# Cost Of Illegal Immigration Clock



## Hossfly (Oct 27, 2019)

This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.

$8-9 thousand a second.


The Cost of Illegal Immigration Clock


----------



## DGS49 (Oct 27, 2019)

But...but...but, everyone KNOWS the real number is "only" eleven million!!!


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Oct 31, 2019)

You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not condemning you.  I'm pointing out that if you want to be honest about it, there is a bit of bias in anything John Tanton financed.  Secondly, there is no point peeing down peoples neck and telling them this is about anything less that racial preservation.  America was founded on the twin pillars of race and religion, so it's time to put this subject into its proper perspective.


----------



## pismoe (Nov 1, 2019)

GOOD for John Tanton .   Looks like he can fund anything he likes same as 'soros' and the 'bush' familia   Porter .


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 1, 2019)

pismoe said:


> GOOD for John Tanton .   Looks like he can fund anything he likes same as 'soros' and the 'bush' familia   Porter .



I just think we ought to be clear about what it is we're actually advocating.  As David Lane once expressed it:

_"We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children"_

As long as people aren't selling this double minded swill about not having objections to people coming here all "_legal"_ like and all, I'm content to take people at their word.  It's when they advocate enforcing laws, put into place by Democrats, designed to dilute the white vote and make whites the minority that I am skeptical of this whole MAGA thing and the supposed "_costs_" of so - called _"illegal_" immigration (which is near impossible feat to accomplish.)  

There are costs for undocumented foreigners to be here.  At the same time, the ledger sheet has *TWO* columns and when you look at both sides, it is advantageous and profitable for business and low income Americans to have access to the el cheapo labor.  Does that make it good for our country?  Hell NO.  

We're losing our culture and our heritage, but our worst problem is in depending upon government to solve an issue we can best resolve for ourselves without government intervention.


----------



## pismoe (Nov 1, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > GOOD for John Tanton .   Looks like he can fund anything he likes same as 'soros' and the 'bush' familia   Porter .
> ...


--------------------------------  hey Sir , in my opinion the USA is done , bagged and cooked .   In my opinion .


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 1, 2019)

pismoe said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...



I agree.  That is why I oppose all these nutty ideas that increase the size, power and / or scope of government.  If the government needs a nickel to implement some new program they claim will benefit me, I know it's a freaking sham.


----------



## OnePercenter (Nov 1, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> 
> $8-9 thousand a second.
> 
> ...



Jail employers that knowingly hire illegals (including tRump) and you'll stop the clock in 30 days. 

While were at it, reverse the Republican worker visa program and and cancel the insane worker visa to US citizenship that tRump promotes and put real Americans back to work.

AMERICANS FIRST starts with workers.


----------



## OnePercenter (Nov 1, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Trusting Corporate America to do the right thing is the real FUCKING sham.


----------



## CWayne (Nov 1, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?
> 
> Don't get me wrong.  I'm not condemning you.  I'm pointing out that if you want to be honest about it, there is a bit of bias in anything John Tanton financed.  Secondly, there is no point peeing down peoples neck and telling them this is about anything less that racial preservation.  America was founded on the twin pillars of race and religion, so it's time to put this subject into its proper perspective.


You should get a look at the amount of money that is in play regarding open borders financed by Soros and friends.

Read all about it.

https://amzn.to/338BSkd


----------



## CWayne (Nov 1, 2019)

OnePercenter said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> ...


America first starts with a 20-year moratorium on ALL immigration to the USA.  Zero immigration for 20 years.


----------



## MaryL (Nov 1, 2019)

When I see democrats create sanctuary cities without actually asking us, I know this transcends democracy or freedom into an outrageous twilight zone of weirdness I cant comprehend. It shouldn't be happening,  empowering foreign nationals over poor Americans. Because, see all those homeless? They didn't get there magically. You did that if you are a liberal democrat. Happy?


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 1, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?
> 
> Don't get me wrong.  I'm not condemning you.  I'm pointing out that if you want to be honest about it, there is a bit of bias in anything John Tanton financed.  Secondly, there is no point peeing down peoples neck and telling them this is about anything less that racial preservation.  America was founded on the twin pillars of race and religion, so it's time to put this subject into its proper perspective.


America was founded on *legal immigration.*  And the information is provided by 3 government agencies, Yale and MIT. 325 billion in 10 months ain't chump change. At 60 billion per year for military spending, illegal aliens are eating up 4 years of defense spending in just 1 year.


----------



## MaryL (Nov 1, 2019)

I live with Hispanics, people that where here generations and I get it. My state, Colorado, is a Spanish derivative. But on the other hand, When I see Hispanics that have been here 150 years call illegal aliens from Mexico Wetbacks and they don't accept them, that is telling. Nobody I can find knew anything about sanctuary cities, nobody was ever asked about it. This is still a democracy, isn't it?   It doesn't seem that way...


----------



## MaryL (Nov 1, 2019)

What is the cost of Illegal immigration? Hmm Billions.Trillions.
People living in the streets dispossessed of their jobs and homes 
 And the loss of American culture, and how you put value on that?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 1, 2019)

OnePercenter said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> ...



If you believed in America first, you'd start with some American history lessons and some basic law.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 1, 2019)

CWayne said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?
> ...



Having been involved in this issue for the last four decades, I could tell your sources things they don't know.  Be very wary of making up your mind based solely on political propaganda.  Some of the people you rely on were on the left not that long ago - and past performance is a good indicator of future behavior.


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 1, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



School me.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 1, 2019)

OnePercenter said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > pismoe said:
> ...



Then boycott corporate America and embrace the free market along with supporting those of like mind.  Nobody is forcing you to business with anyone except that tax collectors and mandatory insurance.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 1, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > OnePercenter said:
> ...




School you on which aspect?  Most of what you've been told is probably in error unless it is citing sources prior to 1875.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 1, 2019)

CWayne said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



According to a report in today's news, the unemployment rate is at an 80 year all time low.  That is statistical ZERO unemployment, IF the figures were true.  So, here is your dilemma:

1) * IF* unemployment is at an all time low,  there are no good pretexts for this over-reaction to foreigners

2)  *IF* unemployment is at an all time low, how do you account for generational welfarites?

When Obama was president the unemployment rate was in double digits.  The people opposing the influx of foreigners would point out that once a person exhausted their unemployment benefits and quit looking for a job, they fell off the books for statistical purposes.

So, today either Trump is eliminating the pretext for sanctions on incoming foreigners *OR* his bean counters are lying just like Obama's were.  I would submit that Trump's bean counters are liars.  

We have generational welfarites and most of them are white males who do not want to work, sacrifice, and build something for themselves.  THAT is why they are relying on Uncle Scam to build the bigger and more intrusive government.  Rest assured, you cannot build a government big enough to save you from your own actions.


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 1, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Illegal is illegal and giving them free stuff is insanity. 275 billion by the end of the year is a lot of our tax money.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 2, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



1)  Illegal is not illegal if the statutes conflict with the Constitution

2)  Whoever is telling you that undocumented foreigners are getting free stuff is full of shit.  Use your head.  Don't let the NWO do a mind fuck on you:

We gave up the Right to Privacy, private property Rights, hogtied ourselves to a National ID / REAL ID Act - E Verify system which saved the 16th Amendment, the IRS and the income tax just to create SSN based National ID.  We done away with the concept of a presumption of innocence / innocent until proven guilty and have spent over a *TRILLION DOLLARS* with the creation and maintenance of the Dept. of Homeland (IN) Security and the Constitution Free Zone. 

The only thing we've accomplished so far is to screw ourselves out of much need privacy, anonymity and the freedom to move about if the SHTF and we have an internal war.   And today the right is STILL complaining that all their efforts did not achieve the desired results.

The right is beginning to sound like the left with their 40,000 plus federal, state, county, and city laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, edicts, Executive Orders, statutes, case law, etc. regarding gun control.  After all that time and money they have not gotten the "_sensible gun laws_" (note that term is in italics because their wording in stupid.)  After *TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS*, the creation of the ultimate *POLICE STATE*, and so many laws regarding "_immigration_" passed that we are no longer the leaders of the free world, you are advocating for MORE government??? REALLY???

What you really need is LESS government and more personal accountability.  You cannot build a government big enough to save you from your own stupidity.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 2, 2019)

Our gov't has passed Social Safety nets out the ying yang...........and illegals know how to take advantage of it.

The Cost burden for illegals costs us a ton of money.  Not to mention a ton of money to process them into the country........Border Agents have to send 2 agents with an illegal to the hospital if they need medical care.  That is policy.....and an example.

The way to end the problem in this country is to find, arrest, and deport those working here with fake i.d's......needed to go to work here.  Since Reagan passed immigration reform a network of fake i.d's was set up to get fake SSN's and names so they can get a job here.  The Social Security Administration admits the same but doesn't care becasue they pay taxes.

Shut down the illegal id networks...........prosecute those with the fake i.d.'s...........and the talking heads would explode.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 2, 2019)

IRS Admits It Encourages Illegals To Steal Social Security Numbers For Taxes


----------



## CWayne (Nov 2, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> CWayne said:
> 
> 
> > OnePercenter said:
> ...


None of which has any significant bearing on the amount of money that is being thrown about in the name of open borders.

The 'open borders' crowd is not interested in alleviating employment woes.  This is purely an exercise in grabbing power and fostering dependencies to cement their hold on this power.

The few hundred billion dollars is a paltry sum compared to the trillions that are at stake.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 2, 2019)

eagle1462010 said:


> Our gov't has passed Social Safety nets out the ying yang...........and illegals know how to take advantage of it.
> 
> The Cost burden for illegals costs us a ton of money.  Not to mention a ton of money to process them into the country........Border Agents have to send 2 agents with an illegal to the hospital if they need medical care.  That is policy.....and an example.
> 
> ...



You have no credible source from which to base your claims.  That is known as fear mongering.

You now tell me that the National ID / REAL ID Act - E Verify system is not working.  So, your side propped up the IRS, the income tax and saved the 16th Amendment (it was on life support and being ready to get repealed when you guys started this National ID B.S.)  Today, *taking away* the advantage of anonymity which is crucial if the people were to have to rebel against a tyrannical government and telling me that the *TRILLIONS* you have already spent on this issue should be a wake up call.

When your proposals are more costly than any benefit they can promise to deliver, it's time for you to have a wake up call.  If you try and tell businesses who they can and cannot hire, do you know what happens?  They move to foreign countries.

You're hitting the "_funny_" icon while you side with those wasting *TRILLIONS* of tax dollars, screwing us out of our Rights, and making it impossible for a resistance to unconstitutional government to exist.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 2, 2019)

CWayne said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > CWayne said:
> ...



Democrat or Republican; left or right; conservative or liberal, the name of the game is *CONTROL.*  It does not matter whether it is Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell or Donald Trump, they are all about *CONTROL.
*
The actions of the politicians is to take advantage of the ignorance of the masses and bring you into a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.  The strategies are calculated to have you lobby for your own defeat.  

The fact is, unless the political hacks have accomplished some new mathematical prestidigitation, the "_solutions_" (if you call regression a solution) have only boasted savings in the hundreds of billions.  Their efforts over the last 15 or so years have* cost TRILLIONS in tax dollars*.  In short, you are spending dollars to save pennies.  It was planned that way.

Embarrassingly, if you went back 20, then 30 and 40 years ago, you are only regurgitating the proposed solutions the Democrats put on the table.  Empowering a federal government with the ability to give you all you want means they are big enough to take all you have.  Now, they're big enough, our demographics give the advantage to the non-whites and the left with each passing year, and they have people like you supporting laws that were designed, specifically, to dilute the white vote and make white people a minority.  You can't make this stuff up.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 2, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Our gov't has passed Social Safety nets out the ying yang...........and illegals know how to take advantage of it.
> ...


Baloney..............in order to work here from that act.........you gotta have an i.d.  ...........Guess the illegals coming here have a magic lamp..........rub it.........and bam.......they have the i.ds..........

Illegal is illegal.......it is clear you are for open borders.......I am not.  If they come here.......do it legally........and BTW...........Every Nation on earth has rules for entering their country..........Go to Mexico without a passport or i.d..............enjoy.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 2, 2019)

eagle1462010 said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > eagle1462010 said:
> ...



Hey Einstein... *EVERYBODY* who comes here does so _"legally_."  You do respect the Rule of Law, don't you?

I am going to presuppose that you already know that the courts in America have tried to usurp powers not given to them in the Constitution.  It's called legislating from the bench.  The father of our country warned against this practice in his Farewell Speech:

_"If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed."_

Is there anything I've said so far you have a problem understanding?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 2, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?
> 
> Don't get me wrong.  I'm not condemning you.  I'm pointing out that if you want to be honest about it, there is a bit of bias in anything John Tanton financed.  Secondly, there is no point peeing down peoples neck and telling them this is about anything less that racial preservation.  America was founded on the twin pillars of race and religion, so it's time to put this subject into its proper perspective.


Even if that were so, we don't need or want these illegal scum or the coyotes or cartels that profit off them at OUR expense.


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 2, 2019)




----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 2, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?
> ...



If that is true, then attack the root of the problem.  You cannot build a government big enough to save you from your own stupidity.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 2, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> View attachment 287718
> 
> View attachment 287719



I know you meant that to be funny, but it is uncannily true and the Republicans along with the Trump supporters being the root cause of the problem.  Never have the white people worked against their own interests  harder than they do with the Democrat "_solutions_" (if you can call regression a solution) they have been programmed, Pavlovian style, to react to, falsely believing those to be something in the white peoples best interest.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 2, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


And what, pray tell, is the root?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 2, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



I suppose you want the bumper sticker answer.  It is wholly inadequate, but here would be *SOME* of the more obvious observations:

When children enter school, many are from single parent homes, homes that are dysfunctional, and / or homes with drug addicts, alcoholics, etc. living in them. What do you think the divorce rate is in this country?

Well now, the child goes to school and the first thing *mommy and / or school officials* thoughtfully do is to begin using hard core drugs like Adderall or Ritalin for nonexistent conditions.  Then the cycle of solving problems with feel good pills begins.  Ultimately the child is in middle school and has graduated to more potent drugs - both legal and illegal.  Opioids, as you know are the number ONE over-used drug with *Americans consuming over 80 percent of the world's opioid supply*.  When these kids cannot get the opioids legally, they are available on the black market.  You also see doctors prescribing SSRIs (associated with mass shooters) about the same time.  It is at this point that many kids begin self medicating with pot, heroin, etc.

By the time this generation is in their 20s, they are dropped from mommy's insurance.  It's a terrible situation.  These kids are now adults and have no high school diploma, no driver's license, no health insurance no work history, no skill sets, no coping skills, no critical thinking skills, a drug habit and a criminal record.

So, they end up living in mommy's house, rent free, drawing out of the welfare dole because they are lazy mother fuckers - *CREATED* by mommy, the school system, doctors, the mental health professions and Big Pharma.  Nobody is going to hire them.  THEY DON'T SHOW UP AND ASK FOR THE JOB IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Who wants someone with a checkered past and no initiative?  BTW, the Trump supporters added to the problem with their background check B.S.  Today, even if these people try to get their excrement together, they are locked out of a job.  They can't get past Big Brother's background checks... put into place by anti-immigrant hacks.  They don't get beyond their past.

So, we allow the system to create drug addicts and the resulting profit motive cops have to bust the dealers and steal their profits to buy more military gear and the cycle goes on and on.  Government gets bigger, Liberties are lost, and we don't resolve the root of the problem.  With a generation (now it's two or more) living off their parents and the free shit you falsely claim undocumented foreigners are getting being given to these lazy pieces of scatological waste and they learn how to make being a welfarite their career.

I advertise for jobs, actually gigs, to help lower income people.  Oddly, whites do not apply for the jobs and then they bitch when a foreigner takes the job.  If you do hire these people they can't do the job, lacking the mental and physical ability to do so.  When they aren't smoking, they are talking on their cell phone.  They are leaving a void whereby business *has to hire the undocumented foreigner -   *well that and the fact that if you do background checks, most of those people don't measure up.  The foreigners WILL work.

As long as whites don't have to work and mommy is going to put a roof over their head AND as long as we keep creating drug addicts, the drug dealers are going to find ways to supply the demand.  Your better course of action is to admit the downfall of our culture and work to change the bottom line.  Man up.

Children do not need drugs.  We should be utilizing *NON-DRUG* therapies, see if children are living in dysfunctional homes and / or abusive environments BEFORE putting them on feel good pills.  Those who are living in mommy's house rent free, dressing like it's Halloween seven days a week, smoking weed, shorting shit up their nose and spending their money on drugs and tattoos need to figure it out.  Help is available.  Change lives and change your culture.  Quit believing that some idiot politician has the ability to change a morally depraved people that cannot think.  - There you go.  The Cliff Notes in ten paragraphs.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 2, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


How about we don't give any handouts? It is not Halloween in the US every day of the year. Whites, blacks, any Americans-no more. And never ever any for illegals


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 2, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Great platitudes, but no blueprint.  See post # 36 for my *first *suggestion on a real solution.

In order to get on a level playing field, Do you believe in the Rule of Law?  Do you support the Constitution as originally written and intended *OR* are you a supporter of the liberal _"living Constitution_" idea?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Do what makes sense is what I support.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Really?  Explain how enforcing laws, forced through Congress by liberal Democrat, Ted Kennedy, and designed to dilute the white vote in order to make whites the minority makes sense.  How does that make sense at any level?  That is the mantra we hear:  enforce the laws.

Since you deflected on the question of which Constitution you support (an originalist interpretation versus the "_living Constitution,_"),  I'm led to believe that as long as you get your single issue agenda attended to, then to Hell with the Constitution.  Correct?  I want you to hear from one of our founders:

"_But in the absence of a constitution, men look entirely to party; and instead of principle governing party, party governs principle. An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself_."

—Thomas Paine, _A Dissertation on the First Principles of Government_ (1795)

Do you have any idea what that means?

We cannot sustain our race, our culture, our heritage nor the principles put forward in the Constitution if you're waging war against it just for instant gratification on a single issue.

"_ For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?_"  Mark 8: 36


----------



## sparky (Nov 3, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> 
> $8-9 thousand a second.
> 
> ...




Pretty _bad_ situation Hoss

and i'll agree ,_something n_eeds be done

But what we miss is WHY it's being foisted on us ,with such vigor 

The _reason_?  , Because H1B labor is _cheap_ labor, which the elites who _run _American and _own_ Congress want to hide behind the whole illegal debacle

That i've done construction for  decades _lousy _with H1B holders made me look into it,  they'll always say there's some annual '_cap_', but invent enough excuses to have it be _10 fold in reality_.

My ICE pal sez i should write my congresscritter, but they'll just tell me what i _want to hear,_ cuz they don't _really_ work for sorts like me






~S~


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


I tilt at one windmill like my insert picture, your're tilting at all of them. Americans don't know there are 50 states, and you want them to be constitutional scholars?


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 3, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?
> ...


Actually this Country was founded on the principle of the self evident truths, all men are created equal and have certain un alienable rights

*In Congress, July 4, 1776.*
*The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,* When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

I don't see any caveats pertaining to immigration. In fact, if immigration was an issue in their day the founders would have been considered illegal.

The ONLY way to "fix" the problem the US has is to actually act on the founding principle which would involve free trade, not the controlled sham passed as such. Free is unencumbered. The "facts" in our current case are that the US gov't controls trade. Not only between countries but between citizens. I'm pretty sure the founders didn't have that in mind when they constituted the gov't rules for keeping the gov't at bay and out of the everyday life of citizens.
This Country has many issues. Most of them come from intentional misinterpretation of the rules the empty suits in DC swear, in the affirmative, to protect and defend. How is it they believe they don't have to abide by rules but real people do?

Free Trade is defined as: international trade left to its natural course without tariffs, quotas, or other restrictions.

It took the founders from the end of the revolution to agree on the constitution several years (the final draft signing/convincing took 13 mos) to come to an agreement called The Constitution. The important aspects being, 1) a representative gov't, not a democracy, 2) rules to help ensure the gov't didn't run rough shod over voters, 3), it didn't make war or willy-nilly decisions without proper procedures being followed.

Yet, here we are, a world wide Empire, with colonies in 80 countries- I guess the legality could be questioned. Right?
The voters in this Country used by politicians to further the reach of the Empire put us into two (2) classes.
Tools or enemies. I'm pretty sure the founders believed that our gov't will only work with virtuous men at the helm. 
When the head monkeys (empty suits in DC) act a fool the follower monkeys will do the same.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

sparky said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> ...



This is an absolute lie.  Having worked in immigration law, we were unable to fill employers needs every year I worked in the business.  H1B caps were met by April and many farms work at 50 percent capacity with NO AMERICANS applying for the jobs.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Our LAW calls for LEGAL immigration. Deport the non-compliant. The rest is bullshit. Thank you.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



I would expect that my American brethren take high school civics and be able to answer basic questions about the government and American history.

Through ignorance you're joining a political movement (for lack of a more descriptive adjective) that advocates following the law when doing so means the end of the white race.  They don't think this shit through.  It's that plain and simple.  Secondary to that, it was having too many laws, granting the government too many powers, and then requiring people to become citizens in order to have basic Liberty that has destroyed this country.  The current generation would think the white race lost their damn mind to demand that they be the masters of their own destiny, but that's how we built this country... and we became the envy of the world.

I responded to one poster who, through abject ignorance, claims that we don't hold to the caps in the H1B visas.  OMG.  Let me tell you the facts.  This year we will have naturalized nearly a *million* new citizens.  If you take all the classes of visas and then exclude students, guests, and tourists, the total number of visas is *NOWHERE* even in the ballpark of the numbers of citizens we naturalize.  According to Forbes:

"_On April 6, 2018, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced it “reached the congressionally-mandated 65,000 H-1B visa cap for fiscal year 2019.” USCIS also stated it had “received a sufficient number of H-1B petitions to meet the 20,000 visa U.S. advanced degree exemption, known as the master’s cap.” Prior to 1990, H-1 visas were used for high-skilled foreign nationals and had no annual limit. With no concept of future technologies and the increased need for high-skilled labor they would bring, in 1990, Congress imposed an annual limit of 65,000, designated the category H-1B and established other restrictions_."

H-1B Visas All Gone For 16th Straight Year

Now you compare that figure of visas to the number of people we naturalize and you might start seeing why I'm posing hard questions.  Let's talk about these people we naturalize:

According to the Pew Research Center 13 percent of our federal legislators are immigrants or the children of immigrants.  They state:

"_There are 52 immigrants and children of immigrants serving in the House of Representatives and 16 serving in the Senate. Counting both chambers, 57 of the 68 lawmakers who are immigrants or children of immigrants are Democrats. Ten others are Republicans, and one – Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont – is an independent.

