RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


bounty44 -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 5:12:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
The answer is 'Yes'. Conservatives and libertarians needs things decided for them. They need a central authority to decide what is 'good' and what is 'not good' for them. Because they seem to lack intellectual skills these days. For if they had such skills, they would know the bullshit being shoveled around by the puppet masters in their political organizations and think tanks!

Go big brother!
What next re-education camps?



Didn't say the government wanted that, but if we need the government to tell us what to think, since you think our ideas are so dangerous, doesn't it make sense to have a means to re-educate the wrong thinking among us.
Are you so out of touch with reality that you don't understand that you are advocating having the government do our thinking for us?


the desire to control other people is in their dna.




mnottertail -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 8:48:06 AM)

As we can tell from their creation of big government, government agencies and cabinet positions, pretty much overwhelmingly republicans.




CreativeDominant -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 9:01:58 AM)

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson admitted Tuesday that the administration goofed in releasing an illegal immigrant to sanctuary city San Francisco ahead of a shocking murder earlier this month, but said there’s little the government can do to pressure sanctuary communities to change their minds...
(Goofed? Really? How about "we fucked up big-time"?)

...But he declined to criticize sanctuary cities themselves, and told Congress not to try to pass laws forcing cooperation, saying it could conflict with the Constitution, and it won’t win over the hearts of reluctant communities...

(We wouldn't want to upset the liberal leaders of these cities)

“My hope is that jurisdictions like San Francisco — San Francisco County — will cooperate with our new program,” he told the House Judiciary Committee. “I’m making the rounds with a lot of jurisdictions. My deputy secretary and I and other leaders in DHS have been very, very active for the purpose of promoting public safety to get jurisdictions to cooperate with us on this.”

He said several dozen jurisdictions who had previously refused to cooperate have already signed up or signaled interest in working with the new Priority Enforcement Program.

Republicans doubted that asking nicely would work with the five cities and counties that have turned Mr. Johnson down already, and they wondered why he and President Obama didn’t want to get tougher on the recalcitrant ones...

(Again...they wouldn't want to upset the liberal leaders of these cities. And this administration's sympathies are clearly in line with 'sanctuary city' policies, despite Federal law)

Now, Steinle’s slaying — and the suspect, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, deported five times before and out on the streets after San Francisco refused to hold him for pickup by immigration agents — has put attention on victims of illegal immigration.

Lopez-Sanchez had just completed a federal prison sentence for one of his many illegal entries into the U.S., and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents had asked the Bureau of Prisons to hold him for them to come pick up.

Instead, the bureau shipped him to San Francisco, which wanted him on a decades-old drug warrant. But San Francisco canceled that charge and, despite another request from ICE that Lopez-Sanchez be held for pickup, released him per its sanctuary policy.

Mr. Johnson said his department and the Bureau of Prisons should be talking these issues out better, and said some sort of discretion is probably needed so the bureau would have prioritized the homeland security claim over San Francisco‘s...

(gee...ya think? Homeland being a priority over an old warrant in a known 'sanctuary city'?)

The Bureau of Prisons didn’t respond to messages seeking comment on how it handled the case.

(They're probably too busy...making sure prisoners go to the right place, you know?)

...Mr. Johnson said he hasn’t yet contacted Steinle’s family, and didn’t know if anyone else in the administration had. That drew criticism from Rep. Steve Chabot, an Ohio Republican who said administration officials managed to reach out to families of those involved in high-profile encounters with the police in recent months, and said it would be good to make similar overtures in this instance.

“Perhaps they need to do that. I would strongly recommend that,” he said.

(Why would they contact the family? She was a white girl (privileged), not shot by a cop (therefore, no police 'brutality' to swoop down on in righteous indignation), shot by one of those 'poor, misunderstood, undocumented citizens-to-be (a fave of this administration). There are no political points to be made here)

...Sanctuary cities have bedeviled the Obama administration for years.

Even as it sued Arizona, arguing it didn’t want a patchwork of immigration laws, the administration allowed cities and counties to refuse to cooperate.

(We don't want a patchwork of laws...unless it goes hand in hand with our agenda)

In 2012, John Morton, then-director of ICE, told Congress he was pushing within the administration to punish sanctuary cities, but signaled the Justice Department was blocking that...

(Eric Holder's DOJ...anyone surprised by that?)

