Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[Porter Rockwell]

Just a few minutes ago, following the news conference, pollsters had it with almost 60 percent of the American people OPPOSING the wall.

Then you have the undecideds. Your major problem, however is that the lawful / de jure / constitutional government in America is a Republic (See Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution)

So I repeat, from where do YOU get your unalienable Rights from?

I don't trust Liberal pollsters.
Also most conservatives don't answer the phone to those they don't know so they don't get polled so their opinion is never included in the polls. But they are included on voting day.

You would believe the pollsters if the numbers were in your favor. The point is, a significant number of Americans are against the wall.

And so, I ask, from where do YOU get YOUR unalienable Rights from?

I'm Agnostic.
I believe Intelligent life is more important than other life. I believe individuals should be free to do any damn thing they want to do as long as it doesn't stop another individual from having his rights.
I believe my ancestors built this country for me to appreciate it and I don't have to give away the stuff I take for granted and end up losing it all to a bunch of people from poverty stricken countries unwilling to fix their own damn countries.
I believe there are 158 million poverty folks on this planet and they can't all come here. They are lucky we allow a million a year to come here.

So, like Ray, you think that rights are inalienable? Do you, like he, believe that our Rights come through mortal men who can vote for or against what they will or will not give you in terms of Liberty?

So, when an employer hires a foreigner, how do you justify taking away his Rights? As I see it, owning private property is one of the greatest hallmarks of our constitutional Republic. Do you disagree with that?

That's a strawman, if you want to argue the theoretical it belongs elsewhere, this is a discussion of what is. You have yet to explain how the existing wall on 1/3rd to the border is effecting your or any one else's rights. Or how an additional wall on 10% more would change anything related to rights.

If an employer hires and illegal he just became a criminal, like the person he hired. Criminals forfeit their rights.

.

.

AFTER I go to bed and you had tapped out, you come by for a hit and run? Where I live you cannot pay an undocumented worker less than $10 an hour. The local government don't waste their time chasing undocumented people since they understand that most of the laws you support are blatantly unconstitutional. I'll explain that to you in a moment.

I have answered your question at least six times on this thread. I may do it again for chits and giggles at some point, but YOU don't repeat anything for me, so it's not my job to read the thread and keep up with what you say either. You got me mixed up. I'm not your push button monkey. So, you should quit lying and read the thread. Now, here is what I think about your unconstitutional laws:

"The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, and any statue, 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 its 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.

Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principals 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 . . .

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 land, it is superseded thereby.

No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."

— Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)

 

[Taz]

Is it your family that's throwing rocks at US border guards?

nope; there is no immigration clause and we have a First Amendment.

We can keep ANYONE out of our country that we feel like. Nobody has a "right" to come here.

there is no need to keep people out with a naturalization clause.

So if a billion Chinese want to come here, we should let them all in?

all won't stay. Capitalism; What is That, Sayeth the Right Wing. Tourism is the first, second, or third largest employer in twenty-nine States.

But if 1 billion Chinese want to stay, then what?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

But the law is unconstitutional and is without any relevance - Said so in post # 2086. It's why they have a Hell of a time enforcing it.

Post # 2086 isn't yours, care to try again?

.

At 80 wpm, it is possible to be imperfect. It is actually post # 2806

Hey thanks for the laugh, all the supremes did in that case was uphold the commerce clause and the immigration powers the Constitution vested in congress after 1808. But goo try.

.

You cannot read. In 1808 state immigration officials were to collect a $10 tax per person they had in their states. That is why, in 1875, California had state immigration officials. That is over half a century AFTER your misrepresentation of the facts.

BTW, I'm in one discussion tonight. Any way you can wait til tomorrow to give me a sporting chance to respond to you?

That's not what CA was doing, they were going far above that. A $500 bond in gold, where were they authorized to do that.

Also, this is an open forum, I'll respond to any post I chose.

.

Semantics. All semantics. What I recall from memory is that the state did not comply with the law. Neither did they answer to the charges and so the court was legally compelled to rule against them.

