bootz
116
but you seem to have missed where I said Trump misspoke about us being the only country.
I was sure you had not read the thread because you would never make an unfounded statement.
out of curiosity, was the video a lie or a misstatement?
No.
Levee en masse is only moral in times where the integrity of the republic is at stake. World War II is only conflict since the Civil War that qualified as a moral use of conscription.
bootz
118
perhaps this politifact article will refresh your memory of everybody else claims.
It is a common tactic of the left. the OP attacks the tactic.
bootz
119
you do not subscribe to the belief if others do it we must as well?
I think it can both ways.
For example, our military’s general staff system is heavily based on the German model that existed from 1871 to 1945. We used it because it was proven to be the best in the world of that era, far superior to the British or French general staff systems.
Let me see if I can make this simple.
Conscription aside, Donald Trump would be plainly violating the Constitution if he wrote an EO doing away with birthright citizenship.
The 14th Amendment exists and is pretty clear in its language, no matter how badly it pisses off Donald.
No. I think we can use ideas from other nations that work while using their mistakes as a guide of what to avoid.
Every country takes ideas from others.
bootz
123
it seems often times that the left uses policies in other socialist nations to promote socialism here.
most on the left are against the use of military force.
hence forced military service should be something they oppose.
bootz
124
who cares about Trump, Trump is no better or worse than Obama.
Depends on what it is.
There are indeed things that other countries do that are better than the way we do them. In that situation, we shouldnt do it because Country X does it that way…we should do it because its better than the current method we are using.
bootz
126
examples? do you have any in mind
Of course. If they weren’t subject to the law, they wouldn’t be breaking it.
bootz
129
you have the right to your opinion and you gave one,
That sets you apart from the Mob that has been active.
I obviously disagree with you on all counts.
First on birth right citizenship, The 14th amendment was to give former slaves the right to vote and be protected by law as opposed to property. It should be examined for it’s current relevance.
second we are a free people not subjects or property of the state. NO Gi’s in America for me.
Voting is a civic duty we agree, but not a right, and not an obligation. If you are going to force a vote you might be sympathetic to mandatory literacy tests or programming.
The price of liberty is inefficiency.
bootz
130
you pretend that is a clear cut legal issue.
some may argue that breaking the law is a disqualifying act to good standing.
It is a clear-cut legal issue.
The words “good standing” do not appear in the 14th amendment.
bootz
132
this is an article written in 2005,
perhaps you are mistaken, perhaps obtuse, but it is by no means clear cut as you presume.
Yeah, I’ve read that article. It’s wrong. If you want to know why it’s wrong, see the other thread.
Do you have other random bloggers that you want to put forth as experts?
Thank you for your direct engagement on my points.
My understanding is that, while the 14th amendment was intended to address slaves, it has since been adjudicated by the SC to mean that the birth children of legal residents qualify. Someone on the conservative side here gave a nice annotated explanation of the history yesterday.
I don’t agree that compulsory service as a cost of citizenship equals slavery or the like. We had a draft, then ended it. I think both acts were and are considered constitutional. For my part, I’d like to see the randomness and favoritism removed from the process. As I said, no student or bone-spur deferments.
It would almost certainly require an amendment to implement my third suggestion, but I consider voting to be a privilege and duty of all Americans. To me, the two worst features of our current electoral process are campaign financing and our ludicrously low rate of participation (60% in 2016, I’ve read).
I get your point about literacy tests, and they surely denote a dark point in our history. But their purpose was to prevent participation, not encourage it. I’ve said elsewhere that I would support public assistance for anyone who has difficulty with testing. Even a waiver if you demonstrably lack the ability to work your way through it. But I’ve seen the citizenship test sample questions, and they’re not rocket surgery. As you say, liberty is inefficient, and costly. I think the expense of ensuring that all citizens have an understanding of how we function as a nation, and penalizing them where they feel it most for not taking a minimum of 30 gd minutes out of their year to participate, would ACTUALLY help to make this country great again.
bootz
135
I have not seen the other thread, but I do find it interesting that posters state for certain what the judges always differ on.
how many supreme court decisions or any high court decisions are split.
Just for kicks, is the income tax a direct or indirect tax? How then is it impacted by the 16th amendment?
