-
Posts
-
As serious as a foreign takeover! California becomes, by turns, Taxifornia, then Mexifornia, eventually, Aztlan. There are already politicans in various jurisdictions (mostly in SoCal, but a few in SF) openly calling for, not only illegal alien voting, but illegal aliens as elected officials. (Of course they don’t mean Irishmen, or Russians.) They see how the Mexican government gets to rip its citizens off, well beyond the ambitions of most US pols, and they want their shot at it.
If secession comes, Mexifornia will be the first, starting a chain of others.
Cry, "Treason!"
Would love to see Mexifornia and New Dork leave .
Mexifornia would leave — give it a decade, or so. I don’t think New York City would — as the center of the financial empire, they treat all the other States, including upstate NY, as colonies. They’ll sic their armed minion, Washington, D.C., on them, if they try to leave, but by the time they get around to doing so, it’ll probably be too late.
None of the breakup will leave the remainder USA stronger, despite the parochial discord.
Cry, "Treason!"
mmmmmmm, makes me want to inject silicone lube into the San Andres Fault!
RobinSilicone lube, eh? Sounds like you want to kill a lot of Californians. Chances are, it’ll take more lube than you have, and you’ll need to study a lot of geology to know where to inject it. But bring it on out, and someone will tell you where to stick it.
Cry, "Treason!"
No time like the present to get started!
RobinAll this comes down to is the Aztlan Movement where the government is catering to the “Spanish Land Grant” people and the “Aztec Land First” crowd……
I hate Trump, but his approach does seem to be sparking a bit of the anti-pol sentiment in many that didn’t realize how badly they hated politicians until now. Fighting against political correctness and winning some battles? Just crazy that anyone could succeed in today’s age.
http://ageofdecadence.com
No birth right citizenship for babies of illegals. A Trump campaign plank. That would stop the mexican invasion in its tracks. And make it retroactive like they did to pass the assault weapons ban.
Mexicans back to MEXICO! They can’t dump their problems on the U.S. and expect us to pay the tab.
Trump cannot deport natural born citizens. Illegal immigrants come here to have children to gain access to pubilic benefits. Cut off the benefits and they will stop coming.
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
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. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Trump cannot deport natural born citizens. Illegal immigrants come here to have children to gain access to pubilic benefits. Cut off the benefits and they will stop coming.
I agree that the volume of illegal alien invasion would diminish, were the freebies to be reduced, but that cannot happen as long as the dependent portion of citizens who receive them, or the governments which want them to remain dependent, have anything to say about it. The Extreme Court has ruled that if benefits are given to citizens, they cannot be withheld from non-citizens who qualify to the extent of being similarly needy, nor can they be withheld from all the putative new anchor-citizens, whom the fedgov, and many states, as well, have actively invited to arrive in the wombs of their soon-to-deliver-a-jackpot-mothers. The fedgov, and various state governments, have effectively told a disenfranchised majority of citizens that they may pound sand forever, but that their country is never going to be returned to a government of their irrelevant choosing, as long as the courts have anything to say about it.
Once upon a time, the courts held to the doctrine that laws, the Constitution included, were to be read to mean, as best it could be determined, whatever the body who passed, or ratified them, intended at the time. This has now been emphatically discarded, in favor of the notion that those who originated any given law in the past (e.g., last year) had no knowledge of current problems, hence the law can be freshly “interpreted” to mean whatever suits the immediate Just-Us(es) reviewing it. It continues to suit them to require the citizens to subsidize their own gradual displacement.
Still, as irrelevant as the answer might now be, I can’t help wondering if the post-War legislatures who ratified the 14th Amendment, truly intended to subsidize gradually supplanting the descendants of their then constituents with descendants of other nations. Perhaps that little clause, “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” originally meant something about the nationality of the person in question.
Cry, "Treason!"
LT,
Unfortunately there are no inaccuracies in your comments. However I suspect the well is running dry on many levels. Analogously I have the scene from movies where the hero asks the passenger of the car “do you have your seat belt on” immediately before accelerating into an intentional crash. Of course it’s something we all see, and are powerless to prevent.Who is John Galt?
http://ageofdecadence.com
Sled, that thought hit me also!
Robin
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.