If we repealed the 14th Amendment and if California challenged the immigration laws on the books, they would win - that's the bottom line.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Because it fundamentally changes America from being a beacon of Freedom for the world to a country that aspires to be a gated community.

Yep, a gated community that welcomes the worthy.

.

More than that, the "gate" has always been there in some form as the method by which we preserve ourselves AS the beacon of freedom! The FREEDOM is for those of us living IN the United States. The freedom has NEVER been about others outside the USA just being free to walk in here and do any damn thing they choose. That might be "free" for them, but represents a HUGE loss of freedom for Americans, thus ultimately destroying America itself for the freedom it tries to preserve and represent.

The US has the most generous legal immigration policy of all the countries in the world. That's not good enough for the commies.

.

You are so funny you should take that act on the road. When you aren't pretending to be a bully or a know it all, you're talking out your ass. In fact, it is easier to get into communist China than the United States. Add to that, you expect everyone who comes here to become a citizen and you hang with those who tell you they are concerned about our culture.

How you people are going to make citizens out of the third world and maintain your culture as you become an irrelevant minority is certainly going to be a trick for the ages.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

He believes that if an employer wants to hire someone for $1 an hour and someone is desperate enough to take the job that the employer should be free to do so.

Yes. That's how freedom and free markets work. People get to make their own decisions without asking the state for permission.

That not allowing the employer to hire slave labor is the equivalent of having a socialistic society.

Comparing voluntary employment to slavery is an insult the memory of real slaves. But the policies you're advocating do lean socialist. Wage and price controls are an important step in taking over the economy with government.

Hiring who you desire is free market, but bringing people in for you to choose from is not. That is up to government. Once they are approved to be here, then you can decide to hire them or not. If you want to hire people outside our country, then move your business there.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I have explained that you are wrong on that count. Your side don't seem to get it. With that attitude you cannot preserve your culture.

Don't you remember? The federal government has no de jure / legal / lawful interests of who the individual state allows in. The feds are claiming an illegal power. The feds were NEVER given any authority to dictate to the states on this issue by the only branch of government constitutionally authorized to give it.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

true Gamorans and true Sodomites make better citizens than false Christians.

I'm not Christian. Now go assfuck another donkey, you know you want to.

you have no truth value; who cares what you think if you have no witnesses.

Is it your family that's throwing rocks at US border guards?

nope; there is no immigration clause and we have a First Amendment.

We can keep ANYONE out of our country that we feel like. Nobody has a "right" to come here.

Where do YOU get YOUR unalienable Rights from?

 

[dblack]

He believes that if an employer wants to hire someone for $1 an hour and someone is desperate enough to take the job that the employer should be free to do so.

Yes. That's how freedom and free markets work. People get to make their own decisions without asking the state for permission.

That not allowing the employer to hire slave labor is the equivalent of having a socialistic society.

Comparing voluntary employment to slavery is an insult the memory of real slaves. But the policies you're advocating do lean socialist. Wage and price controls are an important step in taking over the economy with government.

Hiring who you desire is free market, but bringing people in for you to choose from is not. That is up to government. Once they are approved to be here, then you can decide to hire them or not. If you want to hire people outside our country, then move your business there.

Uh huh... it's really kind of embarrassing watching former "conservatives" dancing around their socialist conceits.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

you have no truth value; who cares what you think if you have no witnesses.

Is it your family that's throwing rocks at US border guards?

nope; there is no immigration clause and we have a First Amendment.

We can keep ANYONE out of our country that we feel like. Nobody has a "right" to come here.

there is no need to keep people out with a naturalization clause.

So if a billion Chinese want to come here, we should let them all in?

When you get spanked by danielpalos like that, maybe you should just sit back, read, and learn. That was so humiliating I don't know whether to feel sorry for you or keep laughing.

 

[sealybobo]

I support border security. A wall is a waste of money. But watching the border is important. You can watch the border with or without a wall. And when you eventually stop watching the border without a wall then you don't feel stupid for building an unnecessary wall that was a huge waste of time and money and now has so many holes in it that it looks like swiss cheese.

