Mexico to send 10,000 soldiers to US border in Trump tariff 'pause' deal

[Diogenes]

Did I not already choose a username?

Of course you did. Poor Richard Saunders.

 

[Diogenes]

Why should I direct you to the court cases when you have already proven you are ignorant of history and unwilling to learn?

The burden of proof, Mr. Pitiful.

 

[Diogenes]

Under the spreading chestnut tree, the village idiot stands…is that Pobre I see?

I doubt it, Earl. Unless you're speaking figuratively.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Just answer the question. Let me restate it for you.

Why are open borders and birthright citizenship so important to you?

TO YOU. Do you understand the fucking question? Or are you going to drivel more bullshit?

Why should I answer your logical fallacy?
Where is your evidence that open borders and birthright citizenship are so important to me?
Facts are important to me. You don't have facts so why should I respond to your delusions? They are your delusions. Not mine.

The Constitution matters to me and the Constitution states that anyone born in the US is a citizen unless they are not subject to US laws such as diplomats and foreign soldiers.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Of course you did. Poor Richard Saunders.

Then why did you say my user name was in the future? Are you that ignorant of history?

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

The burden of proof, Mr. Pitiful.

Do you often get buried by your burden?

 

[Diogenes]

Then why did you say my user name was in the future?

Did I say that?

 

[Diogenes]

Do you often get buried by your burden?

No, Mr. Pitiful, I do not.

 

[christiefan915]

Did anyone say that?

Don't dominoes usually fall like this?

I believe that was the argument Eisenhower used about communism.

 

[Diogenes]

I believe that was the argument Eisenhower used about communism.

Is that relevant?

Dwight D. Eisenhower, during his presidency, used several arguments and perspectives regarding communism, which can be broadly categorized based on his speeches, policies, and actions:

1. Moral and Ideological Opposition:
   • Eisenhower often framed communism in stark opposition to freedom, using language that highlighted the moral and ideological differences. In his speeches, he described communism as a "hostile ideology—global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose and insidious in method". He portrayed communism as a system that denied individual liberty and opposed the natural rights and freedoms that the U.S. stood for, often contrasting it with the American ideals of democracy and individual freedom.
2. Containment and the Domino Theory:
   • Eisenhower was a key figure in the continuation of the containment policy against communism. He articulated this through the "Domino Theory" during a press conference on April 7, 1954, where he warned that if one country fell to communism, others would follow like a row of dominoes. This theory was used to justify U.S. involvement in various global conflicts, particularly in Southeast Asia, to prevent the spread of communism.
3. Economic and Military Assistance:
   • Through the Eisenhower Doctrine, announced in January 1957, he argued for providing economic and military assistance to countries in the Middle East to resist communist threats. This was explicitly aimed at countering the influence of the Soviet Union in the region, where he authorized U.S. forces to be committed "to secure and protect the territorial integrity and political independence of such nations" against communist aggression.
4. Critique of Communist Infiltration:
   • Eisenhower was also concerned with the internal threat of communism in the U.S., although he handled it differently from figures like Senator Joe McCarthy. He supported legislation to extend espionage and sabotage laws and allowed the FBI to increase efforts against Communist Party activities. However, he was cautious about the methods used to combat communism, opposing what he saw as "violent vigilantism" and emphasizing the need to respect civil liberties while fighting against communist influence.
5. Diplomacy and Peaceful Coexistence:
   • Despite his staunch anti-communist stance, Eisenhower also pursued diplomatic avenues, exemplified by his efforts at the Geneva Summit in 1955, where he proposed the "Open Skies" initiative for mutual aerial surveillance to reduce Cold War tensions. His approach was to engage in dialogue while maintaining a strong military deterrent, reflecting his belief that both peace and readiness were necessary to counter communist expansion.

Eisenhower's arguments against communism were thus multifaceted, combining ideological, strategic, and diplomatic elements, aiming to both contain the spread of communism abroad and address its perceived threats at home without compromising American values or security.


@Grok

 

[Diogenes]

The Constitution states that anyone born in the US is a citizen unless they are not subject to US laws such as diplomats and foreign soldiers.

Is that so?

There exists a clear rationale to justify the abolishment of birthright citizenship, in my view.

The argument is straightforward, and it rests on history and precedent.

