Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
OverSword

South Dakota to send National Guard to Texas to help guard the southern border

87 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

RavenHawk
5 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Potential for disaster if you are talking about Suzanna.  She was a  nightmare as was several of her predecessors, including Johnson & Richardson, some dems, some reps.  This state doesn't need more hateful people like you sucking everything dry and burning it to  the ground like Steve Peirce tried to do, selling everything he could to the oil companies, destroying our water supplies etc.   Maybe you would feel better if you lived in Lee county with that idiotic sheriff.

Suzanna was ok.  I think the office was over her head.  When she ran into the democratic legislative and couldn’t get anywhere, she gave up.  Johnson was ok.  He was strange but tried to get things done.  I voted for him as a protest vote over Romney.  Richardson was the monster.  I thought I’d compromise this once because it seemed that this guy had it all together.  He was the worse politician I saw (after the fact), that is why I will never vote for a democrat ever again.  I have never been so fooled as with this phony.  And I don’t get fooled; I usually see right through most people’s façade.  It’s the one that gets through that bites you in the butt.  And MLG is a joke.  It really doesn’t matter who the governor is, the democratic state house has been in control of this state for decades.  That’s why we are always near the bottom of all the wrong lists.

 

I’m sorry to have to let you know, but it is the democrats that spew hatred.  This forum is one good example.  They are the ones sucking everything dry.  The Left is the party of Ignorance and Apathy.  This state can be a major player in this nation’s energy production but this current leadership is going to squander it away for wokism.  The faster we get out of this fad, the better.  This is why I wonder if this isn’t divine intervention??  It’s the “Wonderful Life” scenario where we get a look what it would be like in this nation without Conservatism.  By the end of the story, all is where it should be.  Conservatives will control the Houses both state and federal and we can become prosperous once again for a long time to come.

 

Do you mean Couy Griffin, Otero County Commissioner?  I met him once.  Seems to be an alright kind of guy.  You have to ignore how the MSM paints him out to be.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
On 6/30/2021 at 4:04 PM, Gromdor said:

I understand it perfectly through the Constitution they left for us.

Anyone that says that is ignorant of the Constitution.  The Constitution without understanding and perspective can easily be interpreted any number of ways.  I don’t think the Founding Fathers had that in mind.  If change is inevitable, then they expected it to be with full understanding of the Constitution and the desire to stay true to its meaning (those two are key).  The Constitution is not standalone.  Current meanings of words can change over time.  If you don’t have an inclination of what a word meant at the time of writing, then it can take on any meaning you want.

 

The words are clear and there is no need to channel ghosts to understand it.

The words are clear yet people misconstrue its meaning anyway.  Like those of a liberal persuasion.  One of the best examples is the phrase “separation of church and state”.  People don’t know the history behind that phrase but insist that it is Constitutional.  And they try to use it to degrade the 1A.  Another example is that of the Boston Tea Party.  It really wasn’t about tea or taxes and the ship boarded was a colonial ship.  It was about representation in Parliament.

 

The Constitution is not a “living document” in the liberal sense.  And you DO need to channel ghosts to understand it and we have them available to us.  By the 1820s, pretty much all the Founding Fathers had passed and we no longer had the advantage of going to them directly for questions.  We had to rely on only what they wrote.

 

If the Constitution is like a new car, the Federalist Papers are its user manual.  Oh sure, one could simply hop in and start driving but without familiarity with the user manual, you miss the nuts and bolts in its operation.  The Founders left us more than just the Constitution.  They left us an understanding through their writings, quotes, and biographies.  By reading them, you begin to see what the Founders had in mind and can start to see how lawyers and politicians have tried to twist the meaning ever since.  The government has an unsatiable appetite to seize more power and control from the people.  The three most abused clauses in our Constitution are ‘Commerce’, ‘Necessary and Proper’, and ‘General Welfare’.  The Left uses those like a prybar to dismantle the meaning behind the Constitution.