There are 52 immigrants and children of immigrants serving in the House of Representatives and 16 serving in the Senate. Counting both chambers, *57 of the 68 lawmakers who are immigrants or children of immigrants are Democrats*."_

In 116th Congress, at least 13% of lawmakers are immigrants or the children of immigrants

Well, at least you can boast that you're giving America away to the third world _"legally._"


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Dumb down your pontifications for me, OK? You expect wrong if you think kids get much from high school civics. They don't-you have to appeal to their feelings-not their logic. And I don't ascribe to any party and the rule of law is relative-I believe in Thoreau's Civil Disobedience-when it makes sense.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



As you can see from my last response, what *YOU* advocate is bullshit that isn't too well thought through.  Consider what Gdjjr said and I want to expand on it.  The Declaration of Independence states:

"_We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their *Creator* with certain *unalienable* Rights, that among these are Life,* Liberty *and the pursuit of Happiness_."

I bolded three words for you.  Let me see if you can understand these concepts:

1)  *Unalienable* Rights are bestowed upon all men by a *Creator
*
2) That word *unalienable* means that those Rights, given by a *Creator *are above the legislative powers

3)  Liberty means:  "_Freedom; exemption from extraneous control. The power of the will, in its moral freedom, to follow the dictates of its unrestricted choice, and to direct the external acts of the individual without restraint, coercion, or control from other persons_."

What is LIBERTY? definition of LIBERTY (Black's Law Dictionary)

FWIW, That definition is from Black's Law Dictionary which is the most authoritative legal dictionary recognized in the legal community

4)  Liberty is an *unalienable* Right that does not depend upon your immigration status.  Citizenship, OTOH, is a privilege granted by the government.  You can control citizenship, yet choose not to.  Meanwhile, you deny to foreigners their Liberty at a cost to your own Freedom and Liberty.  It doesn't make a Hell of a lot of sense.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...


OUR LAW CALLS FOR DEPORTATION OF ILLEGAL ALIENS. PERIOD STOP. Follow the law, if you truly _are_ a citizen.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



That is the problem in America today.  You want to play in a complicated world with simple minded solutions.  

Well guess what.  Employers availed themselves of Thoreau's Civil Disobedience when Americans refuse to apply for and / or work jobs.  Allowing one employer to hire foreigners and denying another the same luxury denies to the employer his absolute guaranteed "_equal protection of the laws_."

All men are created equal in the sense that they have a Right to Liberty.  If you deny a foreigner the Right to Liberty when Americans are *willingly* renting to them, selling to them, hiring them, doing business with companies that utilize their labor, etc. then they too are availing themselves of Thoreau's Civil Disobedience.  Quotas deny them the same Rights as all men.

The flip side is, *NOBODY* is forcing you to create a society that has to rely on them.  *NOBODY* forces you to create a society wherein there are so many parent / government created drug addicts.  *NOBODY *forces you to elect political candidates that pass so many laws that it locks out a lot of white people. * NOBODY* forced you to have laws passed that violate a person's Right to Privacy and never allow them to get beyond their past.  You're screwing yourself and imputing the blame onto foreigners.  Then you're asking for the government to save you from your own actions.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Those laws have no constitutional basis.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


I did not do any of that pork chop. I want the illegals out period-what don't YOU understand about that?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Who cares? It is a law-obey it.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



I understand that you can want in one hand and take a giant dump in one hand and see which gets filled first

I got it - you can't read past two sentences and you don't give a rip about the Constitution of the United States *NOR* do you appreciate the Liberties and Freedoms our forefathers fought, bled and died in order to secure for their posterity

If something gets done to pacify you and give you instant gratification, you accept it regardless of the costs.  Got it.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Yeah, I bet you obey every law on the books and when Uncle Scam comes around to collect all those evil "_black assault rifles," _ I expect to see your smiling face at the front of the line.  *For everyone else*, here is a legal lesson for you:

 "_The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:

 The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.

Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....

*No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.*_ 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256 

Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a "_law_", and should not be called a "_law_", even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.  Since that is the opinion of the United States Supreme Court, you have it on good authority


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


No, I don't give a RIP about your boring, pedantic, lectures. If you only want me to want what you think I should, you are the worst example of hypocrisy. .


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


ooh another lesson for me. I don't have to read any further to know you are upon your soapbox again. Try listening to somebody else for a change-even the kooks on this board have some interesting views.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



You talk shit and sound like a moron.  It takes fucking coward to even imply I'm a hypocrite.  I've spilled more blood and made more sacrifices for this cause than your sorry, lazy, uneducated, cowardly ass ever will.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Blah, blah, blah.  You are divisive and ignorant.  Remain that way.  Better to have arrogant asshats like you pecking a keyboard than in the real fight.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Oh please, brag some more to all of us undeserving posters-you really want to call us deplorables, don't you?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


And YOU are in the real fight? Pray tell us, how?


----------



## sparky (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> sparky said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...






> *Cap Exempt* H-1B Processing Time
> H-1B *cap exempt* processing times may vary although on average regular processing *takes* anywhere from 3-4 months while opting for premium processing *can* shorten your petition's processing time to 15 days.



T





> he “cap *exempt*” provision of the *H1B* visa program allows certain US companies and organizations to employ an unlimited number of *H1B* workers and apply for *H1B's* at any time of year (see below for more details) . Cap *exempt H1B's* are available for ALL types of *H1B* jobs and positions.





> It's common knowledge that a current *H1B* holder *can* transfer to another employer within the US during the six-year *H1B* period without being subject to the 65,000 general + 20,000 masters degree cap again. ... A person granted *H1B* status may work in that status for a maximum of six years



~S~


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



For you, deplorable??? that would be a compliment.  You and I both know you can't read past five sentences and call people out without any intention of saying to their face the B.S. you post on the Internet.  What would that make you?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Tell you so can accuse me of bragging?  You aren't too swift are you?  I do more by accident than you do on purpose.  

The one thing I've figured out about the religious fanatics wherein the wall is their religion.  The economic argument is a pretext.  They don't want better jobs; they don't want to save our culture; they don't care about the Rights and Liberties they flush down the toilet.  All they care about is a damn wall - as ineffective as they know it will be.  So, explored their "_cost_" allegation and they can't deal with both sides of the ledger.  It's like arguing with a gun control proponent.  It's not about any problem perceived or real.  It's simply *control. *


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

sparky said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > sparky said:
> ...



If you were trying to make a point, you fell short.  My point was: 1 MILLION new naturalized Americans, the overwhelming majority who become Democrats versus 85,000 work visas.  

You don't care if we give America away provided we do so "_legally_."


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 3, 2019)

*U.S. Code § 1325.Improper entry by alien*

*(a)Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts

Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

(b)Improper time or place; civil penaltiesAny alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of—
alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.

(c)Marriage fraud
Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than $250,000, or both.

(d)Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud
Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance with title 18, or both.

(Continued)

8 U.S. Code § 1325 -  Improper entry by alien

'Nuff said.*


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Come see me face to face then-I don't sweat you. So are all the people here like me deplorables? Huh, Hillary? And I read for quality not quantity. Learn the first rule of writing-be brief.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


So now you are knocking religion. keep going, there must be _somebody_ you haven't insulted yet. And by the way, are you related to Norman or George Rockwell? I think I can guess.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Nov 3, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> 
> $8-9 thousand a second.
> 
> ...


Now, lets compare that to "The Cost of the Red States" clock. It won't even be close.


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 3, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?
> 
> Don't get me wrong.  I'm not condemning you.  I'm pointing out that if you want to be honest about it, there is a bit of bias in anything John Tanton financed.  Secondly, there is no point peeing down peoples neck and telling them this is about anything less that racial preservation.  America was founded on the twin pillars of race and religion, so it's time to put this subject into its proper perspective.


Actually the proper perspective would be the fact that Democrats can't win elections without bringing millions of non-English speaking brown people here. They don't care that it's costing us $300 billion per year to do it....not to mention all of the crime and diseases these fuckers are bringing with them.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> *U.S. Code § 1325.Improper entry by alien*
> 
> *(a)Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts*
> 
> ...



So, you get a little civil misdemeanor for entering the United States.  You cannot even tell me what that law means.  

A civil misdemeanor like that is not sufficient to keep families separated,  As soon as the dog and pony show is over, you will find that out.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



I don't think half the people you think believe the horseshit you do are limited to three or four sentences of reading and then a lot of B.S. you would never say in a public setting.  Some people can actually READ.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



You wall worshipers are generally smart asses.  Why would I knock religion?  I'm a minister.  I went from a legal profession to theology.  Now, I have to debate mental midgets that worship a wall because they cannot have a civil conversation.

In the process, I find a lot of poseurs, fakes, phonies, keyboard commandos and those who like to trash others on the Net, but have *NEVER *been involved as an activist.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 3, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > You do realize that your citing source is funded by a rich white supremacist, right?
> ...



Why are you blaming the Democrats?  Sure, the Democrats passed the anti-white immigration laws, but the wall religionists demand that those laws which were passed to deliberately dilute the white vote and make us a minority be enforced.

Dude, get real, the guy doing the most posting on the side of the anti-immigrants here has admitted that he can't read past two or three sentences at the most.  So, you are relying on guys that have talking points, but no substance.  *I AM IN AGREEMENT THAT DEMOCRATS ARE BRINGING IN NON-WHITE PEOPLE TO DILUTE THE WHITE VOTE, BUT IT'S EQUALLY TRUE (READ THE FREAKING THREAD) THAT THE PEOPLE WHO WORSHIP THE WALL ARE HELPING THE LIBERALS - NOT THE WHITE PEOPLE!!!!!*

One thing that remains painfully obvious here is that you have no educated leadership.  One fruitloop is posting a  civil misdemeanor from Title 8 of the United States Code as if it means something important.  So, here is what *Trump's own attorney said about it:

*
It's not going to change balance of the truth.  If you're making more people citizens than you are allowing to work here, you reach a point where they outnumber you.  For crying out loud please read the thread and check the links before thinking you're criticizing me.


*
*


----------



## mudwhistle (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


I don't think it's a matter of any WHITE VOTE. Even Hispanic citizens have issues with the way Democrats are bringing these people here while ignoring the homeless in their states and cities. Blacks moved out of California in droves about a decade ago because of Democrat policies. Everyone hates high taxes and unemployment except the people living on welfare. They don't give a damn.....they just want to sit in their shacks and smoke dope all day.

The primary issue with all of these people collecting benefits is the massive expense. Just when the Baby-boomers are all retiring the Democrats bring in millions of Muslims and Central Americans to swallow up Social Security and health care. These people that are collecting our benefits shouldn't be. And the Democrats are getting them registered and using their votes wherever they need them. Many of these people haven't a clue what they're signing. Some are being carted around different voter precincts to change the vote in close elections. Some are told to just sign a blank ballot and their vote stolen by DACA activists. Several Democrat controlled states have almost 100% mail-in elections which makes it impossible to keep the vote honest.

So spare me the God Damned lecture.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > *U.S. Code § 1325.Improper entry by alien*
> ...


Families separate themselves by their actions-don't blame the cop for _your _speeding ticket.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


See-you can be brief. That's a good start.Now, reading and comprehending are two different things. You can read 100 sentences, but remember only three or four accurately. You actually make good points I _would_ like to read and remember.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


I have been an activist albeit years ago, but enough about me. What denomination are you a minister of?. Why did you leave the law? Why does the wall bother you so much? I support the wall, but if it never gets built or finished, I won't cry about it-I just think it is a good idea. And most interesting is your take on posters here. I agree, some are fake and annoying, but why do they bother _you_ so much?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



The first thing I would say to you is screw you.  If you don't want to be in the discussion, stay off discussion boards.  Secondly, in order to not look stupid, READ THE THREAD so you know what's going on before posting.

The American people were told before you guys got the National ID / REAL ID Act E Verify system put into place that it would stop this *alleged* stealing of government benefits.  So, you instill a system of National ID that would make Hitler blush.  You based that system of National ID on the Socialist Surveillance Number ...ooops, "_Social Security Number_" and saved the 16th Amendment along with the IRS and the income tax.  You do remember that the 16th Amendment was in danger of being repealed before you guys saved it with the National ID bill, right?

So, let me summarize this so far:

You have supported *TRILLIONS *of tax dollars spent on legislation you admit was ineffective (because you're claiming we still have the problem) and you saved the income tax, IRS and the 16th Amendment.  You have helped in the building of the ultimate *POLICE STATE*, taken away our Right to Privacy, and made if all but impossible for patriots to be able to mount a defense against tyranny.

Then, to add insult to injury you try to claim some Hispanics are on your side.  Yet you didn't bother* READING *this thread.  Of the 68 immigrants or children of immigrants serving in Congress 57 of those are Democrats.  Your B.S. post is dismissed.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



I don't have a clue what that throwaway posting was intended to convey.  My point is, most of those you're deporting will be back when the next Democrat is elected president.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



I'm sorry that you didn't receive a very good education.  Most articles I read in Forbes. Business Week, etc. are far longer than any post I make on this board.  Taxpayers paid for you to have 12 years of education and you're intimidated by 10 paragraphs???  WTF???  Maybe that is why employers don't hire you and give the jobs to foreigners.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



First, you are intimidated by 10 paragraphs and then you ask half a dozen questions, expecting an answer in three or fewer sentences.  Quite the joker you are!  I can do it. Count them.

You are a fake, phony, poseur, and now we can add liar to the mix.  If you had ever been an activist, you already know who I am.  *IF *you had ever been an activist, you would know how the peripheral laws surrounding the building of the wall were used against patriots - some losing their lives, some being put in prison and some were forced to snitch for Uncle Scam. 

Three sentences. BAM.  So much for your dumbassery.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


It is called an analogy. Blame the families-not the law. Your point about return may be right. That's why we need a wall right away. And a second if needed, And a third...


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


You are not sorry-don't lie. Taxpayers paid for 12, I paid for the next four, and my employers paid for the next 4. You did not pay any more for me than the non-English speaking illegal who is drawing more in benefits than you make in a year. I like to read books about philosophy and metaphysics, that's why I am interested in your religious bent. I don't remember saying I was intimidated but if your assumptions about me are more important than fact, fine. And , I am not worried about being hired at this stage of the game, any tussles I had with those damn "furiners" are over. It is interesting you you the word "give" rather than award, one being on the basis of compassion, and the other on merit.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



I've found in the many years I've visited political message boards that most posters prefer a 30 second sound bite type information. A small town newspaper publisher/editor told me most people's reading level is about 4th grade. Add the approximate 10% retention rate as insult to injury makes getting a point across almost impossible. If you talk to these people in person you get the eyes glazed over look or the immediate defensive posturing when their beliefs or knowledge is put on the table.
What I like about the written word is it can be read and reread if not understood and done in privacy it affords a better environment for absorption. 
Back and forth with posters of a different persuasion, regardless of what it is, is a one sided conversation with a narrow minded wall and leads to a pissing contest about whose shit don't stink or whose dick is biggest- that doesn't mean I won't, just pointing out the frustration when the wiring has been crossed.
It's another sad commentary on our society which we call civilized- SMH-


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



A wall does not stop bad legislation.  The peripheral laws will cost more in dollars and lost Liberties than they can help with a problem of your own making.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



No offense - then maybe again I do intend to offend you, but you sound like you are on drugs.  After a couple of sentences, you seem to ramble with no particular point being made.

IF a foreigner got the benefit of an education and used it, he's in much better shape than a man claiming to have 8 years of post secondary education, complaining about being a discussion board and not being able to read 10 paragraphs... then trying to respond to a post he says he didn't read!!!!  You can't make this stuff up people.  

You should reread your post.  It does not reflect the writing of someone with 8 years of post secondary education.  Dude, when you decide to have a conversation; when you get past the insulting; when you can deal with more than a tweet, then come back and try your hand at a civil conversation.  With me, you're getting what you dished out.

You come here like you have a monopoly on understanding AND as much as I *hate* this term, you seem to wallow in logical fallacies - against people you might find you have something in common with.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Ever hear of the SDS-look it up. Hint:it relates to VietNam. The wall is an emotional issue for me. I don't care what it costs, or how effective it may or may not be. It should help, but if nothing more, signals the invaders that they are NOT welcome. More importantly, are you going to answer _any _of my questions?


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



I wouldn't fret about what Cap'n Knowledge spouts. He is for illegal aliens, drug runners, child traffickers and MS13 types. And, the wall will work.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



You deserved so much more than a winner acknowledgment so I wanted to say this:

For a number of years I financed the twice monthly meetings for the Georgia Patriot Network.  Twice a month we would rent out the banquet room at a place called Ryan's Steakhouse.  We would hold meetings and guest speakers were always invited.  A lot of times I would speak for a 15 to 20 minutes (or take the spot of a guest speaker if we had not lined one up.)  We did this from 1987 to 2003 - maybe 2004.  

During that period I went to work in immigration law, working for six years and on every side to make sure I had the facts.  I manned the border in civilian border patrol efforts; worked in one of John Tanton's think tanks, worked with a non-profit Latino organization, and worked with government attorneys that handled immigration cases.  Rest assured, *NOBODY* has a more well rounded factual picture of this issue than I do. I wanted the *FACTS*.

In meetings, I would speak out and tell people the truth.  At the meetings, people would sit there silently and hours later be on a discussion board, under an anonymous board name, calling me everything except a child of God.  

Between the ages of 13 and about 17 I had run away from home and had to know everything one needs to know about fake ID in order to survive.  The government had published a 600 + page book about fake ID and their ideas on how to thwart it. * Every* known way to obtain ID was in those pages and that book was my Bible at that time.  Later, I would be able to use that knowledge to fight against National ID efforts in the political arena as an adult.  I realized how that information is now used with everything about you being tied to your SSN.  National ID is *one *of those peripheral laws that ended up affecting the American citizenry.  I chose it as a starting point because the people who are into wall worship underestimate the value of a Right to Privacy AND how the government can use personal information to control you via political propaganda.

Trying to convey the whole body knowledge has resulted in the very conditions you describe.  This whole wall worship deal has people that are, embarrassingly, waging a war solely with a logical fallacy that if you don't agree with their solutions, you are _"for open borders_."   Those people are unable to understand that I'm not oblivious to the issues of multiculturalism.  What I oppose is the *POLICE STATE*.  What I oppose is a government too big to resist when tyranny is implemented.  What I oppose is elevating myself on the backs of other people who are doing something you and I - *and* the wall worshipers would do if our roles were changed.  The wall and the peripheral laws they are using to enforce it (the Constitution Free Zone, quotas for guest workers, the end of a presumption of innocence - innocent until proven guilty, and around 20 other laws) signal the death of our Republic.  Wall worshipers are too wrapped up in their own little world so that they cannot see the big picture.  I will end this little rant with this:

I was in court 36 times.  I never lost.  The reason was simple.  If I were walking in a courtroom and wanted to convince a jury, then I studied the other guy's case from his perspective until I could argue his case for him - AND do a better job.  I have had to be in court cases with my life on the line - and that was due to the stupid laws the wall worshipers endorsed.  They do not have the ability to see that these laws can cut both ways.  But, you said it all and I thank you from the bottom of my heart.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Funny, I found your 3 paragraphs easier to read than Porter Blowhard's 3 sentences. Maybe content has something to do with it? If not that, certainly style. BTW, I remember reading that newspapers were written on a 6th grade level-I guess our education system is failing us.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


I see the wall as *saving* our liberties AND culture.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Since you cannot comprehend beyond anything that exceeds that 6th grade level of reading comprehension, the education system may have failed us.  And Dude, if you have anything more than a high school diploma, something is really wrong in this country.  I can't give you what you want in a post the size of a tweet.  This is a discussion board, not Twitter.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



No, I'm not going to answer your questions.  It cannot be done in two or three sentences.  I've been doing this shit upward of four decades.  Just the highlights would take a dozen paragraphs.  It would be wasted bandwidth.  That exceeds your reading capacity.  What would the point be?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Walls *never* work.  Talk shit you won't say to a man's face.  We don't have to assume what you're for or against.  You've told us what you are.  

Six Historians on Why Trump’s Border Wall Won’t Work

This has* NOTHING* to do with being for or against a wall that won't work.  You're far too stupid to understand that.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



You're blind as a bat.  That is why your side is always advocating enforcing laws that were pushed through Congress by liberal Democrats for the sole purpose to dilute the white vote and make non-whites the majority.  You are your own worst enemy.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


This time I will read and respond to your musings much as I dislike them.
Never took an illegal drug and the rambling may be *your* lack of focus.
If a foreigner...-how would you know if it is better than 8 years of post education? I can operate in white collar, blue collar, or green collar settings, thanks to the _claim_ of education. You seem to guess a lot-and guess wrong.
I never complained about the board-I complained about you and your pomposity-for someone who complains about my not reading all your crap, you don't seem to read much either.
And you have the nerve to say, "when I am done with my insulting"-check the posts, you threw the first barb.
I will respond to your long posts with short responses-they don't deserve anything more-you are so full of yourself that you write for you instead of your reader.
And if you really thought my posts beneath you, you would break off any contact with me.
And by the way, are you ever going to answer my questions? Not too hard are they?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Did not read this post either-but I will tell you why. You have what is called "I" trouble. You don't "see" anyone else but yourself. Count the number of I's in the above post-there are too many! Try thinking about others, not just yourself.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...


I hear a lot of "can'ts" from you. Try posting some positives, like this-_ Thanks for the reference to newspapers and sixth grade. Since I wrote for a newspaper, I was told to write at a sixth grade level-to accommodate the reader. _See how it is done? *Your* response might have been-_Even tho I was told to write at a sixth grade level, I will make it a third grade level for you. _See the difference? And if you are still bothered that I called you out for being verbose, forget it and go ahead and bore everyone else on this message board.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Try answering just one question-your choice. I'm sure you can handle that.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


The guy just expressed his opinion-why do you get so upset?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Makes NO sense. How does a wall hurt anything?


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Walls work in other countries. East Berlin, the Gaza, Morocco. Saudi Arabia, Kenya, Turkey and 70 other countries. But they wont work here? You have no idea of the technology DHS has.Border crossings are way down and will decrease as each new mile is added. Spare us your overbearing rhetoric.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Your sentences do not reflect that of a person with even a high school diploma.  You seem to be projecting.  You sound like a little child.  If you think I insulted you first, do two wrongs make a right?  

