If they’re under the justification of the US does that mean that they are entitled to the same rights and protections as prisoners still held in the US? Prisoners in the US have a right to be protected from physical and sexual violence, to medical care, they have limited first amendment rights and a right to communicate with their families in most circumstances. Prison overcrowding has been ruled to violate prisoners 8th amendment rights multiple times.

It would also help if they could reliability access the healthcare they need in order to work.

It’s Trump’s secret plan to address student loans. Weaken the dollar until we experience rapid severe devaluation. When the Big Mac hits $1,000 paying off existing loans will be easy for the people lucky enough to still be able to find a job.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pNYp6oc37ds&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5tD

I don’t know about the million dollars but the right to film in public and to film public officials while they are doing their jobs is covered by the first amendment’s freedom of the press. It’s gone to SCOTUS multiple times and been upheld and strengthened each time. Not saying that there’s no way this particular SCOTUS would overturn those rulings but it would be a huge deal and seriously negatively affect not individuals but a bunch of major corporations so that at least would probably give them some pause.

According to an amendment to the US Constitution that was added after the Civil War anyone born on US soil under the jurisdiction of the United States is a natural born citizen. There is no legitimate legal framework that allows for the deportation of a natural born citizen.

Edit: The US also has no legitimate legal framework to strip a natural born citizen of their citizenship but Trump is trying to do that as well.

There’s also a degree to which conservative media and conservative culture teach their people to act like they are more inline with the mainstream. There’s old stuff that’s been going on forever like using coded language so they talk about an “urban problem” instead of openly saying that black people are the problem or they’ll talk about “New York people” instead of openly saying that Jewish people are the problem. If you haven’t been exposed to that then some of what they’re saying can sound somewhat reasonable.

Then there is the “respect” thing. Conservative parents are big about emphasizing how you say something over what you say. So they’re fine with saying that disabled people should just die as long as it’s not phrased that way. It should sound more like “It’s sad that some people are sick but there are only so many resources and we need to put them where they’re most productive. Hopefully their family can take care of them.” It’s more etiquette than real respect but they make a big deal out of it.

You listed all the back to Johnson.

Clinton explicitly didn’t support segregation. One of the biggest influences in his life was his mom’s parents, who he spent a significant portion of his childhood living with. They owned a grocery store and faced frequent harassment and threats because they refused to segregate their business. There’s plenty to go after Big Willy for but this particular point is incorrect. You can’t even shoehorn in his VP like with Obama because Gore was an avid civil rights supporter as well.

I would like to understand the meaning of Goatse.

Hopefully they can get adult children of undocumented immigrants who were born in the US. They have already had their citizenship recognized but the EO doesn’t say that it’s limited to new births so they should still have standing on the basis that, if taken as written, their citizenship is at risk of being retroactively stripped.

Disclaimer: ianal and could be completely wrong.

Al Bundy peaked in highschool, never went to college, was a shoe salesman at the mall. Al Bundy had an, at least, three bedroom single family home in a nice neighborhood, supported a family of four plus a dog on his single income, had ample free time to spend with family and friends and to spend on hobbies.

Al Bundy: Failure and constant butt of jokes in the 1980s, unobtainable vision of success in the 2020s

How does someone who works with homeless vets vote Republican? What he figures more VA cuts and cuts to social programs = more homeless vets = job security?

I wanted to reminisce about the Daily Show when it was at its best. John Stewart and Stephen Colbert were huge for me. Realistically though they aren’t the right kind of people for the type of role model your talking about. Part of the left’s problem is that the language and style that are used is too intellectual. It contrubitues to the right being able to dismiss progressives as “coastal elites” Part of Bernie’s appeal is that he seems very down to earth and straightforward and that’s one of the reason that the right has so much trouble going after him. We need a progressive plumber.

How much personal information is going into the intended use of the tablet? If all you need to do is watch some videos can you take it to a public library or a McDonald’s? Does your Dr’s office have wifi or could you watch it at work?

To your point, I think that there is a fundamental issue with how we talk about success and failure. We effectively target white straight cis men setting them up so that they can never really succeed. As the majority, at least in terms of social and political power, we recognize that they have significant privilege in our culture. We weaponize that privilege such that all successes are external (the system is pushing them up) and all failures are internal (must be something wrong with them if they can fail despite having all of those advantages). Everyone else, to varying degrees depending on how much social and political power we perceive them to have, has the opposite logic applied to them. We say that their success is personal and special because they do it in spite of the system working against them and we blame their failures on the system.

There is of course legitimacy to that reasoning. There are many roadblocks that, especially visible, minorities face that white straight cis men do not. That doesn’t make this mindset not problematic though. The biggest issue with it is that we apply the general to the individual. Does a rural white kid whose parents both work retail have more privilege than Jaden Smith just because of his skin color? That’s of course an extreme example but the point is that the totality of a person’s circumstances is more than just how their biology is perceived by the culture. Privilege does make success easier as compared to people in otherwise similar circumstances but it certainly doesn’t guarantee success or mean that successes don’t have to be worked for.

I like How to Cook That. It’s cool when YouTubers are legitimately educated on the subjects they do videos on.

Winning a majority of the electorial votes is what’s required to be elected president. There is no federal requirement that the electors of the electorial college vote in accordance with the popular vote of the state they represent. If enough fraud is proven that Harris should have one won it doesn’t change the outcome of the electorial vote. According to the laws as they currently are Trump would still be president.

The Federation got him out during the Dominion War and made him a captain according to the games. He’s free in canon too. His name was on a list of Starfleet officers being taken into protective custody on an episode of Lower Decks.

So basically, the Karman line is the theoretical highest point that an airplane can fly, or at least it was when it was calculated. If it were recalculated today it would be higher because of technological advancement. The definition used by the agencies that define it as the edge of space set an altitude near the originally calculated line. The functional difference between being above the line and below the line is that the keplar force will keep an object above the line from falling to Earth within 24 hours while drag will slow the object below the line enough for it to fall back to Earth within 24 hours. It’s fine as a functional definition but I see no reason that it should be universally applied. In the scope of this discussion why should we consider something that will fall back to Earth in 25 hours not be on Earth but something that will fall back to Earth in 23 hours to be on Earth?