 

Reading the Constitution and its supporting documents are not a one-time thing.  You need to constantly immerse yourself in it, otherwise it becomes vague and taken for granted.  Every time you read something from it, you always find something new that you didn’t see before.  It’s not something that you take out of the box and mystically divine an answer.  One must live and breathe the Constitution.  Too few do that these days.  That is not the fault of the Constitution but of what I’ve coined as the curse of the “Oath of Empire” (Ignorance and Apathy of the people and the state).  OoE is not just the name of a trilogy, it is also a curse from the historical revisionist epic that afflicts all great cultures.  Every culture has a defining moment of where it goes after being afflicted.  Most fail.  If the people are aware of it, they have a chance to avoid the outcome.  This is our moment.  What will our response be?

 

The entire history of America and our legal system disagree with you. 

Really?  I think your history is faulty and shallow.  Besides, I’ve already covered this.

 

Heck, even foreign corporations have Constitutional rights...  Remember TIKTOK?  The Chinese company that Trump wanted to ban?  They sued because they weren't granted due process that is granted by our Constitution.

Well, Tiktok isn’t here illegally.  The Constitution worked in this case.  But it should still be shutdown anyway because it is a spying tool for China.  Actually, I guess it doesn’t matter because facebook, twitter, etc. are tools of China as well.  We need a dechinafication.  When Nixon went to China and opened it up for trade, the idea was to use influence as a means to transform it away from Communism.  Somewhere along the way, that backfired and now it is China that influences us.  And the list of sellouts is extensive.  Too many corporations have sacrificed loyalty for profit, which becomes the end of the Invisible Hand and ultimately, each company’s prosperity too.  They may not even be aware of it.  Socialism (any of the many flavors) is a siren’s song.  It is very appealing but one learns too late that it is a trap.  Time to bail from this path, now!

 

You are incorrect as here as well.  There is no privleged "citizen" class that is more deserving of rights than all others.  All men are equal in America.

I didn’t say there was.  It is just ‘citizen’ (all the rights & privileges entitled to a citizen).  As I said before, the Constitution does not guarantee everybody’s rights in the world.  How can it?  Can we protect the rights of the Chinese (say the Uighurs)?  So why should we do so when they are here illegally?  In fact, we are infringing on China’s sovereignty (and China would be infringing on our sovereignty).

 

If they seek asylum then they can come to a port of entry and ask.  Then they should stay in Mexico until their case can be heard and if accepted, then they can get in the back of the line.  That does not give them automatic title to enter this nation.  I have envisioned having “holding” communities (heavily fenced and gated) spring up at or near every port of entry.  10 square miles (5 in Mexico and 5 in the US).  Set up a police force from among the residents and allow them to set up businesses as they begin their assimilation as Americans.  We naturalize about a million immigrants every year.  More than any other nation.  And that puts a strain on our culture.  China probably eradicates a million of their people every year and don’t even bat an eye.  We all saw what they did when people caught covid.  They boarded them up in their homes and left them to die.  Their healthcare is simple, “if you are not useful to the state, we dispose of you”.

 

The Founding Fathers were against having classes, that’s why the Left is using racism to break us apart.  All citizens are privileged, it’s called American Exceptionalism.  An illegal’s rights are not protected under our Constitution (other than basic human compassion).  Their rights are protected by their nation of origin.  They are not entitled to services, welfare, or even to be here.  Those resources belong to the citizen, first and only.  That is a right exclusively belonging to the citizen.  By spitting on that right, we harm our poor & troubled.  We need to stop squandering this nation’s wealth.  If we stop feeding the animals, they stop coming around.

 

I swore an oath to defend the Constitution- Not Ravenhawks' wealth and prosperity. 

No doubt you believe that.  I do not question that belief.  However, first you say that you support the Constitution from one side of your mouth, then with the other side, you disparage it by degrading basic American rights.  Wealth and prosperity are synonymous with freedom and liberty.

 

As for freedom and liberty- that I will protect for all people in America

Again, that is a contradiction. ‘all people’ is not ‘all citizens’.  The existence of a nation depends on even the subtly of difference between those phrases.  Being an American should account for something.  For simplification, our inalienable rights can be boiled down to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.  That means wealth and prosperity.  The Constitution ties in so well with the free market.  You can’t have one without the other.  To say ‘all people’ implies a lean toward globalization.  That is the killer of individualism (ultimate government control and power).  Rights are all about the individual and the Constitution protects those rights by placing limits on government.  So globalization is unconstitutional.  The individual matters.