The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment states: “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.”

The first problem I see here is redundancy. If “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” simply means, as common parlance accepts, that one is subject to the law because of physical presence in the territory, that clause is redundant—"born in the United States” covers that base.

An interpretation of a legal text that creates a redundancy is disfavored, in my experience.

“Subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means owing sole allegiance to the United States.

This was confirmed by one of the primary drafters of the clause, Sen. Lyman Trumbull, who stated “subject to the jurisdiction” meant subject to “complete” jurisdiction—“[n]ot owing allegiance to anybody else.”

Originally, the Supreme Court agreed.

Although dicta (for lazy/stupid people, that means non-binding comments by judges in opinions that although not essential to a case, may be cited as persuasive authority or lead to new legal rules in future cases), both the majority and the dissent in the Slaughter-House cases ( 83 U.S. 36,) agreed that the 14th Amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction” clause excluded the children of citizens and subjects of foreign states who just happened to be born in the United States.

SCOTUS confirmed this in Elk v. Wilkins when it denied birthright citizenship to an Indian born on a reservation who claimed citizenship as an adult. The Court held that the claim of birthright required him not to be “subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.”

In a reversal of stare decisis, the Supreme Court changed direction in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. In that case, a Chinese man born to permanent residents (who were barred by federal statute from obtaining full citizenship) claimed birthright citizenship, and the Court held Wong Kim Ark qualified for the 14th Amendments' birthright citizenship.

I believe the aura this decision placed around Wong Kim Ark is much broader than even its holding, which addressed the child of legal permanent residents.

Birthright citizenship should, at the least, be limited to children of parents here legally.

The situation we have today is absurd and untenable, IMO.

 

[AProudLefty]

Quite a law scholar.

 

[Earl]

Is that relevant?

Dwight D. Eisenhower, during his presidency, used several arguments and perspectives regarding communism, which can be broadly categorized based on his speeches, policies, and actions:

1. Moral and Ideological Opposition:
   • Eisenhower often framed communism in stark opposition to freedom, using language that highlighted the moral and ideological differences. In his speeches, he described communism as a "hostile ideology—global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose and insidious in method". He portrayed communism as a system that denied individual liberty and opposed the natural rights and freedoms that the U.S. stood for, often contrasting it with the American ideals of democracy and individual freedom.
2. Containment and the Domino Theory:
   • Eisenhower was a key figure in the continuation of the containment policy against communism. He articulated this through the "Domino Theory" during a press conference on April 7, 1954, where he warned that if one country fell to communism, others would follow like a row of dominoes. This theory was used to justify U.S. involvement in various global conflicts, particularly in Southeast Asia, to prevent the spread of communism.
3. Economic and Military Assistance:
   • Through the Eisenhower Doctrine, announced in January 1957, he argued for providing economic and military assistance to countries in the Middle East to resist communist threats. This was explicitly aimed at countering the influence of the Soviet Union in the region, where he authorized U.S. forces to be committed "to secure and protect the territorial integrity and political independence of such nations" against communist aggression.
4. Critique of Communist Infiltration:
   • Eisenhower was also concerned with the internal threat of communism in the U.S., although he handled it differently from figures like Senator Joe McCarthy. He supported legislation to extend espionage and sabotage laws and allowed the FBI to increase efforts against Communist Party activities. However, he was cautious about the methods used to combat communism, opposing what he saw as "violent vigilantism" and emphasizing the need to respect civil liberties while fighting against communist influence.
5. Diplomacy and Peaceful Coexistence:
   • Despite his staunch anti-communist stance, Eisenhower also pursued diplomatic avenues, exemplified by his efforts at the Geneva Summit in 1955, where he proposed the "Open Skies" initiative for mutual aerial surveillance to reduce Cold War tensions. His approach was to engage in dialogue while maintaining a strong military deterrent, reflecting his belief that both peace and readiness were necessary to counter communist expansion.

Eisenhower's arguments against communism were thus multifaceted, combining ideological, strategic, and diplomatic elements, aiming to both contain the spread of communism abroad and address its perceived threats at home without compromising American values or security.


@Grok

That’s about all we need to know and then some about Ike and his thoughts about Communism.

One may visit Cuba and see for themselves.

