Trump's Wall

Discussion in 'Political Science' started by Tommy Palven, May 17, 2016.

  1. Tommy Palven

    Tommy Palven Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2013
    Messages:
    2,560
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    38
    LewRockwell.com, which proclaims to be "anti-state, anti-war, and pro-market" has been running articles from Hans Hoppe and others backing Trump's Wall, like this:
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/05/bionic-mosquito/libertarian-open-borders/

    But, a wall around a state is a statist, collectivist concept, pure and simple.

    No matter how you paint it, there is nothing remotely individualist or libertarian about a wall around a state.
     
  2. RPA1

    RPA1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Without strong borders....There is no State.
     
  3. Daniel Light

    Daniel Light Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    Messages:
    31,455
    Likes Received:
    34,881
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How many countries have walls build all around their borders? North Korea. Short list. Not great company to keep.
     
  4. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is absolute HORSESH!+!!!!!!!

    America was founded on the presupposition that we were the New Jerusalem of the Bible. Many of you may be familiar with the Bible on the description of such a place... the land without walls was described in the Bible like this:

    "I lifted up mine eyes again, and looked and behold a man with a measuring line in his hand. Then said I, Whither goest thou? And he said to me, To measure Jerusalem, to see what is the breadth thereof, and what is the length thereof. And, behold, the angel that talked with me went forth, and another angel went out to meet him. And said unto him, Run, speak to this young man, saying, Jerusalem shall be inhabited as towns without walls for the multitude of men and cattle therein." Zechariah 2:1-4

    http://www.kimmillerconcernedchristians.com/Unsealings/1425.pdf

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/apocalypse/explanation/puritans.html

    http://usa-the-republic.com/sheldon emry/old jerusalem not new jerusalem.html

    America was built on that premise and for over 200 years without walls, America became the envy of the world. Why? Could it because we were founded as a nation with a love of Liberty?

    The Constitution went into effect in 1789. A year later, the Naturalization Act of 1790 went into effect. It read like this:

    "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States."

    So, here you had a nation that only allowed white people to become citizens, yet every race, color, creed and religion came here to enjoy the Freedom and Liberty we have extended to every human being. And we had open borders! The anti-immigrant lobby, unable to defend their position resort to name calling, cheap shots and repeating lies over and over to give them the illusion of being the truth, but they are not true. They cannot overcome the fact that we built the greatest nation in the annals of history WITH open borders.

    To the uneducated dum basses, that means that those pointing out facts obviously would give America away - lock, stock and barrel to a class of people the anti-immigrants have dubbed "illegal aliens." Damnable LIES! Those who want a wall around America cannot differentiate between citizenship and unalienable Rights; they don't know the difference between a Right and a privilege; they believe that government / God bestows their Rights upon them for being a good, little, law abiding citizen and a loyal subject of the NEW WORLD ORDER.

    Those who want a wall don't have any facts to substantiate their claim; they cannot afford to engage in a productive and honest discussion. And they cannot dispute the pure and simple fact that America became great without a wall and you don't need one in order to reverse the current trend and began a journey toward Freedom and Liberty.
     
    Tommy Palven likes this.
  5. RPA1

    RPA1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh please, the U.S. HAS BORDERS!!! Look at your diatribe below.

    How can you have a United States without BORDERS!!! You can't even have 'open borders' without borders in the first friggin place. You want weak borders...I get it.
     
  6. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Yep. And we ignore the facts:

    Since the wall has become an obsession for the American people, we spent over a TRILLION DOLLARS to help build the wall, enforce immigration laws, and put the whole people under a yoke of tyranny. The biggest victims of this legislation have been taxpayers and they still don't feel safe. For starters, the Republican / TEA Party / anti - immigrant Establishment has:

    * Created the Dept. of Homeland (IN) Security - Motherland Security ( Communist Russia), Fatherland Security (Nazi Germany) and Homeland (IN) Security (United Socialist States of Amerika)

    * They have given us National ID / REAL ID based upon the Socialist Surveillance Number... I mean "Social(ist) Security Number"

    * They have funded drones and surveillance technology that is used to spy on Americans as well as harass foreigners

    * Those same people have passed the so - called "Patriot Act" that guts most of the Constitution those people claim to believe in

    * They have supported the evisceration of the Fourth Amendment

    Oh, if I gave another example, I might run out of bandwidth telling you how badly the wall fanatics have destroyed this Republic. And, while they spend TRILLIONS in vain, they would call you and I liberals... all while they sign on to the most massive tax increases in history to promote an idea that doesn't work.