 

be they foreign, citizens, and whatever it is you think are sub-citizens.

There are only citizens (and wards – foreign or not) or illegals.  There are no sub-citizens.  The 14A starts off “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”  Illegals are not natural born, are not naturalized, and neither are they under the jurisdiction of our laws.  If they were, then they’d be deported.  QED!  They are fugitives from justice.  You realize that if they are caught a second time being illegally here, they have committed a felony?  They are entitled to humane treatment as they are shown the door.

 

I hate to say it, but I think you understand the Constitution about the same as you understand the term "socialism". 

I take that as a great compliment, even though that is not how you meant it.  I do know both pretty well.  Better than most here (that is obvious).  I study both.  I know at times I probably oversimplify something but my goal is to remove the complexity.  Unveil the falsehoods.  And believe me there are many.

 

You don't need to read 100 pages of background material or listen to conservative media to comprehend it. 

I suppose you don’t but you do need to start.  I think that one key issue here is the difference between Negative and Positive rights.  You can’t get an understanding of those by just a casual reading of the Constitution.  Negative rights are our GOD—given, inalienable rights that we enjoy.  These are the rights that are guaranteed to not be infringed on by the Constitution.  Meaning that these rights are absolute and unbounded and that no state can add or detract from them without it being unconstitutional. 

 

Positive rights, on the other hand, guarantees or grants rights, like healthcare or a job.  What this means is that the government will have to take something away from someone and give it to someone else to produce equity of outcome.  Which makes both equally poor in outcome.  Positive rights do not reflect the thinking of the Founding Fathers.  You just don’t find a clarification of that in the Constitution.  You need to be familiar with what the Founders thought.  They were not for positive rights.  Positive rights are something right out of the “Communist Manifesto” and further, the St Bidet/Sanders manifesto.

 

The act of going out and finding a job is more fulfilling than having the government give one a job.  The Founders did everything to keep us from being a welfare state.  I see nothing wrong with the feds or even the state helping someone to ‘find’ a job.  Once found, it is up to the individual to keep it.  As the character GW McClintock once said, “I don’t give jobs, I hire men!”  Finding a job is a negative right and hence less intrusive.  The Founders were all about being less intrusive.

 

The Founding Fathers made it simple and clear.  If it needed special interpreters then it is a failure as a framework for our whole government system.

It could be a total system failure but not with government, but with society and especially education.  Because education has been greatly infiltrated by Socialism.  Interpreters are needed to counter the MSM and Progressives pushing their agenda to change the original intent and try to convince the people to have the understanding you have.  Which unfortunately seems to be working.  People today are not sure what the Constitution says because all they have is the reading of the syntax with no concept of substance.  People read the Constitution and Bill of Rights and when they come to the “And government SHALL NOT infringe” parts, they turn around and try to put on restrictions.  WTF!

 

We need teachers to instruct and inspire children to learn their history and appreciate what the Founders did and all the documentation they generated.  The only way to truly understand the Constitution is to immerse yourself into the Founding Fathers.  The Legislative spends little time doing that.  Instead, Progressives look for ways to rewrite or eliminate elements of the Constitution, so that they can write a new one, one where meaning can change as the wind blows.  As I said before, they use the three most abused clauses in the Constitution, in combination with attacking the 10A in order to expand their power.  The whole point to the Constitution is to limit the power of federal government.  So you can’t be for defending the Constitution and defending the government expanding its powers over us.  One or the other please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

Anyone that says that is ignorant of the Constitution.  The Constitution without understanding and perspective can easily be interpreted any number of ways.  I don’t think the Founding Fathers had that in mind.  If change is inevitable, then they expected it to be with full understanding of the Constitution and the desire to stay true to its meaning (those two are key).  The Constitution is not standalone.  Current meanings of words can change over time.  If you don’t have an inclination of what a word meant at the time of writing, then it can take on any meaning you want.

