Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2016, 03:16:12 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 604 605 606 607 608 [609] 610 611 612 613 614 ... 1149
15201  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: In the citizenship exam on: February 04, 2012, 12:22:52 am
96-0, tho to be fair, the way the questions are worded makes me suspect that the actual quiz is open-ended and not multiple choice, which would make some of these tougher.
15202  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: In the citizenship exam on: February 03, 2012, 11:35:30 pm
95/96

Under our Constitution, some powers belong to the states. What is one power of the states?     

make treaties

create an army - My answer

provide schooling and education - supposedly correct answer.

coin or print money

However, the states all have their own little militias and state guards and whatever, while there was no such thing as public schooling at the time the constitution was written.
Am I wrong or is the test wrong?

Quote from: Article I Section 10
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

In 18th century parlance, an army and a militia were not the same thing.  An army was a body of paid troops whose primary occupation was soldiering, while the militia was a bunch of armed civilians called up as needed.
15203  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: The US Gov't seizes 307 domains for violating copyright law on: February 03, 2012, 11:08:34 pm
http://www.tecca.com/news/2012/02/03/ice-nfl-website-seizure-superbowl/

This time, all sites were allegedly violating NFL copyright. The sites seized are literally presumed guilty until proven innocent.

So, why do we need SOPA and PIPA again?

If those sites didn't use a US based domain name, their domain names could not have been seized as these were.  One of the arguments put forth by the pro-SOPA/PIPA forces is that it would have given the government authority it does not currently have to deal with .fr, .de, .ru, .zh, .uk, .etc. addresses.  Whether that argument is any good, I'll leave to others to discuss.
15204  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: February 03, 2012, 11:00:34 pm

For how long should he be held? 

Until there was at least a semi-functional society in Haiti again.  If things were done the way I like it, he'd be in Haiti now, unless of course he made another illegal entry after we deported him there.  Haiti is not yet back to the point to where deporting otherwise non-criminal illegal entrants is what I would consider good policy, but it is back to the point where it is about as capable as it was before the earthquake of handling someone like this.


So, there is NO time limit?

Oh, and to return to the facts situation, the individual is currently dead, so deporting him now would be, well, pointless.

But, if he had been held after completion of his sentence for burglary until he might sometime be deported, what if he killed another inmate, or guard while incarcerated while awaiting deportation?  These things happen.

I find it laughable that immediately after castigating me for making a very probable assumption that if he had been held until he could be deported that both he and his victims would still be alive you then bring up the far less probable scenario of him having killed someone else while in prison awaiting deportation.


Please be so good as to indicate the post where I supposedly castigated you "for making a very probable assumption that if he had been held until deported that both he and his victims would still be alive."

The bolded part of the post I was directly replying to CARL, where you suggested that I was calling for deporting a dead man.  If that wasn't castigation on your part then it must have been lack of reading comprehension on your part,

Quote
I further repeat that you have given no real time limit, but have implied that it could well exceed six months.

No I haven't, but no previous temporary suspension of deportations due to a natural disaster has lasted permanently.  Haiti's has lasted so long mainly because Haiti was a basket case even before the earthquake hit, but assuming the too slow pace of recovery there continues along its current trajectory, then I think it should be lifted sometime this autumn after the height of the hurricane season is over.  Whether it will be then, or earlier, or later, I can't predict.  If it happens when I think it should, cynics will no doubt claim the Obama administration made its decision on political grounds, and politics may well play a part in the timing. However, because so much of Haiti's economy is based on subsistence agriculture, waiting until October or November to be certain that Haiti does not suffer a major hurricane this year that will undo the earthquake recovery while it is still fragile seems prudent to me.

Also, as I already indicated, I'd have already resumed deportations of violent felons to Haiti by now.  The reason for allowing non-violent illegals to have a temporary stay of deportability is not only that their return would further burden a malfunctioning society, but that remittances from their work that they send back is a more cost-effective form of after-disaster assistance than government direct aid could be.  Since that latter reason is not applicable to violent felons,  then I think their deportations should resume once a functional criminal justice and police system had resumed in Haiti (functional by Haiti's expectations, not ours, since by ours they weren't functional even before the earthquake).