Nobody is beneath me.  If I were "_full of myself_," I'd be eager to answer your questions - I don't recall what all of them were.  But, since you have stated that you didn't read responses and you jumped to conclusions berating me, what would the point of my responses be?

“_He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him_.”  Proverbs 18:13

Since your responses have been made without reading the whole post, what is the value of your criticisms?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Who said I was upset?  Some "_opinions_" are not opinions, but in the state I live in rise to the level of what are called fighting words.  So, if you said them to someone's face and got a knuckle sandwich, the judge would say, Oh well.  You can't defend things like that.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



What dumbassery!  That has been asked and answered.  Try reading the thread.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



In other words, STFU if I don't agree with you.  Your problem is, you can't do anything to stop me from exposing your stupidity.  And, at a personal level, you're too much of a chickenshit to go out into public and talk your trash to people in person.  Sucks being you, don't it?  Walls don't work and the peripheral laws used to enforce them are going to eliminate you before they impact foreigners.  Sin Loi Victor Charlie.


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...




I see that.  Sucks being you, doesn't it?


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Yeah but we're gonna miss you.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


I just asked why you were upset-never got a straight answer.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Your claim to fame is that you are heavily medicated.  You have no idea of when I'm around and when I'm not.  You gonna shoot me?


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Piss off piss ant.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



I gave you a straight up answer.  I'm not upset.  With this Internet stuff, I start out looking to engage with people who want a civil discourse and to find people who share common ideas so that we can do something productive with combined experiences, education and objectives. 

When that doesn't work out, I read posts like yours for entertainment and to provide information to those who DO read the posts.  Maybe, at first, they pretend to be left wing nutjobs, but some of them finally access a few links and learn about how they got played via Hegelian Dialectics OR, maybe, they look up the term libs like to throw at the right... "_logical fallacy_."  They don't know what it means and they are limited to that and screaming ad hominem as defensive measures.  You put those two terms together with the word racist and it is supposed to shut people down like you. 

Most of the time, they would be wrong, but when people pick fights with their own AND say silly shit like "_he's for open borders_" when you disagree with someone's proposed solution, it IS a logical fallacy... especially when the man you're going against has a better solution.

But we're not trying to solve anything, are we?  You're like a liberal that fights for gun control.  For them, it's not about saving lives, reducing gun violence, or making America safe.  It's only about *control*.  You and I are arguing because the left has flipped people like you.  Now you react to certain stimuli, Pavlovian style, and at the end of the day, the *alleged *costs of undocumented foreigners is *NOT *what any of these threads is about.  It is solely about people that want a wall to pacify them.  What you cannot understand is the costs involved in things like the creation of the Dept. of Homeland (IN)Security and the Constitution Free Zone; the evisceration of Due Process; the 24 / 7 / 365 monitoring and surveillance being done by government on the citizenry - All in the name of enforcing your stupid ass wall costs American lives and delivers little, if anything to address the pretexts you list.. but, again, we're not talking about costs of undocumented foreigners.  That was a ploy to get where we are now in this discussion.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Take your meds; go to bed and let the discussion proceed.  We don't need the input of someone that cannot engage in a civil conversation and lets his feel good drugs talk for him.


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Yes, doctor.


----------



## Likkmee (Nov 4, 2019)

The clock has numbers. Not digital and was $5 at a flea mkt.
Current cost. $8/hr cash. Picking up and bagging sweet taters.
Unreadable/follow-able by the current gringo labor force


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


You don't look for civil discourse-you look for people who agree with you. After the first paragraph, it was all, blah, blah, blah.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Now you are projecting.  That is why I said you were a liar when you falsely claimed to be an activist.  I specialize in playing the Devil's Advocate when the left has a point the right dodges and ducks... like you've been seen to do.  Hell, you can't even address the issue.  You got butt hurt and now the entire thread is about you wanting a private pissing match with me and *NOTHING* relevant to the thread.

Again you couldn't read past the first paragraph.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


WON"T read past the first paragraph,for no other reason than you want me to. FYI- You misused the word projecting. I was an activist-nothing worth it now, all I wanted was a wall, anything else is your idea-left, right, leftright, WTH, I don't think you know what you are. Don't want to piss with you, just wondering why you left the law.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



If you were an activist you would know why.  After winning that case dealing with the so - called "_Patriot Act_," - the one I wasn't supposed to win, it dawned on me that I was working in the world's most dishonest profession and having to deal with narcissists like you that I thought were on our side.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Wrong on two out of three. I am NO LONGER an activist-unless you count working on the campaign for Florida's governor. I am not a narcissist, tho I used to be, but I do agree with you about the dishonest profession thing. Hey, what do you call 50,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea?  *A good start.*


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



The ABA is the most liberal - communist organization in the United States.  Without their blessing, your opportunities are limited.  Prostitution is a more honorable profession.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


At least its older-and more fun.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 4, 2019)

I've found in the many years I've visited political message boards that most posters prefer a 30 second sound bite type information. A small town newspaper publisher/editor told me most people's reading level is about 4th grade. Add the approximate 10% retention rate as insult to injury makes getting a point across almost impossible. If you talk to these people in person you get the eyes glazed over look or the immediate defensive posturing when their beliefs or knowledge is put on the table.
What I like about the written word is it can be read and reread if not understood and done in privacy it affords a better environment for absorption.
Back and forth with posters of a different persuasion, regardless of what it is, is a one sided conversation with a narrow minded wall and leads to a pissing contest about whose shit don't stink or whose dick is biggest- that doesn't mean I won't, just pointing out the frustration when the wiring has been crossed.
It's another sad commentary on our society which we call civilized- SMH-

[/QUOTE]

You deserved so much more than a winner acknowledgment so I wanted to say this:

For a number of years I financed the twice monthly meetings for the Georgia Patriot Network.  Twice a month we would rent out the banquet room at a place called Ryan's Steakhouse.  We would hold meetings and guest speakers were always invited.  A lot of times I would speak for a 15 to 20 minutes (or take the spot of a guest speaker if we had not lined one up.)  We did this from 1987 to 2003 - maybe 2004. 

During that period I went to work in immigration law, working for six years and on every side to make sure I had the facts.  I manned the border in civilian border patrol efforts; worked in one of John Tanton's think tanks, worked with a non-profit Latino organization, and worked with government attorneys that handled immigration cases.  Rest assured, *NOBODY* has a more well rounded factual picture of this issue than I do. I wanted the *FACTS*.

In meetings, I would speak out and tell people the truth.  At the meetings, people would sit there silently and hours later be on a discussion board, under an anonymous board name, calling me everything except a child of God. 

Between the ages of 13 and about 17 I had run away from home and had to know everything one needs to know about fake ID in order to survive.  The government had published a 600 + page book about fake ID and their ideas on how to thwart it. * Every* known way to obtain ID was in those pages and that book was my Bible at that time.  Later, I would be able to use that knowledge to fight against National ID efforts in the political arena as an adult.  I realized how that information is now used with everything about you being tied to your SSN.  National ID is *one *of those peripheral laws that ended up affecting the American citizenry.  I chose it as a starting point because the people who are into wall worship underestimate the value of a Right to Privacy AND how the government can use personal information to control you via political propaganda.

Trying to convey the whole body knowledge has resulted in the very conditions you describe.  This whole wall worship deal has people that are, embarrassingly, waging a war solely with a logical fallacy that if you don't agree with their solutions, you are _"for open borders_."   Those people are unable to understand that I'm not oblivious to the issues of multiculturalism.  What I oppose is the *POLICE STATE*.  What I oppose is a government too big to resist when tyranny is implemented.  What I oppose is elevating myself on the backs of other people who are doing something you and I - *and* the wall worshipers would do if our roles were changed.  The wall and the peripheral laws they are using to enforce it (the Constitution Free Zone, quotas for guest workers, the end of a presumption of innocence - innocent until proven guilty, and around 20 other laws) signal the death of our Republic.  Wall worshipers are too wrapped up in their own little world so that they cannot see the big picture.  I will end this little rant with this:

I was in court 36 times.  I never lost.  The reason was simple.  If I were walking in a courtroom and wanted to convince a jury, then I studied the other guy's case from his perspective until I could argue his case for him - AND do a better job.  I have had to be in court cases with my life on the line - and that was due to the stupid laws the wall worshipers endorsed.  They do not have the ability to see that these laws can cut both ways.  But, you said it all and I thank you from the bottom of my heart.[/QUOTE]

I appreciate and applaud your efforts.

I've spent a good deal of time trying to figure what people have against liberty. It seems to me they fear it more than they want it. I can't imagine why. 

I accept everyone is wired differently, but, at the same time I have to wonder where they got their learnin'- I'm not formally educated, that particular annoyance stopped a long time ago in the 9th grade, twice. But, I love reading and have come to a lot of conclusions I never would have otherwise if I hadn't read, and considered, opposing views. It really irks me how shallow and narrow minded people are. *The poem by Martin Niemoller* comes to mind when I see these anti- liberty people who demand the god they worship (the fed gov't) do what they want, damn the liberty, full speed ahead. They fail to consider History, especially of this gov't, that ensures, they will come for you, it ain't if, but when. I call them worshiping the godvernment because in essence they do and that's how it acts. Tithes are paid, and compliance demanded and non-compliance punished, not in a future after-life but in the here and now.

I've tried being succinct and got accused of being cryptic- I don't lay claim to being a writer, or a speaker, but, I can express myself succinctly, or with verbosity, but, prefer Jefferson's thoughts on why use more when less will suffice.
I subscribe to K.I.S.S.
Keep up the good work. I enjoy reading your commentary.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> I've found in the many years I've visited political message boards that most posters prefer a 30 second sound bite type information. A small town newspaper publisher/editor told me most people's reading level is about 4th grade. Add the approximate 10% retention rate as insult to injury makes getting a point across almost impossible. If you talk to these people in person you get the eyes glazed over look or the immediate defensive posturing when their beliefs or knowledge is put on the table.
> What I like about the written word is it can be read and reread if not understood and done in privacy it affords a better environment for absorption.
> Back and forth with posters of a different persuasion, regardless of what it is, is a one sided conversation with a narrow minded wall and leads to a pissing contest about whose shit don't stink or whose dick is biggest- that doesn't mean I won't, just pointing out the frustration when the wiring has been crossed.
> It's another sad commentary on our society which we call civilized- SMH-



You deserved so much more than a winner acknowledgment so I wanted to say this:

For a number of years I financed the twice monthly meetings for the Georgia Patriot Network.  Twice a month we would rent out the banquet room at a place called Ryan's Steakhouse.  We would hold meetings and guest speakers were always invited.  A lot of times I would speak for a 15 to 20 minutes (or take the spot of a guest speaker if we had not lined one up.)  We did this from 1987 to 2003 - maybe 2004.

During that period I went to work in immigration law, working for six years and on every side to make sure I had the facts.  I manned the border in civilian border patrol efforts; worked in one of John Tanton's think tanks, worked with a non-profit Latino organization, and worked with government attorneys that handled immigration cases.  Rest assured, *NOBODY* has a more well rounded factual picture of this issue than I do. I wanted the *FACTS*.

In meetings, I would speak out and tell people the truth.  At the meetings, people would sit there silently and hours later be on a discussion board, under an anonymous board name, calling me everything except a child of God.

Between the ages of 13 and about 17 I had run away from home and had to know everything one needs to know about fake ID in order to survive.  The government had published a 600 + page book about fake ID and their ideas on how to thwart it. * Every* known way to obtain ID was in those pages and that book was my Bible at that time.  Later, I would be able to use that knowledge to fight against National ID efforts in the political arena as an adult.  I realized how that information is now used with everything about you being tied to your SSN.  National ID is *one *of those peripheral laws that ended up affecting the American citizenry.  I chose it as a starting point because the people who are into wall worship underestimate the value of a Right to Privacy AND how the government can use personal information to control you via political propaganda.

Trying to convey the whole body knowledge has resulted in the very conditions you describe.  This whole wall worship deal has people that are, embarrassingly, waging a war solely with a logical fallacy that if you don't agree with their solutions, you are _"for open borders_."   Those people are unable to understand that I'm not oblivious to the issues of multiculturalism.  What I oppose is the *POLICE STATE*.  What I oppose is a government too big to resist when tyranny is implemented.  What I oppose is elevating myself on the backs of other people who are doing something you and I - *and* the wall worshipers would do if our roles were changed.  The wall and the peripheral laws they are using to enforce it (the Constitution Free Zone, quotas for guest workers, the end of a presumption of innocence - innocent until proven guilty, and around 20 other laws) signal the death of our Republic.  Wall worshipers are too wrapped up in their own little world so that they cannot see the big picture.  I will end this little rant with this:

I was in court 36 times.  I never lost.  The reason was simple.  If I were walking in a courtroom and wanted to convince a jury, then I studied the other guy's case from his perspective until I could argue his case for him - AND do a better job.  I have had to be in court cases with my life on the line - and that was due to the stupid laws the wall worshipers endorsed.  They do not have the ability to see that these laws can cut both ways.  But, you said it all and I thank you from the bottom of my heart.[/QUOTE]

I appreciate and applaud your efforts.

I've spent a good deal of time trying to figure what people have against liberty. It seems to me they fear it more than they want it. I can't imagine why.

I accept everyone is wired differently, but, at the same time I have to wonder where they got their learnin'- I'm not formally educated, that particular annoyance stopped a long time ago in the 9th grade, twice. But, I love reading and have come to a lot of conclusions I never would have otherwise if I hadn't read, and considered, opposing views. It really irks me how shallow and narrow minded people are. *The poem by Martin Niemoller* comes to mind when I see these anti- liberty people who demand the god they worship (the fed gov't) do what they want, damn the liberty, full speed ahead. They fail to consider History, especially of this gov't, that ensures, they will come for you, it ain't if, but when. I call them worshiping the godvernment because in essence they do and that's how it acts. Tithes are paid, and compliance demanded and non-compliance punished, not in a future after-life but in the here and now.

I've tried being succinct and got accused of being cryptic- I don't lay claim to being a writer, or a speaker, but, I can express myself succinctly, or with verbosity, but, prefer Jefferson's thoughts on why use more when less will suffice.
I subscribe to K.I.S.S.
Keep up the good work. I enjoy reading your commentary.[/QUOTE]
Are you two guys going to kiss each other? I wanted to give you something better than a winner acknowledgement? I bet we can guess WHAT that is. If you can't express yourself in fewer words, then cut it in two and say "stay tuned next week for the second half."


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


It requires the forcing of eminent domain- for starters. It gives Mexico the land west, in Texas, or south everywhere else.
It discourages free trade, It discourages free to travel. It costs money that will be paid for by your off spring and their off spring, and it won't change people trying to come across the best way they can. It restricts their right to make their life better. It makes politicians look better than they are at a price we all pay. This Country was founded on the belief that all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights- there are no caveats in that phrase. Denying rights or restricting them is immoral. 
In the Border country the "culture" has been influenced by the latin culture since long before you, or I, were born, and, personally, I enjoy them and their culture, especially the food- the women are pretty too. The music is awesome and they make some damn fine cowboy boots, by hand, and don't charge a small fortune for them.
The fear you exude is beyond my simple mind- I just don't get it.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > I've found in the many years I've visited political message boards that most posters prefer a 30 second sound bite type information. A small town newspaper publisher/editor told me most people's reading level is about 4th grade. Add the approximate 10% retention rate as insult to injury makes getting a point across almost impossible. If you talk to these people in person you get the eyes glazed over look or the immediate defensive posturing when their beliefs or knowledge is put on the table.
> ...



I appreciate and applaud your efforts.

I've spent a good deal of time trying to figure what people have against liberty. It seems to me they fear it more than they want it. I can't imagine why.

I accept everyone is wired differently, but, at the same time I have to wonder where they got their learnin'- I'm not formally educated, that particular annoyance stopped a long time ago in the 9th grade, twice. But, I love reading and have come to a lot of conclusions I never would have otherwise if I hadn't read, and considered, opposing views. It really irks me how shallow and narrow minded people are. *The poem by Martin Niemoller* comes to mind when I see these anti- liberty people who demand the god they worship (the fed gov't) do what they want, damn the liberty, full speed ahead. They fail to consider History, especially of this gov't, that ensures, they will come for you, it ain't if, but when. I call them worshiping the godvernment because in essence they do and that's how it acts. Tithes are paid, and compliance demanded and non-compliance punished, not in a future after-life but in the here and now.

I've tried being succinct and got accused of being cryptic- I don't lay claim to being a writer, or a speaker, but, I can express myself succinctly, or with verbosity, but, prefer Jefferson's thoughts on why use more when less will suffice.
I subscribe to K.I.S.S.
Keep up the good work. I enjoy reading your commentary.[/QUOTE]
Are you two guys going to kiss each other? I wanted to give you something better than a winner acknowledgement? I bet we can guess WHAT that is. If you can't express yourself in fewer words, then cut it in two and say "stay tuned next week for the second half."[/QUOTE]
Why? Because you refuse to read? How about you find someplace else to try looking smart- it ain't working here.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...





Gdjjr said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


This country started with slaves-not all were equal. And morality is a personal belief-not yours to declare. What happens in the "lost states" Cal. Ar. NM. and Tex is up to the people there-if they encourage illegals so be it. It is when they migrate north and create other problems I won't get into, I object strongly. And politicians looking good-that will NEVER happen. I don't fear so there is no exuding-and your mind is not simple, but you are right, you just don't get it. I don't like illegals-never did and never will so anything I can do to hinder them, here or elsewhere, that's what I will do.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...


Are you two guys going to kiss each other? I wanted to give you something better than a winner acknowledgement? I bet we can guess WHAT that is. If you can't express yourself in fewer words, then cut it in two and say "stay tuned next week for the second half."[/QUOTE]
Why? Because you refuse to read? How about you find someplace else to try looking smart- it ain't working here.[/QUOTE]
Tell you what-you stop being a pompous ass, and I will start reading an extra sentence from each of you boring brothers. If I wanted to look smart, I would do it with someone who had more than a ninth grade education-they could appreciate it. And by the way, you don't accept that everyone is wired differently or you would not slide in the word "but" after it. Food for thought.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 4, 2019)

.[/QUOTE]
This country started with slaves-not all were equal. And morality is a personal belief-not yours to declare. What happens in the "lost states" Cal. Ar. NM. and Tex is up to the people there-if they encourage illegals so be it. It is when they migrate north and create other problems I won't get into, I object strongly. And politicians looking good-that will NEVER happen. I don't fear so there is no exuding-and your mind is not simple, but you are right, you just don't get it. I don't like illegals-never did and never will so anything I can do to hinder them, here or elsewhere, that's what I will do.[/QUOTE]

The starting of this country is immaterial. What is material is the phrase used to address the grievances, and the fact that it is the foundation for constituting a gov't to help prevent a narrow minded, tyrannical force from encroaching on those rights listed with the phrase and broadened with the words "among these are".
Most people, except loud mouthed idiots, don't have a problem with those of latin descent. In fact they hire them to swing weed eaters from can to can't- that you display a racist attitude in public speaks to your *superiority complex* and allows you to publicly insult yourself as well with the shallow mindedness of a narrow minded attitude.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 4, 2019)

Racists generally fear people they are unfamiliar with. They may claim to be familiar as a way of justifying their weakness and fear (i.e. their racism), but their idea of "familiar" is limited to 10 second clips online and/or glaring from under a trucker cap at people they pass on the street.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 4, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> .


This country started with slaves-not all were equal. And morality is a personal belief-not yours to declare. What happens in the "lost states" Cal. Ar. NM. and Tex is up to the people there-if they encourage illegals so be it. It is when they migrate north and create other problems I won't get into, I object strongly. And politicians looking good-that will NEVER happen. I don't fear so there is no exuding-and your mind is not simple, but you are right, you just don't get it. I don't like illegals-never did and never will so anything I can do to hinder them, here or elsewhere, that's what I will do.[/QUOTE]

The starting of this country is immaterial. What is material is the phrase used to address the grievances, and the fact that it is the foundation for constituting a gov't to help prevent a narrow minded, tyrannical force from encroaching on those rights listed with the phrase and broadened with the words "among these are".
Most people, except loud mouthed idiots, don't have a problem with those of latin descent. In fact they hire them to swing weed eaters from can to can't- that you display a racist attitude in public speaks to your *superiority complex* and allows you to publicly insult yourself as well with the shallow mindedness of a narrow minded attitude.[/QUOTE]
What is can to can't? How dare you judge my God given right to judge as I see fit. And it is NOT racist you self righteous bastard. And who said anything about Latin-jump the gun much? I am talking illegal-ILLEGAL! Or don't you think laws are worthwhile? And the only one with any complex is you-mocking me who you don't even know. Got to do it tho right-show YOUR superiority, right-look in the mirror if you want to see narrow mindedness-but your attempt at smear tactics IS pretty good-I'll give you that.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Why? Because you refuse to read? How about you find someplace else to try looking smart- it ain't working here.[/QUOTE]
Tell you what-you stop being a pompous ass, and I will start reading an extra sentence from each of you boring brothers. If I wanted to look smart, I would do it with someone who had more than a ninth grade education-they could appreciate it. And by the way, you don't accept that everyone is wired differently or you would not slide in the word "but" after it. Food for thought.[/QUOTE]

Quite frankly, I don't give a shit whether you read what I write or not.  There are other people who are drawn to the thread.  And I left Gdjjr what I wanted to leave in addition to the Winner acknowledgment.  You are one sick individual that probably *IS *a real fairy to imply something sexual.

I stick with 10 to 12 paragraphs.  Now just to make it plain - if you expect anybody on this board to believe you have more than a grammar school education, you are crazy as Hell.

Furthermore, if you aren't a racist, there isn't a cow in Texas.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 4, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> 
> $8-9 thousand a second.
> 
> ...




Occasionally, you have to restart the clock on the OP.  We have people trying to derail the thread, so I will reiterate a theme that I've made throughout this thread:

*EVERY* non-partisan study has concluded that undocumented foreigners pay as much in taxes as they receive in benefits and services from the government.  When you argue immigration from an economic perspective, the right loses its pretext for the extreme measures they want to impose.  If you receive a Social Security check or Social Security Disability check, you better check the facts before jumping onto anyone's bandwagon on this:

Undocumented immigrants quietly pay billions into Social Security and receive no benefits - Marketplace

We do have issues with the numbers of foreigners coming here.Their legal status is a red herring since the Constitution never gave the federal government any *authority* over foreigners except as it relates to creating an uniform Rule of Naturalization (Article I  Section 8 of the Constitution.)  The current crop of immigration laws were put into place due to a power grab by the United States Supreme Court.  Their rulings gave a *power* to Congress that the Constitution did not.  In essence, those laws have NO constitutional basis for even existing.