 

 

 

 

 

The words are clear yet people misconstrue its meaning anyway.  Like those of a liberal persuasion.  One of the best examples is the phrase “separation of church and state”.  People don’t know the history behind that phrase but insist that it is Constitutional.  And they try to use it to degrade the 1A.  Another example is that of the Boston Tea Party.  It really wasn’t about tea or taxes and the ship boarded was a colonial ship.  It was about representation in Parliament.

 

 

 

The Constitution is not a “living document” in the liberal sense.  And you DO need to channel ghosts to understand it and we have them available to us.  By the 1820s, pretty much all the Founding Fathers had passed and we no longer had the advantage of going to them directly for questions.  We had to rely on only what they wrote.

 

 

 

If the Constitution is like a new car, the Federalist Papers are its user manual.  Oh sure, one could simply hop in and start driving but without familiarity with the user manual, you miss the nuts and bolts in its operation.  The Founders left us more than just the Constitution.  They left us an understanding through their writings, quotes, and biographies.  By reading them, you begin to see what the Founders had in mind and can start to see how lawyers and politicians have tried to twist the meaning ever since.  The government has an unsatiable appetite to seize more power and control from the people.  The three most abused clauses in our Constitution are ‘Commerce’, ‘Necessary and Proper’, and ‘General Welfare’.  The Left uses those like a prybar to dismantle the meaning behind the Constitution.

 

 

 

Reading the Constitution and its supporting documents are not a one-time thing.  You need to constantly immerse yourself in it, otherwise it becomes vague and taken for granted.  Every time you read something from it, you always find something new that you didn’t see before.  It’s not something that you take out of the box and mystically divine an answer.  One must live and breathe the Constitution.  Too few do that these days.  That is not the fault of the Constitution but of what I’ve coined as the curse of the “Oath of Empire” (Ignorance and Apathy of the people and the state).  OoE is not just the name of a trilogy, it is also a curse from the historical revisionist epic that afflicts all great cultures.  Every culture has a defining moment of where it goes after being afflicted.  Most fail.  If the people are aware of it, they have a chance to avoid the outcome.  This is our moment.  What will our response be?

 

 

 

 

Really?  I think your history is faulty and shallow.  Besides, I’ve already covered this.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, Tiktok isn’t here illegally.  The Constitution worked in this case.  But it should still be shutdown anyway because it is a spying tool for China.  Actually, I guess it doesn’t matter because facebook, twitter, etc. are tools of China as well.  We need a dechinafication.  When Nixon went to China and opened it up for trade, the idea was to use influence as a means to transform it away from Communism.  Somewhere along the way, that backfired and now it is China that influences us.  And the list of sellouts is extensive.  Too many corporations have sacrificed loyalty for profit, which becomes the end of the Invisible Hand and ultimately, each company’s prosperity too.  They may not even be aware of it.  Socialism (any of the many flavors) is a siren’s song.  It is very appealing but one learns too late that it is a trap.  Time to bail from this path, now!

 

 

 

 

 

I didn’t say there was.  It is just ‘citizen’ (all the rights & privileges entitled to a citizen).  As I said before, the Constitution does not guarantee everybody’s rights in the world.  How can it?  Can we protect the rights of the Chinese (say the Uighurs)?  So why should we do so when they are here illegally?  In fact, we are infringing on China’s sovereignty (and China would be infringing on our sovereignty).

 

 

 

If they seek asylum then they can come to a port of entry and ask.  Then they should stay in Mexico until their case can be heard and if accepted, then they can get in the back of the line.  That does not give them automatic title to enter this nation.  I have envisioned having “holding” communities (heavily fenced and gated) spring up at or near every port of entry.  10 square miles (5 in Mexico and 5 in the US).  Set up a police force from among the residents and allow them to set up businesses as they begin their assimilation as Americans.  We naturalize about a million immigrants every year.  More than any other nation.  And that puts a strain on our culture.  China probably eradicates a million of their people every year and don’t even bat an eye.  We all saw what they did when people caught covid.  They boarded them up in their homes and left them to die.  Their healthcare is simple, “if you are not useful to the state, we dispose of you”.