    How can any idea that stifles the free market by telling an employer who they can and cannot hire be conducive to a free market? How can any idea that increases the power of government ten fold not be a tyrannical idea? One thing is for sure: if we present the facts, they will ignore this thread.
     
  7. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Cut the B.S. for once in your life. How did America become the envy of the world without a freaking a wall and an absolute POLICE STATE oppressing us over the last 200 plus years?
     
  8. CKW

    CKW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,254
    Likes Received:
    3,336
    Trophy Points:
    113
    An individual can have walls to protect its self but a society of individuals can not? Stupid logic.
     
  9. RPA1

    RPA1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Overreacting much? Who said anything about a police state? Chill
     
  10. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Chilling won't alter reality. Your absurd lobbying efforts have cost America TRILLIONS and your legacy is the POLICE STATE. Who said anything about the POLICE STATE? What do you call all the examples I've already given? How is it that you presume to ignore the facts?

    How can you quote Franklin when even he said that "he who would give up essential Liberty for the promise of temporary Safety, deserves neither Liberty or Safety?" You're going to wind up with neither IF you "win" on this issue - and quite frankly with Donald Trump walking his rhetoric back, I don't think you are going to prevail. You're efforts are only going to add the monstrosity we call the federal government.
     
  11. scarlet witch

    scarlet witch Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Messages:
    11,951
    Likes Received:
    7,714
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    You can always use Trumps wall as tourism, maybe have a MacDonalds every 2 miles, Trump selfie statues, Trump pinatas, push a Trump statue off the wall after yelling "you're fired"
    images.jpg
     
  12. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Electronic surveillance, sure. But walls ? They went out with then invention of planes and boats. There is now a net loss of immigrants returning to Mexico. Building a wall now would just hep keep more illegals here who wanted to return. These simple little facts are way over the head of Trump supporters. Mature cucumbers are way over the head of Trump.
     
  13. BillRM

    BillRM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    6,792
    Likes Received:
    1,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Lord I could made a few hundred thousands dollars in a few weeks by taking my ultralight to the border and charging say 2000 dollars per person taken over the fence.
     
    Tommy Palven likes this.
  14. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I understand jet ski rentals go over big too.....
     
  15. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I could almost agree with you - except for the name calling to appease the Trump supporters.

    I'm right of center, but I still believe in the notion that a person is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Thomas Paine put it another way:

    He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
     
  16. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I did reserve to name calling reference for Trump, not his supporters. He has backed off the Muslim ban to "territories" and the deportation and wall are being put in perspective. We said all this months ago. All his ideas are unconstitutional, impractical and unnecessary. Yet, Trump supporters really don't care about facts.
    Trump sounds like a belligerent tough guy when in reality he is an ignoramous as far as governance is concerned. Most people, even most of his supporters, would not like a guy who talked like Trump to date their daughter, let alone be trusted on anything important.
     
  17. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think you missed my point, but it's okay. Trump supporters make the mistake for a different reason. I think outside the box.

    Contrary to popular belief, being in the United States without papers is not a criminal offense. Even if it were, we live in a country where we are presumed innocent until proven guilty (if we abide by the de jure laws.) From personal experience I can tell you how it feels to be pursued when the LEO community presumes you are a criminal absent any evidence or reason. Since the 14th Amendment applies equally to every person, it does not matter what wrongdoing you might be accused of. IF the government can pursue foreigners on the premise that they are "illegal" aliens then that same precedent applies to me, you and everybody else.

    You might be an illegal driver; you might be an illegal gun owner. You might be "illegal" any freaking thing until you get arrested... and then you proclaim how we're supposed to be presumed innocent and that the government needs a warrant based upon probable cause, etc., etc. I keep quoting Thomas Paine but the dumb masses continue to ignore that which flies over their heads:

    “He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression;for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” (Political pamphleteer, whose 'Common Sense' and 'Crisis' papers were important influences on the American Revolution. 1737-1809)

    I agree with your assessment about Donald Trump. I do acknowledge that there are issues related to immigration, but the nutty wall idea IS unconstitutional. The left isn't all that concerned because the wall could never be built.

