Sup Court tosses GOPs racist , voter fraud inspired , “citizenship” census Q.

[LeftofLeft]

its clear to everyone that the cheating republicans wanted to ace out Hispanics from the census count .

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/06/27/politics/census-supreme-court/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

We are a Latino household and I cannot tell you how racial your post comes across. Are Latinos/Hispanics the only non citizen illegals in the US? Republicans don’t want non citizens or undocumented citizens included in the Census count. Census helps drive budget and resources which takes us back to the core debate as to why should US be burdened with significant budget going to illegal inhabitants of the US? This is not a GOP rid Hispanics initiative. That is just a quick card for the liberals to play because they can’t debate how to pay for their Open Borders.

Then be mad at the gop because that’s their thinking .

That is only what lies between your ears. Other pro Open Borders people site some GOP wants illegals for cheap labor since GOP is pro-business. The empirical data points to the majority of illegals being largely Hispanic which is due to the geographic proximity of Central America, the economic and social situations, and the ethnic makeup of those countries. But, it does not correlate to a GOP measure to rid of Hispanics. To support that, you would need to show GOP movement to limit Hispanic legal immigration and/or favoring non Hispanic illegal immigration.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Umm dim wit.

How can I argue that a Legal Precedent which has been in existence for 200 plus years does not exist?

This is the same bullshit as you people did with Kavanaugh.

"Prove that you were not a Teenage Drug Kingpin and Sex Pimp back when you were 17!"

"Well, I have this calendar that my dad kept from that time that shows where I was day to day....and Miss Schizo doesn't know what year, day or month she was in for most of her life."

"LIAR...Prove you aren't a Liar, Drug King Pin, Sexist, Rapist, Sex Party Pimp!"

"You are a Rapist.....Right? Prove you aren't a Rapist! I got a whole bunch of #Me Too Left Tard Loons that say you are!"

It's your job to prove that the Citizenship Question or questions about Legal Status on The US Census that have existed for 200 years have NEVER been established and is not Precedent

I fully supported Kavanaugh and defend him on this very forum, so try and keep up.

Nobody has made the claim that the citizenship question has not been on the census in the past. It has been on there and it has not been on there, thus there is no precedent either way.

you are really starting to lose it here

 

[Third Party]

its clear to everyone that the cheating republicans wanted to ace out Hispanics from the census count .

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/06/27/politics/census-supreme-court/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

I thought they wanted an American citizen count?

 

[The Original Tree]

Umm dim wit.

How can I argue that a Legal Precedent which has been in existence for 200 plus years does not exist?

This is the same bullshit as you people did with Kavanaugh.

"Prove that you were not a Teenage Drug Kingpin and Sex Pimp back when you were 17!"

"Well, I have this calendar that my dad kept from that time that shows where I was day to day....and Miss Schizo doesn't know what year, day or month she was in for most of her life."

"LIAR...Prove you aren't a Liar, Drug King Pin, Sexist, Rapist, Sex Party Pimp!"

"You are a Rapist.....Right? Prove you aren't a Rapist! I got a whole bunch of #Me Too Left Tard Loons that say you are!"

It's your job to prove that the Citizenship Question or questions about Legal Status on The US Census that have existed for 200 years have NEVER been established and is not Precedent

I fully supported Kavanaugh and defend him on this very forum, so try and keep up.

Nobody has made the claim that the citizenship question has not been on the census in the past. It has been on there and it has not been on there, thus there is no precedent either way.

you are really starting to lose it here

A precedent once established never ceases to be a precedent unless there is a ruling overturning it.

Just because the question was removed by a Democrat Administration who wanted to help Blue States unfairly gain more power over Red States does not mean it is still not a Legal Precedent.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

A precedent once established never ceases to be a precedent unless there is a ruling overturning it.

Just because the question was removed by a Democrat Administration who wanted to help Blue States unfairly gain more power over Red States does not mean it is still not a Legal Precedent.

There is no precedent because it has been there part of the time and not there part of the time. Even before it was removed in 1960 it has not been there every census.

Oh, and the Admin that removed it was the of Dwight D. Eisenhower, you might want to look at which party he belonged to.

 

[Timmy]

Feel free to link to that law

So Diplomats, Foreign Dignataries and Illegals are now counted in a State for purposes of Representation?

You better call The Census Bureau, right now and tell them that, and make sure to add those questions in there.

The fact there are exclusions does not carry forth that no non-citizen is counted.

Keep trying.

I will be waiting for the link to that law.