Watching doesn't prevent 1 person from crossing, drones, sensors and other technology won't prevent 1 person from crossing. Then we have to spend nearly $12,000 for each one we catch to deport them. Walls where erected have proven effective.

.

If you watch, stop them and don’t let them in that works.

An unlatched area of wall won’t stop shit. So you just wasted $5 billion.

We didn’t have a problem until Reagan. He and GW Bush stopped cracking down on employers who hire illegals. If we go back to the way things were, illegals would go home. No employer would dare hire them..

Again, no wall necessary.

We survived all these years with no wall. Sorry trump you’re going to loose this one

What you are refusing to acknowledge is that past illegal aliens were single working aged males that wanted to send money home to support their family. They were mostly from Mexico and could easily be removed.

Now we have whole families and unaccompanied minors, the law requires they be treated differently. They are overwhelming the system established to process and care for them. Right now we have almost a million pending asylum cases and thousands a month added to that backlog.

Another thing you seem not to understand is border patrol agent can NOT physically prevent an illegal alien form entering, all they can do is arrest and detain them AFTER they have entered, then the courts and the law gives them due process rights. The only legal way to prevent entry is a barrier that prevents entry in the first place.

Also I doubt Trump is monitoring this forum so your last sentence was a waste of band width. But feel free to try to refute the facts I've presented.

.

You’re not listening to anything I say and you believe the wall is the silver bullet.

Texas should pay for it. States rights.

Never said it was a silver bullet, it's just part of the solution, but your claims that todays illegals are the same as in the past is BS. I notice you didn't even try to actually rebut what I actually said. So carry on with your intellectually dishonest crap and I'll continue to smile at your ignorance.

.

1. We don't need a wall. This is a manufactured crisis
2. Wall is too expensive and won't solve a thing. $5 bill is just the down payment. Do you want to spend a trillion on a wall? Really?
3. So you want your taxes to go up?
4. Our roads and infrastructure are falling apart because we don't have the money to fix them. So we should build a wall first?
5. This is just a simple idea that his simple followers can understand and rally behind. Forget about getting them to understand a comprehensive solution to this.
6. Trump can't be a hypocrite and hire illegals at Mara Largo and then say we need a wall
7. This is a legacy or monument Trump wants personally
8. Trump needs to stop punishing us because he can't stand to lose.
9. We can't give in to Trump or else this will be the new way a President governs.

 

[Taz]

I'm not Christian. Now go assfuck another donkey, you know you want to.

you have no truth value; who cares what you think if you have no witnesses.

Is it your family that's throwing rocks at US border guards?

nope; there is no immigration clause and we have a First Amendment.

We can keep ANYONE out of our country that we feel like. Nobody has a "right" to come here.

Where do YOU get YOUR unalienable Rights from?

From being an actual US citizen.

 

[Taz]

Is it your family that's throwing rocks at US border guards?

nope; there is no immigration clause and we have a First Amendment.

We can keep ANYONE out of our country that we feel like. Nobody has a "right" to come here.

there is no need to keep people out with a naturalization clause.

So if a billion Chinese want to come here, we should let them all in?

When you get spanked by danielpalos like that, maybe you should just sit back, read, and learn. That was so humiliating I don't know whether to feel sorry for you or keep laughing.

Because of his "naturalization" bullshit? Go eat another taco.

 

[sealybobo]

He believes that if an employer wants to hire someone for $1 an hour and someone is desperate enough to take the job that the employer should be free to do so.

Yes. That's how freedom and free markets work. People get to make their own decisions without asking the state for permission.

That not allowing the employer to hire slave labor is the equivalent of having a socialistic society.

Comparing voluntary employment to slavery is an insult the memory of real slaves. But the policies you're advocating do lean socialist. Wage and price controls are an important step in taking over the economy with government.