 

 

 

The Founding Fathers were against having classes, that’s why the Left is using racism to break us apart.  All citizens are privileged, it’s called American Exceptionalism.  An illegal’s rights are not protected under our Constitution (other than basic human compassion).  Their rights are protected by their nation of origin.  They are not entitled to services, welfare, or even to be here.  Those resources belong to the citizen, first and only.  That is a right exclusively belonging to the citizen.  By spitting on that right, we harm our poor & troubled.  We need to stop squandering this nation’s wealth.  If we stop feeding the animals, they stop coming around.

 

 

 

 

 

No doubt you believe that.  I do not question that belief.  However, first you say that you support the Constitution from one side of your mouth, then with the other side, you disparage it by degrading basic American rights.  Wealth and prosperity are synonymous with freedom and liberty.

 

 

 

 

 

Again, that is a contradiction. ‘all people’ is not ‘all citizens’.  The existence of a nation depends on even the subtly of difference between those phrases.  Being an American should account for something.  For simplification, our inalienable rights can be boiled down to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.  That means wealth and prosperity.  The Constitution ties in so well with the free market.  You can’t have one without the other.  To say ‘all people’ implies a lean toward globalization.  That is the killer of individualism (ultimate government control and power).  Rights are all about the individual and the Constitution protects those rights by placing limits on government.  So globalization is unconstitutional.  The individual matters.

 

 

 

 

 

There are only citizens (and wards – foreign or not) or illegals.  There are no sub-citizens.  The 14A starts off “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”  Illegals are not natural born, are not naturalized, and neither are they under the jurisdiction of our laws.  If they were, then they’d be deported.  QED!  They are fugitives from justice.  You realize that if they are caught a second time being illegally here, they have committed a felony?  They are entitled to humane treatment as they are shown the door.

 

 

 

 

I take that as a great compliment, even though that is not how you meant it.  I do know both pretty well.  Better than most here (that is obvious).  I study both.  I know at times I probably oversimplify something but my goal is to remove the complexity.  Unveil the falsehoods.  And believe me there are many.

 

 

 

 

 

I suppose you don’t but you do need to start.  I think that one key issue here is the difference between Negative and Positive rights.  You can’t get an understanding of those by just a casual reading of the Constitution.  Negative rights are our GOD—given, inalienable rights that we enjoy.  These are the rights that are guaranteed to not be infringed on by the Constitution.  Meaning that these rights are absolute and unbounded and that no state can add or detract from them without it being unconstitutional. 

 

 

 

Positive rights, on the other hand, guarantees or grants rights, like healthcare or a job.  What this means is that the government will have to take something away from someone and give it to someone else to produce equity of outcome.  Which makes both equally poor in outcome.  Positive rights do not reflect the thinking of the Founding Fathers.  You just don’t find a clarification of that in the Constitution.  You need to be familiar with what the Founders thought.  They were not for positive rights.  Positive rights are something right out of the “Communist Manifesto” and further, the St Bidet/Sanders manifesto.

 

 

 

The act of going out and finding a job is more fulfilling than having the government give one a job.  The Founders did everything to keep us from being a welfare state.  I see nothing wrong with the feds or even the state helping someone to ‘find’ a job.  Once found, it is up to the individual to keep it.  As the character GW McClintock once said, “I don’t give jobs, I hire men!”  Finding a job is a negative right and hence less intrusive.  The Founders were all about being less intrusive.

 

 

 

 

 

It could be a total system failure but not with government, but with society and especially education.  Because education has been greatly infiltrated by Socialism.  Interpreters are needed to counter the MSM and Progressives pushing their agenda to change the original intent and try to convince the people to have the understanding you have.  Which unfortunately seems to be working.  People today are not sure what the Constitution says because all they have is the reading of the syntax with no concept of substance.  People read the Constitution and Bill of Rights and when they come to the “And government SHALL NOT infringe” parts, they turn around and try to put on restrictions.  WTF!