Since you seem to have missed it before, let me repeat that the six month limit you were harping about is based on the Court's interpretation of Congress' intent in the law that limits the time frame before deportation or release must occur. Congress is completely free to revise those limits and there is at least one bill (H.R. 1932) that has been submitted to revise those limits to allow for indefinite detention in broader circumstances.
15205  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: February 03, 2012, 02:12:33 pm
I agree that he should not have been released until he could be deported.  That he should be deported back to a country whose already inadequate government had been effectively been wiped out by a natural disaster before at least the bare bones of government function had been restored, I absolutely reject.

For how long should he be held?  

Until there was at least a semi-functional society in Haiti again.  If things were done the way I like it, he'd be in Haiti now, unless of course he made another illegal entry after we deported him there.  Haiti is not yet back to the point to where deporting otherwise non-criminal illegal entrants is wat I would consider good policy, but it is back to the point where it is about as capable as it was before the earthquake of handling someone like this.


So, there is NO time limit?

Oh, and to return to the facts situation, the individual is currently dead, so deporting him now would be, well, pointless.

But, if he had been held after completion of his sentence for burglary until he might sometime be deported, what if he killed another inmate, or guard while incarcerated while awaiting deportation?  These things happen.

I find it laughable that immediately after castigating me for making a very probable assumption that if he had been held until he could be deported that both he and his victims would still be alive you then bring up the far less probable scenario of him having killed someone else while in prison awaiting deportation.

Quote
Finally, while I am NOT an immigration lawyer, it seems questionable that one could hold an illegal alien for an extended period of time after the completion of his sentence for a violent felony.  

I suggest you consult Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, (2001),where the Supreme Court held that deportable aliens with criminal records could not be detained indefinitely.

The decision limited detention in such cases (absent terrorism charges pending), to six months

The six month limit was based upon the court's interpretation of what Congress had determined to be a reasonable period of temporary incarceration pending deportation in cases in which the country to which he was to be deported refused to accept the deportee.

I see nothing in Zadvydas that suggests that the Court would find it unconstitutional if Congress were to authorize continued detention during periods of temporary suspension of deportation on humanitarian grounds. You asked me how I would handle it if I could set the law as I would, and while my preferred policy would require a change in the law, it does not appear to require a change in our constitution.
15206  Election Archive / 2012 Elections / Re: The "racist newsletter" author has been identified. Unsurprisingly, media lied. on: February 02, 2012, 09:48:18 pm
So people should feel all warm and tingly because Paul only allowed it to go out under his masthead?  Uh-uh.  Paul justly reaped the brambles he allowed to be sown on his field.
15207  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Daily double in Indiana on: February 02, 2012, 01:52:47 am
I don't know why Dennis Kruse thinks having schools engage in costly litigation to prove once again that "creation science" is not science but religion is a good idea.
15208  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: February 02, 2012, 01:40:31 am
Also, since you NOW indicate that your argument concernig "non-violent felons" did not extend to the case in point, are you therefor conceding that since he was convicted of a violent felony, he should have been deported before he was able to kill?


I agree that he should not have been released until he could be deported.  That he should be deported back to a country whose already inadequate government had been effectively been wiped out by a natural disaster before at least the bare bones of government function had been restored, I absolutely reject.

For how long should he be held? 

Until there was at least a semi-functional society in Haiti again.  If things were done the way I like it, he'd be in Haiti now, unless of course he made another illegal entry after we deported him there.  Haiti is not yet back to the point to where deporting otherwise non-criminal illegal entrants is wat I would consider good policy, but it is back to the point where it is about as capable as it was before the earthquake of handling someone like this.
15209  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: End of the Bashar al-Assad Regime is in Sight on: February 01, 2012, 10:15:06 am
I don't think Assad is dumb enough to think a revived État des Alaouites would be anything more than a short term solution.  Of course, he hay have come to the conclusion that he has no long term solution.
15210  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Nationalization of Natural Resources is only logical. on: February 01, 2012, 10:01:28 am
When goverment touches something, it turns into s**t.
And I think that BP can better control mexican oil.