...Mr. Johnson said they are approaching 31,000 beds being used on an average day — more than the 27,000 being held at the beginning of the year but still short of the 34,000 beds that Congress has mandated the department keep.

Even as it leaves beds unused, the department continues to release immigrants with serious criminal records who go on to commit more crimes.

More than 1,000 criminal aliens released into the community while awaiting deportation in 2014 were convicted of still more crimes after their release, including kidnapping, sexual assault against a child and vehicular homicide, according to statistics released Tuesday by Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte...

(But how can that be? We've been told they just want to live peacefully...that Trump was wrong to label some of them as rapists and killers)

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/14/sanctuary-cities-beyond-federal-control-homeland-s/




Sanity -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 9:02:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
The answer is 'Yes'. Conservatives and libertarians needs things decided for them. They need a central authority to decide what is 'good' and what is 'not good' for them. Because they seem to lack intellectual skills these days. For if they had such skills, they would know the bullshit being shoveled around by the puppet masters in their political organizations and think tanks!

Go big brother!
What next re-education camps?



Didn't say the government wanted that, but if we need the government to tell us what to think, since you think our ideas are so dangerous, doesn't it make sense to have a means to re-educate the wrong thinking among us.
Are you so out of touch with reality that you don't understand that you are advocating having the government do our thinking for us?


the desire to control other people is in their dna.


It is

Theyre not all so stupid that they so readily admit to it though, they would rather Gruber the people along until they have the power to actually do it




KenDckey -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 12:22:07 PM)

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/watch-dhs-admits-to-gowdy-it-wont-force-sanctuary-cities-to-comply/article/2568265

Sounds like DOJ won't uphold their constitutional obligation.




mnottertail -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 2:11:54 PM)

It appears the reason they wont hold it up is due to supreme court rulings on what is their constitutional obligation.




KenDckey -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 2:26:48 PM)

How about enforce the law and let the courts decide or is that too simple




Politesub53 -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 4:14:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Twilight zone ? Some days his posts are more like twilight central.

No slave states in the west.....Its a true classic. He wants to read the main reason Mississippi wanted to secede.


As always

Conservatives post about issues

Leftists post about conservatives

Mississippi was out west? Not by 1861.
Don't remember anyone saying there were no slave states in the west, though Texas was the only one.
I did say that the west was not settled and cleared with slave labor.
Texas was already a Mexican state when the American slave owners got there.



Lmfao....... you need to re-read your posts brains and come to that US history..




Politesub53 -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/15/2015 4:15:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Twilight zone ? Some days his posts are more like twilight central.

No slave states in the west.....Its a true classic. He wants to read the main reason Mississippi wanted to secede.


As always

Conservatives post about issues

Leftists post about conservatives


Hahahahahahahaha
Yes because calling the guardian link a left wing rag is discussing the issue....
ttp://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4823783


Oh come on Lucy........ you know that is allowed because the great Sanity posted it. Although he still has trouble telling left from right, politically speaking.

Come on bruv, lets build some bridges..... At least you woud have somewhere to sleep under. [;)]




mnottertail -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/16/2015 10:56:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

How about enforce the law and let the courts decide or is that too simple



As I pointed out, the courts have decided. Over, on to the next thing. Or............here is a novel idea!!! Make a law!




KenDckey -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/16/2015 11:01:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

How about enforce the law and let the courts decide or is that too simple



As I pointed out, the courts have decided. Over, on to the next thing. Or............here is a novel idea!!! Make a law!



Otter I know you have read the 4th amendment or has SCOTUS decided that it is irrelivant too?




mnottertail -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/16/2015 11:14:34 AM)

Pretty much, those rightwingers are legislating from the bench constantly.




joether -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/16/2015 2:55:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
The answer is 'Yes'. Conservatives and libertarians needs things decided for them. They need a central authority to decide what is 'good' and what is 'not good' for them. Because they seem to lack intellectual skills these days. For if they had such skills, they would know the bullshit being shoveled around by the puppet masters in their political organizations and think tanks!

Go big brother!
What next re-education camps?



Didn't say the government wanted that, but if we need the government to tell us what to think, since you think our ideas are so dangerous, doesn't it make sense to have a means to re-educate the wrong thinking among us.
Are you so out of touch with reality that you don't understand that you are advocating having the government do our thinking for us?


the desire to control other people is in their dna.