    For one thing, all the kids born in the United States whose parents are here without papers are still citizens. Again, this is something I can tell you from first hand experience. Been to court on the matter and can tell you how it ended (it surprised me as I went in expecting to lose.)

    Splitting families apart over a civil violation of the immigration laws is cruel and unusual punishment regardless of which side of the aisle you profess to be sitting on. In courtrooms, juries are guided by laws and facts, not political ideologies and talking points. In law, the U.S. has no jurisdiction in other countries so we cannot force a portion of our citizenry out of the U.S. to a country that may not accept the children.

    But, let's be sensible for a change:

    Let us suppose Trump could be successful and he deports 11 million people AND their U.S. born children. It would have a net negative impact on our economy, leaving millions of homes and apartments empty and driving down property values along with the amount of rental income landlords charge. That, of course, impacts local tax bases and NOBODY would want that. My property tax is going to double next year. If a third of the people left this town, government wouldn't downsize, they'd raise my taxes. What bad deal!

    That's the part the Trump guys want to debate. Let's look at the issue they can't debate. We send all those people home. They take their children that were born here. A few years go by and those children want to leave Mexico, Salvador, etc. so they gather up their birth certificates, Socialist Surveillance Numbers ...ooops "Social Security Number" and National ID Cards. They walk right into the U.S. "legally" AND now having no family support system, no education, no work experience, and maybe no English speaking skills, they will become welfare recipients! What do you do then?

    The last thing the anti-immigrant lobby wants is a discussion of the impossibility of what they propose. It does not mean that they don't have a legitimate issue we should address.
     
  18. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    33,372
    Likes Received:
    36,882
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  19. Daniel Light

    Daniel Light Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    Messages:
    31,455
    Likes Received:
    34,881
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There isn't going to be a wall.

    A President Trump would have very little support from his own party, let alone any Democrats for such a construction
    project.

    Environmentalists would tie up any such endeavor for years with lawsuits.

    Land owners would also sue to keep their property from being dissected with a wall - and Libertarians would be
    turned off by the miles of eminent domain claims Trump would have to make to build such a wall.

    Every mile would be met with demonstrators chaining themselves to building equipment.

    It would quickly become a symbol that America was no longer a country to aspire to emulate - but one of housing bigotry
    and distrust. It would be a PR nightmare.
     
  20. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I believe it is a fallacy of false Cause to compare customary and usual immigration practices with refugee assistance practices. They are not the same thing.

    In the US, we already have a Union of States and our free trade area. No US state has any power over immigration since 1808.

    We should be simply charging foreign Persons a market friendly fee for a work visa, so they can try their luck in our markets.

    Generating revenue to defray the cost of government is what supply side economics should be about.
     
  21. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I still say that before any consideration should be given to building Trump's Wall the U.S. should seize one of Mexico's northern states, not necessarily as a place for those 11,000,000 people who are here illegally to live, but as compensation for providing them a home in the U.S. and because the Mexican government cynically shipped many of those people into our country. Might I suggest Tamaulipas? Or Baja? We could use more frontage on the Sea of Cortez.
     
  22. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    they will just claim they are trying to "recoup costs" incurred due to our US, war on drugs.
     
  23. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well then, they can wave "buh-bye" to Baja or Sonora. I would give those Mexican states all the rights of American states immediately, banking, real estate, law enforcement, all of it. We are not charging them anywhere near what we are spending trying to interdict their drugs coming across the border. I've sorta felt over the years that Mexico's way of solving their poverty problem by shipping it north is pretty close to an act of war, although I'm not in any way opposed to immigration. I'm just in favor of Mexicans (or any other Latins) being able to live where they want to live, which I presume would be closer to their familial infrastructure.
     
  24. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    i would just end our useless, war on drugs.
     
  25. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So would I but we should get some sort of quid pro quo for helping to solve their poverty problem and providing new homes for their indigent.
     

Share This Page