 

 

 

We need teachers to instruct and inspire children to learn their history and appreciate what the Founders did and all the documentation they generated.  The only way to truly understand the Constitution is to immerse yourself into the Founding Fathers.  The Legislative spends little time doing that.  Instead, Progressives look for ways to rewrite or eliminate elements of the Constitution, so that they can write a new one, one where meaning can change as the wind blows.  As I said before, they use the three most abused clauses in the Constitution, in combination with attacking the 10A in order to expand their power.  The whole point to the Constitution is to limit the power of federal government.  So you can’t be for defending the Constitution and defending the government expanding its powers over us.  One or the other please.

 

Oh dear lord.  America is a failure if we need speciai interpreters to understand what was supposed to be a simple document.  Needing an interpreter to understand our Constitution is the same as needing a commentator to understand the news. I pity those people that have to constantly have others explain their life and liberties to them- because their shackles of ignorance lets those "interpreters" control them.  They are slaves to whatever the "interpreter" tells them.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
19 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Needing an interpreter to understand our Constitution is the same as needing a commentator to understand the news.

Or an official of a denomination be it priest, preacher, or rabbi to interpose themselves between an individual and their deity to tell them what to think.

Seems like intelligent people who value personal freedom and responsibility would eschew all of those things. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
6 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Or an official of a denomination be it priest, preacher, or rabbi to interpose themselves between an individual and their deity to tell them what to think.

Seems like intelligent people who value personal freedom and responsibility would eschew all of those things. 

I get that life is a dark scary place and while some people carry their own light, others need a light house.  I don't begrudge people like that.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
1 hour ago, Gromdor said:

I get that life is a dark scary place and while some people carry their own light, others need a light house.  I don't begrudge people like that.  

I must admit that is a very good point.  Sometimes I am just too cranky.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
On 7/4/2021 at 6:46 PM, Gromdor said:

Oh dear lord.  America is a failure

Maybe to you, as led by Progressives.  Conservatives believe that our best days are ahead of us.  We are not perfect, but we are the most perfect the world has ever seen.  But we can’t rest on our laurels, we are still a work in progress.  And what has made us so successful is preserving the original intent.  Reagan was quoted as saying something like “freedom is not passed along in the bloodstream”.  We pass it along via instruction.  You could give a 4 year old a calculus textbook and tell them to read this, but you can’t expect them (vast majority) to develop even a basic understanding overnight if ever.

 

if we need speciai interpreters to understand what was supposed to be a simple document. 

It becomes simple if you have people versed in it (a teacher, parent, or even a guy on the internet) teaching it, passing on shared values.  It is a cultural thing.  We have a concept among Native Americans of the “Storyteller”.  It is actually a worldwide tradition.  Basically, it is passing on the most important pillars of a culture to new generations.  That is by design.  What can be more important than our birthright as celebrated in the Constitution?  You can’t just sit down and read the Constitution only and expect to understand what the Founders had in mind.  It is up to each and every generation to teach it to the up-and-coming generations and pass it on.  The Constitution is not just some words written a long time ago.  It is as relevant today as it was at its creation.  It’s written with human nature in mind and human nature does not change.  That is something that Marx and Mao neglected to understand.

 

Needing an interpreter to understand our Constitution is the same as needing a commentator to understand the news.

Only if one is not familiar with the news story as they are not familiar with the Constitution.  The Constitution is a framework to ensure that the individual retains their full rights.  That is far more important than “the news”.  Many don’t comprehend that because it is something abstract to them.  There is noting to bring it alive to them if it is reduced to just reading some words from some document.  Each generation must be tested.  If the Constitution is not passed on and only to be read, there will come a generation which only allows the holy words of “Ee'd Plebnista” to be read by chiefs.

 

I pity those people that have to constantly have others explain their life and liberties to them- because their shackles of ignorance lets those "interpreters" control them.  They are slaves to whatever the "interpreter" tells them.

Wow!  So you say that the Constitution does not need to be taught (just reading is enough), but you accept all manner of Marxism imparted by the MSM?  Or what the government feeds you?  That is enslavement.  Learning the Constitution is a form of indoctrination.  But you seem to prefer indoctrination into Marxism more.  This is not about someone controlling you, it is to ensure that you know the original intent, so you can’t be controlled.  There needs to be more indoctrination on what we are based on.  The Constitution defines who we are.  It is a very narrow field.  One is indoctrinated into one thing or another.  You can be indoctrinated into natural rights or indoctrinated into things like the Marxist and racist CRT.  It just depends on which one you want to be immersed in.  If you are an American, you can only be immersed into one thing.  What do you have against that?  Don’t just read the Constitution, study it, seek understanding through the ghosts of our Founding Fathers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
On 7/4/2021 at 7:09 PM, Tatetopa said:

Or an official of a denomination be it priest, preacher, or rabbi to interpose themselves between an individual and their deity to tell them what to think.

