Sanctuary States

Republicans accuse Democrats in places like California of letting illegal immigrants vote. But regardless of whether or not they actually go to the voting booth, they all vote in the electoral college – which is determined by census. The more illegals they can flood into California, the more electoral votes California receives , and this the more influence they have in elections.

Illegal immigrants get just as much say in presidential elections as citizens do, and that is exactly the way Democrats want it.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Sanctuary States

  1. One really needs to study the progressive movement to understand why they seem to be trying to fundamentally change America, for the worse. They are.

    • LOL in Oregon says:

      According to Reuter’s news, today,
      …….using pot, especially during pregnancy, causes brain damage,
      So, how many of the “we religiously believe YOU are guilty” folk
      use or had parents who used pot?

      So have a couple of tokes, kick back, have someone else pay, and
      …..it all makes (insane, brain-damaged) sense?!?

      • Johansen says:

        Of course it impacts the brain. It makes you lazy, slow, hungry, and kind of dumb. Lots of heavy equipment operators are stoned all day long, from 7 am to 9 pm, on very powerful weed that would make normal people freak out; I know this is 100% true from personal experience. Lots of teachers and professional people are stoned all day long, from the minute they wake up in the morning. This is 100% true.

      • gregole says:

        Personally I’ve always been kind of on the fence over pot. I think it’s poor public policy to put people in jail for smoking pot, but to me it stands to reason that smoking pot is bad for mental and physical health. I mean, “smoking” anything just strikes me as bad for health; and if this stuff alters your brain and thinking how can that be good? It would not surprise me if it ends up that smoking pot is far less harmless than some people seem to imply. It’s also interesting to me that companies still require drug tests and for many kinds of work a positive for pot would absolutely disqualify you for employment; regardless of relaxing the laws on pot use. We live in interesting times.

        • Gator says:

          Our government used the same kind of propaganda to convince Americans to stop drinking alcohol…

          https://blogs.stockton.edu/prohibition/propaganda-2/

          They also killed thousands, in an attempt to stop people from drinking…

          The next year new poisons had to be added as a result of government order. They included mercury salts, benzene, cadmium, zinc, ether, chloroform, carbolic acid, acetone, iodine, brucine (similar to strychnine), formaldehyde (the major component of embalming fluid), methyl alcohol (wood alcohol), kerosene, and gasoline. The poison formulas had to be approved by government. It required that as much as 10% of the poisoned industrial alcohol had to include wood alcohol. The latter was hard to remove by re-distillation. It was very deadly.

          As we all know, the government will say or do anything to get their way.

          Our founders understood.

          • Johansen says:

            Wait until it gets legalized in your state, it’s like full blown in all public places now in S. Calif. Your favorite coffee shop stinks, the beaches stink, vagrants smoking on the boardwalk, and nobody gives a sh__. I really don’t think business owners and the owners of these $7-8 million beach homes that are paying 50,000-100,000 a year in property taxes are going to put up with this very long. I’m all for freedom, though

          • Gator says:

            I don’t spend time in cities, they already stink of piss and trash, so it will make zero difference to me where that is concerned.

            What will be different is that we will save billions of dollars annually, and we will not have overcrowded prisons that are internships that turn nonviolent offenders into violent offenders. We will no longer ruin lives of people who just want an alternative to alcohol. Plus police can concentrate on real crime and violent criminals.

      • SO the solution is to send men with guns out to rob, murder and imprison people over plant leaves? Herbert Hoover tried that with hops (crash, depression). George Holy War Bush tried to get a death sentence for plant leaves (crash, depression). George Waffen Bush tried the same thing again, backed by “faith-based” asset forfeiture (crash, depression). Yet hemp was perfectly legal and used to cure corns for centuries before the Great Depression.

