|
|
| Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan (1619806) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 6 |
||
|
| (1619980) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:43:09 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Apr 23 11:40:56 2019. I'm confused. When I took political science classes in college, I never heard of the Trump Party before |
|
|
| (1619981) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:44:57 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by bingbong on Tue Apr 23 12:22:45 2019. Not if I had MY way... |
|
|
| (1619982) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:47:47 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Apr 23 12:51:55 2019. You got to put politics aside and get these illegal aliens out of our country. They should not be counted in anything. If somebody asks you how many people live in the house, do you include the burglar who was hiding upstairs under the bed? |
|
|
| (1619983) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:49:03 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by bingbong on Tue Apr 23 12:50:10 2019. Let 'em go to Canada! And those illegal aliens will not be paying for those hospitals, utilities, services. It's the overtaxed citizens that would be |
|
|
| (1619984) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:50:46 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by bingbong on Tue Apr 23 17:32:42 2019. Our Forefathers are spinning in their graves! |
|
|
| (1619985) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:53:44 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Apr 23 12:27:12 2019. All of these Mexican illegal aliens are Indians who don't pay taxes, so it specifically says not to count them. |
|
|
| (1619986) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:54:18 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Apr 23 12:36:18 2019. Yes, they are all Indians |
|
|
| (1619987) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:55:12 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Apr 23 12:48:26 2019. Persons and men are interchangeable. They mean the same thing. |
|
|
| (1619988) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Wed Apr 24 01:56:41 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:43:09 2019. There was no trump party then. The Trumpists appeared in 2016 |
|
|
| (1619989) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:57:15 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by bingbong on Tue Apr 23 12:50:51 2019. How is it hateful? It's just a question. |
|
|
| (1619990) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:57:47 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by bingbong on Tue Apr 23 17:36:03 2019. And who pays for all of this? |
|
|
| (1619991) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Apr 24 01:59:34 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:47:47 2019. As I said to Chicagomotorman, as a policy issue I can agree with you, but not as a Constitutional matter. The plain text of the Constitution makes clear that everyone other than Indians not taxed must be counted, including those not eligible to vote. This has been that way since its drafting. When drafted, women and children could not vote yet they were still counted. As someone who does not believe in a “Living Constitution” that allows 5 justices can subvert clear written language when the text does not support their policy preference, I am compelled by the plain meaning of the Constitution to say that the inclusion of the question is unconstitutional. If you have a problem with it, amend the Constitution. |
|
|
| (1619992) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:00:30 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Apr 23 11:47:09 2019. Two wrongs don't make a right |
|
|
| (1619993) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:04:12 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by chicagomotorman on Tue Apr 23 12:21:56 2019. Exactly! |
|
|
| (1619994) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:04:59 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by bingbong on Tue Apr 23 12:24:09 2019. What game? Skin? We ALL have skin. |
|
|
| (1620004) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:31:40 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Fred G on Wed Apr 24 01:56:41 2019. There still isn't one now. |
|
|
| (1620006) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:32:19 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Apr 24 01:59:34 2019. What these Mexicans ARE Indians |
|
|
| (1620007) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:32:31 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Apr 24 01:59:34 2019. But these Mexicans ARE Indians |
|
|
| (1620010) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Apr 24 03:05:03 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Apr 23 18:52:29 2019. How so? |
|
|
| (1620011) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Apr 24 03:11:15 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:32:19 2019. No they are not. Indians refer to a specific class of people that is defined elsewhere in the United States Code and various treaties. |
|
|
| (1620013) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Wed Apr 24 03:39:58 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by chicagomotorman on Tue Apr 23 11:38:55 2019. What is your basis for saying that "Anti Semitism is still in the majority"? I really don't think that's true. |
|
|
| (1620014) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 03:59:20 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Apr 24 03:11:15 2019. Genetically they are Native American |
|
|