Anecdotal, yes, but one of the men who installed our hardwood floors was from Cuba. He had nothing nice to say about that worker’s paradise.

Basketball to watch.

Mas trade,

 

[christiefan915]

Is that relevant?

Dwight D. Eisenhower, during his presidency, used several arguments and perspectives regarding communism, which can be broadly categorized based on his speeches, policies, and actions:

1. Moral and Ideological Opposition:
   • Eisenhower often framed communism in stark opposition to freedom, using language that highlighted the moral and ideological differences. In his speeches, he described communism as a "hostile ideology—global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose and insidious in method". He portrayed communism as a system that denied individual liberty and opposed the natural rights and freedoms that the U.S. stood for, often contrasting it with the American ideals of democracy and individual freedom.
2. Containment and the Domino Theory:
   • Eisenhower was a key figure in the continuation of the containment policy against communism. He articulated this through the "Domino Theory" during a press conference on April 7, 1954, where he warned that if one country fell to communism, others would follow like a row of dominoes. This theory was used to justify U.S. involvement in various global conflicts, particularly in Southeast Asia, to prevent the spread of communism.
3. Economic and Military Assistance:
   • Through the Eisenhower Doctrine, announced in January 1957, he argued for providing economic and military assistance to countries in the Middle East to resist communist threats. This was explicitly aimed at countering the influence of the Soviet Union in the region, where he authorized U.S. forces to be committed "to secure and protect the territorial integrity and political independence of such nations" against communist aggression.
4. Critique of Communist Infiltration:
   • Eisenhower was also concerned with the internal threat of communism in the U.S., although he handled it differently from figures like Senator Joe McCarthy. He supported legislation to extend espionage and sabotage laws and allowed the FBI to increase efforts against Communist Party activities. However, he was cautious about the methods used to combat communism, opposing what he saw as "violent vigilantism" and emphasizing the need to respect civil liberties while fighting against communist influence.
5. Diplomacy and Peaceful Coexistence:
   • Despite his staunch anti-communist stance, Eisenhower also pursued diplomatic avenues, exemplified by his efforts at the Geneva Summit in 1955, where he proposed the "Open Skies" initiative for mutual aerial surveillance to reduce Cold War tensions. His approach was to engage in dialogue while maintaining a strong military deterrent, reflecting his belief that both peace and readiness were necessary to counter communist expansion.

Eisenhower's arguments against communism were thus multifaceted, combining ideological, strategic, and diplomatic elements, aiming to both contain the spread of communism abroad and address its perceived threats at home without compromising American values or security.


@Grok

You implied that countries will bow to trump's will rows of dominoes falling.

The Domino Theory, a Cold War-era concept, posited that if one country in a region fell to communism, neighboring countries would follow suit like a row of dominoes. Here's an analysis of its legitimacy:

Arguments Against Its Legitimacy:

• Oversimplification: Critics argue the Domino Theory oversimplified complex political, cultural, and nationalistic dynamics in countries. Each state has its own unique context that doesn't necessarily lead to a domino effect.
• Vietnam Outcome: The fall of South Vietnam did not immediately lead to the expected communist takeover of other Southeast Asian countries like Thailand or Malaysia, which suggests the theory was not universally applicable.
• Nationalism vs. Ideology: The assumption that ideological alignment would automatically lead to political alignment ignored strong nationalist sentiments in many countries.

Modern Reflection:

• Historical Reassessment: Scholars today often view the Domino Theory as an oversimplification used for political rhetoric. It contributed to significant military engagements where the outcomes did not match the predicted scenarios.
• Complexity: International relations now recognize the complex interplay of domestic politics, international alliances, economic factors, and cultural nuances that cannot be boiled down to a simple cause-and-effect model.

Conclusion:
The Domino Theory had some basis in the geopolitical realities of the Cold War but was largely criticized for its oversimplification and the failure of its predictions in many instances. It might have been legitimate in capturing certain fears or trends of the era but was not a reliable predictor of political change everywhere. Its application led to significant policy decisions, particularly in U.S. foreign policy, which have been debated and reevaluated over time.

Therefore, while it wasn't entirely without merit, the Domino Theory's legitimacy is nuanced and largely dependent on the specific historical and regional contexts it was applied to.

