HeyYou

Exactly. :) Careful, your knife might make you a killer.

The 14th amendment doesn't make any distinctions in parentage for birthright citizenship. Children of foreign nationals, whether they are here legally or not, CAN and DO get american citizenship. That is a fact, and easily proven to be so with a simple google search.

I agree with you on this, a large majority of people realize that "most" politicians do lie. Which is ironic why someone like Clinton for some reason is getting a lot of heat for the current email scandal she is facing. It really comes down to how the media rails a story. The Clinton email scandal wouldn't even be any concern to anyone if it wasn't even talked about. The New York times first started railing Clinton in three stores by accidentally reporting falsely and printing info about the story that even they eventually redacted. Since then the right wing media jumped in and took the story to a whole different level. Getting rid of even "part" of the 14th amendment would fundamentally just destroy one of the things that makes America actually such a great country. I mean how far would one go to just getting rid of part of it, as only applying to "illegal" immigrants? Would this apply to immigrants that are here legally that happen to have a child in the U.S.? would this mean if a couple has a baby born in this country and just one of them isn't an actual a citizen but still here legally their child would be automatically labeled as an "illegal"? If you are talking about a person giving birth to a child in this country who is completely undocumented, there is no statistical data showing this even being an actual problem in this country other then making America a richer and more diverse society. Citizen children cannot sponsor their parents for citizenship until they turn 21. If the parents are illegal, they would have to return home for at least 10 years before even applying to come in. Having a baby to secure citizenship for the parent is an extremely long-term and uncertain process anyways... Citizen child can produce some short-term benefits but not enough that creates any sort of statistical problem. Having a child can help an undocumented parent qualify for relief from deportation, but only 4,000 unauthorized immigrants can receive such status per year, and the person has to have been in the U.S. for at least 10 years to begin with. Stuff like this is so small in comparison to any other problem this nation faces. It's just ridiculous why anyone would want to get rid of birthright citizenship when there isn't even a real problem that America faces. But more to the point Trump doesn't just want to stop there. Trump wants to force deport every undocumented immigrant in this country. How exactly do you think one can accomplish this? Crate a separate police that targets anyone who isn't white/caucasian? does this mean me being an Asian American citizen could be randomly pulled over in order to prove I am actually a citizen? Maybe you can see why I do not like Trumps position on immigration. I am sure you wouldn't support someone who would set forth some policy that would potentially or even automatically target you as some type of 2nd class citizen just based on your race. What part of "children of illegal immigrants don't get citizenship' did you miss? The operative word there being "ILLEGAL". Currently, that system is exploited in a major way by illegals that come here, squeeze out a baby, that is automagically an american citizen, thus, cannot be deported. Hence "Anchor Baby". This practice needs to stop. We are the ONLY country in the world that grants citizenship to children of illegals. If an immigrant is here legally, it should be obvious that this wouldn't apply to them. Deporting all the illegals is more than likely impossible. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that they come in faster than we could deport them. Even if we made a concerted effort. But, as it stands today...... we are like folks at a fishing contest. It's 'catch and release'. Regardless of their history. Some of them have been here for years, been caught several times, and still they are released. What strikes me as even stupider is, a cop is forbidden by law from questioning anyones citizenship when they are pulled over....... I am thinkin' if the person doesn't understand english, doesn't have a drivers license, nor any other form of identification, that should be a pretty major clue, and SHOULD bring up the question. If the answer is "illegally here", then deportation should be the answer. Sure, this country was built on immigration. But, now we have a population of over 300 million, and in some areas of the country, (like those where most of the illegals come in....) are desparately running short of resources. Especially water, and money. So, why are we spending billions on benefits for folks whose very first act of coming to this nation was to break its laws? We would anyone think that is a good idea? We are trillions of dollars in debt, and going even further down, we don't have the money to spend to 'save the world', or even a small corner of it. We can't even afford to save ourselves. And please don't try and convince me that the illegals pay taxes/contribute to the economy. That is a losing proposition. We spend FAR more on illegals, than they put in to our economy. It is a hugh net loss. Of course, I don't think we should be sending 10 billion a year to Iraq either, or 4 billion to Israel. Etc.......

All politicians lie. Some more so than others, but, I don't trust anything that comes out of a politicians mouth. Even if they told me the sky is blue, I would go out and look for myself. (and it would probably be grey.) Trump wants to drop the 'born here, get citizenship' part of the 14th amendment. Or at least, alter it so it does NOT apply to the children of ILLEGAL immigrants. I don't have a problem with that.

Oh no, I didn't think you were 'trolling me'. From what I have seen, that isn't something you do. Besides, I agree with you. :D

Actually, I agree with him. :) It may not be politically correct, but, it is indeed accurate. :D But, you quoted me.......