Seems like intelligent people who value personal freedom and responsibility would eschew all of those things. 

  I agree completely.  It’s a good thing that being indoctrinated into the Constitution is not the same as being indoctrinated into religious dogma.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
On 7/4/2021 at 7:18 PM, Gromdor said:

I get that life is a dark scary place and while some people carry their own light, others need a light house.  I don't begrudge people like that.  

People immersed into the Constitution carry their own light.  It is those that don’t bother to learn that goes dark.  The world is a dark scary place.  That is why it behooves one to be prepared for it.  If you don’t keep the maintenance up on the light house, when you need it, it will fail.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
21 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Looks like the various National Guard troops/State Troopers did get to play a part in border security-  The just helped with a band of 300-400 immigrants that showed up at a Texas border gate: Massive Migrant Group of Hundreds Met by Agents at Texas Border Wall (msn.com)

Seems like most are from Haiti.

AND, they did not try to enter illegally, they showed up at the gate.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
1 hour ago, Desertrat56 said:

AND, they did not try to enter illegally, they showed up at the gate.

Most of them do.  The caravans that everyone panicked about leaving Central America over the last few years all headed for a gate.  The ones using ladders don't go in large groups like that. Fact Sheet: U.S. Immigration and Central American Asylum Seekers - WOLA

I think there is a huge misconception on who is coming and how they get in.   

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa

Meanwhile, how many Canadians and refugees from other nations are slipping across the unguarded North Dakota border?  Blonde haired and blue eyed they mix surreptitiously with our own population to steal our jobs, demand free medical care, burden our welfare system, and demand parental leave and sick days?  You can bet they will vote Democrat.

North Dakota is powerless to stop them and now Kristi Noem has turned a blind eye to the peril and diverted needed troops as far away as possible.  What is her secret game?

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
7 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Meanwhile, how many Canadians and refugees from other nations are slipping across the unguarded North Dakota border?  Blonde haired and blue eyed they mix surreptitiously with our own population to steal our jobs, demand free medical care, burden our welfare system, and demand parental leave and sick days?  You can bet they will vote Democrat.

North Dakota is powerless to stop them and now Kristi Noem has turned a blind eye to the peril and diverted needed troops as far away as possible.  What is her secret game?

Finally someone is talking about this :gun:

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
22 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Meanwhile, how many Canadians and refugees from other nations are slipping across the unguarded North Dakota border?  Blonde haired and blue eyed they mix surreptitiously with our own population to steal our jobs, demand free medical care, burden our welfare system, and demand parental leave and sick days?  You can bet they will vote Democrat.

North Dakota is powerless to stop them and now Kristi Noem has turned a blind eye to the peril and diverted needed troops as far away as possible.  What is her secret game?

Well, it's actually been the other way around: Americans Are Trying to Sneak into Canada and Getting Caught By Border Patrol Officers (distractify.com)

The border has been closed because of Covid but hordes of illegal Americans have been trying to sneak over in their RVs and fishing boats.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
Just now, aztek said:

COVID cases among migrants in Rio Grande Valley sector surge 900% as border numbers continue to rise]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/covid-cases-migrants-rio-grande-valley-sector-border-numbers

You would think that they would know better than to come to Texas and get infected with COVID with how hesitant Republicans seem to be with getting the vaccine.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
13 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

You would think that they would know better than to come to Texas and get infected with COVID with how hesitant Republicans seem to be with getting the vaccine.