@Grok

 

[Diogenes]

You implied that countries will bow to trump's will rows of dominoes falling.

Did I?

 

[ULTRA MAGA]

Why should I answer your logical fallacy?
Where is your evidence that open borders and birthright citizenship are so important to me?
Facts are important to me. You don't have facts so why should I respond to your delusions? They are your delusions. Not mine.

The Constitution matters to me and the Constitution states that anyone born in the US is a citizen unless they are not subject to US laws such as diplomats and foreign soldiers.

You are a shit fly ass worm larvae not worth my bother. Fuck you and your interpretation of the constitution which of course I know doesn't mean jack shit to your demented ass. All you know is orange man very bad.

Watch and see what's happening next. As for me I will just observe your meltdowns and smile. Fucking idiot.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

You are a shit fly ass worm larvae not worth my bother. Fuck you and your interpretation of the constitution which of course I know doesn't mean jack shit to your demented ass. All you know is orange man very bad.

Watch and see what's happening next. As for me I will just observe your meltdowns and smile. Fucking idiot.

I see you have decided to double down on your logical fallacies. Let us know when you grow up and can act like an adult.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

No, Mr. Pitiful, I do not.

Are you sure?

 

[Diogenes]

Are you sure?

Indeed I am, Mr. Pitiful.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Is that so?

There exists a clear rationale to justify the abolishment of birthright citizenship, in my view.

The argument is straightforward, and it rests on history and precedent.

The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment states: “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.”

The first problem I see here is redundancy. If “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” simply means, as common parlance accepts, that one is subject to the law because of physical presence in the territory, that clause is redundant—"born in the United States” covers that base.

An interpretation of a legal text that creates a redundancy is disfavored, in my experience.

“Subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means owing sole allegiance to the United States.

This was confirmed by one of the primary drafters of the clause, Sen. Lyman Trumbull, who stated “subject to the jurisdiction” meant subject to “complete” jurisdiction—“[n]ot owing allegiance to anybody else.”

Originally, the Supreme Court agreed.

Except the Supreme Court never agreed to that. Can you cite the case where the court agreed to that? The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction" is hardly redundant since there are 2 specific classes of people that exist in the US that are not subject to the jurisdiction.
Trumbull also stated that the child born of German parents in the US would be a citizen of the US.

Mr. Cowan, of Pennsylvania, asked, "Whether it will not have theeffect of naturalizing the children of Chinese and Gypsies born inthis country?" Mr. Trumbull answered, "Undoubtedly," and asked, "isnot the child born in this country of German parents a citizen?"Mr. Cowan replied, "The children of German parents are citizens;but Germans are not Chinese." Mr. Trumbull rejoined: "The law makesno such distinction, and the child of an Asiatic is just as much acitizen as the child of a European."
US v Wong Kim Ark

Although dicta (for lazy/stupid people, that means non-binding comments by judges in opinions that although not essential to a case, may be cited as persuasive authority or lead to new legal rules in future cases), both the majority and the dissent in the Slaughter-House cases ( 83 U.S. 36,) agreed that the 14th Amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction” clause excluded the children of citizens and subjects of foreign states who just happened to be born in the United States.

SCOTUS confirmed this in Elk v. Wilkins when it denied birthright citizenship to an Indian born on a reservation who claimed citizenship as an adult. The Court held that the claim of birthright required him not to be “subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.”

Talk about completely ignoring what Elk actually says. What reservation are children born on when they are born to foreign citizens? The Constitution clearly gave Indians a separate status since they are exempted when they are "Indians not taxed."

In a reversal of stare decisis, the Supreme Court changed direction in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. In that case, a Chinese man born to permanent residents (who were barred by federal statute from obtaining full citizenship) claimed birthright citizenship, and the Court held Wong Kim Ark qualified for the 14th Amendments' birthright citizenship.

No. the court didn't change direction. Anyone that reads Wong would know that the court didn't change direction at all. It clarified that foreign citizens are not Indians.

I believe the aura this decision placed around Wong Kim Ark is much broader than even its holding, which addressed the child of legal permanent residents.

Birthright citizenship should, at the least, be limited to children of parents here legally.

The situation we have today is absurd and untenable, IMO.

Birthright citizenship has always been anyone born in the US and subject to US laws is a citizen.