Recent events seem to certainly have vindicated your opinion =/

Considering that BP got Deepwater Horizon under control in three months and it took Pemex nine months to plug Ixtoc I, your joke may have more truth than you intended.
15211  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: Russ Feingold unfit for Presidency on: February 01, 2012, 01:46:16 am
Precisely because he is a Jew, Feingold would be less likely to take his marching orders from Jerusalem than some of our presidents have been in the past.

(One good stereotype deserves another.)
15212  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Process / Re: Gary Johnson on: February 01, 2012, 01:37:17 am
If Johnson had started out running as a Libertarian, I'd agree he wouldn't tarnish the Libertarians if he were their nominee.  As a failed nominee of another party, he does.
Did Ron Paul, a then-former Republican who had lost three separate races for the House as well as a Senate primary, tarnish the Libertarian Party in 1988? Not really. He got half a percent of the vote, which was more than David Bergland's total in 1984 and Andre Marrou's in 1992 (both with a third of a percent). Since then, Paul's total has only been matched once, by Harry Browne in 1996.
Paul did not attempt to get the Republican nomination in 1988, which is a crucial difference.  He started off that campaign cycle running as a Libertarian.  He didn't switch after losing the nomination of his first choice party.
15213  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: February 01, 2012, 01:08:49 am
It's interesting that you're using the language of 'choice' while in your parenthetical remark referencing people 'trapped in unfortunate circumstances', but I presume you take the view that there are for most such people other, preferable options? If so, may I ask you to expound on this?
Nathan, practically anything else is preferable to being a sex slave, which are the 'unfortunate circumstances' I was trying to politely refer to.  About the only thing that isn't better is being dead, and that's a matter of opinion.

For most of those who come here illegally, there are economic benefits to themselves to do so, but that is no excuse for breaking the law.  Now, if we had a better immigration policy that both increased the amount of allowed immigration and was tough on those who employ illegal workers, we'd have a lot less illegal immigration, since it would reduce the economic incentives to come here illegally to do otherwise law-abiding work, and enable us to more easily keep out the undesirables we don't want coming here.
15214  Election Archive / 2012 Elections / Re: Hot or Not: The "46 States to Go" Signs on: January 31, 2012, 10:54:40 pm
Not a good sign, but in some ways, better than the one Mitt has in your sig, Politico.  I believe in America, but I don't believe in Mitt Romney.
15215  Election Archive / 2012 Elections / Re: The FL Election Day & Results Thread on: January 31, 2012, 10:51:12 pm
Listening to Romney's victory speech, one thing was glaringly apparent.  The man was just too damn smug.  Not confident, but condescendingly smug.  It was grating in the extreme.  Considering that Mitt doesn't have much substance, he needs to work on his style.  He is only doing well because he has been campaigning for six years, has a ton of money to throw around, and Newt has personal flaws he has been able to exploit.    Problem is, in November, he'll be facing an opponent that will have also been campaigning for six years, will have a ton of money to throw around, and who does not have much in the way of personal flaws.  At this point Romney's only hope is that we have a deep double dip recession of the sort Obama cannot blame on the Republicans, and I don't see it.

Bleh!  More divided government coming up at a time we can't afford it.
15216  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: January 31, 2012, 07:07:25 pm
They are here illegally, and could not have gotten jobs here legally under current law.

And whose fault is that?

Their own in almost all cases.  They knew that they did not have permission to legally immigrate here and yet they still chose to come. (A very small portion have been forced to come here for the sex worker trade, tho most of those trapped in those unfortunate circumstances were not aware of what would be required of them by those they paid to smuggle them until they got here.)
15217  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: guess the preceding poster's password on: January 31, 2012, 05:46:59 pm
Conley2010
15218  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: January 31, 2012, 04:35:03 pm
I might point out that 'migrant' is another serviceable word that seems to lack that particular prescriptivist connotation without being dehumanizing and/or excessively clinical. We okay with 'undocumented migrant'?