You were touched/chosen by Akatosh. :)

Well, it's already apparent that Hilary hasn't been as honest about the whole deal as she claims. (and has sworn to....) At this point, no, no charges have been filed, because the investigation is still ongoing. "Missing" emails from the record Hilary turned over, are still coming to light, so, the committee still doesn't have a complete picture of what all went down. Are the republicans simply dragging out the investigation, in hopes of a nice bomb to drop further into the election cycle? Entirely possible. Are the republicans in trouble due to the fact that The Donald is the most viable candidate they currently have? Undoubtedly. Is either party going to do a damn thing to help america? Highly doubtful. Is whoever gets elected going to do their damndest to make sure they leave some variety of 'legacy', be it good or bad? Yep. Do I expect the next adminsistration to be any more effective than the last four? Nope. Not at all. American government has become a beast with many heads, all of which are hungry, and all of which want dollars to eat. They don't care where they come from, or whom they hurt to get them. NONE of them have the best interests of the country at heart, only their own best interests. It is government of the rich, for the rich, by the rich. And that's the end of it. The rest of us don't matter. No, neither do our votes. Why do you think voter turnout was the lowest it has ever been since the 30's? The american people are fed up with politics, realized they have no power, so, pretty much just ignore it, and hope it goes away without causing too much damage to their lives. A rather forlorn hope.

I would point out that better than 60% of population doesn't vote for ANYONE...... So stating they won't vote for Trump is pretty much meaningless. I am curious how "hilariy's emails being investigating" does NOT imply that Hilary herself is NOT being investigated. Did those emails send themselves? Will they be charged in a criminal court? Or will it be the person that wrote them? The mere fact that she HAD her own, personal, private, email server, on a federal government network, was in and of itself an illegal act. The additional fact that it is now gone, along with the data, implies that she did indeed have something to hide there. Why else would she pull the disappearing act? She may not be convicted in a court of law, but, in the court of public opinion, she pretty much already has been. That is not going to help her campaign, and that is already showing in her slipping poll numbers. I am of the opinion that ANY program that supports criminals in their acts, should not exist. I.E. any program that helps ILLEGAL immigrants stay in this country. If we aren't going to enforce the laws equally, what is the point of having them at all?

So far, Beth hasn't had any continuity between player characters from game to game. For the most part, the previous PC is 'legendary', so, something similar. Given the time span between Oblivion, and Skyrim, it is impractical to think that any but PC not of Elvish descent would even still be around........ humans just don't live that long. Granted, Oblivion was just a few short years after Morrowind.... But, each game has been stand-alone, you needn't have played any of the previous games to get the full experience of the current game. I really don't see that changing.... Given that by the end of the game, most PC's are god-like in their power in any event. Would be tough to make a new game that was even remotely challenging for them.... and resetting them back to first level would just piss folks off. :)

You do realize Trump's plan on taking down ISIS is to "take the oil".... To take something like "the oil" would actually equate for the need of sending hundreds of thousands of troops on the ground. Most of the things that Trump constantly keeps preaching about sounds great to those who are just angry but logically nothing really adds as being even realistic or possible... Donald Trump wants to make America great again... for Donald Trump! I would still rather have trump, than billary. But, we are still a long way from election day. Let's wait and see how it plays out, before we go predicting the future. As you will recall, all it really takes is ONE wrong statement, and that particular candidate is no longer in the running.

Just like the last two...... :D Exactly. The american government/military/industrial complex wants to continue playing world police, as it makes the politicians, and corporate folks quite rich. The american PEOPLE, on the other hand, really don't care what government is in place in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, or a host of other countries. If they aren't bothering us, then they aren't an issue. When they start bothering us, solve the problems with some well-place bombs, NOT boots on the ground, and do NOT rebuild all the stuff we just spent millions to blow up. That's idiotic. Eventually, folks will get the idea that we are country not to be trifled with. As it stands now, no one respects us.

And presidential campaign is going to be a compromise for the voters. There is not a single candidate from any party that I completely agree with..... Basically, it boils down to which platform I hate the least...... Republicans have abortion, dems have gun control. Then we have immigration reform, and foreign policy....... Both land mines for any candidate....... and there are many more. Donald is popular because he is different. He ISN'T a politician, and I don't think he has a clue what 'politically correct' means..... which, so far as I am concerned, is a vote in his favor. :) Of course, his lack of diplomatic skills might get us into a war........ Which is something else I am not really interested in. America basically needs to stop playing world police, and start concentrating on getting their act back together, right here at home.

Unfortunately, I think it is the latter. What is even more amazing, is that we have made it this long, being led by mentally inferior (deranged?) folks, that are only interested in further themselves, not the nation they were elected to help lead.

