And in case anyone here was unaware, Republican state legislators have been caught submitting legislation with ALECs letterhead.
Printable View
And in case anyone here was unaware, Republican state legislators have been caught submitting legislation with ALECs letterhead.
republicans are against legal immigration too. they have been trying to reduce legal immigration since the 1990s.
i don't think you understand the republican party.
its a dodge anyway, what is legal and illegal immigration is very easy for us to change if we wanted to. and its exactly what liberals want to do, is streamline the process and have a taxable path to citizenship.
Yep - We would have one portion that would be a more direct democracy, and hopefully more representative. And one that would be for each state. The other bit with the house change would result in far less importance on any few members having direct control. With nearly 3,000 representatives the power of a single one would diminish, and with that the cronyism that can be inherent in that. I think it would be a win. I would hazard you would agree?Quote:
Smaller more regularly shaped districts would inherently cause the house to become closer to direct democracy. It would be akin to increasing measurement resolution.
But you're not stupid so you already knew that.
Generally we balance - lately that has worked well. Clinton vs Newt was some of our best government in my opinion. Bush lost both houses, Obama did also, but then that also was some of our worst spending under both, so.... I am actually kind of surprised Trump didn't lose both houses. The precedent was there.Quote:
Because there is an infrastructure imbalance for both the Senate and House to be Republican, I always tell friends and family they should vote for a Democratic president.
Well, read their quotes. It IS true. The problem is the motivation is not understood. If NOT racism, if LEGAL immigration is strongly applauded even when insulted, what could the motive be? There is an answer there that fits those two facts.Quote:
How can this be true, exactly? The President just this week tried to change our current immigration laws to prevent people from requesting asylum as Congress has legislated. He's trying to argue that a legal means of immigration should be made illegal. The boundaries of what the republican party wants on immigration are factional and geographic, but at the executive level have been designed since day 1 to limit people from our South and muslim countries from entering the country regardless of the legality.
Also - don't forget the border restriction from select countries was also something Obama did. Is that motivation the same?
While different, well, let me quote somebody:
So, differences are fairly straight forward. But the motivation, the promise to the people and request from them has been the same.Quote:
The suggestively labelled *Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act* of December 2015 complicated the visa application process for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Sudan or Syria. It also made it more difficult for anyone who had visited any of these countries on or after March 1 2011 to get a visa, as I had to find out myself after I was effectively barred from attending a conference in the US as an EU academic because I had previously visited Iran.
The restrictions aimed to prevent people with ties to countries thought to pose a terror threat from using the Electronic System for Travel Authorisation to travel to the US with minimal screening.
That act erected discriminatory barriers for access to the US for scholars, people with dual nationality, or tourists. And while the December 2015 act was not based on an executive order issued by the president, Obama could have vetoed that congressional piece of legislation, but didn*t. Somalia, Libya, and Yemen were added in February 2016 as *countries of concern* by the Department of Homeland Security, and it was this list of seven countries referred to in Trump*s executive order.
The motive is fairly straight forward. They simply want to control the border, and make sure MS-13 and ISIS and related don't get in.
And before any of you doubt this, I talk to hundreds of conservatives on this topic. All races. They are very consistent. They want control. They want to keep MS-13 and ISIS and to in general be able to keep out people who want to kill Americans. Look at the Trumping going on about people who were here illegally murdering people who were illegal, and who were already kicked out a couple of times.
They don't care about the race, or even really the religion. They want to sleep safer at night knowing they have some control of their borders, and that the people here want to become citizens and MAGA. That's it. It is kinda of a false security. But they want it.
Associating it about race is damn good messaging by the Left. Gordon believes it.
But it is false.
You just saw a few dozen tweets that all say exactly the opposite of what you do Gordon, then requote the whole F'ing thing, and act as if they do not exist.Quote:
republicans are against legal immigration too.
If that is the only way to make your point, you missed.
What, you haven't seen Democrats do anything stupid like this? Oh, but lets only talk about what the GOP does bad. The DNC is perfect little angels, and never tries anything illegal. Evar.Quote:
And in case anyone here was unaware, Republican state legislators have been caught submitting legislation with ALECs letterhead.
How about just taking Top Secret off of forms to send them through the fax? Oh....nevermind?
It's not about doing something stupid with a document, it's about corporate capture of the republican party and voter suppression sponsored by the capital class. Nevermind that ALEC's founder explicitly advocated voter suppression. Do you know what ALEC is?
Classic though, the whataboutism with Hillary's emails. Buttery males!
Edit: don't get me wrong, it takes some balls to respond to a decades-long systematic attack on the vote by a private organization that has significant control over the republican party with one politician's mishandling of sensitive documents.
It totally is! I acknowledge it, and will own it. Just finger pointing "The other party did bad" on repeat isn't really isn't doing much either. I mean, you are smarter than this, and can make a better run of arguments, though I know you are busy. Unlike Gordon I don't think either of you are morons, you're both quite intelligent, but this is low hanging fruit. Like my reply. :)Quote:
Classic though, the whataboutism with Hillary's emails.
I actually was going to write "Let's check in with Broward Country and see what they have to say about this Steve..." but I had people come to my desk. That would have been far better.
What about Broward County?
https://www.tampabay.com/florida-pol...-goes-nowhere/
....no resignations there. Or anything. Move along, the media doesn't want to talk about it any more (makes shooing motions with hand.)
On that note, a Happy Thanksgiving to all of you. I hope you get to enjoy your families and related, or at least enjoy the drive to them. Be safe out there, see y'all on Monday.
One last bit of reading: https://spaceweatherarchive.com/2018...solar-minimum/
I know, just a bit:
Oh no, the atmosphere at the Thermosphere level responds directly to TSI.Quote:
Sept. 27, 2018: The sun is entering one of the deepest Solar Minima of the Space Age. Sunspots have been absent for most of 2018, and the sun*s ultraviolet output has sharply dropped. New research shows that Earth*s upper atmosphere is responding.
*We see a cooling trend,* says Martin Mlynczak of NASA*s Langley Research Center. *High above Earth*s surface, near the edge of space, our atmosphere is losing heat energy. If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold.*
These results come from the SABER instrument onboard NASA*s TIMED satellite. SABER monitors infrared emissions from carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), two substances that play a key role in the energy balance of air 100 to 300 kilometers above our planet*s surface. By measuring the infrared glow of these molecules, SABER can assess the thermal state of gas at the very top of the atmosphere*a layer researchers call *the thermosphere.*
*The thermosphere always cools off during Solar Minimum. It*s one of the most important ways the solar cycle affects our planet,* explains Mlynczak, who is the associate principal investigator for SABER.
When the thermosphere cools, it shrinks, literally decreasing the radius of Earth*s atmosphere. This shrinkage decreases aerodynamic drag on satellites in low-Earth orbit, extending their lifetimes. That*s the good news. The bad news is, it also delays the natural decay of space junk, resulting in a more cluttered environment around Earth.
https://spaceweatherarchive.files.wo...yers.jpg?w=676
https://spaceweatherarchive.files.wo.../tci.png?w=676
But it comes from those Deniers at NASA, so lets not pay attention. ;)
ah no, they have actually written and tried to pass laws reducing legal immigration.
here is trump actually reducing legal immigration: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ion/692447002/
here are republicans trying to pass laws to reduce legal immigration:
https://www.cato.org/blog/house-gop-...-over-20-years
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...al-immigration
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...eveals/553631/
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/26/polit...ion/index.html
so no, the republicans in the fucking government have, and do, want to reduce legal immigration.
you are 100% flat the fuck out wrong. do you actually know what republicans do in government? do you know your bold face lying? or too stupid to tell the difference?