Except that in Texas anyone can walk in and get a vaccine.  They keep the locations posted on line.   Early on a lot of people in New Mexico who could not get the vaccine drove to Amarillo to get vaccinated.    Texas may be republican for the most part but it is also easy to live there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
1 hour ago, Desertrat56 said:

Except that in Texas anyone can walk in and get a vaccine.  They keep the locations posted on line.   Early on a lot of people in New Mexico who could not get the vaccine drove to Amarillo to get vaccinated.    Texas may be republican for the most part but it is also easy to live there.

Anyone can walk in and get one here in Iowa too, they just choose not to.  Coming to Texas and getting a 900% higher chance of getting Covid is pretty sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
1 minute ago, Gromdor said:

Anyone can walk in and get one here in Iowa too, they just choose not to.  Coming to Texas and getting a 900% higher chance of getting Covid is pretty sad.

"There were 135 detainees who tested positive in the first two weeks of July alone, marking a 900% increase in confirmed positive cases compared to the previous 14 months."

the 900% is not the population of the Rio Grande Valley, it is the migrants coming to the Rio Grande Valley.  According to the article (but it is Fox), the migrants are bringing it with them.  They are tested while they are being detained.  And 135 were tested positive this month, which is a 900% increase from previous detainee populations in previous months.   I am trying to figure out the math.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
3 hours ago, Gromdor said:

You would think that they would know better than to come to Texas and get infected with COVID with how hesitant Republicans seem to be with getting the vaccine.

It's people coming to cross the border who's infection rate has increased not the people already in TX.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
3 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

"There were 135 detainees who tested positive in the first two weeks of July alone, marking a 900% increase in confirmed positive cases compared to the previous 14 months."

the 900% is not the population of the Rio Grande Valley, it is the migrants coming to the Rio Grande Valley.  According to the article (but it is Fox), the migrants are bringing it with them.  They are tested while they are being detained.  And 135 were tested positive this month, which is a 900% increase from previous detainee populations in previous months.   I am trying to figure out the math.   

A 900% increase resulting in 135 is 15.  So they had 15 people in the previous 14 months.  135 out of a few hundred thousand isn't really that bad.  Texas had over 3 million coivd cases and 51,558 deaths: Tracking the Coronavirus in Texas – 24/7 Wall St. (247wallst.com) out of 28.7 million.  So basically 1 out of 9 or so Texan were infected.

The article I think is just to make people think the immigrants pose a health hazard for an illness we currently have a vaccine for. (but people refuse to take.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

A 900% increase resulting in 135 is 15.  So they had 15 people in the previous 14 months.  135 out of a few hundred thousand isn't really that bad.  Texas had over 3 million coivd cases and 51,558 deaths: Tracking the Coronavirus in Texas – 24/7 Wall St. (247wallst.com) out of 28.7 million.  So basically 1 out of 9 or so Texan were infected.

The article I think is just to make people think the immigrants pose a health hazard for an illness we currently have a vaccine for. (but people refuse to take.)

Thanks.  My brain wasn't working.   it was a simple problem - divide 135 by 9.   But it isn't the Texans, it is the immigrants that were infected.  The infected people were turned away, not allowed to enter the country.   Fox twist of fear, but they copied the article from the Washington post which was clearer.

Edited by Desertrat56
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
Just now, Desertrat56 said:

Thanks.  My brain wasn't working.   it was a simple problem - divide 135 by 9.   But it isn't the Texans, it is the immigrants that were infected.

Eh, people are people.  These people are in Texas so we should compare the numbers with the average Texans.

Heh, what we should do is tell them that if them come here, we will give them vaccinations!  If they are anything like the average American that will strike fear into/deter a good 50% of them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Eh, people are people.  These people are in Texas so we should compare the numbers with the average Texans.

Heh, what we should do is tell them that if them come here, we will give them vaccinations!  If they are anything like the average American that will strike fear into/deter a good 50% of them!

They were sent back as soon as it was found they had the virus.   They never made it past the detainment center at the border.   And I suspect, since it is Texas, those that were not infected did get the vaccine before they were let loose.   And the "average American" is not in fear of the vaccine, the average American has been vaccinated if they could be and there are a lot of reasons they can't be vaccinated that are legitimate.

Where do you live?  What is the percentage of vaccinated where you live (if you live in the U.S.)?

Edited by Desertrat56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.