Hiring who you desire is free market, but bringing people in for you to choose from is not. That is up to government. Once they are approved to be here, then you can decide to hire them or not. If you want to hire people outside our country, then move your business there.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Trump can't be serious that he wants a wall built when the illegals who work at his resorts are getting here a plethora of other ways.

Again, if we just went after illegal employers like Trump we could solve this problem.

And we can patrol a border without building a multi trillion dollar ineffective monument to Donald Trump.

 

[Taz]

He believes that if an employer wants to hire someone for $1 an hour and someone is desperate enough to take the job that the employer should be free to do so.

Yes. That's how freedom and free markets work. People get to make their own decisions without asking the state for permission.

That not allowing the employer to hire slave labor is the equivalent of having a socialistic society.

Comparing voluntary employment to slavery is an insult the memory of real slaves. But the policies you're advocating do lean socialist. Wage and price controls are an important step in taking over the economy with government.

Hiring who you desire is free market, but bringing people in for you to choose from is not. That is up to government. Once they are approved to be here, then you can decide to hire them or not. If you want to hire people outside our country, then move your business there.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Trump can't be serious that he wants a wall built when the illegals who work at his resorts are getting here a plethora of other ways.

Again, if we just went after illegal employers like Trump we could solve this problem.

And we can patrol a border without building a multi trillion dollar ineffective monument to Donald Trump.

Schumer Says A Wall 'Ineffective,' 'Unnecessary.' Here's What He Said In 2009.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Watching doesn't prevent 1 person from crossing, drones, sensors and other technology won't prevent 1 person from crossing. Then we have to spend nearly $12,000 for each one we catch to deport them. Walls where erected have proven effective.

.

If you watch, stop them and don’t let them in that works.

An unlatched area of wall won’t stop shit. So you just wasted $5 billion.

We didn’t have a problem until Reagan. He and GW Bush stopped cracking down on employers who hire illegals. If we go back to the way things were, illegals would go home. No employer would dare hire them..

Again, no wall necessary.

We survived all these years with no wall. Sorry trump you’re going to loose this one

What you are refusing to acknowledge is that past illegal aliens were single working aged males that wanted to send money home to support their family. They were mostly from Mexico and could easily be removed.

Now we have whole families and unaccompanied minors, the law requires they be treated differently. They are overwhelming the system established to process and care for them. Right now we have almost a million pending asylum cases and thousands a month added to that backlog.

Another thing you seem not to understand is border patrol agent can NOT physically prevent an illegal alien form entering, all they can do is arrest and detain them AFTER they have entered, then the courts and the law gives them due process rights. The only legal way to prevent entry is a barrier that prevents entry in the first place.

Also I doubt Trump is monitoring this forum so your last sentence was a waste of band width. But feel free to try to refute the facts I've presented.

.

You’re not listening to anything I say and you believe the wall is the silver bullet.

Texas should pay for it. States rights.

Never said it was a silver bullet, it's just part of the solution, but your claims that todays illegals are the same as in the past is BS. I notice you didn't even try to actually rebut what I actually said. So carry on with your intellectually dishonest crap and I'll continue to smile at your ignorance.

.

1. We don't need a wall. This is a manufactured crisis
2. Wall is too expensive and won't solve a thing. $5 bill is just the down payment. Do you want to spend a trillion on a wall? Really?
3. So you want your taxes to go up?
4. Our roads and infrastructure are falling apart because we don't have the money to fix them. So we should build a wall first?
5. This is just a simple idea that his simple followers can understand and rally behind. Forget about getting them to understand a comprehensive solution to this.
6. Trump can't be a hypocrite and hire illegals at Mara Largo and then say we need a wall
7. This is a legacy or monument Trump wants personally
8. Trump needs to stop punishing us because he can't stand to lose.
9. We can't give in to Trump or else this will be the new way a President governs.

Of every argument the build the walls guys make, they seem to ignore it when their spokesmen, from Bill O Reilly to Donald Trump hire undocumented foreigners. They never ask why. AND, as long as they chant the mantra - the talking points, they are forgiven even if they do it again.