I've been on the notion that each of us should be as educated as we can. To help others 'get up to speed' on information related to government. To be....well informed citizens....as a measure against evil, sadistic, cruel, and/or tyrannical government. How many of you understand the Affordable Care Act of 2010? None of you! Who has had correct all the misunderstandings of the law? Whom has had to correct the political bullshit being slung with the actual facts? Me!

Do I get any created for my efforts? Course not.....

Because its easier for most of you to be totally ignorant and easily manipulated. Hence why the GOP/TP have controlled conservatives and libertarians for so long and so easily. To a smaller extent, the DNC does the same towards liberals and moderates. Yes, I've had to correct liberals on the ACAA as well. Usually they got bullshit for the limits and concepts. To which I would explain carefully why each is as it is. And WHOM did that....

The desire to control one's destiny, future and fate, is within each person. Some are just more ambitious with that desire than others. In the framework of D/s, is there not a desire to control things in a Safe, Sane, Consensual way? That we should have school teachers controlling children so they learn well? That police control the streets let alone the morons that drive through red lights at 90 mph? Of our military officers making sure our troops are not thrown away like the rush on Red Square in World War 2 (the opening firefight scene from the movie "The Enemy at the Gate").

We all like to control things. Is it nature or nurture is hard to say. My cats have a 'catch and release' policy with mice in my house. They catch them, then play with them, release them, chase them again. Is that not a controlling aspect found in nature? There is only one animal on the planet that can kill all life in 42.3 minutes flat....

Even on those firearm debates I'm surprised at the lack of education and knowledge. While there exist quite a depth of knowledge for firearms themselves; the actual language and understanding of the 18th century viewpoint and the 2015 are very different. I would think it would be quite in-depth. But never goes lower than the surface. Really disappointing. But that is because people seem to like being ignorant and manipulated to things.




joether -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/16/2015 3:07:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Pretty much, those rightwingers are legislating from the bench constantly.


Heller vs District of Columbia comes to mind.....

In that the Justices made a political ruling, NOT, a constitutional one. Makes it more curious was the timing: 2006. What was going on in 2006? The Republicans were losing across the board to Democrats and needed a 'win' to generate support for the mid-term elections (which they would lose). The case was taken after the lower courts both ruled in favor of DC. Which is a rarity for the US Supreme Court to do, but not unheard. Scalia, led the charge on the verdict (i.e. mouthpiece of the GOP in the US Supreme Court).

Mr. Heller was considered a US Citizen like any other person. Just because his day job (special operations for the DC police) allowed a firearm; him as a citizen was not. He wanted to have a firearm because he was part of "A well regulated militia". However, the firearm to be used, was not part of that militia in any form. By legal standing and understanding of the 2nd amendment, that second gun would not be protected under the 2nd BECAUSE it was not used directly or indirectly with regards to "A well regulated militia...". If Mr. Heller was so convinced, there was another action open to him at the time: Legislation. That would mean getting like-minded individuals to convince other people to change existing laws, rather than, legislating from the bench. Conservatives hate it when liberal judges do it; therefore, they should ALSO, hate it when conservative activist judges do it as well. Which they dont, and hence, become hypocrites!





BamaD -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/16/2015 3:27:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Pretty much, those rightwingers are legislating from the bench constantly.


Heller vs District of Columbia comes to mind.....

In that the Justices made a political ruling, NOT, a constitutional one. Makes it more curious was the timing: 2006. What was going on in 2006? The Republicans were losing across the board to Democrats and needed a 'win' to generate support for the mid-term elections (which they would lose). The case was taken after the lower courts both ruled in favor of DC. Which is a rarity for the US Supreme Court to do, but not unheard. Scalia, led the charge on the verdict (i.e. mouthpiece of the GOP in the US Supreme Court).

Mr. Heller was considered a US Citizen like any other person. Just because his day job (special operations for the DC police) allowed a firearm; him as a citizen was not. He wanted to have a firearm because he was part of "A well regulated militia". However, the firearm to be used, was not part of that militia in any form. By legal standing and understanding of the 2nd amendment, that second gun would not be protected under the 2nd BECAUSE it was not used directly or indirectly with regards to "A well regulated militia...". If Mr. Heller was so convinced, there was another action open to him at the time: Legislation. That would mean getting like-minded individuals to convince other people to change existing laws, rather than, legislating from the bench. Conservatives hate it when liberal judges do it; therefore, they should ALSO, hate it when conservative activist judges do it as well. Which they dont, and hence, become hypocrites!