The reason so many foreigners come here is to take advantage of economic opportunities willingly offered.  It is called free enterprise.  The people advocating for a wall don't like it when you take their pretexts away, but foreigners come here because it is economically profitable for business and profitable for the foreigner.

*IF* America truly wanted more Americans to go to work, they would get that lazy ass generation of American welfarites back into the workforce.  But those worshiping the wall* will not *do that.  They need a dependent class in order to sell stupid people on the nutty wall idea.  Meanwhile, the Democrats, who started the wall talk, get third world voters so that it becomes easier to make the Republicans out to be the bad guys, disenfranchise the whites, and then bury the Republican party so as to make way for the United Socialist States of Amerika.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 5, 2019)

[/QUOTE]
What is can to can't? How dare you judge my God given right to judge as I see fit. And it is NOT racist you self righteous bastard. And who said anything about Latin-jump the gun much? I am talking illegal-ILLEGAL! Or don't you think laws are worthwhile? And the only one with any complex is you-mocking me who you don't even know. Got to do it tho right-show YOUR superiority, right-look in the mirror if you want to see narrow mindedness-but your attempt at smear tactics IS pretty good-I'll give you that.[/QUOTE]

I don't believe you have the authority to judge. Since most immigrants are of an ethnicity other than white it is racist.
Where a wall is being built it is being built between Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California and Mexico. Mexicans are not white, though some Spanish influence in their heritage did create a pretty nice off-white, not quite brown pigmentation- and those dark eyes and dark hair is, in some cases, beautiful to look at.

I'm not mocking you, I'm pointing out a personality flaw I see. I don't claim, or even imply I'm superior to anyone and I am the one, not you, using the phrase that all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights- there are no ethnic, or citizenship caveats. I respect all men until they disrespect me. I believe in living by the Golden Rule. I believe in setting a good example. Sadly, bad examples by authority figures are more prevalent and I at times wonder why I keep it up- then I remember a vow I made to me and mine- to leave my space a little better than I found it. However, I'm a bit philosophical as well and find quotes from those a lot smarter than me helpful and validation for my beliefs. I also know that Individual effort is what will make a difference, hopefully, exponentially, and (to quote Washington) when the seeds of liberty take root it is a plant of rapid growth- I also know that bad for liberty seeds planted in sponges for brains bear fruit as well- I know that we're living it- this conversation is indicative of those seeds.

I don't believe in forcing others to do my bidding through having their liberty's restricted, by law, for whatever-

As for worthwhile laws I see very few that are moral and the two, moral and legal, rarely meet. Most laws are revenue generators for law writers and lawyers and judges. ALL laws restrict Liberty and punish for crimes others have committed hoping they prevent similar crimes, and fail to do that. BUT, they sometimes are used to punish an actual criminal who actually harmed another person or property. They OFTEN punish, through wealth confiscation, property seizure and incarceration because idiots demand liberty should be punished even if no real crime has been committed.

If you have to ask what from can to can't means that is your problem and with your alleged higher education you should have been taught, from the get-go, how to find an answer to a question, not given an answer to pass a test. Maybe you should contact your center for indoctrination and see about a refund.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...


Tell you what-you stop being a pompous ass, and I will start reading an extra sentence from each of you boring brothers. If I wanted to look smart, I would do it with someone who had more than a ninth grade education-they could appreciate it. And by the way, you don't accept that everyone is wired differently or you would not slide in the word "but" after it. Food for thought.[/QUOTE]

Quite frankly, I don't give a shit whether you read what I write or not.  There are other people who are drawn to the thread.  And I left Gdjjr what I wanted to leave in addition to the Winner acknowledgment.  You are one sick individual that probably *IS *a real fairy to imply something sexual.

I stick with 10 to 12 paragraphs.  Now just to make it plain - if you expect anybody on this board to believe you have more than a grammar school education, you are crazy as Hell.

Furthermore, if you aren't a racist, there isn't a cow in Texas.[/QUOTE]
Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Quite frankly, I don't give a shit whether you read what I write or not.  There are other people who are drawn to the thread.  And I left Gdjjr what I wanted to leave in addition to the Winner acknowledgment.  You are one sick individual that probably *IS *a real fairy to imply something sexual.

I stick with 10 to 12 paragraphs.  Now just to make it plain - if you expect anybody on this board to believe you have more than a grammar school education, you are crazy as Hell.

Furthermore, if you aren't a racist, there isn't a cow in Texas.[/QUOTE]
Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico. [/QUOTE]

Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico. [/QUOTE]

Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?[/QUOTE]

The biggest ego I see on this thread is that of Third Party.  The censors have kept me from saying what I'd really like to say to Third Party, but I digress.

When the guy with the biggest ego goes after the people willing to engage in civil discourse and projects, you have to realize he doesn't have much in the way of an education.  Now he admits to his real age.  So, we've done what we needed to do.

Our 12 year old doesn't understand that this thread is about the supposed "_costs"_ of undocumented foreigners being here.  Any costs are the direct result of having a citizenry wherein half of them are dependent upon the government for at least some portion of their livelihood.  Since the citizenry does not pick themselves up by the bootstraps and get a job, that is *THEIR* fault.  *NOBODY *is forcing Americans to put their children on drugs and create the most drug addicts of any nation in the world except the government, school officials, doctors, mental health officials and Big Pharma - it's an internal problem.  

Lately we've witnessed children scaling Trump's wall; Mexicans using $80 saws to cut through it and learned of a negative environmental impact that would be irreversible with a wall.  Military personnel are being arrested by the dozens for engaging in human trafficking.  So, we're trading one set of problems for another and my objection is related to the peripheral laws that have *already cost more *than the pro-wall side claims the foreigners cost.  They're spending dollars to save nickles.  That is BEFORE you ever get to my objection regarding lost Liberties and the assault on the Constitution.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public? [/QUOTE]


Who are you addressing this stuff to?

Third Party makes this a sexual thing and you're chastising me for not caring whether or not he reads my posts?  WTH is going on here?

I think you had better go back and reread what you've written.  It makes no sense; misquotes people out of context and if you thought Third Party is ahead of the game, you have to explain all the times you've thanked me over him.[/QUOTE]

I think there is some serious confusion going on here- I think he's confusing himself with his own words.

This is a copy and paste - 
(Third Party) Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico. [/QUOTE]

(me) Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?

This format sucks- it posts too many quotes in one response to make sense of it.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...




Who are you addressing this stuff to?

Third Party makes this a sexual thing and you're chastising me for not caring whether or not he reads my posts?  WTH is going on here?

I think you had better go back and reread what you've written.  It makes no sense; misquotes people out of context and if you thought Third Party is ahead of the game, you have to explain all the times you've thanked me over him.[/QUOTE]

I think there is some serious confusion going on here- I think he's confusing himself with his own words.

This is a copy and paste -
(Third Party) Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico. [/QUOTE]

(me) Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?

This format sucks- it posts too many quotes in one response to make sense of it.[/QUOTE]

I deleted my posting to you and changed it.  At first, it looked as though you were addressing me.  It was really you quoting Junior, the 12 year old.  I don't do the multi quote crap as this is the kind of chaos it causes - and nobody knows or cares who said what at some point.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico. [/QUOTE]

Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?[/QUOTE]
Surely you are smart enough to realize YOU are the one being insulted. If you want it to stop, just say"please stop" and we can explore one of your lengthy discourses.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?[/QUOTE]

The biggest ego I see on this thread is that of Third Party.  The censors have kept me from saying what I'd really like to say to Third Party, but I digress.

When the guy with the biggest ego goes after the people willing to engage in civil discourse and projects, you have to realize he doesn't have much in the way of an education.  Now he admits to his real age.  So, we've done what we needed to do.

Our 12 year old doesn't understand that this thread is about the supposed "_costs"_ of undocumented foreigners being here.  Any costs are the direct result of having a citizenry wherein half of them are dependent upon the government for at least some portion of their livelihood.  Since the citizenry does not pick themselves up by the bootstraps and get a job, that is *THEIR* fault.  *NOBODY *is forcing Americans to put their children on drugs and create the most drug addicts of any nation in the world except the government, school officials, doctors, mental health officials and Big Pharma - it's an internal problem. 

Lately we've witnessed children scaling Trump's wall; Mexicans using $80 saws to cut through it and learned of a negative environmental impact that would be irreversible with a wall.  Military personnel are being arrested by the dozens for engaging in human trafficking.  So, we're trading one set of problems for another and my objection is related to the peripheral laws that have *already cost more *than the pro-wall side claims the foreigners cost.  They're spending dollars to save nickles.  That is BEFORE you ever get to my objection regarding lost Liberties and the assault on the Constitution.[/QUOTE]
The wall has become secondary to two guys attacking me. I'll keep fighting, and I hereby give the moderators permission to let any naughty word you post about me "slip" by.-I can take it. And without reading the bulk of your post, I'll say you throw any anti wall thought you come up with at the readers here, without any thought to another point of view. *Very* _open minded_ of you.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?[/QUOTE]
Surely you are smart enough to realize YOU are the one being insulted. If you want it to stop, just say"please stop" and we can explore one of your lengthy discourses.[/QUOTE]

If you consider 10 or 12 paragraphs to be a "_lengthy discourse_" then your level of mental midgetry precludes you being able to do anything except insult your fellow posters.

Who you insult and how many times is on you.  It adds nothing to the substantive portion of this thread and it destroys the credibility of the build the wall - deport 'em all crowd.  Your political position rests on the lobbying efforts of people like you.

When you are trying to insult people and refusing to get into the nuts and bolts of the discussion, most rational people realize you're blowing smoke and don't have anything save of an obsession with a wall.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...




Who are you addressing this stuff to?

Third Party makes this a sexual thing and you're chastising me for not caring whether or not he reads my posts?  WTH is going on here?

I think you had better go back and reread what you've written.  It makes no sense; misquotes people out of context and if you thought Third Party is ahead of the game, you have to explain all the times you've thanked me over him.[/QUOTE]

I think there is some serious confusion going on here- I think he's confusing himself with his own words.

This is a copy and paste -
(Third Party) Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico. [/QUOTE]

(me) Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?

This format sucks- it posts too many quotes in one response to make sense of it.[/QUOTE]
So now you blame the format-I told you guys your posts are too long and now you have confused yourselves.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



I think there is some serious confusion going on here- I think he's confusing himself with his own words.

This is a copy and paste -
(Third Party) Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico. [/QUOTE]

(me) Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?

This format sucks- it posts too many quotes in one response to make sense of it.[/QUOTE]

I deleted my posting to you and changed it.  At first, it looked as though you were addressing me.  It was really you quoting Junior, the 12 year old.  I don't do the multi quote crap as this is the kind of chaos it causes - and nobody knows or cares who said what at some point.[/QUOTE]
Knew you would cave


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...



The biggest ego I see on this thread is that of Third Party.  The censors have kept me from saying what I'd really like to say to Third Party, but I digress.

When the guy with the biggest ego goes after the people willing to engage in civil discourse and projects, you have to realize he doesn't have much in the way of an education.  Now he admits to his real age.  So, we've done what we needed to do.

Our 12 year old doesn't understand that this thread is about the supposed "_costs"_ of undocumented foreigners being here.  Any costs are the direct result of having a citizenry wherein half of them are dependent upon the government for at least some portion of their livelihood.  Since the citizenry does not pick themselves up by the bootstraps and get a job, that is *THEIR* fault.  *NOBODY *is forcing Americans to put their children on drugs and create the most drug addicts of any nation in the world except the government, school officials, doctors, mental health officials and Big Pharma - it's an internal problem.

Lately we've witnessed children scaling Trump's wall; Mexicans using $80 saws to cut through it and learned of a negative environmental impact that would be irreversible with a wall.  Military personnel are being arrested by the dozens for engaging in human trafficking.  So, we're trading one set of problems for another and my objection is related to the peripheral laws that have *already cost more *than the pro-wall side claims the foreigners cost.  They're spending dollars to save nickles.  That is BEFORE you ever get to my objection regarding lost Liberties and the assault on the Constitution.[/QUOTE]
The wall has become secondary to two guys attacking me. I'll keep fighting, and I hereby give the moderators permission to let any naughty word you post about me "slip" by.-I can take it. And without reading the bulk of your post, I'll say you throw any anti wall thought you come up with at the readers here, without any thought to another point of view. *Very* _open minded_ of you.[/QUOTE]

What makes me open minded is the fact that I can read more than 10 or 12 paragraphs.  What makes me open minded is that I read a post before responding.  What makes me open minded is that I'm willing to discuss the issues at hand without trying to insult people for being ignorant.  

You've added nothing to this discussion except proof that the wall worshipers are narrow minded bigots that engage in logical fallacies, insults, and off topic material when they cannot engage in civil discourse due to a lack of facts to substantiate their view.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Gdjjr said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



I think there is some serious confusion going on here- I think he's confusing himself with his own words.

This is a copy and paste -
(Third Party) Fairy? What are you, eighty?  If you did not care whether or not I read your rantings, you would not respond to me. And I do love you say people are drawn to the thread-sounds like something Trump would say. Then again, you both have giant egos. As far as grammar school education-you are right-you have been toe to toe with a 12 year old and losing. Lastly, the question is not whether the cows in Texas are racist, but if a wall would keep them from wandering into Mexico. [/QUOTE]

(me) Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?

This format sucks- it posts too many quotes in one response to make sense of it.[/QUOTE]
So now you blame the format-I told you guys your posts are too long and now you have confused yourselves. [/QUOTE]

Had Gdjjr not posted as soon as I did, there would have been no confusion.  Most of the confusion is due to the fact that you are so uneducated, *you* fail to use quotation marks when quoting people.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...


Surely you are smart enough to realize YOU are the one being insulted. If you want it to stop, just say"please stop" and we can explore one of your lengthy discourses.[/QUOTE]

If you consider 10 or 12 paragraphs to be a "_lengthy discourse_" then your level of mental midgetry precludes you being able to do anything except insult your fellow posters.

Who you insult and how many times is on you.  It adds nothing to the substantive portion of this thread and it destroys the credibility of the build the wall - deport 'em all crowd.  Your political position rests on the lobbying efforts of people like you.

When you are trying to insult people and refusing to get into the nuts and bolts of the discussion, most rational people realize you're blowing smoke and don't have anything save of an obsession with a wall.[/QUOTE]
You don't have the ability to be terse-that's what ALL this is about. And it sounds like you have read the minds of ALL the rest of the readers here who think I blow smoke. Nice trick, Kreskin! Read them again-you may be disappointed.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...



(me) Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?

This format sucks- it posts too many quotes in one response to make sense of it.[/QUOTE]

I deleted my posting to you and changed it.  At first, it looked as though you were addressing me.  It was really you quoting Junior, the 12 year old.  I don't do the multi quote crap as this is the kind of chaos it causes - and nobody knows or cares who said what at some point.[/QUOTE]
Knew you would cave[/QUOTE]

Son, I don't know what in the Hell that means.  I responded to a post wherein *YOU* failed to use quotation marks.  While I was proofreading the post, I noticed that *YOU* were insulting Gdjjr and myself.  That was confusing because *YOU* failed to use quotation marks.  Had Gdjjr given me 10 minutes to change my post, there would have been no confusion.

The format you see and what I see are different.  That is why, to be clear, when you quote someone else you use quotation marks "   "  to avoid confusion.  You making a federal case out of it confirms that you are only 12 and really need some help before thinking you are qualified to engage in a discussion of any magnitude. Trying to benefit off your own ignorant actions is quite funny, however.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


The wall has become secondary to two guys attacking me. I'll keep fighting, and I hereby give the moderators permission to let any naughty word you post about me "slip" by.-I can take it. And without reading the bulk of your post, I'll say you throw any anti wall thought you come up with at the readers here, without any thought to another point of view. *Very* _open minded_ of you.[/QUOTE]

What makes me open minded is the fact that I can read more than 10 or 12 paragraphs.  What makes me open minded is that I read a post before responding.  What makes me open minded is that I'm willing to discuss the issues at hand without trying to insult people for being ignorant. 

You've added nothing to this discussion except proof that the wall worshipers are narrow minded bigots that engage in logical fallacies, insults, and off topic material when they cannot engage in civil discourse due to a lack of facts to substantiate their view.[/QUOTE]
Reading does not make you open minded. You can read the adventures of Joe Bazooka on bubble gum wrappers, but not gain much knowledge. Being selective in what you read makes you intelligent. Thinking as you read makes you open minded.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Gdjjr said:
> ...



(me) Why do you insist on insulting your own intelligence in public?

This format sucks- it posts too many quotes in one response to make sense of it.[/QUOTE]
So now you blame the format-I told you guys your posts are too long and now you have confused yourselves. [/QUOTE]

Had Gdjjr not posted as soon as I did, there would have been no confusion.  Most of the confusion is due to the fact that you are so uneducated, *you* fail to use quotation marks when quoting people.[/QUOTE]
I will admit I don't like quotes-per se. If I repeat something you say of WORTH, I will say you said it. If it is silly, I won't bag you with it. Fair enough?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



I deleted my posting to you and changed it.  At first, it looked as though you were addressing me.  It was really you quoting Junior, the 12 year old.  I don't do the multi quote crap as this is the kind of chaos it causes - and nobody knows or cares who said what at some point.[/QUOTE]
Knew you would cave[/QUOTE]

Son, I don't know what in the Hell that means.  I responded to a post wherein *YOU* failed to use quotation marks.  While I was proofreading the post, I noticed that *YOU* were insulting Gdjjr and myself.  That was confusing because *YOU* failed to use quotation marks.  Had Gdjjr given me 10 minutes to change my post, there would have been no confusion.

The format you see and what I see are different.  That is why, to be clear, when you quote someone else you use quotation marks "   "  to avoid confusion.  You making a federal case out of it confirms that you are only 12 and really need some help before thinking you are qualified to engage in a discussion of any magnitude. Trying to benefit off your own ignorant actions is quite funny, however.[/QUOTE]
To cave means to give in-I'll get you a dictionary for the modern age-LOL


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



What makes me open minded is the fact that I can read more than 10 or 12 paragraphs.  What makes me open minded is that I read a post before responding.  What makes me open minded is that I'm willing to discuss the issues at hand without trying to insult people for being ignorant.

You've added nothing to this discussion except proof that the wall worshipers are narrow minded bigots that engage in logical fallacies, insults, and off topic material when they cannot engage in civil discourse due to a lack of facts to substantiate their view.[/QUOTE]
Reading does not make you open minded. You can read the adventures of Joe Bazooka on bubble gum wrappers, but not gain much knowledge. Being selective in what you read makes you intelligent. Thinking as you read makes you open minded.[/QUOTE]

Well Junior, that is about the best self indictment that I have ever read in all the time I've been on discussion boards.  You don't read our posts through and then comment on them.  Now you're realizing that?  

I'm quite open minded.  As you missed by not reading my posts, I spent six years in immigration law.  I've spent *years* at the table with the people whose propaganda you worship.  I can argue your case better than you.  You, on the other hand, don't have a clue as to where I stand, but you finally realize that you have to pay attention to BOTH sides to understand them.

I grew up around Don Black and David Duke.  They rented a basement in a house my father owned.  When I was on breaks from college, we discussed this stuff into the wee hours of the morning.  When you count the six years I spent in that one field of law, I'm generally the first guy around here attorneys ask for advice on their cases.  Thanks for that shy apology regarding your bigotry.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 5, 2019)

This reminds me of a conversation I had with an email friend several years ago in  that her emails truncated on top of emails-
I'm too simple minded for that type of confusion- so I'll just reiterate what I've already said- all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights- I do my best to live by it, with no caveats or reservations-


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


So now you blame the format-I told you guys your posts are too long and now you have confused yourselves. [/QUOTE]

Had Gdjjr not posted as soon as I did, there would have been no confusion.  Most of the confusion is due to the fact that you are so uneducated, *you* fail to use quotation marks when quoting people.[/QUOTE]
I will admit I don't like quotes-per se. If I repeat something you say of WORTH, I will say you said it. If it is silly, I won't bag you with it. Fair enough?[/QUOTE]

If you plan on having a lot of these pissing matches, you may want to take writing classes and do it right the first time.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Knew you would cave[/QUOTE]

Son, I don't know what in the Hell that means.  I responded to a post wherein *YOU* failed to use quotation marks.  While I was proofreading the post, I noticed that *YOU* were insulting Gdjjr and myself.  That was confusing because *YOU* failed to use quotation marks.  Had Gdjjr given me 10 minutes to change my post, there would have been no confusion.

The format you see and what I see are different.  That is why, to be clear, when you quote someone else you use quotation marks "   "  to avoid confusion.  You making a federal case out of it confirms that you are only 12 and really need some help before thinking you are qualified to engage in a discussion of any magnitude. Trying to benefit off your own ignorant actions is quite funny, however.[/QUOTE]
To cave means to give in-I'll get you a dictionary for the modern age-LOL[/QUOTE]

The problem for you is I haven't "_caved_" on anything.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Reading does not make you open minded. You can read the adventures of Joe Bazooka on bubble gum wrappers, but not gain much knowledge. Being selective in what you read makes you intelligent. Thinking as you read makes you open minded.[/QUOTE]

Well Junior, that is about the best self indictment that I have ever read in all the time I've been on discussion boards.  You don't read our posts through and then comment on them.  Now you're realizing that? 

I'm quite open minded.  As you missed by not reading my posts, I spent six years in immigration law.  I've spent *years* at the table with the people whose propaganda you worship.  I can argue your case better than you.  You, on the other hand, don't have a clue as to where I stand, but you finally realize that you have to pay attention to BOTH sides to understand them.

I grew up around Don Black and David Duke.  They rented a basement in a house my father owned.  When I was on breaks from college, we discussed this stuff into the wee hours of the morning.  When you count the six years I spent in that one field of law, I'm generally the first guy around here attorneys ask for advice on their cases.  Thanks for that shy apology regarding your bigotry.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for making my point-you confuse experience with knowledge. So you were not open minded about MY post. And I don't have to read more than two sentences of your posts to know where they are going-its all me,me,me. Even now name dropping David Duke-oh wow-can I get an autograph? There are none so blind as those who will not see-open YOUR eyes.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> This reminds me of a conversation I had with an email friend several years ago in  that her emails truncated on top of emails-
> I'm too simple minded for that type of confusion- so I'll just reiterate what I've already said- all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights- I do my best to live by it, with no caveats or reservations-





*RESPONSE* -  The quote feature seems not to work properly here as it usually puts the post you're quoting in a box of its own and the background a darker color.