 

[Taz]

If you watch, stop them and don’t let them in that works.

An unlatched area of wall won’t stop shit. So you just wasted $5 billion.

We didn’t have a problem until Reagan. He and GW Bush stopped cracking down on employers who hire illegals. If we go back to the way things were, illegals would go home. No employer would dare hire them..

Again, no wall necessary.

We survived all these years with no wall. Sorry trump you’re going to loose this one

What you are refusing to acknowledge is that past illegal aliens were single working aged males that wanted to send money home to support their family. They were mostly from Mexico and could easily be removed.

Now we have whole families and unaccompanied minors, the law requires they be treated differently. They are overwhelming the system established to process and care for them. Right now we have almost a million pending asylum cases and thousands a month added to that backlog.

Another thing you seem not to understand is border patrol agent can NOT physically prevent an illegal alien form entering, all they can do is arrest and detain them AFTER they have entered, then the courts and the law gives them due process rights. The only legal way to prevent entry is a barrier that prevents entry in the first place.

Also I doubt Trump is monitoring this forum so your last sentence was a waste of band width. But feel free to try to refute the facts I've presented.

.

You’re not listening to anything I say and you believe the wall is the silver bullet.

Texas should pay for it. States rights.

Never said it was a silver bullet, it's just part of the solution, but your claims that todays illegals are the same as in the past is BS. I notice you didn't even try to actually rebut what I actually said. So carry on with your intellectually dishonest crap and I'll continue to smile at your ignorance.

.

1. We don't need a wall. This is a manufactured crisis
2. Wall is too expensive and won't solve a thing. $5 bill is just the down payment. Do you want to spend a trillion on a wall? Really?
3. So you want your taxes to go up?
4. Our roads and infrastructure are falling apart because we don't have the money to fix them. So we should build a wall first?
5. This is just a simple idea that his simple followers can understand and rally behind. Forget about getting them to understand a comprehensive solution to this.
6. Trump can't be a hypocrite and hire illegals at Mara Largo and then say we need a wall
7. This is a legacy or monument Trump wants personally
8. Trump needs to stop punishing us because he can't stand to lose.
9. We can't give in to Trump or else this will be the new way a President governs.

Of every argument the build the walls guys make, they seem to ignore it when their spokesmen, from Bill O Reilly to Donald Trump hire undocumented foreigners. They never ask why. AND, as long as they chant the mantra - the talking points, they are forgiven even if they do it again.

Schumer Says A Wall 'Ineffective,' 'Unnecessary.' Here's What He Said In 2009.

 

[sealybobo]

He believes that if an employer wants to hire someone for $1 an hour and someone is desperate enough to take the job that the employer should be free to do so.

Yes. That's how freedom and free markets work. People get to make their own decisions without asking the state for permission.

That not allowing the employer to hire slave labor is the equivalent of having a socialistic society.

Comparing voluntary employment to slavery is an insult the memory of real slaves. But the policies you're advocating do lean socialist. Wage and price controls are an important step in taking over the economy with government.

Hiring who you desire is free market, but bringing people in for you to choose from is not. That is up to government. Once they are approved to be here, then you can decide to hire them or not. If you want to hire people outside our country, then move your business there.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Trump can't be serious that he wants a wall built when the illegals who work at his resorts are getting here a plethora of other ways.

Again, if we just went after illegal employers like Trump we could solve this problem.

And we can patrol a border without building a multi trillion dollar ineffective monument to Donald Trump.

Schumer Says A Wall 'Ineffective,' 'Unnecessary.' Here's What He Said In 2009.

Show me where you agreed with him in 2009.

 

[Taz]

He believes that if an employer wants to hire someone for $1 an hour and someone is desperate enough to take the job that the employer should be free to do so.

Yes. That's how freedom and free markets work. People get to make their own decisions without asking the state for permission.

That not allowing the employer to hire slave labor is the equivalent of having a socialistic society.

Comparing voluntary employment to slavery is an insult the memory of real slaves. But the policies you're advocating do lean socialist. Wage and price controls are an important step in taking over the economy with government.

