), and then a temporary halt post-9/11 but the latter was more of a travel issue. Will add links when I get back...
And that's answering my other post even if Knapp stole my thunder a bit
Hope you're feeling better.EDIT:
Here's some links, outright bans are absent in the modern era, few & far between before that at a Federal level. In the 1800s, a lot of states passed immigration but those were eliminated by the Supreme Court as a Federal responsibility.
http://www.fairus.org/facts/us_laws
http://cis.org/ImmigrationHistoryOverview
To be honest, I dont think bans work. There have been cases of homegrown terrorists already, they dont have to be imported. One of the dangers of living in a free society.
Those are not outright immigration bans by the POTUS.
One is an order supporting UN travel ban and sanctions. The other two are excluding individuals who committed specific intolerable acts.
None of these are the POTUS banning immigration, definitely not arbitrarily banning ALL immigration from specific country.
I don't want to get into an argument over semantics, but they were still officially trying to keep people from entering the country.
So having specific requirements an individual needs to meet to immigrate to this country is functionally equivalent to banning say ALL immigration into this country? I am not trying to be difficult, I just do not see how that is semantics...
Managing immigration is way different than banning it. It is the difference between say having felony convictions or never being arrested... I appreciate your thoughts.
My point was that we have had immigration restrictions before. A ban is still a ban ,even if its only for say, men of a certain age, etc .etc.
-
So my turn to stir the pot. Has anyone bothered checking to see if any other presidents have banned immigration? FDR is a gimme, so that doesn't count.
Immigration really wasn't halted under FDR inasmuch as international travel was not really possible. The Bracero program basically removed the border with Mexico to increase non-immigrant laborers to replace agricultural workers lost to the war effort.
Off the top of my head, there was the Chinese exclusion act, I believe in the 1800s there was something to limit Southern Europeans (might just be quota system), and then a temporary halt post-9/11 but the latter was more of a travel issue. Will add links when I get back...
And that's answering my other post even if Knapp stole my thunder a bit
Hope you're feeling better.EDIT:
Here's some links, outright bans are absent in the modern era, few & far between before that at a Federal level. In the 1800s, a lot of states passed immigration but those were eliminated by the Supreme Court as a Federal responsibility.
http://www.fairus.org/facts/us_laws
http://cis.org/ImmigrationHistoryOverview
To be honest, I dont think bans work. There have been cases of homegrown terrorists already, they dont have to be imported. One of the dangers of living in a free society.
Those are not outright immigration bans by the POTUS.
One is an order supporting UN travel ban and sanctions. The other two are excluding individuals who committed specific intolerable acts.
None of these are the POTUS banning immigration, definitely not arbitrarily banning ALL immigration from specific country.
I don't want to get into an argument over semantics, but they were still officially trying to keep people from entering the country.
-
Donald Trump: The Religious Right's Trojan Horse
There's a lot in this article. One passage that caught my eye is this one. It describes the way the Justice Department was transformed under Bush (that guy we're missing all of a sudden?), something that is at risk to happen once again. If not because it is Trump's personal mission -- on some level I doubt it is -- then because it is the objective of those he trusts with power.
“The division is bringing fewer voting rights and employment cases involving systematic discrimination against African-Americans and more alleging reverse discrimination against whites and religious discrimination against Christians,” reported Charlie Savage, then with The Boston Globe (now at The Times), in 2006. Something similar can be expected under Mr. Sessions.
I never bought into Trump being a christian. Especially after he said "two Corinthians" speaking at a christian university .
-
2
-
-
So my turn to stir the pot. Has anyone bothered checking to see if any other presidents have banned immigration? FDR is a gimme, so that doesn't count.
Immigration really wasn't halted under FDR inasmuch as international travel was not really possible. The Bracero program basically removed the border with Mexico to increase non-immigrant laborers to replace agricultural workers lost to the war effort.
Off the top of my head, there was the Chinese exclusion act, I believe in the 1800s there was something to limit Southern Europeans (might just be quota system), and then a temporary halt post-9/11 but the latter was more of a travel issue. Will add links when I get back...
And that's answering my other post even if Knapp stole my thunder a bit
Hope you're feeling better.EDIT:
Here's some links, outright bans are absent in the modern era, few & far between before that at a Federal level. In the 1800s, a lot of states passed immigration but those were eliminated by the Supreme Court as a Federal responsibility.
http://www.fairus.org/facts/us_laws
http://cis.org/ImmigrationHistoryOverview
To be honest, I dont think bans work. There have been cases of homegrown terrorists already, they dont have to be imported. One of the dangers of living in a free society.
-
2
-
-
I do actually. Any human with great power should be under some sort of scrutiny.
Im not that concerned with DeVos, her known policies dont raise my eyebrows. Bannon ruined what Breitbart used to be. But neither was convicted of blowing up govt buildings.
Replying to Knapp , forgot to quote
-
Russia is not to be trusted, Putin is a KGB snake. Also, IMO, McCain is another poster boy for term limits
-
So my turn to stir the pot. Has anyone bothered checking to see if any other presidents have banned immigration? FDR is a gimme, so that doesn't count.