Now THAT is FUNNY. I didn't miss your sarcasm there, nor your contradictory statements, by the way. And I DID offer a solution. One that didn't require any tribunals, secret meetings, or, the guillotine either...... The FACT that the rich can LEGALLY PURCHASE politicians is the main problem. Stating that 'they will flee the country, and take their jobs with them', really isn't much of a threat, as the jobs are already gone, not to mention that they are off-shoring their corporate headquarters to better tax havens in any event. Quite frankly, we really don't have anything to lose by leveling the playing field. I also note that you are quick to consider anyone that isn't 100% pro-business as a Socialist/Marxist/etc........ I am none of those things. I am not a conservative either. I think both parties have sold the american people down the river, and at this point, their main concerns are: 1. Making their campaign contributors happy, and keeping them that way, by passing their pet legislation. and 2. Making as much money for themselves as they possibly can, at the taxpayers expense. anything else, like 'the good of the country' is a distant third. But, as you say, there is "no solution". So, we should just accept our lot as third class citizens, do nothing, and watch as the middle class shrinks at an ever increasing rate, the poor get poorer, and the rich get richer at an ever increasing rate.... Soon, we will look just like all the other third-world nations in the world, and our wages and standard of living will reflect that. Is that really what you think we should do?

Have a read here for what folks are paying taxes, and why. From that article: The vast majority of those not paying taxes, are the very young, and the very old. (working age.) Over their lifetimes though, they pay in more than they get paid out. Yes, the rich folks create the jobs, but, look at what they have been doing to the jobs market. The once-good-paying jobs have been outsourced to their world countries, thanks to free trade agreements. This was supposed to make products less expensive. It didn't. It made them cheap junk. fully 70 percent of the jobs created in the last five years, have been service industry, low-wage, no-skill, part-time jobs, with no benefits. This is due to the free-trade agreements that ONLY benefit those 'job creators'....... Did dodge trucks get cheaper when production was moved to mexico? Nope, the price went UP. Where is the savings we were promised? In the rich folks pockets. That's where. It IS class warfare, the rich are waging it, buying politicians, and winning.

That's exactly what we have. And the rich are most certainly winning. I don't expect anything to change either, as the only folks that can actually change it, are the very same people that benefit the most by NOT changing it.

I was always kinda partial to the 69 ZL1......

We already have a system run by the rich, for pretty much their sole benefit. We could fix a whole lotta stuff by getting the money OUT of politics. Starting with campaign finance reform. Spending a billion dollars over two years, to get a job that pays 400,000 a year, for four years, is just stupid. In this day and age of instant information/communication, there is absolutely no reason for it.

It's an engine problem. I have the same issue, with far fewer mods than what you run. I have never been able to figger out how to fix it.

Thanks for the hat. :) I feel much better now. My neighbor is a full-blown conspiracy theorist...... When he started talking about black helicopters (I live less than 6 miles from an airport, and they have...... helicopters.......) and chem trails, I suspected he was going to be interesting to live near..... I was correct. Don't see him real often.... Living out in the sticks does have some advantages....... So, not too much of an issue. I don't really care to get into a debate with him about it.

I want a hat too!!! Ad-block is a wonderful thing. Setting your browser to NOT accept third-party cookies doesn't hurt either. if you have an internet connection, you are being tracked. Just the way it is. Even Microsoft wants to track you, look at all the Data Win10 can potentially phone home with.......

I have given overwhelming reasons to show why sex organs have only ONE purpose-*procreation*. Couple that with the arguments I gave, and you will understand why Homosexuality is objectively against the very nature of the Human system. I have never told anything about it being 'Common' or 'Normal'.You seem to be deliberately straw-manning. I will summarize it for easier understanding: Fact1: The sexual system “indicates” that certain organs are sexual (genital) organs and certain other organs are non-sexual organs. Fact 2: The sexual system indicates that the normal expected sexual target is an ADULT, HUMAN of the OPPOSITE SEX. Thus the clear indication is that the sex organs are for procreation. Thus, Condoms, birth control, and masturbation etc. Can all be seen as a clear misuse of one's organs. Unless you can prove that Organs are not sexual in nature and were really intended for pleasure, you are implicitly agreeing that you don't have anything to say against this argument. There are many practices that society as a whole has become very tolerant about.But this does not make it morally jusitfied. For the "Homosexuality in animals" argument i will just quote Dr. Antonio Pardo: "Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals.... For reasons of survival, the reproductive instinct among animals is always directed towards an individual of the opposite sex. Therefore, an animal can never be homosexual as such. Nevertheless, the interaction of other instincts (particularly dominance) can result in behavior that appears to be homosexual. Such behavior cannot be equated with an animal homosexuality. All it means is that animal sexual behavior encompasses aspects beyond that of reproduction." You completely ignored where I blew your 'fact 2' out of the water. Basing assumptions on a false premise just doesn't work.

I think it's hidden. :D

How do you define "adult"? Based on simple physical compatability, some folks are 'sexually capable' as young as 12-13 years old, in that, they are capable of having sex, and producing offspring. I don't know of many (any) places where girls that age (or guys for that matter) are considered "adult"...... Nature doesn't care about anything else. Nature has no morals, does not have some set age where sex is 'acceptable', in a cultural context. Nature just wants continuation of the species. That's it. But, from that perspective, homosexuality is incapable, in and of itself, of producing offspring. (in humans) Therefore, homosexuality should be considered 'unnatural'. Now, when you introduce 'sex for pleasure', it's a whole new ball-game.