Be that as it may, I believe what you believe in.  It's just a simple way of saying do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

As we're witnessing, not everyone believes that.  Unable to put forth a cogent argument, this has become a private pissing match for a 12 year old.  For those into wall worship, if you disagree with their solution, you are their enemy.  Still, what I find perplexing; what seems not to make sense is why they would destroy their own culture and their own heritage just to empower a tyrannical government.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Had Gdjjr not posted as soon as I did, there would have been no confusion.  Most of the confusion is due to the fact that you are so uneducated, *you* fail to use quotation marks when quoting people.[/QUOTE]
I will admit I don't like quotes-per se. If I repeat something you say of WORTH, I will say you said it. If it is silly, I won't bag you with it. Fair enough?[/QUOTE]

If you plan on having a lot of these pissing matches, you may want to take writing classes and do it right the first time.[/QUOTE]
So you would rather continue arguing? OK-but I have to go for my morning constitutional now. I look forward to swapping sentences with you and consonant happy gdjjr.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



Well Junior, that is about the best self indictment that I have ever read in all the time I've been on discussion boards.  You don't read our posts through and then comment on them.  Now you're realizing that?

I'm quite open minded.  As you missed by not reading my posts, I spent six years in immigration law.  I've spent *years* at the table with the people whose propaganda you worship.  I can argue your case better than you.  You, on the other hand, don't have a clue as to where I stand, but you finally realize that you have to pay attention to BOTH sides to understand them.

I grew up around Don Black and David Duke.  They rented a basement in a house my father owned.  When I was on breaks from college, we discussed this stuff into the wee hours of the morning.  When you count the six years I spent in that one field of law, I'm generally the first guy around here attorneys ask for advice on their cases.  Thanks for that shy apology regarding your bigotry.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for making my point-you confuse experience with knowledge. So you were not open minded about MY post. And I don't have to read more than two sentences of your posts to know where they are going-its all me,me,me. Even now name dropping David Duke-oh wow-can I get an autograph? There are none so blind as those who will not see-open YOUR eyes.[/QUOTE]


*RESPONSE* -  Your refusal to read more than three sentences works to your disadvantage.  My knowledge base allows me to make *YOUR* argument better than you can and still defeat it. 

The fact that you don't know the players in the game puts you at a disadvantage of  not being able to fully understand even your own position.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


I will admit I don't like quotes-per se. If I repeat something you say of WORTH, I will say you said it. If it is silly, I won't bag you with it. Fair enough?[/QUOTE]

If you plan on having a lot of these pissing matches, you may want to take writing classes and do it right the first time.[/QUOTE]
So you would rather continue arguing? OK-but I have to go for my morning constitutional now. I look forward to swapping sentences with you and consonant happy gdjjr.[/QUOTE]

Actually the pissing match part is getting boring.  You need to quit laying around in mommy's house and go the Hell to school.  

I have to get out of here and get some real work done today.  I'm not arguing with you.  You've been dealt a serious spanking today and are too stupid to realize it.  All Gdjjr and I need to do from here on out with this thread is to add to the beat down you were subjected to.  When we point out that what you're for is *control*, nothing more need be said.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Thanks for making my point-you confuse experience with knowledge. So you were not open minded about MY post. And I don't have to read more than two sentences of your posts to know where they are going-its all me,me,me. Even now name dropping David Duke-oh wow-can I get an autograph? There are none so blind as those who will not see-open YOUR eyes.[/QUOTE]


*RESPONSE* -  Your refusal to read more than three sentences works to your disadvantage.  My knowledge base allows me to make *YOUR* argument better than you can and still defeat it.

The fact that you don't know the players in the game puts you at a disadvantage of  not being able to fully understand even your own position.[/QUOTE]
Clever-typing *response.* That's one reason I use large lettering-its easy to discern.
I just saw a post from someone I respect on here, but it was too long, so I skipped it. You need to understand some people will do things you don't like or understand-that's life. I have no disadvantage or lack of understanding-that is YOUR misconception. As an FYI-if I took the time to read 10 of your paragraphs, that time could have been used to read a paragraph from 10 other posters, and I like to play the numbers.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



If you plan on having a lot of these pissing matches, you may want to take writing classes and do it right the first time.[/QUOTE]
So you would rather continue arguing? OK-but I have to go for my morning constitutional now. I look forward to swapping sentences with you and consonant happy gdjjr.[/QUOTE]

Actually the pissing match part is getting boring.  You need to quit laying around in mommy's house and go the Hell to school. 

I have to get out of here and get some real work done today.  I'm not arguing with you.  You've been dealt a serious spanking today and are too stupid to realize it.  All Gdjjr and I need to do from here on out with this thread is to add to the beat down you were subjected to.  When we point out that what you're for is *control*, nothing more need be said.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, my mother is dead-or do you have a wisecrack about that? What work are you going to do? Or is it a secret? So you and guitar are going to tag team me now? Good idea-two half wits are better than one. Control like beauty is in the eye of the beholder-I do not seek control, but I can see you are *out* of control.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...




*RESPONSE* -  Your refusal to read more than three sentences works to your disadvantage.  My knowledge base allows me to make *YOUR* argument better than you can and still defeat it.

The fact that you don't know the players in the game puts you at a disadvantage of  not being able to fully understand even your own position.[/QUOTE]
Clever-typing *response.* That's one reason I use large lettering-its easy to discern.
I just saw a post from someone I respect on here, but it was too long, so I skipped it. You need to understand some people will do things you don't like or understand-that's life. I have no disadvantage or lack of understanding-that is YOUR misconception. As an FYI-if I took the time to read 10 of your paragraphs, that time could have been used to read a paragraph from 10 other posters, and I like to play the numbers.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  I'm not here to impress you nor even exchange posts with you personally.  You have an inflated opinion of your worth on this discussion board - a real legend in your own mind.  

When you answer a posting without reading it, you are proving the level of idiocy by which *you* operate from.  If you don't read the paragraphs I provide, someone else may read them.  Then they get to see a 12 year old smart ass that* thinks* he knows all about the world versus posters like Gdjjr and figure out that you a fake, phony poseur with NO knowledge base to work from and NO facts to substantiate your case.  

Unable to stay on point - and the issue here is the *alleged costs* of undocumented immigrants, you switch to a nutty wall idea and when that didn't work out, you tried personal attacks.  You've been exposed and we can now return to the topic at hand.  

The reality is - wall or no wall, the foreigners will continue to come here and new and novel approaches will be utilized to facilitate their entry into the United States.  They are profitable for those who work, own businesses, *AND* they supply the drugs that our society believes they need in order to cope with life.  Laws and walls have no impact on the supply and demand of foreigners that fill a void left by people too sorry and lazy to work.  Furthermore, as long as we keep creating drug addicts, the foreigners will find new and novel ways to supply them... BTW, the government is profiting off the drug trade as well, so don't think that stops because a wall gets put up.  Then again, the people who worship a wall don't seek to solve any problem - real or perceived.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


So you would rather continue arguing? OK-but I have to go for my morning constitutional now. I look forward to swapping sentences with you and consonant happy gdjjr.[/QUOTE]

Actually the pissing match part is getting boring.  You need to quit laying around in mommy's house and go the Hell to school.

I have to get out of here and get some real work done today.  I'm not arguing with you.  You've been dealt a serious spanking today and are too stupid to realize it.  All Gdjjr and I need to do from here on out with this thread is to add to the beat down you were subjected to.  When we point out that what you're for is *control*, nothing more need be said.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, my mother is dead-or do you have a wisecrack about that? What work are you going to do? Or is it a secret? So you and guitar are going to tag team me now? Good idea-two half wits are better than one. Control like beauty is in the eye of the beholder-I do not seek control, but I can see you are *out* of control.[/QUOTE]

Son, if Gdjjr or I divided our IQ by 4 we'd still have 5 times the IQ you've displayed on this board.  Whether you choose to lose or learn is up to you. 

My work is simple.  I have a ministry. I go out and solicit handyman jobs in the low income house district that are owned by retirees and those with a low income.  Then I get guys that have little to no money - even the homeless to do the work.  Low income people get their homes repaired for a modest price; the unemployed and homeless make a few dollars and our church provides a free service to both.

Anyone that don't kiss your ass and worship at the altar of the wall is out of control in your opinion. You cannot even focus on the topic at hand - which don't have squat to do with what you want.  If you can't focus on the topic, there is no need for us to compare knowledge or IQ scores.  You lose.  You're incompetent and cannot stay on point.  So, insult me all you want.  You cannot change the facts.  You don't pack the gear and nobody cares what you think.  We're discussing the *alleged costs* of undocumented foreigners in the U.S.  You can join the conversation or play the victim role.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Clever-typing *response.* That's one reason I use large lettering-its easy to discern.
I just saw a post from someone I respect on here, but it was too long, so I skipped it. You need to understand some people will do things you don't like or understand-that's life. I have no disadvantage or lack of understanding-that is YOUR misconception. As an FYI-if I took the time to read 10 of your paragraphs, that time could have been used to read a paragraph from 10 other posters, and I like to play the numbers.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  I'm not here to impress you-too late nor even exchange posts with you personally-you just did.  You have an inflated opinion of your worth-how would you know? on this discussion board - a real legend in your own mind. 

When you answer a posting without reading it, you are proving the level of idiocy by which *you* operate from-no, it shows an advanced mind capable of accurate prediction. If you don't read the paragraphs I provide, someone else may read them.  Then they get to see a 12 year old smart ass that* thinks* he knows all about the world versus posters like Gdjjr and figure out that you a fake, phony poseur with NO knowledge base to work from and NO facts to substantiate your case-ONLY YOUR OPINION-WHICH IS WHY I DON'T READ ALL YOUR STUFF.

Unable to stay on point - and the issue here is the *alleged costs* of undocumented immigrants, you switch to a nutty wall idea and when that didn't work out, you tried personal attacks.  You've been exposed and we can now return to the topic at hand. No one knows all the costs, obvious and hidden of illegal aliens. But its more than YOU think.

The reality is - wall or no wall, the foreigners will continue to come here and new and novel approaches will be utilized to facilitate their entry into the United States.  They are profitable-not proven for those who work, own businesses, *AND* they supply the drugs that our society believes they need in order to cope with life-like heroin and fentanyl Laws and walls have no impact on the supply and demand of foreigners that fill a void left by people too sorry and lazy to work-so you are calling your fellow Americans lazy and sorry? WOW!.  Furthermore, as long as we keep creating drug addicts, the foreigners will find new and novel ways to supply them... BTW, the government is profiting off the drug trade as well, so don't think that stops because a wall gets put up.  Then again, the people who worship a wall don't seek to solve any problem - real or perceived.[/QUOTE]
Like ACA, a wall is an incremental step. First tighten illegal entry law. Next, the wall. Next, better technology all along it. Next, more agents at the border. Next, interior roundup and deputizing American citizens to report illegals and their helpers. God bless America!


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Actually the pissing match part is getting boring.  You need to quit laying around in mommy's house and go the Hell to school.

I have to get out of here and get some real work done today.  I'm not arguing with you.  You've been dealt a serious spanking today and are too stupid to realize it.  All Gdjjr and I need to do from here on out with this thread is to add to the beat down you were subjected to.  When we point out that what you're for is *control*, nothing more need be said.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, my mother is dead-or do you have a wisecrack about that? What work are you going to do? Or is it a secret? So you and guitar are going to tag team me now? Good idea-two half wits are better than one. Control like beauty is in the eye of the beholder-I do not seek control, but I can see you are *out* of control.[/QUOTE]

Son, if Gdjjr or I divided our IQ by 4 we'd still have 5 times the IQ you've displayed on this board.  Whether you choose to lose or learn is up to you.

My work is simple.  I have a ministry. I go out and solicit handyman jobs in the low income house district that are owned by retirees and those with a low income.  Then I get guys that have little to no money - even the homeless to do the work.  Low income people get their homes repaired for a modest price; the unemployed and homeless make a few dollars and our church provides a free service to both.

Anyone that don't kiss your ass and worship at the altar of the wall is out of control in your opinion. You cannot even focus on the topic at hand - which don't have squat to do with what you want.  If you can't focus on the topic, there is no need for us to compare knowledge or IQ scores.  You lose.  You're incompetent and cannot stay on point.  So, insult me all you want.  You cannot change the facts.  You don't pack the gear and nobody cares what you think.  We're discussing the *alleged costs* of undocumented foreigners in the U.S.  You can join the conversation or play the victim role.[/QUOTE]
It sounds like you are looking for a handout for your church or you are a wanna be Jimmy Carter. Don't want my ass kissed-I am not a perv. And call undocumented foreigners what they really are-ILLEGAL ALIENS! Undocumented foreigners are spies.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



*RESPONSE*:  I'm not here to impress you-too late nor even exchange posts with you personally-you just did.  You have an inflated opinion of your worth-how would you know? on this discussion board - a real legend in your own mind.

When you answer a posting without reading it, you are proving the level of idiocy by which *you* operate from-no, it shows an advanced mind capable of accurate prediction. If you don't read the paragraphs I provide, someone else may read them.  Then they get to see a 12 year old smart ass that* thinks* he knows all about the world versus posters like Gdjjr and figure out that you a fake, phony poseur with NO knowledge base to work from and NO facts to substantiate your case-ONLY YOUR OPINION-WHICH IS WHY I DON'T READ ALL YOUR STUFF.

Unable to stay on point - and the issue here is the *alleged costs* of undocumented immigrants, you switch to a nutty wall idea and when that didn't work out, you tried personal attacks.  You've been exposed and we can now return to the topic at hand. No one knows all the costs, obvious and hidden of illegal aliens. But its more than YOU think.

The reality is - wall or no wall, the foreigners will continue to come here and new and novel approaches will be utilized to facilitate their entry into the United States.  They are profitable-not proven for those who work, own businesses, *AND* they supply the drugs that our society believes they need in order to cope with life-like heroin and fentanyl Laws and walls have no impact on the supply and demand of foreigners that fill a void left by people too sorry and lazy to work-so you are calling your fellow Americans lazy and sorry? WOW!.  Furthermore, as long as we keep creating drug addicts, the foreigners will find new and novel ways to supply them... BTW, the government is profiting off the drug trade as well, so don't think that stops because a wall gets put up.  Then again, the people who worship a wall don't seek to solve any problem - real or perceived.[/QUOTE]
Like ACA, a wall is an incremental step. First tighten illegal entry law. Next, the wall. Next, better technology all along it. Next, more agents at the border. Next, interior roundup and deputizing American citizens to report illegals and their helpers. God bless America![/QUOTE]

IF you have a point to make, you should make it.  Yes, I called my fellow Americans lazy.  HALF of them are dependent upon the government for at least part of their daily bread while Trump boasts that unemployment is down to under 3 percent (which is statistical ZERO.)  Many of them are just like you:  living off someone else, spending all day trying pick personal fights instead of doing something beneficial for your country.

Again, there is *NO* authority in the Constitution to do what you want done *NOR IS THERE ANY LEGITIMATE REASON TO DO SO*.

Since there ARE ways of determining approximate costs of foreigners being here, so are there ways of determining their approximate *CONTRIBUTIONS*.  For example, if you have some home remodeling done and save - let us say 5 grand, then that value is in your home where the bank (which operates on fractional reserve banking) can then loan 20 grand more to people starting businesses and buying homes based off the value of your home. Remember, banks can loan 4 dollars for every 1 they hold in assets.

IF Bubba had over-charged you and you paid 5 grand more than you normally would, he would spend most of his money on junk made in China, Japan, etc.  There are two columns in the ledger sheet.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Sorry, my mother is dead-or do you have a wisecrack about that? What work are you going to do? Or is it a secret? So you and guitar are going to tag team me now? Good idea-two half wits are better than one. Control like beauty is in the eye of the beholder-I do not seek control, but I can see you are *out* of control.[/QUOTE]

Son, if Gdjjr or I divided our IQ by 4 we'd still have 5 times the IQ you've displayed on this board.  Whether you choose to lose or learn is up to you.

My work is simple.  I have a ministry. I go out and solicit handyman jobs in the low income house district that are owned by retirees and those with a low income.  Then I get guys that have little to no money - even the homeless to do the work.  Low income people get their homes repaired for a modest price; the unemployed and homeless make a few dollars and our church provides a free service to both.

Anyone that don't kiss your ass and worship at the altar of the wall is out of control in your opinion. You cannot even focus on the topic at hand - which don't have squat to do with what you want.  If you can't focus on the topic, there is no need for us to compare knowledge or IQ scores.  You lose.  You're incompetent and cannot stay on point.  So, insult me all you want.  You cannot change the facts.  You don't pack the gear and nobody cares what you think.  We're discussing the *alleged costs* of undocumented foreigners in the U.S.  You can join the conversation or play the victim role.[/QUOTE]
It sounds like you are looking for a handout for your church or you are a wanna be Jimmy Carter. Don't want my ass kissed-I am not a perv. And call undocumented foreigners what they really are-ILLEGAL ALIENS! Undocumented foreigners are spies.[/QUOTE]

If I called undocumented foreigners _"illegal aliens_," I'd have to refer to you as a raging idiot.  This where I part company with racists.

1)  All persons are considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers.  Consequently the legal status of any human being must be determined BEFORE you can call them illegal any freaking thing

2)  There is *NO* provision in the Constitution of the United States giving the federal government any authority over foreigners unless and until they decide to become citizens.  Now, personally, I think that the 14th Amendment was* illegally ratified*.  Nevertheless, the 14th Amendment guarantees to all *persons *(as differentiated from citizens) a government granted right to Liberty.  There is no authority to infringe upon the Liberty of others

3)  The 14th Amendment makes no distinction as to a person's immigration status (sic) when doling out the government grant of Liberty.

I don't ask for handouts from a swinging soul.  I've been involved in the church since the mid 1970s.  We have never passed a collection plate nor solicited for money for any reason.  You kept asking the same question.  I give you an answer and you use that for another of your stupid allegations - crap you would never say to any person face to face.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Like ACA, a wall is an incremental step. First tighten illegal entry law. Next, the wall. Next, better technology all along it. Next, more agents at the border. Next, interior roundup and deputizing American citizens to report illegals and their helpers. God bless America![/QUOTE]

IF you have a point to make, you should make it.  Yes, I called my fellow Americans lazy.  HALF of them are dependent upon the government for at least part of their daily bread while Trump boasts that unemployment is down to under 3 percent (which is statistical ZERO.)  Many of them are just like you:  living off someone else, spending all day trying pick personal fights instead of doing something beneficial for your country.

Again, there is *NO* authority in the Constitution to do what you want done *NOR IS THERE ANY LEGITIMATE REASON TO DO SO*.

Since there ARE ways of determining approximate costs of foreigners being here, so are there ways of determining their approximate *CONTRIBUTIONS*.  For example, if you have some home remodeling done and save - let us say 5 grand, then that value is in your home where the bank (which operates on fractional reserve banking) can then loan 20 grand more to people starting businesses and buying homes based off the value of your home. Remember, banks can loan 4 dollars for every 1 they hold in assets.

IF Bubba had over-charged you and you paid 5 grand more than you normally would, he would spend most of his money on junk made in China, Japan, etc.  There are two columns in the ledger sheet.[/QUOTE]
Glad you are honest about the lazy comment-that is refreshing. Sorry to disappoint, but i worked for 50 years and now enjoy the fruits of that labor. When I did work, I saw the effects of illegals in the community. Besides the normal dirt, drugs and sex traffic, you had identity theft, burglary, and fraud. For every illegal you saw as upstanding, I saw three criminals(even tho technically they all are anyway. So your experiences and my experiences don't match. What a surprise. I tried to do something for my country several times-I called INS and ICE to pick up illegals. They said they could not or would not-what a game! So you keep patting them on the head and letting them in, and I will vouch for your character when you are locked up for aiding and abetting.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Son, if Gdjjr or I divided our IQ by 4 we'd still have 5 times the IQ you've displayed on this board.  Whether you choose to lose or learn is up to you.

My work is simple.  I have a ministry. I go out and solicit handyman jobs in the low income house district that are owned by retirees and those with a low income.  Then I get guys that have little to no money - even the homeless to do the work.  Low income people get their homes repaired for a modest price; the unemployed and homeless make a few dollars and our church provides a free service to both.

Anyone that don't kiss your ass and worship at the altar of the wall is out of control in your opinion. You cannot even focus on the topic at hand - which don't have squat to do with what you want.  If you can't focus on the topic, there is no need for us to compare knowledge or IQ scores.  You lose.  You're incompetent and cannot stay on point.  So, insult me all you want.  You cannot change the facts.  You don't pack the gear and nobody cares what you think.  We're discussing the *alleged costs* of undocumented foreigners in the U.S.  You can join the conversation or play the victim role.[/QUOTE]
It sounds like you are looking for a handout for your church or you are a wanna be Jimmy Carter. Don't want my ass kissed-I am not a perv. And call undocumented foreigners what they really are-ILLEGAL ALIENS! Undocumented foreigners are spies.[/QUOTE]

If I called undocumented foreigners _"illegal aliens_," I'd have to refer to you as a raging idiot.  This where I part company with racists.

1)  All persons are considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers.  Consequently the legal status of any human being must be determined BEFORE you can call them illegal any freaking thing

2)  There is *NO* provision in the Constitution of the United States giving the federal government any authority over foreigners unless and until they decide to become citizens.  Now, personally, I think that the 14th Amendment was* illegally ratified*.  Nevertheless, the 14th Amendment guarantees to all *persons *(as differentiated from citizens) a government granted right to Liberty.  There is no authority to infringe upon the Liberty of others

3)  The 14th Amendment makes no distinction as to a person's immigration status (sic) when doling out the government grant of Liberty.

I don't ask for handouts from a swinging soul.  I've been involved in the church since the mid 1970s.  We have never passed a collection plate nor solicited for money for any reason.  You kept asking the same question.  I give you an answer and you use that for another of your stupid allegations - crap you would never say to any person face to face.[/QUOTE]
Calm down-I am not even trying to bug you, but I do disagree with some of your views. I do not consider an illegal alien a "person". I consider them a foreign invader-just like the Japs in WWII. I have to go read the 14th amendment to reply to the rest of your post.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



IF you have a point to make, you should make it.  Yes, I called my fellow Americans lazy.  HALF of them are dependent upon the government for at least part of their daily bread while Trump boasts that unemployment is down to under 3 percent (which is statistical ZERO.)  Many of them are just like you:  living off someone else, spending all day trying pick personal fights instead of doing something beneficial for your country.

