The Real timschochet

Thanks for the advice. I’m trying to be a decent human being. That’s why I’m opposed to informing on other people. Today Trump’s new Justice Department announced that it is seeking ways to prosecute officials from “Sanctuary Cities” who won’t cooperate with their deportation plans. I hope the officials resist. That is decency in my book.

Also you’ve repeated this line before and I keep trying to tell you it’s ignorant of history. Almost the first thing the Communists did in every country they took power in during the last century was take the Democratic socialists, line then up against a wall, and shoot them. They’re not friends.

What does any of this have to do with my views on immigration, which are rooted in capitalism and libertarianism and the free market?

Well the Germans must have thought so.

Go ahead. Only scum would actually turn people in. Sounds like you would though.

You keep moving the goalposts. The public wants strong action taken in regards to undocumented immigration, you’re right about that. But they don’t want to end birthright citizenship. You’re wrong about that. The University of Chicago is hardly a left wing university, you just made that part up. And AP is about as middle of the road as they come. Earlier you asserted that Americans overwhelmingly support removing birthright citizenship. That was wrong and stupid on your part to make such an assertion. Back it up if you can, or withdraw it, or continue to look like an idiot. Your choice.

Look you’re right that my opinion about the topic isn’t authoritative, it’s my opinion. But what I wrote about the history IS authoritative. I linked the source for you. I didn’t make it up.

It’s never OK

I am. I would prefer if there were no tariffs whatsoever but we can’t fight that by adding tariffs of our own. Doesn’t work; never has. History has been quite decisive on this point.

The assumption that if people vote for a candidate they agree with everything the candidate is for is pretty damn stupid even for you.

Look as I already wrote, your first paragraph is wrong. The amendment was primarily a response to slavery and Dred Scott, but immigration was discussed at the time. And this was confirmed by the Supreme Court shortly thereafter: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark As an aside in your last paragraph you wrote “I am hopeful we can find a result that benefits Americans, not illegal immigrants.” We already have that result. Birthright citizenship is a benefit to all here. Also, despite their lack of papers, IMO undocumented immigrants are every bit as American as anyone else, perhaps more so, as many of them risked their lives and freedoms coming here. How many of us can say that?!

Unlike @TrailGuy I’m in favor of this investment. I think it’s a good thing and I applaud Trump for doing it. But it has nothing to do with the tariffs which are the subject of this thread. I think the tariffs are idiotic and will be disastrous.

51% of Americans oppose changing birthright citizenship: https://amp.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article298897150.html

Hegseth will be confirmed. Republicans in the Senate don’t have the guts to stand up to Trump at this point, really on any issue. If this was a private vote Hegseth would lose in a landslide. But it isn’t so he will go through.

Well I think you’re wrong. Trump is against NATO. He is an isolationist. And my views on this aren’t far left, they’re mainstream establishment (or used to be anyhow.)

This is wrong. The outcome of children of immigrants becoming citizens was NOT unexpected. It was actually debated prior to the passage of the 14th Amendment and determined to be a desirable outcome. This included children born here of people who came here without papers across our borders- at that time the borders were pretty much wide open. Most legal scholars, both conservative and liberal, believe the Supreme Court will slap down Trump on this. It may even be a unanimous decision. Birthright citizenship is here to stay unless you change the Constitution.

Well the tariffs alone will certainly transform us….

You and others keep making this claim. But the problem is that he has made no demands to China and his demands against Mexico and Canada are extremely vague, not specific at all. Furthermore he keeps saying, and seems to sincerely believe, that tariffs are not a means to an end but the end itself. Don’t get me wrong I hope you are correct about this. But we’ll see.

Yeah sure. Question: do you understand the difference between Communism and Capitalism? Do you know what a free market means?

Starting Feb 1: 25% on Canada 25% on Mexico 10% on China Here we go. Anyone think this is a good idea?

And is Antoine overrated? I’ve no idea; someone told me I should eat there.

Thanks but damn that’s too many. Narrow it down to 2-3 absolute musts?

Well except for the guy who asked me and who I was responding to. Damn what an idiot you are.

I also want to add to this that as of last night a new litmus test: any politician who supported Trump’s commutation of the Jan 6 thugs will NEVER get my vote.

You’re correct that laws are what makes us a civilized society. You’re also correct that you can’t just pick and choose. But what if a law is truly immoral to you? William Lloyd Garrison, the famous abolitionist, was faced with this question following the Dred Scott decision and he answered it by setting fire to a copy of the Constitution, an act of civil disobedience. Such acts are part of our American heritage, dating back to the Boston Tea Party. And no I am not arguing that there are any existing current laws that are so immoral that they demand disobedience. But it could happen. Of course my Anne Frank analogy earlier was way over the top, deliberately so. Still, if somebody from ICE had reason to come to me and ask me to name people that I know who are undocumented, and where they currently live, I wouldn’t do it. Even under the threat of arrest I wouldn’t do it.