So you fall back on your lame anti gun arguments when trying to defend the indefensible.




KenDckey -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/16/2015 4:34:02 PM)

and here I thought comma's between thoughts meant something different than between adj's

Joe you have no clue do you? Is it your liberal education or what? Also I thought this was about sanctuary cities and not gun rights. oh wait run rights has the word right in it. maybe that is it




thishereboi -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/17/2015 2:57:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
The answer is 'Yes'. Conservatives and libertarians needs things decided for them. They need a central authority to decide what is 'good' and what is 'not good' for them. Because they seem to lack intellectual skills these days. For if they had such skills, they would know the bullshit being shoveled around by the puppet masters in their political organizations and think tanks!

Go big brother!
What next re-education camps?



Didn't say the government wanted that, but if we need the government to tell us what to think, since you think our ideas are so dangerous, doesn't it make sense to have a means to re-educate the wrong thinking among us.
Are you so out of touch with reality that you don't understand that you are advocating having the government do our thinking for us?


the desire to control other people is in their dna.


I've been on the notion that each of us should be as educated as we can. To help others 'get up to speed' on information related to government. To be....well informed citizens....as a measure against evil, sadistic, cruel, and/or tyrannical government. How many of you understand the Affordable Care Act of 2010? None of you! Who has had correct all the misunderstandings of the law? Whom has had to correct the political bullshit being slung with the actual facts? Me!

Do I get any created for my efforts? Course not.....

Because its easier for most of you to be totally ignorant and easily manipulated. Hence why the GOP/TP have controlled conservatives and libertarians for so long and so easily. To a smaller extent, the DNC does the same towards liberals and moderates. Yes, I've had to correct liberals on the ACAA as well. Usually they got bullshit for the limits and concepts. To which I would explain carefully why each is as it is. And WHOM did that....

The desire to control one's destiny, future and fate, is within each person. Some are just more ambitious with that desire than others. In the framework of D/s, is there not a desire to control things in a Safe, Sane, Consensual way? That we should have school teachers controlling children so they learn well? That police control the streets let alone the morons that drive through red lights at 90 mph? Of our military officers making sure our troops are not thrown away like the rush on Red Square in World War 2 (the opening firefight scene from the movie "The Enemy at the Gate").

We all like to control things. Is it nature or nurture is hard to say. My cats have a 'catch and release' policy with mice in my house. They catch them, then play with them, release them, chase them again. Is that not a controlling aspect found in nature? There is only one animal on the planet that can kill all life in 42.3 minutes flat....

Even on those firearm debates I'm surprised at the lack of education and knowledge. While there exist quite a depth of knowledge for firearms themselves; the actual language and understanding of the 18th century viewpoint and the 2015 are very different. I would think it would be quite in-depth. But never goes lower than the surface. Really disappointing. But that is because people seem to like being ignorant and manipulated to things.



wow Joe, I never realized you were the only one who truly understood the ACA. What a fucking burden to carry. Perhaps you should contact the DNC and see if they have a spot for you. Maybe you could be the czar of arrogance?




bounty44 -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/17/2015 3:27:59 AM)

I think the people in the dnc know the difference between who and whom though, so he'd have some catching up to do...

if you are reading this comrade penguin, nothing you said really refutes my point about leftists desire to control other people being in their dna and some of it, even though you used the same words, is actually off-topic. if you want to have an "in-depth" conversation about it, you know, the kind you apparently crave, I invite you to start a new thread on it.

and since the thread's gotten removed you might not have seen my also inviting you to start a thread on exactly how Christianity has interfered with medical research and treatment in general, and with stem cells in particular.

I like to think you'd be capable of learning how the other half thinks so to speak, or what the other half knows, but im skeptical...however, the thread would at least be good for many of the rest of us.




Kirata -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/17/2015 4:33:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Whom has had to correct the political bullshit being slung with the actual facts? Me!

Do I get any created for my efforts? Course not.....

What did you want created?

K.





CreativeDominant -> RE: Thank God for Sanctuary Cities (7/17/2015 5:37:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Whom has had to correct the political bullshit being slung with the actual facts? Me!

Do I get any created for my efforts? Course not.....

What did you want created?

K.



A platform for his massive ego...since its yet-to-be-proven that there's any legitimate underpinnings to it?




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625