| (1620018) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Apr 24 05:08:13 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 03:59:20 2019. And that matters to the Constitution how?If you insist that they are classified as "Indians" under US law, then they are automatically allowed to stay here forever, and vote immediately. That doesn't further your goals. |
|
|
| (1620019) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census plan |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Apr 24 05:26:27 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by TRAIN DUDE on Tue Apr 23 18:36:02 2019. It's what they do, isn't it. |
|
|
| (1620029) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 05:51:56 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by AlM on Tue Apr 23 21:15:44 2019. No, there is only one issue concerning the Census. The other stuff you and bingbong keep mentioning are useful, but are not relevant to the citizenship question and its motivation. |
|
|
| (1620031) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census plan |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Apr 24 05:53:56 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:32:31 2019. They don't look Hindu to me. |
|
|
| (1620038) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:03:57 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Fred G on Wed Apr 24 01:56:41 2019. Exactly. Back then it was called the "Republican Party." |
|
|
| (1620039) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:05:19 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:31:40 2019. Yes there is. The two major parties are the Trump Party and the Democratic Party. |
|
|
| (1620041) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Apr 24 06:06:42 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 05:51:56 2019. I agree that the "useful" things do not address the issue before the Court. |
|
|
| (1620044) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:09:17 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:47:47 2019. If the burglar lives there, yes.The census also counts children, convicts, and legal non-citizens, none of whom can vote. Representatives represent the interests of non-voters as well. |
|
|
| (1620046) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:10:32 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:32:31 2019. “Indians not taxed” refers to those who live on reservations. |
|
|
| (1620051) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:21:36 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by AlM on Wed Apr 24 05:08:13 2019. FALSE. Traditionally, "Indians not taxed" were not US Citizens and could not vote outside of tribal elections. They were among the group intended to be not included under the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in Amend. XIV, sec. 1. Any Indian who became a citizen was counted. Indians were conferred citizenship en masse by an act of Congress in 1924, making this provision entirely moot, at least until such time as Indian citizenship is repealed. |
|
|
| (1620052) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Apr 24 06:24:35 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:21:36 2019. Indians were conferred citizenship en masse by an act of Congress in 1924That was my point - "Indians" are citizens now. So if BB wants to call these Central Americans "Indians" under US law, they are US citizens. Not the goal he is trying to achieve. |
|
|
| (1620053) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:25:01 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:50:46 2019. Hardly. |
|
|
| (1620054) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:25:49 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:53:44 2019. They are neither Indians nor do they not pay taxes. |
|
|
| (1620056) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:27:55 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 01:55:12 2019. “Men” can mean either humans in general or adult male humans specifically.“Persons” always means humans in general, regardless of sex or age. Thus, it was clearly intended to include women and children who could not vote. |
|
|
| (1620057) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:28:57 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Apr 24 02:00:30 2019. Way to miss the point, as usual. |
|
|
| (1620060) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:37:52 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Dave on Wed Apr 24 03:05:03 2019. Seriously?How is section 1 relevant to section 2? § 1 defines citizens and then § 2 does not use the word “citizen” at all. Nor does it make any reference to birth or naturalization. Were it intended to apply solely to citizens, it obviously would have said so. And you call yourself a lawyer? |
|
|
| (1620066) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Apr 24 06:47:01 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by mtk52983 on Tue Apr 23 12:54:54 2019. I disagree. The "living Constitution" model is essential in our Republic. For example, slaves held in the Southern states were counted as "three-fifths of a whole person" for census purposes, a compromise on Congressional representation by the Northern states.Without continuous interpretation of the Constitution as a living document, there would likely have been no meaningful way to rectify that. |
|
|
| (1620067) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Apr 24 06:51:49 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Apr 24 06:47:01 2019. there would likely have been no meaningful way to rectify thatYes, there were Amendments to rectify that. I believe mtk is referring to constantly reinterpreting the exact same provisions. |
|
|