  2. Bob Hoye says:

    We’ve seen it in Canada as well.
    A couple of decades ago, I attended a luncheon where the speaker was recently retired from the Dept. of Immigration.
    He cited some five rules or regulations that defined who could get in.
    He showed how the government (Liberal Party of Canada) was defying them.
    The reason:
    They were profiling people who would likely get on welfare and vote Liberal.
    They don’t care what the country becomes, so long as they are in office.
    And this is going on “big time” in the US.
    It is disturbing, but the popular uprising with Trump as its executive is making gains and will continue.
    I published a piece (1,000 words) on it on July 4, 2016.
    “American Spring”
    Bob Hoye

    • The Liberal Party of America (est. 1931) rejected communism root and branch and declared against the dole. It also came out for repeal of the Prohibition Amendment. Infiltrators of the looter persuasion love being called “liberals” as Anthony Comstock and 1932 Republicans bandied the word about. I am convinced using the term is an equivocation and a big tactical error.

  3. Josh says:

    The scumbags Democrats are trying to make it morally right for illegal immigrants to fill in the census. Currently, many illegals still do not fill in the census in red states at least though this is changing due to fear mongering and free shit given to illegals by Dems.
    If there is one pattern most identifiable with Democrats, it is they love illegal actions

    • Phil. says:

      The census form sent to most households asks the occupant to fill out the form, there is no requirement to be a citizen in order to fill in the census. There’s no question about citizenship on the form.

  4. arn says:

    Letting people from foreign countries vote in your country and therefore determine your countries future is a coup and not a vote.

    But that’s what the NWO,globalisation and Agenda21/30 is all about.

  5. Johansen says:

    These were the prototypes evaluated. The one in the foreground was ultimately chosen, and is being installed now. The press sure seems confused about the whole bidding/requisition process, but the whole bid package is on FedBizOps. It’s a totally standard request for proposals. The chosen design allows surface water to flow and animals to cross, and the vertical bollards and anti-scaling section at the top makes it really hard to breach the wall. It’s really a nice design from an engineering standpoint. The project is ‘prevailing wage’, too, which means construction people (including many Hispanic) are being paid around $70 per hour including wage and fringes

  6. Taphonomic says:

    Not only electoral votes but also representatives in the US House of Representatives are apportioned based upon census which includes illegal aliens. It has been estimated that California receives at least eight extra Representatives because of illegal aliens.

    • gregole says:

      Wow. Never thought of it that way, but you and Tony have made good points.

    • Phil. says:

      Originally done in the Constitution to increase the representation of the slave owning states (prior to 1870 slaves were only counted as 3/5th of a person).

      • Johansen says:

        I would just point out that no civilization in the history of humankind has *ever* granted voting rights to its slaves or resident aliens. I’m not defending black/African slavery… it was a disgusting practice. I’m just pointing out that the 3/5ths provision was pretty “enlightened” in the context of history. Peace …

        • Gator says:

          Exactly, it was s clever way to keep the South from gaining too much power. Brilliant!

          • Phil. says:

            Actually it was a compromise, the slave owning states would like to count all the population to give them a larger representation in the House of Representatives. However the Northern states didn’t want that. Also the amount of tax that the states paid was linked to there population and the slave owning states didn’t want to pay that much in taxes, hence the 3/5th rule.
            Just a point for Johansen, the slaves weren’t granted voting rights, the slave owners were given an enhanced representation in congress.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            “it was s clever way”

            Phil. doesn’t get jokes, does he?

            “Just a point for Johansen, the slaves weren’t granted voting rights”

            Phil. has reading comprehension problems. Johansen didn’t say any such thing.

            “slave owning states didn’t want to pay”

            The 3/5th rule was established as an economic principle before the Constitution was written because it was understood that free populations were more productive and generated more wealth that could be taxed.

            Phil. doesn’t know that. Par for the course.

          • Gator says:

            Slaves could not vote, they were property, and the South was trying to pull a fast one when it came to representation. Clever founders argued that if the South could claim representation from property, the North could use their vast property holdings to also gain seats. Thus the compromise, and eventual abolishment of slavery in North America.

          • Phil. says:

            The 3/5th rule was established as an economic principle before the Constitution was written because it was understood that free populations were more productive and generated more wealth that could be taxed.

            It was discussed but not adopted in the Articles of Federation. It was proposed by proposed by James Wilson and Roger Sherman at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 and was eventually adopted.

      • Johansen says:

        At the time it was written, “All men are created equal” had more impact on worldwide Jewry than on African slaves. That miraculous phrase would have resonated *big league* throughout the ghettos

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.