Trump to propose ideological test for immigrants to U.S.

[Athan]

I'm for it. We should filter out statists. They have plenty of countries to infest.

 

[CaptUSA]

So, is this still a question on immigration applications: Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?

It seems to me that that question royally failed to prevent the spread of communism in the US. Why should anyone expect this "ideological test" to produce any better results?! Remember, even if you think the idea sounds good, governments suck at this type of thing.

 

[EBounding]

Why should anyone expect this "ideological test" to produce any better results?! Remember, even if you think the idea sounds good, governments suck at this type of thing.

Because Trump is going to have good people taking care of it--the BEST people, OK?

 

[RonPaulMall]

Hillary and her ilk are open borders fanatics, but it's possible she could twist Trump's immigration test to exclude people she considers "politically incorrect," much like they do in the UK.

Because the nation is currently being flooded with immigrants who believe in classical liberalism? Hillary can't twist anything to her advantage because as it stands now, 99.9% of immigrants are exactly the sort of people she wants to replace the American population with.

 

[TheCount]

The questionnaire could be something to the effect of "do you pledge an oath to adhere to our laws and the Constitution over Sharia Law?"

Our elected officials already swear that oath and looks how well it works for us.

 

[jmdrake]

No one wants to stop them from petitioning. But, since their spouse is not a U.S. citizen, sorry, but the Constitution does not apply to foreigners.

The constitution does apply to U.S. citizens and if as a U.S. citizen your petition for your spouse to come is automatically rejected because your spouse is a Muslim then that is a violation of your U.S. constitutional rights. If you don't understand that they you simply do not understand the constitution and how it is applied. Sorry, you just don't. Look at it this way. If Ted Cruz who opposes gay marriage had become president and tried to push through a law saying that a gay spouse couldn't bring over his/her spouse would that hold up?

He should have said it differently and he later did. The goal is still the same. Keep $#@!s out of our country who want to blow us to kingdom come. The FBI director has said that we currently have no way to adequately vet refugees, in case you were not aware.

Don't let in the refugees. But Muslims living in Pakistan (like the Khans before they came here) don't fit into that category.

Edit: And you don't need "extreme vetting" or "ideological questionnaires" to say you aren't letting in a refugee population. I actually agree with Trump's proposal for "safe zones." And if Trump could talk sense, instead of talking to his less than bright supporters all the time, he might actually win this election. Turn the argument of discrimination on its head and point out that Obama isn't letting in Christian refugees because "they aren't fleeing Assad" (so being on the run from ISIS doesn't make you a refugee in Obama's eyes). Say "What's happening isn't fair to the Christian refugees and we want to be fair so lets make safe zones in Syria for everybody." There you go. Problem solved. No constitutional issue at all.

Uh huh, sure, Drake. And Khan didn't write about how the Constitution should be subordinated to Sharia, either.

Nice dishonest change of the subject by you LE. Donald Trump said exactly what I said he said. Here's the video so go eat some crow.



Trump made it clear that he was "not talking about the Khans." Get that through your skull. So if Trump was not talking about the Khans, and by extension people like that, then his "extreme vetting" simply makes more work for attorneys like Mr. Khan. Attorneys bill by the hour so more work = more money.

 

[Occam's Banana]

The questionnaire could be something to the effect of "do you pledge an oath to adhere to our laws and the Constitution over Sharia Law?"

Our elected officials already swear that oath and looks how well it works for us.

Well, then, we should just make them (elected officials and immigrants) swear an oath to uphold that oath.

Problem solved! Is that all you got?

 

[kahless]

Don't let in the refugees. But Muslims living in Pakistan (like the Khans before they came here) don't fit into that category.

The Khans should not have been allowed in. They are part of the problem to.

Very interesting you and a few others here on RPF always give cover to people whose goal is to dispense with the Constitution and grow big government. Ron Paul supporters my ass.

 

[kahless]

I'm for it. We should filter out statists. They have plenty of countries to infest.

Exactly. It is truly unbelievable there is such a loud contingent of supposedly libertarians, Conservatives and Paul supporters hell bent on importing statists and people whom loathe the Constitution.

 

[TheCount]

Well, then, we should just make them (elected officials and immigrants) swear an oath to uphold that oath.

Problem solved! Is that all you got?

This just in: Alt-right scientists have determined that the existence of nonwhites is the reason why white politicians don't uphold their oaths of office.

 

[spudea]

https://www.commdiginews.com/news-2...rrows-from-policies-of-presidents-past-69523/

Trump’s immigration proposal builds on these existing policies and aims to boost security for the United States. The motivation is neither racism nor xenophobia, but a simple concern for the safety of America.

 

[TheCount]

The Khans should not have been allowed in.

Based upon what metric?

 

[Ender]

The Khans should not have been allowed in. They are part of the problem to.

Very interesting you and a few others here on RPF always give cover to people whose goal is to dispense with the Constitution and grow big government. Ron Paul supporters my ass.

Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
This election was never about liberty. It's about battling globalism and sending it to the depths.

kahless: ^This.

I think Ron probably knows this and the strategic benefit but he has a business to run catering to the anti-Trump crowd and ideologically pure Libertarians.

Says the person who made the above statement about Ron Paul.

 

[kahless]

Says the person who made the above statement about Ron Paul.

One quote has nothing to with the other. Unlike you and the other open border clowns here I am consistent in supporting policies that provide a path for limited government and individual liberty within our borders.

 

[Ender]

One quote has nothing to with the other. Unlike you and the other open border clowns here I am consistent in supporting policies that provide a path for limited government and individual liberty within our borders.

While you accuse Ron Paul of just sayin' stuff "cause he has a business to run........ Riiiight.........

 

[AuH20]

Exactly. It is truly unbelievable there is such a loud contingent of supposedly libertarians, Conservatives and Paul supporters hell bent on importing statists and people whom loathe the Constitution.

It's almost like they want to be outnumbered and subsequently punished. Did they ever logically deduct the endgame?

 

[CPUd]

It's almost like they want to be outnumbered and subsequently punished. Did they ever logically deduct the endgame?

These cucks need to get with the program

 

[AuH20]

These cucks need to get with the program

The white genocide stuff is overblown, but the end result will be the ideological death of the west. The 3rd world wants it's revenge for our past transgressions. There can be no harmony with them. I say we stop ravaging their countries and keep them out of ours.

 

[bubbleboy]

The questionnaire could be something to the effect of "do you pledge an oath to adhere to our laws and the Constitution over Sharia Law?"

++Rep

 

[jmdrake]

The Khans should not have been allowed in. They are part of the problem to.

Very interesting you and a few others here on RPF always give cover to people whose goal is to dispense with the Constitution and grow big government. Ron Paul supporters my ass.

Hey dipshit. Donald Trump himself said the Khans should have been let it. So are you now going to say Donald Trump wants to dispense with the Constitution? Well for once I agree with you.