Again, there is *NO* authority in the Constitution to do what you want done *NOR IS THERE ANY LEGITIMATE REASON TO DO SO*.

Since there ARE ways of determining approximate costs of foreigners being here, so are there ways of determining their approximate *CONTRIBUTIONS*.  For example, if you have some home remodeling done and save - let us say 5 grand, then that value is in your home where the bank (which operates on fractional reserve banking) can then loan 20 grand more to people starting businesses and buying homes based off the value of your home. Remember, banks can loan 4 dollars for every 1 they hold in assets.

IF Bubba had over-charged you and you paid 5 grand more than you normally would, he would spend most of his money on junk made in China, Japan, etc.  There are two columns in the ledger sheet.[/QUOTE]
Glad you are honest about the lazy comment-that is refreshing. Sorry to disappoint, but i worked for 50 years and now enjoy the fruits of that labor. When I did work, I saw the effects of illegals in the community. Besides the normal dirt, drugs and sex traffic, you had identity theft, burglary, and fraud. For every illegal you saw as upstanding, I saw three criminals(even tho technically they all are anyway. So your experiences and my experiences don't match. What a surprise. I tried to do something for my country several times-I called INS and ICE to pick up illegals. They said they could not or would not-what a game! So you keep patting them on the head and letting them in, and I will vouch for your character when you are locked up for aiding and abetting.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*: Now you're retired.  Earlier, you were 12.  You need to go really slow and explain what it is you think you're accomplishing.  

We live in a free nation. We cannot just go around picking up people without probable cause. That is why ICE turned you down.  Of course, I ended up with the government trying to prosecute me on some of the legislation you lobbied for because you cannot understand the 14th Amendment.  Then, because people like you disagreed with the concept of Liberty for all, a couple of wall worshipers tried to con the government into killing me.  It almost worked.

You need to to the bank and get $50 then go to the dog pound and buy yourself a dog.  You need to name that dog Life.  That way you can say you have one.

At the end of the day, if I accept your argument at face value, if the United States Supreme Court declares that all undocumented foreigners can stay in the United States after paying a fine, any back taxes and registering as guest workers, you would be fine with their presence.  Correct?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


It sounds like you are looking for a handout for your church or you are a wanna be Jimmy Carter. Don't want my ass kissed-I am not a perv. And call undocumented foreigners what they really are-ILLEGAL ALIENS! Undocumented foreigners are spies.[/QUOTE]

If I called undocumented foreigners _"illegal aliens_," I'd have to refer to you as a raging idiot.  This where I part company with racists.

1)  All persons are considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers.  Consequently the legal status of any human being must be determined BEFORE you can call them illegal any freaking thing

2)  There is *NO* provision in the Constitution of the United States giving the federal government any authority over foreigners unless and until they decide to become citizens.  Now, personally, I think that the 14th Amendment was* illegally ratified*.  Nevertheless, the 14th Amendment guarantees to all *persons *(as differentiated from citizens) a government granted right to Liberty.  There is no authority to infringe upon the Liberty of others

3)  The 14th Amendment makes no distinction as to a person's immigration status (sic) when doling out the government grant of Liberty.

I don't ask for handouts from a swinging soul.  I've been involved in the church since the mid 1970s.  We have never passed a collection plate nor solicited for money for any reason.  You kept asking the same question.  I give you an answer and you use that for another of your stupid allegations - crap you would never say to any person face to face.[/QUOTE]
Calm down-I am not even trying to bug you, but I do disagree with some of your views. I do not consider an illegal alien a "person". I consider them a foreign invader-just like the Japs in WWII. I have to go read the 14th amendment to reply to the rest of your post.[/QUOTE]

Disagreeing with my viewpoints is perfectly acceptable in a civil discourse.  Now let us talk *FACTS*.  According to the legal terminology, the term invasion means:

_"INVASION. The entry of a country by a public enemy, making war.
     2. The Constitution of the United States, art. 1, s. 8, gives power to 
congress "to provide for calling the militia to execute the laws of the 
Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions."  A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856._

Taking advantage of the free market economy is not waging war.  So your opinion is not fact.  It is in error.  IF this were a war, Trump would be required to seek a Declaration of War.

IF you don't believe that undocumented foreigners are "_persons_,"  then you will be happy to know that even my point of view favors your opinion at times.  In Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, non-whites are considered only three fifths of a person.  *Without* the 14th Amendment, undocumented foreigners - as well as Blacks -  would not be a "_person_."  Right now, however, they are.  The mishmash of laws on the books and contradictory statutes make your position untenable at the moment.  Maybe you should study the 14th Amendment... particularly that part where it was* illegally ratified*.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Glad you are honest about the lazy comment-that is refreshing. Sorry to disappoint, but i worked for 50 years and now enjoy the fruits of that labor. When I did work, I saw the effects of illegals in the community. Besides the normal dirt, drugs and sex traffic, you had identity theft, burglary, and fraud. For every illegal you saw as upstanding, I saw three criminals(even tho technically they all are anyway. So your experiences and my experiences don't match. What a surprise. I tried to do something for my country several times-I called INS and ICE to pick up illegals. They said they could not or would not-what a game! So you keep patting them on the head and letting them in, and I will vouch for your character when you are locked up for aiding and abetting.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*: Now you're retired.  Earlier, you were 12.  You need to go really slow and explain what it is you think you're accomplishing. 

We live in a free nation. We cannot just go around picking up people without probable cause. That is why ICE turned you down.  Of course, I ended up with the government trying to prosecute me on some of the legislation you lobbied for because you cannot understand the 14th Amendment.  Then, because people like you disagreed with the concept of Liberty for all, a couple of wall worshipers tried to con the government into killing me.  It almost worked.

You need to to the bank and get $50 then go to the dog pound and buy yourself a dog.  You need to name that dog Life.  That way you can say you have one.

At the end of the day, if I accept your argument at face value, if the United States Supreme Court declares that all undocumented foreigners can stay in the United States after paying a fine, any back taxes and registering as guest workers, you would be fine with their presence.  Correct?[/QUOTE]
First, the 14th talks about citizens-not humans. Liberty for ALL American CITIZENS-not invaders. I don't know how you almost got killed, but that sounds overly dramatic. The last pet I had i had to put down-won't get another. Your last sentence is tough-if they stay and pay, will they be recognized as citizens or just their offspring?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



If I called undocumented foreigners _"illegal aliens_," I'd have to refer to you as a raging idiot.  This where I part company with racists.

1)  All persons are considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers.  Consequently the legal status of any human being must be determined BEFORE you can call them illegal any freaking thing

2)  There is *NO* provision in the Constitution of the United States giving the federal government any authority over foreigners unless and until they decide to become citizens.  Now, personally, I think that the 14th Amendment was* illegally ratified*.  Nevertheless, the 14th Amendment guarantees to all *persons *(as differentiated from citizens) a government granted right to Liberty.  There is no authority to infringe upon the Liberty of others

3)  The 14th Amendment makes no distinction as to a person's immigration status (sic) when doling out the government grant of Liberty.

I don't ask for handouts from a swinging soul.  I've been involved in the church since the mid 1970s.  We have never passed a collection plate nor solicited for money for any reason.  You kept asking the same question.  I give you an answer and you use that for another of your stupid allegations - crap you would never say to any person face to face.[/QUOTE]
Calm down-I am not even trying to bug you, but I do disagree with some of your views. I do not consider an illegal alien a "person". I consider them a foreign invader-just like the Japs in WWII. I have to go read the 14th amendment to reply to the rest of your post.[/QUOTE]

Disagreeing with my viewpoints is perfectly acceptable in a civil discourse.  Now let us talk *FACTS*.  According to the legal terminology, the term invasion means:

_"INVASION. The entry of a country by a public enemy, making war.
     2. The Constitution of the United States, art. 1, s. 8, gives power to 
congress "to provide for calling the militia to execute the laws of the 
Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions."  A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856._

Taking advantage of the free market economy is not waging war.  So your opinion is not fact.  It is in error.  IF this were a war, Trump would be required to seek a Declaration of War.

IF you don't believe that undocumented foreigners are "_persons_,"  then you will be happy to know that even my point of view favors your opinion at times.  In Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, non-whites are considered only three fifths of a person.  *Without* the 14th Amendment, undocumented foreigners - as well as Blacks -  would not be a "_person_."  Right now, however, they are.  The mishmash of laws on the books and contradictory statutes make your position untenable at the moment.  Maybe you should study the 14th Amendment... particularly that part where it was* illegally ratified*.[/QUOTE]
Invader- 1. One who invades; an assailant; an encroacher; an intruder. Tomato Tomoto. 
Taking advantage-well put-but not acceptable.
Did read it, I feel justified in my views. Especially since *the law* calls illegals illegal.
And FYI, my rambling style is used to answer all your questions, tho not always in order-some find it hard to get used to.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



*RESPONSE*: Now you're retired.  Earlier, you were 12.  You need to go really slow and explain what it is you think you're accomplishing.

We live in a free nation. We cannot just go around picking up people without probable cause. That is why ICE turned you down.  Of course, I ended up with the government trying to prosecute me on some of the legislation you lobbied for because you cannot understand the 14th Amendment.  Then, because people like you disagreed with the concept of Liberty for all, a couple of wall worshipers tried to con the government into killing me.  It almost worked.

You need to to the bank and get $50 then go to the dog pound and buy yourself a dog.  You need to name that dog Life.  That way you can say you have one.

At the end of the day, if I accept your argument at face value, if the United States Supreme Court declares that all undocumented foreigners can stay in the United States after paying a fine, any back taxes and registering as guest workers, you would be fine with their presence.  Correct?[/QUOTE]
First, the 14th talks about citizens-not humans. Liberty for ALL American CITIZENS-not invaders. I don't know how you almost got killed, but that sounds overly dramatic. The last pet I had i had to put down-won't get another. Your last sentence is tough-if they stay and pay, will they be recognized as citizens or just their offspring?[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*: 

1)  The 14th Amendment talks about *PERSONS*.  Every PERSON born or naturalized in the United States is a *citizen* of the United States and is entitled to government granted _"privileges and immunities_."  *ALL PERSONS* (as differentiated from citizens) are granted Life, Liberty and Property" subject to Due Process of the law.

Citizen - granted unspecified immunities and privileges along with Life, Liberty, Property subject to Due Process

Person - granted Life,* Liberty,* Property subject to Due Process.

2)  What happened to me was not overly dramatic.  Cliff notes just for you:

A)  I win an election to an office

B) Opponent didn't like the results; goes to work for a government agency as a Confidential Informant accusing me of a felony

C) Using the so - called "_Patriot Act_," a government agency hatched a plan to raid my home, kill me and claim I resisted arrest

D)  News reporter gets wind of the plot and knows the allegations against me are total B.S. and blows the whistle on the government

E) The LEO that started the actions against me is dealt with in court

3)  Without the 14th Amendment, non-whites will not be citizens in any generation - born here or not.  Dred Scott v Sanford was a ruling that said, basically, the Constitution is a contract between we, the people and that entity called government.  We, the people, were restricted to the white race.  

So, with the 14th Amendment, what you want will NEVER happen.  Nullify the 14th and non-whites are not citizens, but mere guests.  HOWEVER, the *states* will retain the jurisdiction over foreigners as per the original intent of the Constitution.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Calm down-I am not even trying to bug you, but I do disagree with some of your views. I do not consider an illegal alien a "person". I consider them a foreign invader-just like the Japs in WWII. I have to go read the 14th amendment to reply to the rest of your post.[/QUOTE]

Disagreeing with my viewpoints is perfectly acceptable in a civil discourse.  Now let us talk *FACTS*.  According to the legal terminology, the term invasion means:

_"INVASION. The entry of a country by a public enemy, making war.
     2. The Constitution of the United States, art. 1, s. 8, gives power to 
congress "to provide for calling the militia to execute the laws of the 
Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions."  A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856._

Taking advantage of the free market economy is not waging war.  So your opinion is not fact.  It is in error.  IF this were a war, Trump would be required to seek a Declaration of War.

IF you don't believe that undocumented foreigners are "_persons_,"  then you will be happy to know that even my point of view favors your opinion at times.  In Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, non-whites are considered only three fifths of a person.  *Without* the 14th Amendment, undocumented foreigners - as well as Blacks -  would not be a "_person_."  Right now, however, they are.  The mishmash of laws on the books and contradictory statutes make your position untenable at the moment.  Maybe you should study the 14th Amendment... particularly that part where it was* illegally ratified*.[/QUOTE]
Invader- 1. One who invades; an assailant; an encroacher; an intruder. Tomato Tomoto. 
Taking advantage-well put-but not acceptable.
Did read it, I feel justified in my views. Especially since *the law* calls illegals illegal.
And FYI, my rambling style is used to answer all your questions, tho not always in order-some find it hard to get used to.[/QUOTE]

The law says no such thing.  It don't even refer to it as a crime.  People come here and IF they're caught, it is improper entry.  *The United States Supreme Court ruled that* *being in the United States without papers is not a crime.

Legal definitions are not subject to a layman's dictionary.  I cited from a legal dictionary.  Guess which one a judge would rely on.*


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...





Japan did not invade the United States during WWII.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


First, the 14th talks about citizens-not humans. Liberty for ALL American CITIZENS-not invaders. I don't know how you almost got killed, but that sounds overly dramatic. The last pet I had i had to put down-won't get another. Your last sentence is tough-if they stay and pay, will they be recognized as citizens or just their offspring?[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:

1)  The 14th Amendment talks about *PERSONS*.  Every PERSON born or naturalized in the United States is a *citizen* of the United States and is entitled to government granted _"privileges and immunities_."  *ALL PERSONS* (as differentiated from citizens) are granted Life, Liberty and Property" subject to Due Process of the law.

Citizen - granted unspecified immunities and privileges along with Life, Liberty, Property subject to Due Process

Person - granted Life,* Liberty,* Property subject to Due Process.

2)  What happened to me was not overly dramatic.  Cliff notes just for you:

A)  I win an election to an office

B) Opponent didn't like the results; goes to work for a government agency as a Confidential Informant accusing me of a felony

C) Using the so - called "_Patriot Act_," a government agency hatched a plan to raid my home, kill me and claim I resisted arrest

D)  News reporter gets wind of the plot and knows the allegations against me are total B.S. and blows the whistle on the government

E) The LEO that started the actions against me is dealt with in court

3)  Without the 14th Amendment, non-whites will not be citizens in any generation - born here or not.  Dred Scott v Sanford was a ruling that said, basically, the Constitution is a contract between we, the people and that entity called government.  We, the people, were restricted to the white race. 

So, with the 14th Amendment, what you want will NEVER happen.  Nullify the 14th and non-whites are not citizens, but mere guests.  HOWEVER, the *states* will retain the jurisdiction over foreigners as per the original intent of the Constitution.[/QUOTE]
First, if those are cliff notes, I'd hate to see the prose.
Due process to me says we honor the law about illegal aliens.
Too bad about your ordeal-can't help you there
You keep saying "what i want"-you don't KNOW. And you keep saying non-white and I keep saying illegal. Russians without papers are illegal aliens too and they ARE white.
What I want is work visas to deserving workers and deportation for illegal aliens. Period.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Disagreeing with my viewpoints is perfectly acceptable in a civil discourse.  Now let us talk *FACTS*.  According to the legal terminology, the term invasion means:

_"INVASION. The entry of a country by a public enemy, making war.
     2. The Constitution of the United States, art. 1, s. 8, gives power to 
congress "to provide for calling the militia to execute the laws of the 
Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions."  A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856._

Taking advantage of the free market economy is not waging war.  So your opinion is not fact.  It is in error.  IF this were a war, Trump would be required to seek a Declaration of War.

IF you don't believe that undocumented foreigners are "_persons_,"  then you will be happy to know that even my point of view favors your opinion at times.  In Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, non-whites are considered only three fifths of a person.  *Without* the 14th Amendment, undocumented foreigners - as well as Blacks -  would not be a "_person_."  Right now, however, they are.  The mishmash of laws on the books and contradictory statutes make your position untenable at the moment.  Maybe you should study the 14th Amendment... particularly that part where it was* illegally ratified*.[/QUOTE]
Invader- 1. One who invades; an assailant; an encroacher; an intruder. Tomato Tomoto. 
Taking advantage-well put-but not acceptable.
Did read it, I feel justified in my views. Especially since *the law* calls illegals illegal.
And FYI, my rambling style is used to answer all your questions, tho not always in order-some find it hard to get used to.[/QUOTE]

The law says no such thing.  It don't even refer to it as a crime.  People come here and IF they're caught, it is improper entry.  *The United States Supreme Court ruled that* *being in the United States without papers is not a crime.

Legal definitions are not subject to a layman's dictionary.  I cited from a legal dictionary.  Guess which one a judge would rely on.*[/QUOTE]
Why do Democrat candidates keep saying they want to reduce illegal entry from a crime to a misdemeanor?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Unkotare said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Aleutian islands?


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Disagreeing with my viewpoints is perfectly acceptable in a civil discourse.  Now let us talk *FACTS*.  According to the legal terminology, the term invasion means:

_"INVASION. The entry of a country by a public enemy, making war.
     2. The Constitution of the United States, art. 1, s. 8, gives power to 
congress "to provide for calling the militia to execute the laws of the 
Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions."  A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856._

Taking advantage of the free market economy is not waging war.  So your opinion is not fact.  It is in error.  IF this were a war, Trump would be required to seek a Declaration of War.

IF you don't believe that undocumented foreigners are "_persons_,"  then you will be happy to know that even my point of view favors your opinion at times.  In Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, non-whites are considered only three fifths of a person.  *Without* the 14th Amendment, undocumented foreigners - as well as Blacks -  would not be a "_person_."  Right now, however, they are.  The mishmash of laws on the books and contradictory statutes make your position untenable at the moment.  Maybe you should study the 14th Amendment... particularly that part where it was* illegally ratified*.[/QUOTE]
Invader- 1. One who invades; an assailant; an encroacher; an intruder. Tomato Tomoto. 
Taking advantage-well put-but not acceptable.
Did read it, I feel justified in my views. Especially since *the law* calls illegals illegal.
And FYI, my rambling style is used to answer all your questions, tho not always in order-some find it hard to get used to.[/QUOTE]

The law says no such thing.  It don't even refer to it as a crime.  People come here and IF they're caught, it is improper entry.  *The United States Supreme Court ruled that* *being in the United States without papers is not a crime.

Legal definitions are not subject to a layman's dictionary.  I cited from a legal dictionary.  Guess which one a judge would rely on.*[/QUOTE]
Looked up the law:

Gaining illegal entry into the United States is a criminal offense. When an individual is caught illegally entering into the U.S., he/she will be returned to his/her country of citizenship. In addition, he/she may be issued a ban, which will prohibit him/her from entering into the United States for a specified period of time.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...





Failed attempt at invasion.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 5, 2019)

Unkotare said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...


Did plant their flag for a time.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Unkotare said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



You are replying to the wrong poster.  Our buddy Third Party made that claim.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



*RESPONSE*:

1)  The 14th Amendment talks about *PERSONS*.  Every PERSON born or naturalized in the United States is a *citizen* of the United States and is entitled to government granted _"privileges and immunities_."  *ALL PERSONS* (as differentiated from citizens) are granted Life, Liberty and Property" subject to Due Process of the law.

Citizen - granted unspecified immunities and privileges along with Life, Liberty, Property subject to Due Process

Person - granted Life,* Liberty,* Property subject to Due Process.

2)  What happened to me was not overly dramatic.  Cliff notes just for you:

A)  I win an election to an office

B) Opponent didn't like the results; goes to work for a government agency as a Confidential Informant accusing me of a felony

C) Using the so - called "_Patriot Act_," a government agency hatched a plan to raid my home, kill me and claim I resisted arrest

D)  News reporter gets wind of the plot and knows the allegations against me are total B.S. and blows the whistle on the government

E) The LEO that started the actions against me is dealt with in court

3)  Without the 14th Amendment, non-whites will not be citizens in any generation - born here or not.  Dred Scott v Sanford was a ruling that said, basically, the Constitution is a contract between we, the people and that entity called government.  We, the people, were restricted to the white race.

So, with the 14th Amendment, what you want will NEVER happen.  Nullify the 14th and non-whites are not citizens, but mere guests.  HOWEVER, the *states* will retain the jurisdiction over foreigners as per the original intent of the Constitution.[/QUOTE]
First, if those are cliff notes, I'd hate to see the prose.
Due process to me says we honor the law about illegal aliens.
Too bad about your ordeal-can't help you there
You keep saying "what i want"-you don't KNOW. And you keep saying non-white and I keep saying illegal. Russians without papers are illegal aliens too and they ARE white.
What I want is work visas to deserving workers and deportation for illegal aliens. Period.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE:* You got three years of litigation and headlines in less than ten sentences and you still bitch.  Your IQ is lower than your shoe size.

The Constitution does not cover what you want done.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Invader- 1. One who invades; an assailant; an encroacher; an intruder. Tomato Tomoto. 
Taking advantage-well put-but not acceptable.
Did read it, I feel justified in my views. Especially since *the law* calls illegals illegal.
And FYI, my rambling style is used to answer all your questions, tho not always in order-some find it hard to get used to.[/QUOTE]

The law says no such thing.  It don't even refer to it as a crime.  People come here and IF they're caught, it is improper entry.  *The United States Supreme Court ruled that* *being in the United States without papers is not a crime.

Legal definitions are not subject to a layman's dictionary.  I cited from a legal dictionary.  Guess which one a judge would rely on.*[/QUOTE]
Why do Democrat candidates keep saying they want to reduce illegal entry from a crime to a misdemeanor?[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  That makes no sense and Democrats could never say that.  Crimes are misdemeanors and felonies.  Improper Entry is a federal civil misdemeanor - the federal equivalent of an Improper U Turn.  If they reduced the offense to anything lower, it wouldn't be an offense.  You can't get any lower than it is without transferring interactions with foreigners back to the states where it belongs.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 5, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Invader- 1. One who invades; an assailant; an encroacher; an intruder. Tomato Tomoto. 
Taking advantage-well put-but not acceptable.
Did read it, I feel justified in my views. Especially since *the law* calls illegals illegal.
And FYI, my rambling style is used to answer all your questions, tho not always in order-some find it hard to get used to.[/QUOTE]

The law says no such thing.  It don't even refer to it as a crime.  People come here and IF they're caught, it is improper entry.  *The United States Supreme Court ruled that* *being in the United States without papers is not a crime.