Sorry, you are wrong on this, and The Trump Administration will win this court case. That is why it was sent back down and SCOTUS ordered the lower court to rehear it.

Guess where it is going if they are stupid enough to make the same ruling?

Does that mean you will not link to the law you claim exist?

Why am I not surprised.

So, you willing to wager on if the Trump admin wins in the end?

I am waiting for you to prove that asking if you are a Citizen on a Census is Illegal?

It's been an official question on The Census since 1820.

That is The Precedent. I need not argue anything else.

What does the phrase "FOREIGNERS NOT NATURALIZED" Mean?

We counted slaves! And they were property at the time .

The problem is the WHY they added the question . And we all know why .

 

[The Original Tree]

So Diplomats, Foreign Dignataries and Illegals are now counted in a State for purposes of Representation?

You better call The Census Bureau, right now and tell them that, and make sure to add those questions in there.

The fact there are exclusions does not carry forth that no non-citizen is counted.

Keep trying.

I will be waiting for the link to that law.

Sorry, you are wrong on this, and The Trump Administration will win this court case. That is why it was sent back down and SCOTUS ordered the lower court to rehear it.

Guess where it is going if they are stupid enough to make the same ruling?

Does that mean you will not link to the law you claim exist?

Why am I not surprised.

So, you willing to wager on if the Trump admin wins in the end?

I am waiting for you to prove that asking if you are a Citizen on a Census is Illegal?

It's been an official question on The Census since 1820.

That is The Precedent. I need not argue anything else.

What does the phrase "FOREIGNERS NOT NATURALIZED" Mean?

We counted slaves! And they were property at the time .

The problem is the WHY they added the question . And we all know why .

Why don't you tell us why.

It is not that they counted anyone or not DUPE.

We categorized people by their Legal Status and always have for 200 years until DemNazis took that off of the Census to Defraud and Disenfranchise American Citizens from being fairly represented in Government. The Democrats did this in favor of Blue States unethically and immorally gaining power at the expense of Red States.

Immigrant, Citizen, Slave, Free Man, Free Woman more or less, have been the categories. between 1790 to 1820.

In 1820 we added "Foreigner Not Naturalized" to the Census.

When you say WE COUNTED SLAVES, you mean The Democrat Owning States in The South.

America particularly The North Abhored Slavery and tried to abolish it from the very start.

The Union should not have allowed The DemNazi South to keep Slaves, but were forced to, because the Democrat Owning South Threatened to Cede from The UNION clear back during The Revolutionary War.

The Original Constitution Tried to Abolish Slavery RIGHT THEN

But The Slave Owning Democrat South Opposed it and threatened to fight with The British against The Colonists.

Fuck Democrats.

With the 1820 Compromise, we tried to Stop The Greedy Slave Labor Dependent South From Spreading its disease.

This ended in the Civil War of 1860.

Today The Party of Slaves, are Still Dependent on Brown Skin Slaves from Latin America.

They Are Monsters. Evil People, and you should Separate Yourselves From them before you End up IN HELL with them.

I have no problems counting Illegals. They Should be COUNTED AS ILLEGALS.

End of Case.

 

[Timmy]

This is politics . Since when do we cross reference with threads in other sections ! ? 90% of politics is “breaking news “ or “current events” if you want to go that route .

As for flame bait? When in Rome .

Also. Blue states make all the money for the USA . The census is about counting everyone. Cons don’t want that to happen.

Politics?

It COULD be in Current Events, or Law and Justice.

Or, as already noted, Breaking News.

Cross reference?

when you do a search on a topic, do you only check Politics?

Yes. Cause this is where I hang .

Why is this only an issue when conservatives don’t like the story? You can have 10 Hillary threads at once and no one says boo.

Yes. Cause this is where I hang .

Which doesn't mean squat.

"When starting a new Thread, please first check and confirm that there are not Current Threads, on the Same Topic, This will Avoid Merges. Please select the forum that best relates to the subject matter of your topic. "

I did look for current threads IN POLITICS and there were none .

Does the rule state to look for current topics in the forum of your choice?

Do we need separate threads on the same topic in Politics, Current Events, Breaking News and General Discussion, because THAT is where the OP 'rolls'?

Why bother having different forums then? Just have one ! Why separate when we are all expects to know what’s posted in all of them all times . ?!

 

[Timmy]

The fact there are exclusions does not carry forth that no non-citizen is counted.

Keep trying.

I will be waiting for the link to that law.

Sorry, you are wrong on this, and The Trump Administration will win this court case. That is why it was sent back down and SCOTUS ordered the lower court to rehear it.