Hiring who you desire is free market, but bringing people in for you to choose from is not. That is up to government. Once they are approved to be here, then you can decide to hire them or not. If you want to hire people outside our country, then move your business there.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Trump can't be serious that he wants a wall built when the illegals who work at his resorts are getting here a plethora of other ways.

Again, if we just went after illegal employers like Trump we could solve this problem.

And we can patrol a border without building a multi trillion dollar ineffective monument to Donald Trump.

Schumer Says A Wall 'Ineffective,' 'Unnecessary.' Here's What He Said In 2009.

Show me where you agreed with him in 2009.

I've always thought that a secure border, including a barrier, is necessary.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

you have no truth value; who cares what you think if you have no witnesses.

Is it your family that's throwing rocks at US border guards?

nope; there is no immigration clause and we have a First Amendment.

We can keep ANYONE out of our country that we feel like. Nobody has a "right" to come here.

Where do YOU get YOUR unalienable Rights from?

From being an actual US citizen.

We got to talk about this one. I need for you to explain this:

Your Rights are a by product of citizenship? So, work with me here:

Let us say you own a firearm or you belong to a religion the government does not like OR maybe the liberals decide that you cannot be agnostic or atheist, but instead must belong to a One World Religion. If such a proposition is put into place by majority vote, do you then comply? if not, can you explain to me your theory of law?

 

[Taz]

Is it your family that's throwing rocks at US border guards?

nope; there is no immigration clause and we have a First Amendment.

We can keep ANYONE out of our country that we feel like. Nobody has a "right" to come here.

Where do YOU get YOUR unalienable Rights from?

From being an actual US citizen.

We got to talk about this one. I need for you to explain this:

Your Rights are a by product of citizenship? So, work with me here:

Let us say you own a firearm or you belong to a religion the government does not like OR maybe the liberals decide that you cannot be agnostic or atheist, but instead must belong to a One World Religion. If such a proposition is put into place by majority vote, do you then comply? if not, can you explain to me your theory of law?

Your example is absurd and makes no sense. What planet would this be on?

 

[sealybobo]

Yes. That's how freedom and free markets work. People get to make their own decisions without asking the state for permission.
Comparing voluntary employment to slavery is an insult the memory of real slaves. But the policies you're advocating do lean socialist. Wage and price controls are an important step in taking over the economy with government.

Hiring who you desire is free market, but bringing people in for you to choose from is not. That is up to government. Once they are approved to be here, then you can decide to hire them or not. If you want to hire people outside our country, then move your business there.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Trump can't be serious that he wants a wall built when the illegals who work at his resorts are getting here a plethora of other ways.

Again, if we just went after illegal employers like Trump we could solve this problem.

And we can patrol a border without building a multi trillion dollar ineffective monument to Donald Trump.

Schumer Says A Wall 'Ineffective,' 'Unnecessary.' Here's What He Said In 2009.

Show me where you agreed with him in 2009.

I've always thought that a secure border, including a barrier, is necessary.

I'm all for a secure border. I can't believe it's possible for people to cross it illegally. We need to figure out a way to stop this. A wall isn't the answer. A 5 TRILLION dollar wall. Don't let Trump lie to you again. $5 billion is nothing. He knows a wall will cost way more than that. But if he can get Pelosi to give him $5 billion he can say he won and it'll help him get re elected in 2020 but it won't solve our illegal EMPLOYER problem.

Reclaiming the Issues: "It's an Illegal Employer Problem"

This is what we were saying in 2006 back when you guys loved illegals doing jobs Americans wouldn't do.

Today's Immigration Battle Corporatists vs. Racists (and Labor is Left Behind)

So we don't disagree with you. We need to stop illegal employers from hiring illegals. Then they'll stop crossing.

We didn't have a problem until the 1980's. Back when you were worshiping Reagan the Republicans were fucking you and you didn't even know it.

This is one way the gap between rich and poor widened. It hurt workers and the rich benefited from the cheap labor.