Legal definitions are not subject to a layman's dictionary.  I cited from a legal dictionary.  Guess which one a judge would rely on.*[/QUOTE]
Looked up the law:

Gaining illegal entry into the United States is a criminal offense. When an individual is caught illegally entering into the U.S., he/she will be returned to his/her country of citizenship. In addition, he/she may be issued a ban, which will prohibit him/her from entering into the United States for a specified period of time.
[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE: * No sir, it is not.  You have your nose up Trump's ass.  Ask *HIS* attorney:


You only want to believe those political propaganda prostitutes when they tell you what you want to hear, but before Trump got into wall worship,  his own attorney was telling the truth.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


First, if those are cliff notes, I'd hate to see the prose.
Due process to me says we honor the law about illegal aliens.
Too bad about your ordeal-can't help you there
You keep saying "what i want"-you don't KNOW. And you keep saying non-white and I keep saying illegal. Russians without papers are illegal aliens too and they ARE white.
What I want is work visas to deserving workers and deportation for illegal aliens. Period.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE:* You got three years of litigation and headlines in less than ten sentences and you still bitch.  Your IQ is lower than your shoe size.

The Constitution does not cover what you want done.[/QUOTE]
You don't know my shoe size.


----------



## WillowTree (Nov 6, 2019)

I never plan to visit Mexico.



Mexico Travel Advisory


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



The law says no such thing.  It don't even refer to it as a crime.  People come here and IF they're caught, it is improper entry.  *The United States Supreme Court ruled that* *being in the United States without papers is not a crime.

Legal definitions are not subject to a layman's dictionary.  I cited from a legal dictionary.  Guess which one a judge would rely on.*[/QUOTE]
Why do Democrat candidates keep saying they want to reduce illegal entry from a crime to a misdemeanor?[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  That makes no sense and Democrats could never say that.  Crimes are misdemeanors and felonies.  Improper Entry is a federal civil misdemeanor - the federal equivalent of an Improper U Turn.  If they reduced the offense to anything lower, it wouldn't be an offense.  You can't get any lower than it is without transferring interactions with foreigners back to the states where it belongs.[/QUOTE]
At the debates a number of Democrats did say that-I remember Beto and Booker saying it.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



The law says no such thing.  It don't even refer to it as a crime.  People come here and IF they're caught, it is improper entry.  *The United States Supreme Court ruled that* *being in the United States without papers is not a crime.

Legal definitions are not subject to a layman's dictionary.  I cited from a legal dictionary.  Guess which one a judge would rely on.*[/QUOTE]
Looked up the law:

Gaining illegal entry into the United States is a criminal offense. When an individual is caught illegally entering into the U.S., he/she will be returned to his/her country of citizenship. In addition, he/she may be issued a ban, which will prohibit him/her from entering into the United States for a specified period of time.
[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE: * No sir, it is not.  You have your nose up Trump's ass.  Ask *HIS* attorney:


You only want to believe those political propaganda prostitutes when they tell you what you want to hear, but before Trump got into wall worship,  his own attorney was telling the truth.[/QUOTE]
I got that right off the internet when I asked the question is illegal entry a crime? you better check YOUR sources. Save yourself some typing-Trump has nothing to do with this-I thought the wall was a good idea when Barry Goldwater proposed it and Hillary was a Goldwater girl.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



*RESPONSE:* You got three years of litigation and headlines in less than ten sentences and you still bitch.  Your IQ is lower than your shoe size.

The Constitution does not cover what you want done.[/QUOTE]
You don't know my shoe size.[/QUOTE]

It wouldn't matter.  It's quite low when compared to an IQ score.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Why do Democrat candidates keep saying they want to reduce illegal entry from a crime to a misdemeanor?[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  That makes no sense and Democrats could never say that.  Crimes are misdemeanors and felonies.  Improper Entry is a federal civil misdemeanor - the federal equivalent of an Improper U Turn.  If they reduced the offense to anything lower, it wouldn't be an offense.  You can't get any lower than it is without transferring interactions with foreigners back to the states where it belongs.[/QUOTE]
At the debates a number of Democrats did say that-I remember Beto and Booker saying it.[/QUOTE]

Then Democrats are plain dumb.  But, the Republicans are playing you too.  Crimes come in two flavors: misdemeanors and felonies.  Then you have civil law.  Civil law covers a lot of things, but it also covers offenses that do not rise to the level of a crime.

An example would be an improper U Turn.  An improper U Turn is an offense. You could pay a fine - even have to go to jail.  But, an Improper U Turn is a civil offense.  It is tried in traffic court and it does not go on your criminal record* UNLESS* you have repeated violations.  It works the same way for Improper Entry which is found in a CIVIL CODE in the U.S. Code (the official laws of the United States.)  IF the immigration officials catch you coming in, they can charge you with a host of *immigration related crimes* like eluding police, lying to LEOs, fake ID, etc.  However, if an immigrant gets in the U.S. undetected, the United States Supreme Court has ruled it is not a crime to be in the United States without papers.  It is a deportable offense (it's still against the law), but it just is not a crime.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


Looked up the law:

Gaining illegal entry into the United States is a criminal offense. When an individual is caught illegally entering into the U.S., he/she will be returned to his/her country of citizenship. In addition, he/she may be issued a ban, which will prohibit him/her from entering into the United States for a specified period of time.
[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE: * No sir, it is not.  You have your nose up Trump's ass.  Ask *HIS* attorney:


You only want to believe those political propaganda prostitutes when they tell you what you want to hear, but before Trump got into wall worship,  his own attorney was telling the truth.[/QUOTE]
I got that right off the internet when I asked the question is illegal entry a crime? you better check YOUR sources. Save yourself some typing-Trump has nothing to do with this-I thought the wall was a good idea when Barry Goldwater proposed it and Hillary was a Goldwater girl.[/QUOTE]

You can get a lot of shit off the Internet.  Giuliani and I have an advantage: we worked in immigration law.  Without your source telling where they get their information, they are are just shooting you a line of shit. 

1)  Improper Entry violations are not decided in a criminal court

2)  Congress tried to change the wording of the offense from Improper Entry to Unlawful Entry.  That legislation* failed 
*
3)*  In Title 8 USC 1325 the wording of the statute is IMPROPER ENTRY.  *This was previously explained to you and Title 8 is NOT the Criminal Code in the United States Code.  Crimes are in Title 18 of the US Code

4) Immigration related crimes are mentioned in Title 8 USC 1325 and prosecuted under Title 18.  IF Improper Entry were a crime, then Title 8 would not refer you to Title 18 of the US Code to prosecute the immigration related crimes.  It wouldn't need to

5)  Improper Entry is NOT listed as a crime in Title 18 of the US Code that covers Criminal Law

If you want to be IN this discussion, you're going to have to learn how to read.  I don't argue with idiots.  Quit being a sorry mother fucker and spend some time educating yourself or I will quit responding to you.

Here is what I found out about Goldwater:

"_Barry Goldwater jotted down some thoughts on where his beloved Arizona would be in 50 years. On immigration and Mexico, he said:

Our ties with Mexico will be much more firmly established in 2012 because, sometime within the next 50 years, the Mexican border will become as the Canadian border, a free one, with the formalities and red tape of ingress and egress cut to a minimum so that the residents of both countries can travel back and forth across the line as if it were not there_."

Barry Goldwater’s vision of open borders


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


You don't know my shoe size.[/QUOTE]

It wouldn't matter.  It's quite low when compared to an IQ score.[/QUOTE]
You don't know my IQ score-bet its higher than yours!


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



*RESPONSE*:  That makes no sense and Democrats could never say that.  Crimes are misdemeanors and felonies.  Improper Entry is a federal civil misdemeanor - the federal equivalent of an Improper U Turn.  If they reduced the offense to anything lower, it wouldn't be an offense.  You can't get any lower than it is without transferring interactions with foreigners back to the states where it belongs.[/QUOTE]
At the debates a number of Democrats did say that-I remember Beto and Booker saying it.[/QUOTE]

Then Democrats are plain dumb.  But, the Republicans are playing you too.  Crimes come in two flavors: misdemeanors and felonies.  Then you have civil law.  Civil law covers a lot of things, but it also covers offenses that do not rise to the level of a crime.

An example would be an improper U Turn.  An improper U Turn is an offense. You could pay a fine - even have to go to jail.  But, an Improper U Turn is a civil offense.  It is tried in traffic court and it does not go on your criminal record* UNLESS* you have repeated violations.  It works the same way for Improper Entry which is found in a CIVIL CODE in the U.S. Code (the official laws of the United States.)  IF the immigration officials catch you coming in, they can charge you with a host of *immigration related crimes* like eluding police, lying to LEOs, fake ID, etc.  However, if an immigrant gets in the U.S. undetected, the United States Supreme Court has ruled it is not a crime to be in the United States without papers.  It is a deportable offense (it's still against the law), but it just is not a crime.[/QUOTE]
I don't know, between the definition of illegal entry as a crime and the dems saying it, it seems compelling. To me, breaking and entering is a crime, unless your're in California.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Looked up the law:

Gaining illegal entry into the United States is a criminal offense. When an individual is caught illegally entering into the U.S., he/she will be returned to his/her country of citizenship. In addition, he/she may be issued a ban, which will prohibit him/her from entering into the United States for a specified period of time.
[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE: * No sir, it is not.  You have your nose up Trump's ass.  Ask *HIS* attorney:


You only want to believe those political propaganda prostitutes when they tell you what you want to hear, but before Trump got into wall worship,  his own attorney was telling the truth.[/QUOTE]
I got that right off the internet when I asked the question is illegal entry a crime? you better check YOUR sources. Save yourself some typing-Trump has nothing to do with this-I thought the wall was a good idea when Barry Goldwater proposed it and Hillary was a Goldwater girl.[/QUOTE]

You can get a lot of shit off the Internet.  Giuliani and I have an advantage: we worked in immigration law.  Without your source telling where they get their information, 
1)  Improper Entry violations are not decided in a criminal court

2)  Congress tried to change the wording of the offense from Improper Entry to Unlawful Entry.  That legislation* failed 
*
3)*  In Title 8 USC 1325 the wording of the statute is IMPROPER ENTRY.  *This was previously explained to you and Title 8 is NOT the Criminal Code in the United States Code.  Crimes are in Title 18 of the US Code

4) Immigration related crimes are mentioned in Title 8 USC 1325 and prosecuted under Title 18.  IF Improper Entry were a crime, then Title 8 would not refer you to Title 18 of the US Code to prosecute the immigration related crimes.  It wouldn't need to

5)  Improper Entry is NOT listed as a crime in Title 18 of the US Code that covers Criminal Law

If you want to be IN this discussion, you're going to have to learn how to read.  I don't argue with idiots.  Quit being a sorry mother fucker and spend some time educating yourself or I will quit responding to you.

Here is what I found out about Goldwater:TRY READING HIS STANCE IN THE 1964 ELECTION.

"_Barry Goldwater jotted down some thoughts on where his beloved Arizona would be in 50 years. On immigration and Mexico, he said:

Our ties with Mexico will be much more firmly established in 2012 because, sometime within the next 50 years, the Mexican border will become as the Canadian border, a free one, with the formalities and red tape of ingress and egress cut to a minimum so that the residents of both countries can travel back and forth across the line as if it were not there_."

Barry Goldwater’s vision of open borders[/QUOTE]
Well, you can quit responding to me, because I am NOT going to read any more at your behest. And since I don't take your insults seriously, you can save them for somebody else. And I shortened the post some to make for easier reading. Your're welcome.


----------



## toobfreak (Nov 6, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> $8-9 thousand a second.
> The Cost of Illegal Immigration Clock



B-But, Hoss!  We just cannot afford 20 billion to build a righteous wall to curb most of this!


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



It wouldn't matter.  It's quite low when compared to an IQ score.[/QUOTE]
You don't know my IQ score-bet its higher than yours![/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  You have a bet and at any amount you can name.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


At the debates a number of Democrats did say that-I remember Beto and Booker saying it.[/QUOTE]

Then Democrats are plain dumb.  But, the Republicans are playing you too.  Crimes come in two flavors: misdemeanors and felonies.  Then you have civil law.  Civil law covers a lot of things, but it also covers offenses that do not rise to the level of a crime.

An example would be an improper U Turn.  An improper U Turn is an offense. You could pay a fine - even have to go to jail.  But, an Improper U Turn is a civil offense.  It is tried in traffic court and it does not go on your criminal record* UNLESS* you have repeated violations.  It works the same way for Improper Entry which is found in a CIVIL CODE in the U.S. Code (the official laws of the United States.)  IF the immigration officials catch you coming in, they can charge you with a host of *immigration related crimes* like eluding police, lying to LEOs, fake ID, etc.  However, if an immigrant gets in the U.S. undetected, the United States Supreme Court has ruled it is not a crime to be in the United States without papers.  It is a deportable offense (it's still against the law), but it just is not a crime.[/QUOTE]
I don't know, between the definition of illegal entry as a crime and the dems saying it, it seems compelling. To me, breaking and entering is a crime, unless your're in California.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  You sound like something between a parrot and a National Socialist.  Keep repeating the same thing over and over - it still won't come true.  The is *NO* statute in the United States Code referring to improper entry as a crime.

The dumbasses you hang with have been preaching that shit since 2003.  They've lost more cases and the United States Supreme Court given them the beat down so many times that you'd think you would be embarrassed.  Yet you aren't... and you're too stupid to realize when you're outmatched.  You are a trip.  What happened when your side argued the claptrap you just posted?  Let me quote the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT word for word:

"_*As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States*. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U. S. 1032, 1038 (1984). If the police stop someone based on nothing more than possible removability, the usual predicate for an arrest is absent. When an alien is suspected of being removable, a federal official issues an administrative document called a Notice to Appear. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a); 8 CFR §239.1(a) (2012). The form does not authorize an arrest. Instead, it gives the alien information about the proceedings, including the time and date of the removal hearing. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a)(1). If an alien fails to appear, an in absentia order may direct removal. §1229a(5)(A)._"  *Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) *

When the United States Supreme Court rules, even Jesus has been reluctant to challenge their rulings - Congress NEVER has.  If you don't like this, you should simply acknowledge that the high Court never had jurisdiction beyond naturalization and allow their unconstitutional system to collapse.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


You don't know my IQ score-bet its higher than yours![/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  You have a bet and at any amount you can name.[/QUOTE]
Coin of the realm-one dollar


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Then Democrats are plain dumb.  But, the Republicans are playing you too.  Crimes come in two flavors: misdemeanors and felonies.  Then you have civil law.  Civil law covers a lot of things, but it also covers offenses that do not rise to the level of a crime.

An example would be an improper U Turn.  An improper U Turn is an offense. You could pay a fine - even have to go to jail.  But, an Improper U Turn is a civil offense.  It is tried in traffic court and it does not go on your criminal record* UNLESS* you have repeated violations.  It works the same way for Improper Entry which is found in a CIVIL CODE in the U.S. Code (the official laws of the United States.)  IF the immigration officials catch you coming in, they can charge you with a host of *immigration related crimes* like eluding police, lying to LEOs, fake ID, etc.  However, if an immigrant gets in the U.S. undetected, the United States Supreme Court has ruled it is not a crime to be in the United States without papers.  It is a deportable offense (it's still against the law), but it just is not a crime.[/QUOTE]
I don't know, between the definition of illegal entry as a crime and the dems saying it, it seems compelling. To me, breaking and entering is a crime, unless your're in California.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  You sound like something between a parrot and a National Socialist.  Keep repeating the same thing over and over - it still won't come true.  The is *NO* statute in the United States Code referring to improper entry as a crime.

The dumbasses you hang with have been preaching that shit since 2003.  They've lost more cases and the United States Supreme Court given them the beat down so many times that you'd think you would be embarrassed.  Yet you aren't... and you're too stupid to realize when you're outmatched.  You are a trip.  What happened when your side argued the claptrap you just posted?  Let me quote the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT word for word:

"_*As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States*. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U. S. 1032, 1038 (1984). If the police stop someone based on nothing more than possible removability, the usual predicate for an arrest is absent. When an alien is suspected of being removable, a federal official issues an administrative document called a Notice to Appear. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a); 8 CFR §239.1(a) (2012). The form does not authorize an arrest. Instead, it gives the alien information about the proceedings, including the time and date of the removal hearing. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a)(1). If an alien fails to appear, an in absentia order may direct removal. §1229a(5)(A)._"  *Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) *

When the United States Supreme Court rules, even Jesus has been reluctant to challenge their rulings - Congress NEVER has.  If you don't like this, you should simply acknowledge that the high Court never had jurisdiction beyond naturalization and allow their unconstitutional system to collapse.[/QUOTE]
First, I don't have a side, so I don't care. I just want the question answered accurately. You keep saying it is not a crime and that Democrats are dumb for saying it, but i am looking for these words-*It is not a crime to illegally enter the United States- from some Federal legal document.* "As a general rule" is too vague and only refers to remaining-not entering.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...



*RESPONSE*:  You have a bet and at any amount you can name.[/QUOTE]
Coin of the realm-one dollar[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE:*  Minimum bet $7500  We have to exchange addresses, find a place to administer the IQ test and get an impartial party to hold the money.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


I don't know, between the definition of illegal entry as a crime and the dems saying it, it seems compelling. To me, breaking and entering is a crime, unless your're in California.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE*:  You sound like something between a parrot and a National Socialist.  Keep repeating the same thing over and over - it still won't come true.  The is *NO* statute in the United States Code referring to improper entry as a crime.

The dumbasses you hang with have been preaching that shit since 2003.  They've lost more cases and the United States Supreme Court given them the beat down so many times that you'd think you would be embarrassed.  Yet you aren't... and you're too stupid to realize when you're outmatched.  You are a trip.  What happened when your side argued the claptrap you just posted?  Let me quote the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT word for word:

"_*As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States*. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U. S. 1032, 1038 (1984). If the police stop someone based on nothing more than possible removability, the usual predicate for an arrest is absent. When an alien is suspected of being removable, a federal official issues an administrative document called a Notice to Appear. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a); 8 CFR §239.1(a) (2012). The form does not authorize an arrest. Instead, it gives the alien information about the proceedings, including the time and date of the removal hearing. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a)(1). If an alien fails to appear, an in absentia order may direct removal. §1229a(5)(A)._"  *Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) *

When the United States Supreme Court rules, even Jesus has been reluctant to challenge their rulings - Congress NEVER has.  If you don't like this, you should simply acknowledge that the high Court never had jurisdiction beyond naturalization and allow their unconstitutional system to collapse.[/QUOTE]
First, I don't have a side, so I don't care. I just want the question answered accurately. You keep saying it is not a crime and that Democrats are dumb for saying it, but i am looking for these words-*It is not a crime to illegally enter the United States- from some Federal legal document.* "As a general rule" is too vague and only refers to remaining-not entering.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE:* The courts interpret the law.  The procedure for removal was laid out for you.  It is not a criminal process; the statute is NOT in the Criminal Code (Title 18)  Believe whatever in the Hell you like.  But, you are parroting the party line of National Socialists who have lost this battle every time they have taken it to court.  

Feel free to waste your time.  If you have anything related to the OP, I will discuss it.  This back and forth is only stroking your ego, so I'm out.  I laid out the facts.  My position has always been that the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified and we should leave it up to the states who they do and do not allow in.  That is the way it was originally and the bigger you make the federal government, the more problems you have.


----------



## Picaro (Nov 6, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> 
> $8-9 thousand a second.
> 
> ...



A Florida university professor was hired by a Democratic Party pol to find out how much immigration has cost the state of Florida over the years, and he found that the state suffered a net loss of around $2,400 per immigrant. He didn't distinguish between legal and illegal immigration, for obvious reasons and who was paying for the 'study', but it gives some idea of the costs overall, some states spending a lot more than Florida on them.

The Professor's name was Michael Denslow and the study is available online somewhere, unless somebody thought to hide it behind a paywall somewhere, like they have with the faggot studies and other facts they don't want the public to know, even though the public pays for these studies.

So, assuming Florida's net loss of $2,400 or so and a conservative estimate of 20,000,000 criminals running around, we can arrive at $48 billion a year net loss, not including the loss in wages to legal citizens due to these scum and their crooked employers. Wouldn't take much to double that estimate, of course, and it doesn't include legal immigrants, either, nor the medical costs of the epidemics and diseases they bring in with them.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Coin of the realm-one dollar[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE:*  Minimum bet $7500  We have to exchange addresses, find a place to administer the IQ test and get an impartial party to hold the money.[/QUOTE]
Trump will hold the money


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



*RESPONSE*:  You sound like something between a parrot and a National Socialist.  Keep repeating the same thing over and over - it still won't come true.  The is *NO* statute in the United States Code referring to improper entry as a crime.

The dumbasses you hang with have been preaching that shit since 2003.  They've lost more cases and the United States Supreme Court given them the beat down so many times that you'd think you would be embarrassed.  Yet you aren't... and you're too stupid to realize when you're outmatched.  You are a trip.  What happened when your side argued the claptrap you just posted?  Let me quote the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT word for word:

"_*As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States*. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U. S. 1032, 1038 (1984). If the police stop someone based on nothing more than possible removability, the usual predicate for an arrest is absent. When an alien is suspected of being removable, a federal official issues an administrative document called a Notice to Appear. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a); 8 CFR §239.1(a) (2012). The form does not authorize an arrest. Instead, it gives the alien information about the proceedings, including the time and date of the removal hearing. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a)(1). If an alien fails to appear, an in absentia order may direct removal. §1229a(5)(A)._"  *Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) *

When the United States Supreme Court rules, even Jesus has been reluctant to challenge their rulings - Congress NEVER has.  If you don't like this, you should simply acknowledge that the high Court never had jurisdiction beyond naturalization and allow their unconstitutional system to collapse.[/QUOTE]
First, I don't have a side, so I don't care. I just want the question answered accurately. You keep saying it is not a crime and that Democrats are dumb for saying it, but i am looking for these words-*It is not a crime to illegally enter the United States- from some Federal legal document.* "As a general rule" is too vague and only refers to remaining-not entering.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE:* The courts interpret the law.  The procedure for removal was laid out for you.  It is not a criminal process; the statute is NOT in the Criminal Code (Title 18)  Believe whatever in the Hell you like.  But, you are parroting the party line of National Socialists who have lost this battle every time they have taken it to court. 

Feel free to waste your time.  If you have anything related to the OP, I will discuss it.  This back and forth is only stroking your ego, so I'm out.  I laid out the facts.  My position has always been that the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified and we should leave it up to the states who they do and do not allow in.  That is the way it was originally and the bigger you make the federal government, the more problems you have.[/QUOTE]
You are right about one thing-this subject is beat to death. The most interesting thing going on now is the  presidential election. I see Steve Bullock of Montana running for the Dems and Trump for the Reps. What are your predictions?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Picaro said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> ...