Guess where it is going if they are stupid enough to make the same ruling?

Does that mean you will not link to the law you claim exist?

Why am I not surprised.

So, you willing to wager on if the Trump admin wins in the end?

I am waiting for you to prove that asking if you are a Citizen on a Census is Illegal?

It's been an official question on The Census since 1820.

That is The Precedent. I need not argue anything else.

What does the phrase "FOREIGNERS NOT NATURALIZED" Mean?

We counted slaves! And they were property at the time .

The problem is the WHY they added the question . And we all know why .

Why don't you tell us why.

It is not that they counted anyone or not DUPE.

We categorized people by their Legal Status and always have for 200 years until DemNazis took that off of the Census to Defraud and Disenfranchise American Citizens from being fairly represented in Government. The Democrats did this in favor of Blue States unethically and immorally gaining power at the expense of Red States.

Immigrant, Citizen, Slave, Free Man, Free Woman more or less, have been the categories. between 1790 to 1820.

In 1820 we added "Foreigner Not Naturalized" to the Census.

When you say WE COUNTED SLAVES, you mean The Democrat Owning States in The South.

America particularly The North Abhored Slavery and tried to abolish it from the very start.

The Union should not have allowed The DemNazi South to keep Slaves, but were forced to, because the Democrat Owning South Threatened to Cede from The UNION clear back during The Revolutionary War.

The Original Constitution Tried to Abolish Slavery RIGHT THEN

But The Slave Owning Democrat South Opposed it and threatened to fight with The British against The Colonists.

Fuck Democrats.

With the 1820 Compromise, we tried to Stop The Greedy Slave Labor Dependent South From Spreading its disease.

This ended in the Civil War of 1860.

Today The Party of Slaves, are Still Dependent on Brown Skin Slaves from Latin America.

They Are Monsters. Evil People, and you should Separate Yourselves From them before you End up IN HELL with them.

I have no problems counting Illegals. They Should be COUNTED AS ILLEGALS.

End of Case.

We counted slaves in the red states . Red states then , red states now .

 

[Auld Phart]

Politics?

It COULD be in Current Events, or Law and Justice.

Or, as already noted, Breaking News.

Cross reference?

when you do a search on a topic, do you only check Politics?

Yes. Cause this is where I hang .

Why is this only an issue when conservatives don’t like the story? You can have 10 Hillary threads at once and no one says boo.

Yes. Cause this is where I hang .

Which doesn't mean squat.

"When starting a new Thread, please first check and confirm that there are not Current Threads, on the Same Topic, This will Avoid Merges. Please select the forum that best relates to the subject matter of your topic. "

I did look for current threads IN POLITICS and there were none .

Does the rule state to look for current topics in the forum of your choice?

Do we need separate threads on the same topic in Politics, Current Events, Breaking News and General Discussion, because THAT is where the OP 'rolls'?

Why bother having different forums then? Just have one ! Why separate when we are all expects to know what’s posted in all of them all times . ?!

timmy


Before I'd considering putting your thread in Politics, I'd strongly consider Breaking News, Current Events, or Law.


Because it is a better fit there than Politics.

Despite your one track mind.

 

[JoeB131]

Because there should be advantages and benefits for those who attained their citizenship legally, along with disadvantages and demerits for those who didn't. People who break our laws don't (or shouldn't) have the right to participate in our democracy or dictate how it functions.

Why not? Frankly, they have as much of a stake in how this country is run as the rest of us.

That branches off into another topic entirely. If we encouraged people already here, already citizens, and who are able bodied, to get up and be productive citizens... we could eliminate the need to hire illegal aliens. Tell people that prosperity requires effort, not procrastination.

But I digress.

You first, Couch Boy.

The people already here know they don't have to do those shitty jobs. When was the last time you hung out outside the Home Depot offering to help people hang drywall when that DIY project wasn't as easy as Chip and Joanna made it look. You'd have to bust your ass, but you'd make okay money.

 

[kyzr]

The USSC is simply wrong. Why should US citizens have their votes and congressional representation diminished by the fucking illegals? I hope Trump keeps fighting until fucking Roberts gets his head out of his ass.

Probably because people like Roberts care more about their power and perks than the American People and their Constitutional Oath?

Roberts will not change. He is what he is. What is REALLY disappointing is that Trump has now essentially given up not one but TWO perfect chances to at least balance the SCOTUS and yet he keeps putting people there who either he didn't know well enough, fooled him handily or were precisely who the Powers That Be wanted on the bench. Neither have proven to be reliable Conservative Justices.