No.  While I won't throw a hissy-fit if you use "undocumented" I am certain others will.  I'm nowhere near as Humpty-Dumpty on this topic as CARL is, but "undocumented" makes it sound like they merely forgot to get some paperwork done.  That's not the case.  They are here illegally, and could not have gotten jobs here legally under current law. "Illegal" is the most appropriate adjective to use.
15219  Election Archive / 2012 Elections / Re: Remember When JFK Kissed the Pope's Ring, and Made the Pope the King of America? on: January 31, 2012, 01:09:55 pm
Not an issue for me. Besides, if Mitt is elected he won't be the first American president to be a Mormon, just the first to be one while he was still alive and in office. Wink
15220  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: January 31, 2012, 01:53:06 am
I must admit that you are very "imaginative" in you use of language.  So, please "imaginatively" continue to babel.

You're incredibly consistent with spelling when correcting others' language.

(Consistently wrong!)

Thank you for your compliment.

Yes, I know you consistently disagree with everything I post.

Oh, BTW, let me say that I am opposed to Communism. 

Unfortunately for you CARL, we aren't alien computers from the original series of Star Trek.  Your non-sequiturs are not going to cause us to shut down amid a flurry of sparks and smoke.
15221  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: January 31, 2012, 01:49:30 am
Considering your repeated strenuous objections to the use of the phrase "illegal immigrant", CARL, it's clear that you are counted amongst those others who take the Humpty Dumpty approach.

Once again, I use the correct terminology, and you use inaccurate terminology.

If you check, you will see that the term "immigrant" means someone who moves to another country for a permanent residence.  All the experts agree that many of the aliens illegally present in this country are sojourners.

So, why do you persist in calling such persons immigrants?

Actually, if you look, I simply used the term "illegals" so as to avoid a pointless quibble over word meaning, but if you insist on being a Humpty-Dumpty, so be it.

Why do people use it?  Perhaps because its widely?

From dictionary.com:
Quote
a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence.

They don't seem to think all immigrants do so on a permanent basis.

To be fair, at present Merriam-Webster does include that prescriptive restriction that immigrants must intend on permanent residence that you Humpty-Dumpty on about.

Language is not immutable.  Whether you like it or not, the terms immigrant and immigration are losing the restriction that the crossing of a border be intended to be permanent.  Judging by your posts here on the Forum, I conclude that you find change intolerable, so I suppose I should not be surprised that you cling to the walls of your Humpty-Dumpty notions as to what language is.  However, keep in mind, Humpty-Dumpty had a great fall off of his wall, CARL.  Try as you might, you can't put the past back together again.
15222  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A poster boy for Amnesty on: January 31, 2012, 01:22:28 am
Also, since you NOW indicate that your argument concernig "non-violent felons" did not extend to the case in point, are you therefor conceding that since he was convicted of a violent felony, he should have been deported before he was able to kill?


I agree that he should not have been released until he could be deported.  That he should be deported back to a country whose already inadequate government had been effectively been wiped out by a natural disaster before at least the bare bones of government function had been restored, I absolutely reject.

(P.S. If you are going to criticize posts for spelling, shouldn't you at the bare minimum use a spell checker before you post?)
15223  General Discussion / Constitution and Law / Re: Constutionality of admitting The Moon as the 51st state. on: January 31, 2012, 01:09:51 am
It would be the easy part.

However, due to the Northwest Ordinance, it would have to be 60,000 people.

The moon is not in the Northwest Territory, so that does not apply.  Indeed, Nevada was admitted with under 60,000 people in the expectation that it would rapidly grow, which did not pan out.

The United States has signed a treaty in which it has pledged not to annex any part of the Moon.

The Outer Space Treaty can be exitted with one year notice.  Not that I think that would be a good thing to do.
15224  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The Michael A. Naso Institute of Comedy on: January 30, 2012, 12:51:55 pm
Click for context.
Low double digits, though.

15225  General Politics / Economics / Re: Germany wants to take control of the Greek budget ?! on: January 30, 2012, 11:55:35 am
Aren't options 1 and 2 essentially the same?  After all, given the current situation, EU control would only be a fig-leaf for German control.
Pages: 1 ... 604 605 606 607 608 [609] 610 611 612 613 614 ... 1149


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines