Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I seen that in Boston to.. but it’s because forced desegregation that whites moved out of urban areas in the 70-80’s . These jobs belonged to Americans, black white spanish.I saw the entire building and construction business in Northern California pass from the hands of native citizens to entirely illegals in the matter of a mere decade.Without out* our permission is an invasion.
And who cares who hires them ,,, it’s an invasion.. they should be put down
I work in a restaurant in Boston the entire back of the house is illegal.. with a high black unemployment rate.. the invasion is killing America
It's in the Constitution. Defense of the nation itself is one of the prime duties of the federal government.Still, you have failed to find any legal citation for your beliefs. When Americans are WILLINGLY hiring these foreigners, it does not and I mean factually not meet the definition of an invasion.
Is this something you disagree with? Is this not a fact? Are you contesting this simple well known truth?
And Porter baby, if you think Americans are offering jobs for every one of the tens of thousands of people who have
made the long trip from Central America to the Southern border and all they have to do is walk on over and claim these
jobs as landscapers, janitors, bus boys, etc. then you are fooling yourself, but no one else.
Whether Americans are willingly seeking illegals who will work for next to nothing is immaterial.
You still need legal permission to reside or work here. Period! Now buzz off with your nonsense.
Without out* our permission is an invasion.You are wrong ,, millions crossing our border with our permission is a invasionThe federal government has the inherent and basic duty and right to protect the nation from all invasion and threats.Can you direct me to the part of the Constitution giving the federal government jurisdiction over who a state may invite within their confines as a guest?
If California or New Mexico or any state wants to open it's doors wide open to tens of millions of illegals from all over the world (Mexico, Iran, China, etc.) it would not be allowed to do so unless it could guarantee somehow those people they gave free entry to would not disperse throughout the nation (like a virus entering the body and invading vital organs all throughout
the body itself) which it could not possibly ever do so. It's an absolute absurdity.
Just like your post premise.
Still, you have failed to find any legal citation for your beliefs. When Americans are WILLINGLY hiring these foreigners, it does not and I mean factually not meet the definition of an invasion.
"Our" permission... or YOUR permission? You just identified where the disconnect is.
Under the Constitution the federal government has but one area of jurisdiction here: naturalization. Naturalization = citizenship. Who the state invites is their business.
Liberal states, like California, deliberately abuse the right. So, the better option is to allow them to create their own Hell and let the protect other states from paying for it.
California has Sanctuary Cities. It's of no concern to me. Maybe when states start resisting federal Red Flag Laws, you might understand the principle.
And who cares who hires them ,,, it’s an invasion.. they should be put down
I work in a restaurant in Boston the entire back of the house is illegal.. with a high black unemployment rate.. the invasion is killing America
It's in the Constitution. Defense of the nation itself is one of the prime duties of the federal government.Still, you have failed to find any legal citation for your beliefs. When Americans are WILLINGLY hiring these foreigners, it does not and I mean factually not meet the definition of an invasion.
Is this something you disagree with? Is this not a fact? Are you contesting this simple well known truth?
And Porter baby, if you think Americans are offering jobs for every one of the tens of thousands of people who have
made the long trip from Central America to the Southern border and all they have to do is walk on over and claim these
jobs as landscapers, janitors, bus boys, etc. then you are fooling yourself, but no one else.
Whether Americans are willingly seeking illegals who will work for next to nothing is immaterial.
You still need legal permission to reside or work here. Period! Now buzz off with your nonsense.
You're making a claim you cannot substantiate. If the governor of a state says no state of emergency exists, like it or not, it does not exist and no invasion is taking place.
I'm not making any claim about jobs one way or another; it is the wallists who want to throw a lot of skeet on the wall (no pun intended) and see what sticks. One of their socialist solutions is to punish employers who hire the employee of their choice.
The problem you have with this permission argument is that you cannot find any constitutional authority for it. Would you like me explain the illegal manner the feds ended up claiming they could pass unconstitutional laws relative to this issue?
Sorry dude, but unless the foreigner is seeking to become a citizen, you're pretty much S.O.L. The United States Supreme Court has already ruled. It is not a crime for a deportable alien to remain in the United States. It does not stand to reason that an American should be punished for doing business with them... AND if you're honest, the feds have NO constitutional jurisdiction over any foreigner a state gives sanctuary state to. Don't draw conclusions about how I may or may not feel for sharing the reality of the situation with you.
Without out* our permission is an invasion.You are wrong ,, millions crossing our border with our permission is a invasionThe federal government has the inherent and basic duty and right to protect the nation from all invasion and threats.
If California or New Mexico or any state wants to open it's doors wide open to tens of millions of illegals from all over the world (Mexico, Iran, China, etc.) it would not be allowed to do so unless it could guarantee somehow those people they gave free entry to would not disperse throughout the nation (like a virus entering the body and invading vital organs all throughout
the body itself) which it could not possibly ever do so. It's an absolute absurdity.
Just like your post premise.
Still, you have failed to find any legal citation for your beliefs. When Americans are WILLINGLY hiring these foreigners, it does not and I mean factually not meet the definition of an invasion.
"Our" permission... or YOUR permission? You just identified where the disconnect is.
Under the Constitution the federal government has but one area of jurisdiction here: naturalization. Naturalization = citizenship. Who the state invites is their business.
Liberal states, like California, deliberately abuse the right. So, the better option is to allow them to create their own Hell and let the protect other states from paying for it.
California has Sanctuary Cities. It's of no concern to me. Maybe when states start resisting federal Red Flag Laws, you might understand the principle.
And who cares who hires them ,,, it’s an invasion.. they should be put down
I work in a restaurant in Boston the entire back of the house is illegal.. with a high black unemployment rate.. the invasion is killing America
According to Donald Trump, we are at a statistical zero unemployment rate. That would be anything under 4 percent. If someone hired the foreigner, someone rented to them, and businesses do business with them, they must have THEIR permission. If the states are telling the feds to butt out, the foreigners must have permission.
We might not like it, but that's reality.
That’s a whole nother argument,, but we have 30 millions invaders here and they need to go and yes America will stuggle and yes libs will be forced to do jobs that they don’t want to do.. but to badWithout out* our permission is an invasion.You are wrong ,, millions crossing our border with our permission is a invasionThe federal government has the inherent and basic duty and right to protect the nation from all invasion and threats.
If California or New Mexico or any state wants to open it's doors wide open to tens of millions of illegals from all over the world (Mexico, Iran, China, etc.) it would not be allowed to do so unless it could guarantee somehow those people they gave free entry to would not disperse throughout the nation (like a virus entering the body and invading vital organs all throughout
the body itself) which it could not possibly ever do so. It's an absolute absurdity.
Just like your post premise.
Still, you have failed to find any legal citation for your beliefs. When Americans are WILLINGLY hiring these foreigners, it does not and I mean factually not meet the definition of an invasion.
"Our" permission... or YOUR permission? You just identified where the disconnect is.
Under the Constitution the federal government has but one area of jurisdiction here: naturalization. Naturalization = citizenship. Who the state invites is their business.
Liberal states, like California, deliberately abuse the right. So, the better option is to allow them to create their own Hell and let the protect other states from paying for it.
California has Sanctuary Cities. It's of no concern to me. Maybe when states start resisting federal Red Flag Laws, you might understand the principle.
And who cares who hires them ,,, it’s an invasion.. they should be put down
I work in a restaurant in Boston the entire back of the house is illegal.. with a high black unemployment rate.. the invasion is killing America
According to Donald Trump, we are at a statistical zero unemployment rate. That would be anything under 4 percent. If someone hired the foreigner, someone rented to them, and businesses do business with them, they must have THEIR permission. If the states are telling the feds to butt out, the foreigners must have permission.
We might not like it, but that's reality.
It's in the Constitution. Defense of the nation itself is one of the prime duties of the federal government.Still, you have failed to find any legal citation for your beliefs. When Americans are WILLINGLY hiring these foreigners, it does not and I mean factually not meet the definition of an invasion.
Is this something you disagree with? Is this not a fact? Are you contesting this simple well known truth?
And Porter baby, if you think Americans are offering jobs for every one of the tens of thousands of people who have
made the long trip from Central America to the Southern border and all they have to do is walk on over and claim these
jobs as landscapers, janitors, bus boys, etc. then you are fooling yourself, but no one else.
Whether Americans are willingly seeking illegals who will work for next to nothing is immaterial.
You still need legal permission to reside or work here. Period! Now buzz off with your nonsense.
You're making a claim you cannot substantiate. If the governor of a state says no state of emergency exists, like it or not, it does not exist and no invasion is taking place.
I'm not making any claim about jobs one way or another; it is the wallists who want to throw a lot of skeet on the wall (no pun intended) and see what sticks. One of their socialist solutions is to punish employers who hire the employee of their choice.
The problem you have with this permission argument is that you cannot find any constitutional authority for it. Would you like me explain the illegal manner the feds ended up claiming they could pass unconstitutional laws relative to this issue?
Sorry dude, but unless the foreigner is seeking to become a citizen, you're pretty much S.O.L. The United States Supreme Court has already ruled. It is not a crime for a deportable alien to remain in the United States. It does not stand to reason that an American should be punished for doing business with them... AND if you're honest, the feds have NO constitutional jurisdiction over any foreigner a state gives sanctuary state to. Don't draw conclusions about how I may or may not feel for sharing the reality of the situation with you.
1. If anyone says that this issue is not a crisis, they are either fools or liars.
2. If an illegal alien is here is violation of a law, then it is a crime for the illegal alien go be here. If being here is a violation of a law, or numerous laws, than the breaking of those laws are CRIMES.
We have millions of Europeans that would come here and do this farm work. Maybe not for the wage Mexicans do it for but they will assimilate. And add value to our country..
Latinos are to subservient, they never protest democrats, most are doing something illegal, and they don’t invest in America most use us and move back home
Yes they have destroyed every neighborhood they moved in to.. that was once white..gtfo with your garbageWe have millions of Europeans that would come here and do this farm work. Maybe not for the wage Mexicans do it for but they will assimilate. And add value to our country..
Latinos are to subservient, they never protest democrats, most are doing something illegal, and they don’t invest in America most use us and move back home
sounds as if you think everyone south of our border is the same. they aren't
hispanic people have played important roles in the growth and creation of our country.
but the mexican people are not the same as the people from honduras for example
only illegals don't care about the law.I simply understand the concepts. Congress has power over the land and naval forces; there is no such Thing as "well regulated militia of Individuals, in our Republic", you are either well regulated or unorganized militia.
Okay. But if you're not a legitimate militia, then what? How is anything you pasted from the Constitution relevant here, daniel?
That's a discussion that could be had by itself, it's just not relevant here.
Don't make me Have to muster and get to know my heavy weapons section.When we are knocking on your door don’t worry we don’t exist lolI simply understand the concepts. Congress has power over the land and naval forces; there is no such Thing as "well regulated militia of Individuals, in our Republic", you are either well regulated or unorganized militia.I quoted our federal Constitution.
Yes, I know. But why? What's it have to do with the thread. I'd like to expand on it if you'd forward the courtesy of supporting your paste in some coherent sort of context. That's how functional debat works, daniel. So, again, explain, please. Thanks!
It's probably gonna be your last chance, btw. If you keep screwing around I'm gonna put you back on ignore and start new threads myself, that way I know it'll be discussed right. It's a win/win for me, daniel. Ya know? So quit fukin around and support yourself in a way that's relative to some point, any point, I don't even care, daniel. Just pick one.
That is a simple appeal to ignorance. I really am a federalist. There is no such Thing as well regulated militia of Individuals of the People in our Republic under our federal doctrine.I simply understand the concepts. Congress has power over the land and naval forces; there is no such Thing as "well regulated militia of Individuals, in our Republic", you are either well regulated or unorganized militia.I quoted our federal Constitution.
Yes, I know. But why? What's it have to do with the thread. I'd like to expand on it if you'd forward the courtesy of supporting your paste in some coherent sort of context. That's how functional debat works, daniel. So, again, explain, please. Thanks!
It's probably gonna be your last chance, btw. If you keep screwing around I'm gonna put you back on ignore and start new threads myself, that way I know it'll be discussed right. It's a win/win for me, daniel. Ya know? So quit fukin around and support yourself in a way that's relative to some point, any point, I don't even care, daniel. Just pick one.
Incorrect.
The term "well regulated" means well practiced, familiar with weapons, and not in need of weapons training.
The word regular means timely and well functioning, like a regulator clock or regular bowels.
All militia is both well regulated AND unorganized initially.
It is ONLY when the unorganized militia is called up for emergencies by the federal government, that is becomes the organized Militia.
The whole point of the 2nd amendment is to ensure everyone is armed and practiced, so therefore is well regulated in arms.
So everyone is well regulated as long as the 2nd amendment is followed.
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
Knock knockDon't make me Have to muster and get to know my heavy weapons section.When we are knocking on your door don’t worry we don’t exist lolI simply understand the concepts. Congress has power over the land and naval forces; there is no such Thing as "well regulated militia of Individuals, in our Republic", you are either well regulated or unorganized militia.I quoted our federal Constitution.
Yes, I know. But why? What's it have to do with the thread. I'd like to expand on it if you'd forward the courtesy of supporting your paste in some coherent sort of context. That's how functional debat works, daniel. So, again, explain, please. Thanks!
It's probably gonna be your last chance, btw. If you keep screwing around I'm gonna put you back on ignore and start new threads myself, that way I know it'll be discussed right. It's a win/win for me, daniel. Ya know? So quit fukin around and support yourself in a way that's relative to some point, any point, I don't even care, daniel. Just pick one.
Who's there?Knock knockDon't make me Have to muster and get to know my heavy weapons section.When we are knocking on your door don’t worry we don’t exist lolI simply understand the concepts. Congress has power over the land and naval forces; there is no such Thing as "well regulated militia of Individuals, in our Republic", you are either well regulated or unorganized militia.I quoted our federal Constitution.
Yes, I know. But why? What's it have to do with the thread. I'd like to expand on it if you'd forward the courtesy of supporting your paste in some coherent sort of context. That's how functional debat works, daniel. So, again, explain, please. Thanks!
It's probably gonna be your last chance, btw. If you keep screwing around I'm gonna put you back on ignore and start new threads myself, that way I know it'll be discussed right. It's a win/win for me, daniel. Ya know? So quit fukin around and support yourself in a way that's relative to some point, any point, I don't even care, daniel. Just pick one.
The Militia member have adamantly DENIED that they pointed guns at anyone. They may have been carrying firearms, but it seems the MEDIA yet again invented the issue of being held at "gun point".
When someone is waving a gun at you then what else can you call it.
We have millions of Europeans that would come here and do this farm work. Maybe not for the wage Mexicans do it for but they will assimilate. And add value to our country..
Latinos are to subservient, they never protest democrats, most are doing something illegal, and they don’t invest in America most use us and move back home
Yes they have destroyed every neighborhood they moved in to.. that was once white..gtfo with your garbageWe have millions of Europeans that would come here and do this farm work. Maybe not for the wage Mexicans do it for but they will assimilate. And add value to our country..
Latinos are to subservient, they never protest democrats, most are doing something illegal, and they don’t invest in America most use us and move back home
sounds as if you think everyone south of our border is the same. they aren't
hispanic people have played important roles in the growth and creation of our country.
but the mexican people are not the same as the people from honduras for example
PatriotsWho's there?Knock knockDon't make me Have to muster and get to know my heavy weapons section.When we are knocking on your door don’t worry we don’t exist lolI simply understand the concepts. Congress has power over the land and naval forces; there is no such Thing as "well regulated militia of Individuals, in our Republic", you are either well regulated or unorganized militia.Yes, I know. But why? What's it have to do with the thread. I'd like to expand on it if you'd forward the courtesy of supporting your paste in some coherent sort of context. That's how functional debat works, daniel. So, again, explain, please. Thanks!
It's probably gonna be your last chance, btw. If you keep screwing around I'm gonna put you back on ignore and start new threads myself, that way I know it'll be discussed right. It's a win/win for me, daniel. Ya know? So quit fukin around and support yourself in a way that's relative to some point, any point, I don't even care, daniel. Just pick one.
LO fucking L!! How are these people in New Mexico anything remotely like Quantrell's Raiders?Quantrill's Raiders were a group that called themselves a militia. When the civil war was in it's early stages, "bloody" bill Anderson was comissioned by the confederate government.
After the raid on Lawerence ks, the confederate government withdrew that commision and the authority to operate as a militia.
Under Usa AND CSA law, these men became outlaws to both sides.
After the war was ended, confederate soldiars were granted amnesty and granted citizenship in the usa.
Quantrill's Raiders, and groups like them were not granted anything and were hunted outlaws.
The law remains the same now as it was then.(Partisan Ranger Act)
These guys acted illegally. They are not heros and likely will face charges.
You can't deny you are trying to make some sort of analogy here.
That is hyperbolic bullshit completely devoid of facts.
no sir, it is a valid comparison.