Truth is, waiting for Trump to save us is almost like waiting for the Sow to turn into the Stallion.

You do know who recommends the justices to Trump, don't you?
Trump nominated Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, and with a 2nd term probably Amy Coney Barrett if/when RBG goes.
Roberts was put in by G W Bush, and was the swing vote for the citizenship question.
Why are you complaining about Trump? Roberts is playing politics like with Obamacare.
Trump is doing just fine as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The USSC is simply wrong. Why should US citizens have their votes and congressional representation diminished by the fucking illegals? I hope Trump keeps fighting until fucking Roberts gets his head out of his ass.

Probably because people like Roberts care more about their power and perks than the American People and their Constitutional Oath?

Roberts will not change. He is what he is. What is REALLY disappointing is that Trump has now essentially given up not one but TWO perfect chances to at least balance the SCOTUS and yet he keeps putting people there who either he didn't know well enough, fooled him handily or were precisely who the Powers That Be wanted on the bench. Neither have proven to be reliable Conservative Justices.

Truth is, waiting for Trump to save us is almost like waiting for the Sow to turn into the Stallion.

You do know who recommends the justices to Trump, don't you?
Trump nominated Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, and with a 2nd term probably Amy Coney Barrett if/when RBG goes.
Roberts was put in by G W Bush, and was the swing vote for the citizenship question.
Why are you complaining about Trump? Roberts is playing politics like with Obamacare.
Trump is doing just fine as far as I'm concerned.

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are not the mindless drones you hope they will be. Both have already dissented with the conservative members in their short time on the court.

Trump did well putting in two people that are not slaves to their ideology

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are not the mindless drones you hope they will be. Both have already dissented with the conservative members in their short time on the court.
Trump did well putting in two people that are not slaves to their ideology

So you are glad that the Supreme Court continues to lean Left rather than be "balanced" and represent ALL Americans........Got it.

 

[OKTexas]

the basis of representation therein shall be reduced

What's wrong, can't you read?

.

your focus is on the wrong part of section 2

It's the part that is applicable to the discussion. You try to ignore it because it doesn't support your propaganda, but it's there for all to read.

.

It is not applicable to the discussion as it deals with what happens to states if they deny or abridge the rights of male citizens to vote (since then only males could vote).

Those terms have been altered by subsequent Amendments, but the concept is still valid and has never been changed.

.

And this has never changed either and is still valid today...yet you want to ignore it...


Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.

Only a true commie idiot would think you could ignore the remainder of the section, all of section 2 applies to the correct appropriation of representatives . Run along commie.

.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

its clear to everyone that the cheating republicans wanted to ace out Hispanics from the census count .

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/06/27/politics/census-supreme-court/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

Actually it is the Democrats who are racist because they are trying to displace Anglo voters with third world illegal aliens

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are not the mindless drones you hope they will be. Both have already dissented with the conservative members in their short time on the court.
Trump did well putting in two people that are not slaves to their ideology

So you are glad that the Supreme Court continues to lean Left rather than be "balanced" and represent ALL Americans........Got it.

They are not leaning left, that is just stupid. But I am glad that we have a few justices that put the Constitution before the party. I realize that for you party always comes first, but we are not all the same.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

your focus is on the wrong part of section 2

It's the part that is applicable to the discussion. You try to ignore it because it doesn't support your propaganda, but it's there for all to read.

.

It is not applicable to the discussion as it deals with what happens to states if they deny or abridge the rights of male citizens to vote (since then only males could vote).

Those terms have been altered by subsequent Amendments, but the concept is still valid and has never been changed.

.

And this has never changed either and is still valid today...yet you want to ignore it...


Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.

Only a true commie idiot would think you could ignore the remainder of the section, all of section 2 applies to the correct appropriation of representatives . Run along commie.

.

The rest of section two lays out what will happen if the voting rights of male citizens (the only people allowed to vote at the time) are violated. I am sorry that you lack basic grammar and reading skills, but you are beyond my ability to educate as you revel in your ignorance. It is a badge of honor for you.

 

[LilOlLady]

Illegal aliens should not be counted on the census and states should not get federal funds for them. If the citizenship question is not on the census I will not respond to the census.

 

[LilOlLady]

its clear to everyone that the cheating republicans wanted to ace out Hispanics from the census count .

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/06/27/politics/census-supreme-court/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

It doe not ace out Hispanic who are citizens but those who are illegal. And they should not be counted anyway.