| (1620068) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:54:38 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Apr 24 06:47:01 2019. I disagree. The "living Constitution" model is essential in our Republic.That is your opinion and I disagree. Without continuous interpretation of the Constitution as a living document, there would likely have been no meaningful way to rectify that. WHAT THE F---? This thread includes the very amendment to the Constitution which explicitly rectified that outside of Court intervention or any sort of "interpretation." This blows your argument completely out of the water. Also, arguably, the 3/5th compromise did not need to be amended out, as with the abolition of slavery, there were no longer persons who were not "free persons" who would fall under its purview. It could be interpreted as allowing the Census Bureau to count 3/5ths of prisoners, but it's unlikely any state would have wanted that as all states had prisoners and moreover it would not be deleterious to freedom as it would actually disincentivize over-incarceration. |
|
|
| (1620069) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:55:03 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by AlM on Wed Apr 24 06:51:49 2019. JayZeeBMT is baffled. |
|
|
| (1620077) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by TRAIN DUDE on Wed Apr 24 07:02:05 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:55:03 2019. LOL. Thinking is not his thing. |
|
|
| (1620078) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Apr 24 07:02:15 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:54:38 2019. Following ratification of the 13th and 14th Amendments, there followed a century of Jim Crow, which effectively created two classes of citizenship in the United States. Are you absolutely sure the three-fifths compromise wouldn't have found new life in the same way barriers to Black voting in Southern states were erected under Jim Crow? A lot of flagrantly unconstitutional things went on in the former Confederacy between Reconstruction and the 1960s. Active interpretation of the (living) Constitution by SCOTUS helped end all that.The three-fifths compromise ended postbellum as former slaves gained agency in their communities, before Jim Crow legislation put a stop to Black people getting elected to public office. |
|
|
| (1620079) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Apr 24 07:02:17 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 06:37:52 2019. Constitutional Interpretation builds upon previously used terms. "People" are defined in Section 1 and that definition therefore carries through anywhere afterwards that word is used again. Since People are defined as born in the U.S. or naturalized, the use of the word People in Section 2 does not refer to illegal immigrants unless they are anchor babies. |
|
|
| (1620085) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Apr 24 07:09:08 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Dave on Wed Apr 24 07:02:17 2019. I think "persons" as used in Section 1 is for the purpose of describing who is a citizen, not the later term "person" used for representation purposes, meaning "human beings who are physically here". |
|
|
| (1620088) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 07:11:46 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Apr 24 07:02:15 2019. Are you absolutely sure the three-fifths compromise wouldn't have found new life in the same way barriers to Black voting in Southern states were erected under Jim Crow?Do you even know what the three-fifths compromise was and to whom it was detrimental? You're also contradicting yourself. If your claim was that the three-fifths compromise died due to the "living Constitution" model and its re-interpretation, why didn't it "[find] new life" during the Jim Crow era? A lot of flagrantly unconstitutional things went on in the former Confederacy between Reconstruction and the 1960s. Active interpretation of the (living) Constitution by SCOTUS helped end all that. You have it backwards. If those things you claim1 happened during the Jim Crow era were "flagrantly unconstitutional," then wouldn't that show that your "living Constitution" model is bullshit and that the Supreme Court beginning in the 1960s finally interpreted the Constitution as written and got rid of all of "flagrantly unconstitutional" things? If the constitution were subject to continual reïnterpretation, then all of those things would have been Constitutional at the time until reïnterpreted out. 1I'm not going to dumb this down. |
|
|
| (1620089) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Apr 24 07:12:07 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Apr 24 07:09:08 2019. That's not how constitutional interpretation works. If a different definition was intended for Section 2, that definition would have been set forth in Section 2. |
|
|
| (1620090) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Apr 24 07:14:52 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Dave on Wed Apr 24 07:02:17 2019. Constitutional Interpretation builds upon previously used terms. "People" are defined in Section 1 and that definition therefore carries through anywhere afterwards that word is used again.So you're saying every census up till now has wrongly been counting illegal aliens? the use of the word People in Section 2 does not refer to illegal immigrants unless they are anchor babies. WTF? How is an anchor baby an illegal immigrant? Are you joining CMM in wanting me deported? |
|
|
| (1620091) | |
Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Apr 24 07:15:09 2019, in response to Re: Supreme Court appears likely to allow Trump Administration census rigging plan, posted by Dave on Wed Apr 24 07:02:17 2019. "Persons" are not defined in section 1. The word persons is used in section 1 without definition therein.Also, you meant "persons." The word "people" is unused in the amendment. "Since People are defined as born in the U.S. or naturalized" Go get tested for dementia. Seriously. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 6 |
||