Question for the Board's Constitutionalists

The KKK is a racist organization. La Raza is not

 

Not me.

 

Really? Name one instance.

Hadrian's Wall? NO. It was constantly ineffective of the various barbaric tribes that penetrated the wall on multiple occasions.

Maginot Line? No, it was overrun in less than 10 days during the Battle of France, from the front I might add.

Great Wall in China? No. Three of the last four dynasties in China were foreign.

Wall in Palestine? No, see Hadrian's Wall.

As Patton said, "Static fortifications (read walls) are a monument to man's stupidity."

 

"The Race" isn't? LOL

 

If it was being built as a "fortification" you might have a point.

 

His point was obviously missed. For the wall to be effective it would need to be a manned fortification. And by manned we are talking within line of sight of each other. Which means yet another government agency or thousands more border patrol agents. Aka more government.

 

The point wasn't missed at all. That person was talking about walls as defensive structures, and this isn't one.

Actually having a wall means you need fewer personnel, especially with things like motion sensors and cameras which can be easily placed along the wall. Less patrolling is required, and less risk to the agents patrolling.

It's not more government, especially since it will save us a projected $100 billion a year on illegal immigrant costs.

 

The problem is you are assuming that there will be something left which could be rebuilt. I don't think that is a safe assumption with Trump, the man is to erratic and too egotistical to make that assumption. He could easily miscalculate in an international crisis and get us blown to smithereens. Trump is a clear and present danger to the survival of this nation.

 

You really need to have this spoon-fed to you after this past weekend?!??!!?

Simply put, Trump believes that a federal judge's race and/or religion should disqualify him from trying a case of his because of his comments about "Building a Wall" and "Banning Muslim immigration." Disqualifying someone from doing their job, particularly a federal judge, based on his ethnicity or religion strikes at the very foundation on which this country was built.

Is that "clear" enough for you Trumpsters out there?

 

Yes please use your Hillary funds to take the time to spoon feed me.

A judge who belongs to a group advocating illegal immigration and belongs to a La Raza lawyer group presiding over Trumps case makes about as much sense as having a judge belonging to a KKK group presiding over a BLM case.

Is that clear enough for you Cankleites?

 

Nice try. You would think Donald Trump would have mentioned the judge's "racist" group affiliation in his criticism of him instead of saying he's being treated unfairly because of his Mexican heritage. Maybe The Donald didn't mention it because the La Raza group you mentioned that has attacked Trump's views on immigration is NOT the group that Judge Curiel belongs to. Curiel's association is with a group of San Diego lawyers affiliated with the Hispanic National Bar Association..

 

Yeah La Raza and La Raza San Diego lawyers have nothing to do with each other I'm sure. Just a coincidence.

Besides, an "Hispanic National Bar Association" is just as racist as a "Caucasian National Bar Association".

If the latter existed, people's heads would explode over it.

 

You obviously know very little about site and area security. Static positions need far more personel and support staff than mobile patrols.

 

Do I? I know as a Marine that when we threw up constantine barriers we needed fewer guys to keep an area secure.

Obviously you don't understand that with technology and the aforementioned cameras and motion sensors (which are already being used in some areas to reduce patrols, btw), we no longer need to guard a wall like it's the crenelations of some medieval battlements.

This isn't Game of Thrones, nor are Mexican tanks trying to get through it.

 

That's a matter of opinion.

 

You could claim the boy scouts are a racist organization if you want. It would also be a matter of opinion

 

I wouldn't say I'm perplexed. After all, personality cults are not exactly rare phenomena. I was just trying to highlight the shallowness of the sentiment being expressed.

If I wonder about anything, it's how anyone content to be the focus of such a cult could be anything but a disaster as President.

 

1. The above is a blatant straw man, and in addition to the obvious fallacy, just like all -your- posts to -your- joke of a thread, contains no indicia of any kind of adult discussion, just a parroted soundbite advertising equivalent.

2. Good lawyers use every tactic imaginable tens of thousands of times every day in the US to get favorable venues, seat favorable juries, and yeah, get the most favorable judge possible. Not doing these things can rise to the level of malpractice. I don't see LWers griping about the blatant evasiveness of the current administration or the Clintons when it comes to courtroom maneuvers and lawyering up, but when any political opposition does it, of course it's motivated by racism instead of plain old legal tactics. Seriously, can you and yours not see the glaring double standard here? Is half the country -that- infantile and unaware of the basics of legal practice?

Play the violins for the LW bemoaning the erosion of "the very foundation on which this country was built." Do spare us all the sackcloth and hand-flapping, we weren't born yesterday and are well familiar with all the -real- erosion of this country's founding principles engineered by people like you every day. Trying to get a judge to recuse based on association with a racist group that gives even the mere appearance of bias is completely kosher within the foundation on which this country was built.

I guess the "Trump said... on... date in... venue that seems to conflict with ... constitutional principles. Isn't it hypocritical to support someone who says things like this while professing love for the Constitution?" simple structure of adult discussion flew right past you. Sorry bout that.

 

Read up on the siege of Alesia. If Caesar could do that with ancient technology, we can do it far more efficiently today. OF COURSE if it is the typical crony capitalist pork trough of the gov-edu-union-contractor-grantee-MSM Complex, it will be prohibitively expensive, ineffectual, and create permanent welfare equivalent jobs for tens of thousands of dependent incompetents as part of a gigantic new bureaucracy.

I assure you, the private sector would do a much better job. Hell, there are probably a million Americans who would volunteer some time to work on it.

 

It's the height of hypocrisy to wail about "the real erosion" of this country's founding principles (code for judges who support Roe v. Wade) and excuse a would-be President who believes that a person's race or religion should disqualify someone to do a job whether that job is being a janitor or a Federal judge.

 

I am advocating for "harassing the Judicature" into doing their jobs.

 

Yeah, well I'm pro choice, .MOD EDIT>>>FLAME BAIT<<<. OR actually post something Trump said, when and where he said it, and then set out the Constitutional principle you think that violates. .MOD EDIT>>>FLAME BAIT<<<

 

Watch his August 19th 2015 speech.MOD EDIT>>>FLAME BAIT<<<

 

All walls that prevent crossings or other strategic military objectives are built as fortifications of some sort.

There is a huge difference between the barbed wire that spread across the west and the examples I gave.

 

a waste of money. good walls making good neighbors only works in the private sector.

how much is wall going to cost; and, will it stop the right from whining about immigration from now on?