-
What did you imagine, out of curiosity, and why?
I figured the Bill of rights to be decimated i.e. speech, guns, due process etc., government control over personal property and the like. The rhetoric the dems were throwing with the help of main stream media and hollywood. It had seemed as if Obama was going to have carte blanche with his agenda, and the "right" could pound sand
I recall the rhetoric over Obama/Dems & 2nd Amendment issues. Outside of massively unfounded propaganda, I do not recall anything Obama actually said in his campaign to justify his wanting to dismantle any of the other Amendments. What specifically made you believe the bolded?
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press
Amendment 2 - The Right to Bear Arms
Amendment 3 - The Housing of Soldiers
Amendment 4 - Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
Amendment 5 - Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property
Amendment 6 - Rights of Accused Persons in Criminal Cases
Amendment 7 - Rights in Civil Cases
Amendment 8 - Excessive Bail, Fines, and Punishments Forbidden
Amendment 9 - Other Rights Kept by the People
Amendment 10 - Undelegated Powers Kept by the States and the People
This article sums it up fairly good
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-obama-legacy-an-assault-on-the-bill-of-rights/article/2601342
That was an article written in 2016 and takes a lot of liberties besides being way after either of Obama's elections. To be more explicit in my original question: During the 2008 and/or 2012 Presidential election cycles, what specifically did Obama say/do that made you believe he would be dismantling the Bill of Rights as you believed? I am trying to understand at the time cast your vote; anecdotal answer is fine...
I am not trying to pick on you and you are welcome to ignore this. I am interested in your response if you are willing to continue...
Trying to remember 2008...
Hindsight is 20/20 so they say.I believe it was his views towards the wars ,universal healthcare being forced upon everyone that i disliked the most, plus his "acquaintances" that had anti American leanings like bill ayers ,jeremiah wright. So at the time ,that was enough reason for me.
would've replied sooner but I caught the flu bug..yay
-
There's always Article V of the constitution, it's a safeguard for runaway govt.
-
I had my problems with Bush as well. The Patriot Act and TARP being the biggest.
Right there with you, brother. The strange thing is how on board I was with it all at the time.
Patriotism is one of those words that's so powerful, and so dangerous when co-opted. To hold patriotism and "total allegiance" to be our national bedrock...it's all nothing too new, I suppose, but a bit like a horror movie.
And I think it does inspire feelings of revulsion and horror in a lot of Americans. Even those of us who would disagree on many other policy points. It's just good to find common ground. (Echo knapp's edit above wholeheartedly
)“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
and you as well Zoog
-
1
-
-
I bet there is some, such as your self, that feel the exact same way a lot us did 2008. Being told that the president is going too "fundamentally change the country" was unsettling at best. I know its hearsay now but it wasn't as bad as I had imagined.
And I'm sure a LOT of people voted for Trump as the opposite of Obama. But the problem with this is, Obama never ran on a platform of fundamentally changing America. His 2008 platform was:
And I posted his platform. So you're right he used those words, and to you that means he said he was going to do things similar to what Trump has done in just his first few days:
Registering immigrants
Build a wall and make Mexico pay for it
Ban Muslims from entering America
Put a gag order in effect on America's government departments
Enable climate change deniers
Threaten "send in the Feds" on cities he disagrees with
These are not remotely the same things. One (Obama) was accused of being a dictator. The other (Trump) is actually in fact behaving like a dictator.
EDIT - just want to point out that, while it appears we may disagree politically, it is a pleasure to discuss this with someone who brings salient, supported facts to the discussion. Keep this up!
Ditto Knapp
-
1
-
-
What did you imagine, out of curiosity, and why?
I figured the Bill of rights to be decimated i.e. speech, guns, due process etc., government control over personal property and the like. The rhetoric the dems were throwing with the help of main stream media and hollywood. It had seemed as if Obama was going to have carte blanche with his agenda, and the "right" could pound sand
I recall the rhetoric over Obama/Dems & 2nd Amendment issues. Outside of massively unfounded propaganda, I do not recall anything Obama actually said in his campaign to justify his wanting to dismantle any of the other Amendments. What specifically made you believe the bolded?
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press
Amendment 2 - The Right to Bear Arms
Amendment 3 - The Housing of Soldiers
Amendment 4 - Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
Amendment 5 - Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property
Amendment 6 - Rights of Accused Persons in Criminal Cases
Amendment 7 - Rights in Civil Cases
Amendment 8 - Excessive Bail, Fines, and Punishments Forbidden
Amendment 9 - Other Rights Kept by the People
Amendment 10 - Undelegated Powers Kept by the States and the People
This article sums it up fairly good
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-obama-legacy-an-assault-on-the-bill-of-rights/article/2601342
-
He never closed gitmo...
I'm quite obviously referring to him signing an executive order that intended to close it within a year.
I figured the Bill of rights to be decimated i.e. speech, guns, due process etc., government control over personal property and the like.
Well, that's just absolutely absurd and has, nor had, no bearing on reality.
HAAHAHAHAHA
The Republican Utopia
in Politics & Religion
Posted
No, humans have traded and bartered since the beginning of time.