*RESPONSE:  *If you read some of this thread, I have pointed out that there are two sides of the accounting ledger.  You are focusing on the "_costs_."  That is intellectual dishonesty.  You have to factor in the *contributions*.  When that was done, the non-partisan *Congressional Budget Office* did such a study in 2007 and concluded that immigrants paid as much into the system as they took in benefits:

https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/110th-congress-2007-2008/reports/12-6-immigration.pdf

Many times people such as yourself are being propagandized by think tanks like the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and Numbersusa.  ALL of those organizations were founded and financed by John Tanton, a eugenics activist with strong support from neo Nazi organizations that pioneered the talking points you see bandied about by their parrot on this thread.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 6, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


First, I don't have a side, so I don't care. I just want the question answered accurately. You keep saying it is not a crime and that Democrats are dumb for saying it, but i am looking for these words-*It is not a crime to illegally enter the United States- from some Federal legal document.* "As a general rule" is too vague and only refers to remaining-not entering.[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE:* The courts interpret the law.  The procedure for removal was laid out for you.  It is not a criminal process; the statute is NOT in the Criminal Code (Title 18)  Believe whatever in the Hell you like.  But, you are parroting the party line of National Socialists who have lost this battle every time they have taken it to court.

Feel free to waste your time.  If you have anything related to the OP, I will discuss it.  This back and forth is only stroking your ego, so I'm out.  I laid out the facts.  My position has always been that the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified and we should leave it up to the states who they do and do not allow in.  That is the way it was originally and the bigger you make the federal government, the more problems you have.[/QUOTE]
You are right about one thing-this subject is beat to death. The most interesting thing going on now is the  presidential election. I see Steve Bullock of Montana running for the Dems and Trump for the Reps. What are your predictions?[/QUOTE]


Unless some twisted fate of improbability happens, Donald Trump IS the next president, winning reelection against an inferior challenger, regardless of the best the Democrats can conjure up.  

Trump will turn on the right, as did all his Republican predecessors in my lifetime, and then the REAL Donald Trump will stand up.  His WWE affiliations make his actions predictable.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 6, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Third Party said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



*RESPONSE:* The courts interpret the law.  The procedure for removal was laid out for you.  It is not a criminal process; the statute is NOT in the Criminal Code (Title 18)  Believe whatever in the Hell you like.  But, you are parroting the party line of National Socialists who have lost this battle every time they have taken it to court.

Feel free to waste your time.  If you have anything related to the OP, I will discuss it.  This back and forth is only stroking your ego, so I'm out.  I laid out the facts.  My position has always been that the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified and we should leave it up to the states who they do and do not allow in.  That is the way it was originally and the bigger you make the federal government, the more problems you have.[/QUOTE]
You are right about one thing-this subject is beat to death. The most interesting thing going on now is the  presidential election. I see Steve Bullock of Montana running for the Dems and Trump for the Reps. What are your predictions?[/QUOTE]


Unless some twisted fate of improbability happens, Donald Trump IS the next president, winning reelection against an inferior challenger, regardless of the best the Democrats can conjure up. 

Trump will turn on the right, as did all his Republican predecessors in my lifetime, and then the REAL Donald Trump will stand up.  His WWE affiliations make his actions predictable.[/QUOTE]
I agree Trump will run, but the losses in Virginia and the Kentucky governorship indicate cracks in his support, doesn't it?


----------



## Picaro (Nov 7, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Actually as I said my source was from a study contracted for by Florida Democrats, so your typically stupid attempts at annoying the adults fails yet again. If you think the CBO is 'non-partisan' you're an idiot.


----------



## pismoe (Nov 7, 2019)

as a quick comment , I can see TRUMP turning on his supporters if he wins re-election .   My concern is simply because of his use of the words and concept of HUMANITARIAN Crisis on the Southern Border ,    -------------   just a comment .


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 7, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Third Party said:
> ...


You are right about one thing-this subject is beat to death. The most interesting thing going on now is the  presidential election. I see Steve Bullock of Montana running for the Dems and Trump for the Reps. What are your predictions?[/QUOTE]


Unless some twisted fate of improbability happens, Donald Trump IS the next president, winning reelection against an inferior challenger, regardless of the best the Democrats can conjure up.

Trump will turn on the right, as did all his Republican predecessors in my lifetime, and then the REAL Donald Trump will stand up.  His WWE affiliations make his actions predictable.[/QUOTE]
I agree Trump will run, but the losses in Virginia and the Kentucky governorship indicate cracks in his support, doesn't it?[/QUOTE]

*RESPONSE:  *The impeachment deal is damning.  My personal opinion is that if Trump's fate ends in impeachment, if that does not send this country into a civil war, then we're probably going to end up a socialist and tyrannical dictatorship in the next presidential cycle. Mitt Romney wants to be the nominee so badly that he's working behind the scenes to help the Dems.

FWIW, a really smart guy taught me once to never pay attention to what the news media was saying if you want to know what is really going on.  With Trump on Ukraine I'm an outsider, looking in.  It looks to me like Trump did not knowingly break the law.  If anything, he trusted Rudy because Trump knew enough about himself that he didn't know how to make some things happen when they need some legal knowledge or political experience.

It's either Rudy is responsible for any illegal acts OR Trump was careful enough to work things where Trump has plausible deniability.  *If *Trump gets impeached over this nothing B.S., I think those who back the wall would start a civil war IF one will ever be started.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 7, 2019)

Picaro said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



Idiot, huh?  Sounds like you are making a desperation post.  The CBO has about 250 employees.  Let me quote you something about that office:

"_The Speaker of the House of Representatives *and* the president pro tempore of the Senate jointly appoint CBO’s Director, after considering recommendations from the two Budget Committees. Directors are appointed for four-year terms and may be reappointed to the position; in addition, a Director serving at the expiration of a term may continue to serve until a successor is appointed. The Budget Act specifies that CBO’s Director is to be chosen without regard to political affiliation. CBO has had ten Directors and several Acting Directors_."

Organization and Staffing | Congressional Budget Office

You had an unnamed Democrat saying something that is also found in the talking points of John Tanton's think tanks.  OMG... How can that be?  I've explained this many times on this board.

The nutty wall idea was the Democrats pet project *BEFORE* Trump came along. Furthermore, manning the border was David Duke's idea *BEFORE* the Dems took up the cause. David Duke was a member of the Nazi Party before starting his own version of the Ku Klux Klan.  Duke has a friend from his college days and that friend shows us that there is a socialist taint to this wall idea.  Duke's college buddy is Don Black of Stormfront fame.

Bill Clinton picked up Duke's National Socialist talking points, even sounding like the build the wall guys of today.  Also let's not forget that Trump and the Clintons were social friends before Trump decided to change parties and become a Republican.  Let history be your guide:



How did we understand this in 1985 and now you're taking up a Democrat cause?  You got played.


----------



## Gdjjr (Nov 7, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> *If *Trump gets impeached over this nothing B.S.



IF this shit show actually is held in public all but the acolytes will see the corruption for what it is- it will turn into a he did it first and worse back and forth - those on the fence will make up their minds based on pre-determined answers to pre-determined questions of pre-determined witnesses- the Empire is failing/falling and the walls will come tumbling down. It's gone too far to say if, it's only when- Historians will assign the Time Line and the straw that broke the camels back. I only hope they aren't biased in their assessment and render their conclusions from an objective point of view.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 7, 2019)

pismoe said:


> as a quick comment , I can see TRUMP turning on his supporters if he wins re-election .   My concern is simply because of his use of the words and concept of HUMANITARIAN Crisis on the Southern Border ,    -------------   just a comment .



*RESPONSE*:  As you can see with Third Party's responses I have to write that word response in bold so that people can tell who said what.  Don't know how your quote will appear.

OK, Trump will not fully turn on his wall supporters.  Trump is wholly anti-gun and his Second Amendment supporters don't believe the truth about Trump any more than his wall supporters.  My objection to Trump is his anti-gun stance.  After all, Trump managed to violate THREE provisions of the Constitution with one single Executive Order and the right is as quiet as a church mouse.

Back to the issue at hand.  Rational people know the truth when they hear it.  It does not take a Nostradamus or Edgar Cayce to look into the future and see what is going to happen relative to immigration.

Entering the United States without papers is a federal civil misdemeanor.  Even if you cannot accept that truth, the civil statute still lists the offense as one that has the same maximum penalty as a *misdemeanor.* 

Since we all saw the push back when the feds began separating families, we know what is going to happen when American children begin suing in federal court over being separated from their undocumented parents.  IF the issue need be it will end in federal court wherein the court *WILL* rule that you cannot keep families apart over such a minor infraction.  The United States Supreme Court will rule that the actions of the federal government are a clear violation of the 8th Amendment. 

Your real problem is not who enters this country to exercise* Liberty*. The REAL issue is how many people we naturalize and make citizens each year.  Citizenship is a privilege. * Liberty is an unalienable Right.*  So, as foreigners entrench themselves in the federal legislature, the anti - immigrant laws are going to be over-ruled at one level or another.  Furthermore, Trump's laws are mostly Executive Orders and policies that any Democrat president can reverse with the stroke of a pen.  The Dems played the liberals and won their undying loyalty and now they have flipped the Republicans.  The end game is Globalism.  You got played.


----------



## Bo Didleysquat (Nov 7, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> 
> $8-9 thousand a second.
> 
> ...


And to think all americans ever had to do was alter their shopping habits and pay a bit more at the cash register to encourage capital to pay a bit more to hire americans.


----------



## Bo Didleysquat (Nov 7, 2019)

Gdjjr said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > *If *Trump gets impeached over this nothing B.S.
> ...


Don will simply be remembered as a Nero-like symptom of our empire in decline.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 7, 2019)

Bo Didleysquat said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> ...



If a real American had been concerned with the wages of Americans AND the Liberty of all men, instead of Donald Trump simply cutting corporate taxes, he would have stuck all this immigration nonsense on the back burner and told corporate America:

We're going to start with what was then a 39 percent tax for business.

If a company takes someone off welfare, disability, or unemployment they get a tax break

If a company brings jobs back to America they get a tax break

If a company hires an all American staff they get another tax break

If a company pays 15 percent more than an established poverty level, they get yet another tax break

If a company has a tuition program to pay employees some tuition benefits  and / or  on the job training leading to a certification in a field of employment (certified welder, electrician, etc.) they get another tax break.

If a company could utilize all those tax breaks, their tax rate would go from the old 39 percent to just 15 percent.  

You have to incentivize employers to hire Americans,  not infringe on them and try to criminalize Liberty.


----------



## Third Party (Nov 7, 2019)

Bo Didleysquat said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> ...


So the leave a penny, take a penny was supporting our millennial workforce?


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 7, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > *U.S. Code § 1325.Improper entry by alien*
> ...


It means you get thrown the hell back were you came from.

2nd offense is a Felony.........by our laws.........

Now you need to go to a foreign country without a passport and say the BS you have been saying here.

Enjoy...........People who obey the rules have no problems...............those that don't........should get thrown back............easy peasy.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 7, 2019)

eagle1462010 said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



*RESPONSE:*  You can cite a law all day long that you don't understand.  It won't change the fact that every practicing U.S. Attorney (those in charge of representing the government in enforcing that statute) along with immigration judges, the Dept. of Home (IN) Security and the courts have all verified the facts presented on this thread.  READ the thread and access the links.   Posting crap as large as you like don't take away from the fact that it is a civil offense and, legally speaking, is not that big of a deal.  

You can get butt hurt all you like; call me names; pretend to be something you are not, but if you ever want to challenge my patriotism, remember I can be reached via PM away from the eyes of mods.

If you like Mexico's immigration laws, I wish to Hell you would leave my country and go there.  Pack your shit and *LEAVE*.  This is the United States of America - the land of* LIBERTY.*  You are misinforming people while you finance your own destruction AND you are unable to find one, single, solitary post I've made wherein the facts are not exactly as I presented them.

If you get a DUI, it is a misdemeanor; do it repeatedly, it becomes a felony, so I didn't get whatever point you were trying to make.  

If the founders could read what you post, they would literally hang your ass for* treason.  *The statute you cite was not allowed to exist until ALL the founders / framers were dead and buried* AND THEN*, the United States Supreme Court had to legislate from the bench (an unconstitutional act) to give Congress the power to pass that kind of legislation.  

You seem not to be able to differentiate between *LIBERTY *and citizenship. You stupid, insane, dim witted, ignorant misguided political propaganda prostitutes don't have a clue.  IF you criminalize Liberty for one person, *NOT A SWINGING DICK AMONG US WILL HAVE LIBERTY.  *Citizenship, OTOH, is a privilege.  THAT is where you should focus your efforts.  Once YOU HAVE made enough people from foreign countries citizens, they will control Congress and this fight will be moot because they will vote you into oblivion and you will only exist to be some liberal's bitch.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 7, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


I sense butt hurt here with anyone who disagrees with you.  I simply don't care.  Every nation on earth has rules for entry.  Illegals violate the laws coming here without permission whether you like it or not.

Get the hell out of my country...........................Make me...........Born and raised and if you want some come get some.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 7, 2019)

eagle1462010 said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > eagle1462010 said:
> ...



If I knew what rock I had to flip over to see you face to face, I would buy your one way ticket to Mexico.

*YOU* are the one who got butt hurt.  You do your usual strategy of jumping into the middle of conversations without knowing what the Hell is being said, and spout your B.S.  The advantage I have over you is that I can present your views better than you can.

I know the difference between political propaganda used to motivate people to act and the actual laws that need addressing once people do act.  You don't.  You are a keyboard commando, hiding behind a board name on a discussion board that has never worked in immigration cases that were heard in immigration court.  I have.  So, you are the only one that gets butt hurt.  

I just get tired of your feminine whining and pretending to be a bad ass, but never around when the heat is on.  What you say to me is what men say to other men *in private* when they want to face off against them and see if they are what they* think* they are.  Give it up.  Cowards that act tough and try to start shit on the net live in a world of fear - and you are about the most insecure poster I've met in a good while.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Nov 7, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...


Your long winded butt hurt impresses NO ONE................You are the one getting more enraged when people do not agree with you.........

I could care less about your opinions................and you aren't throwing anyone out of this country.

They come across obeying our laws or we will throw them out.  It's that simple.  Just like the rest of the nations on earth.

Because you don't like isn't my problem........it's yours.........suck it up...........and deal with the fact that hardly anyone agrees with you on this thread.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 7, 2019)

eagle1462010 said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > eagle1462010 said:
> ...



I do not care who agrees with me or who disagrees with me.  I present the facts and let them stand on their own merits.  You want to make it personal, but you don't have the balls to do anything about it except make attack posts.  You aren't smart enough to have a civil conversation.

How about this?  If you don't like my posts, don't read the damn things.  That is simple enough.  Throw out as many people as you like, but they are going to keep coming back.  This will be moot after the next election, so it isn't worth telling your dumb ass how you're setting the movement back 50 more years.

You belong in Mexico, not the shining city on a hill.


----------



## Picaro (Nov 7, 2019)

eagle1462010 said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > eagle1462010 said:
> ...



He/she/it/mutant claims it's a 'lawyer'; as we can see it's clear why it isn't busy and has so much time to blather dumbass nonsense on the innernutz. Such trolling shouldn't be allowed in the CDZ if they were really serious about it being a 'Clean' zone.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 8, 2019)

Picaro said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Although I went to law school, I've made no such claim as to what I am right now. You are a liar.  Feel free to read this thread as we've covered that material and it has already been asked and answered.

What I can say to you is that you have to be a communist, atheist and or heathen to even contemplate criminalizing Liberty.

You have to be a stark raving idiot to push Trump's agenda which has been shown to be the Democrats way to wage a subtle form of genocide against the white people in the United States.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 8, 2019)

The usual suspects have shown up.  Now they want me banned for giving them sound advice on keeping Trump in office and calling it trolling.  The fact that my critics want to limit the First Amendment by censoring the Freedom of Expression should tell you who they are.  Then they wage war on Liberty.  That is strike two.  

Here are political fanatics that advocate enforcing existing laws.  But, the existing laws were put into place by Democrats for the sole purpose of diluting the white vote and making whites a minority.  Is that my critics cannot understand English OR are they working for some entity that hates America and the white people?

As we saw earlier in this thread, immigrants and the children of immigrants make up 13 percent of the federal legislators.  Of the 68 immigrants / children of immigrants 57 are Democrats and Bernie Sanders is an Independent.  Notice how my critics conveniently ignore that warning.  They want you focused on a wall.  Meanwhile, Congress is being taken over by Democrats.  You're losing to the Democrats; the build the wall guys strategies are to increase the influence of Democrats in Congress and to keep naturalizing a *million people* per year.  Ask yourself, honestly, what is wrong with this picture?


----------



## Zorro! (Nov 12, 2019)

Hossfly said:


> This is where our tax money is being wasted by liberals. OAN News network shows this every hour.
> 
> $8-9 thousand a second.
> 
> ...


That's interesting information.

There also is some other information in the news recently, about the costs of the different steps of illegal information that are supposed to be shouldered by the illegal immigrants that has been shifted to the taxpayer.

The costs incurred by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is primarily funded by fees charged to those seeking admission to the country. Or at least it would be if we were taking in enough money to pay for it all.

With that in mind, the Trump administration is proposing a revamp of the current fee structure, increasing the cost for immigration applications and adding a new fee for asylum claims. 

The Trump administration plans to raise fees on various immigration applications and impose a $50 fee on asylum claims.

In a statement released on Friday, Acting Director Ken Cuccinelli said that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), an agency funded almost entirely by fees, will be raising fees in order to match increasing expenditures. The administration’s proposed fee rule will be added to the Federal Register on Nov. 14.

“USCIS is required to examine incoming and outgoing expenditures, just like a business, and make adjustments based on that analysis. This proposed adjustment in fees would ensure more applicants cover the true cost of their applications and minimizes subsidies from an already over-extended system, ” Cuccinellii said.​
The USCIS is currently projected to be underfunded to the tune of $1.3 billion this year. These fee changes would go at least some way toward closing the gap.

And how did we get so far in the hole? As Stocking reported, consider that there were 6,382 pending asylum cases in January of 2010. As of January of this year, there were _325,277 pending affirmative asylum cases_. And every one of them takes time and manpower to record, investigate and process.

Asylum requests have increase by 51 TIMES.

Over the years these fees have been reviewed on a regular basis and slowly increased. If they are increasing faster now it’s because the rate of incoming applicants is growing exponentially. If the people doing the complaining want all of these costs dumped onto the general funds supported by taxpayers, they should get the Democrats to put that proposal into a legislative bill.


----------



## Zorro! (Nov 12, 2019)

mudwhistle said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...


Their moralistic self-righteous outrage is a little much.  Nobody was hunting down DACA, then Obama decided to turn them into a political football.  So now here we are at SCOTUS.

The President announced some time ago that he planned to start winding down and eventually ending DACA (the “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” program created by President Obama)* if* Congress failed to enact any sort of comprehensive immigration reform or supporting legislation. As with virtually all of his executive orders, this one was immediately challenged and remains tied up in court to this day. Now, however, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case and put it to rest once and for all. But as the Associated Press explains, the outcome is far from certain.

The Supreme Court is taking up the Trump administration’s plan to end legal protections that shield 660,000 immigrants from deportation, a case with strong political overtones amid the 2020 presidential election campaign.

All eyes will be on Chief Justice John Roberts when the court hears arguments Tuesday. Roberts is the conservative justice closest to the court’s center who also is keenly aware of public perceptions of an ideologically divided court.​


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 12, 2019)

Zorro! said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



You're shitting me, right?  If Trump feels the way you do, why not rescind the Executive Order signed by Obummer?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 13, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> ....  But, the existing laws were put into place by Democrats for the sole purpose of diluting the white vote and making whites a minority.  Is that my critics cannot understand English OR are they working for some entity that hates America and the white people?...


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 13, 2019)

Unkotare said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > ....  But, the existing laws were put into place by Democrats for the sole purpose of diluting the white vote and making whites a minority.  Is that my critics cannot understand English OR are they working for some entity that hates America and the white people?...




Comedian.  NOT.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 13, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



Have you concocted a brilliant plan to foil the nefarious plot to eliminate da white guys? I'm getting pretty nervous reading all your pathetic mewling.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 13, 2019)

Unkotare said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



A brilliant plan to eliminate white guys???  I think the only thing pathetic here is your inability to comprehend what you read and then not having enough common sense to ask for someone to elaborate before spewing your swill.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 13, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



What? Just trying to agree with your spineless, irrational panic.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 13, 2019)

Unkotare said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Don't project there dude.  I'm not hiding and if you have something to say, PM me.  There is one thing you can bank on, you are the only spineless one here.  

Truth - tell me for real: Are you admin, moderator, or troll?  Did you bother to see what this thread is about?  How did you just jump in to make personal attacks in open forum?  Are you trying to elicit a response?  I have a feeling you've done this before.  Have you ever actually called anyone out to find out if they were spineless?  Of course not.  The reason?  Trolls are spineless.

Now, if you have something to say about the OP, say it.  If not learn how to read what a topic is about before trying to get into a pissing match.  It's REAL unbecoming of even you.


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben (Nov 13, 2019)

Unkotare said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...


Uncle Torre you are a foul liberal bottom feeder. You can never appreciate the plight of this nation because you are integral to the problem. Your tactics are trite and facile. You ridicule those with genuine concern calling them racist and fear mongers.


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 13, 2019)

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...



You are a demented dude.  You sound like you want to polish a knob.  That guy's avatar appears to look like you picked the right one to suck up to.  Being able to be free from accountability makes people like you say really silly stuff - the kind of stuff you don't say in person.


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben (Nov 13, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...


 Polishing knobs? You projecting?  Porter Rockwell...sounds like some kind of closeted WASP faggot.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 13, 2019)

Porter Rockwell said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Porter Rockwell said:
> ...





On a scale of 1-10, just how intense are your feelings of victimhood, spineless?


----------



## Porter Rockwell (Nov 13, 2019)

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> Porter Rockwell said:
> 
> 
> > Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> ...



Stating a fact, not projecting.  See if your dumb ass can let you return to the OP.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 13, 2019)

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> ... You can never appreciate the plight of this nation...




Plight you say? To what plight do you refer?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 13, 2019)

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> ..... you are a foul liberal.....




"Liberal"? You're not paying attention, Junior.


----------

