55
   

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

 
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:00 am
@okie,
Quote:
Well, Fidel Castro wasn't even his parent and he was able to get Elian Gonzales shipped back to Cuba at gunpoint,

This is what you remembered about the Elian episode okie and it is in no way true.

The US court system granted custody to Elian's father. The family in Florida refused to give him up in violation of the law. It had nothing to do with Fidel Castro getting Elian shipped back at gunpoint.

Quote:
You ignore the fact that the legal guardianship over Elian was highly contested and at best unclear and subject to opinion.
No, it wasn't subject to opinion at the time Elian was sent back. It was subject to a court ruling pursuant to US law.

Quote:
At least don't send the poor kid back to Cuba because of Castro.
The legal reason for sending him back had NOTHING to do with Castro. It had to do with legal guardianship as established under US law.

Quote:
You don't seem to be very consistent in your moral judgements about what is right or wrong, parados.
I am consistent in believing that court rulings should be followed. It is the basis of this country. Without respect for the law we won't survive.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:27 am
@parados,
Parados, to be perfectly honest, I have mixed feelings about this. I can see your argument, that the court decisions have to be followed. However, it seems so ironic to me that a kid's mother died trying to seek asylum, and the kid wanted to stay here, but the court denied him the privilege. I am the first to admit I am unfamiliar with custody decisions, but in divorce cases, don't they often consider the desire of the kids involved in disputes? I just happen to think that the Justice Department at the time, headed by the great Janet Reno, was more sympathetic to a communist government or interest than it was in the interests of the child.

Look, I am not going to raise a big stink over this, but I happen to have the opinion that the decision could have been different if people with a different mindset and sympathy would have been in charge. Apparently the kid is happy now with what happened to him, but it won't surprise me if at some point in the future he decides to try to come here again and denounce what happened to him. Nobody knows, only the future will tell.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:37 am
@okie,
Quote:
Parados, to be perfectly honest, I have mixed feelings about this.

You don't have mixed feelings okie. You have made up facts. Castro did NOT force the return of Elian at gunpoint. That is FALSE. It is a LIE.

Did Castro force the return of Elian at gunpoint? Yes or No? If Casto didn't force Elian returned at gunpoint then can you be decent enough to admit it and retract your statement?

Quote:
Look, I am not going to raise a big stink over this,
No, you are going to try to pretend that your lie wasn't a lie. And now you will accuse me of attacking you and again ignore the lie you told.
Quote:
I made nothing up.
If you didn't make up this up okie then what is it?
Quote:
Well, Fidel Castro wasn't even his parent and he was able to get Elian Gonzales shipped back to Cuba at gunpoint, so that he could indoctrinate the poor kid.
It certainly isn't true. It is just as I said, made up crap.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:39 am
@okie,
Quote:
but I happen to have the opinion that the decision could have been different if people with a different mindset and sympathy would have been in charge.

You would be happy if people had ignored the law? I think that says a lot about you okie.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:41 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

Quote:
but I happen to have the opinion that the decision could have been different if people with a different mindset and sympathy would have been in charge.

You would be happy if people had ignored the law? I think that says a lot about you okie.


Hardly a revelation. Okie doesn't care about the law or legality at all - ever. All that matters is that his ideological position carries the day, no matter what. We saw this over and over again during the Bush administration, when he defended every illegal and immoral act that they took, and we see it now under Obama, when he relentlessly attacks everything the man does regardless of the morality of legality of the decision.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:42 am
@parados,
No, not ignore the law. I think the law could have allowed asylum for Elian here. That is my opinion, okay, and I think I am far from alone. I think custody of Elian could have remained with his relatives here, instead of giving it to a father that had essentially ignored him in Cuba.

If you cared about the law, you would not be an advocate of illegal immigration into this country.

I happen to think political asylum is justified and desireable, parados. Apparently you do not?
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:44 am
@parados,
Quote:
You would be happy if people had ignored the law? I think that says a lot about you okie.


So we have okie the dopie - the lawless kid.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:48 am
@okie,
Quote:
If you cared about the law, you would not be an advocate of illegal immigration into this country.

When in doubt just build a strawman. When have I ever advocated for illegal immigration? But I notice you haven't retracted your lie. Instead you just tell other lies to try to change the subject. Nope, You don't have any decency at all, do you okie? It's pretty obvious in this little exchange. You tell a lie. Then you attack me when I point out it was a lie.



You do realize that Elian entered the country illegally, don't you okie? He did not have a passport or a visa allowing him into the country when he immigrated here. That makes him an illegal immigrant. And you are the one proposing that this illegal immigrant should have been allowed to stay here.
okie
 
  0  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:51 am
@talk72000,
talk72000 wrote:

Quote:
You would be happy if people had ignored the law? I think that says a lot about you okie.


So we have okie the dopie - the lawless kid.

I am all for law, but I also recognize the reality of the world, that the law can be used or twisted to fit the liberal desired end, and in Elian's case, it was to send the kid back to Communist Cuba, against what the kid at that time expressed the desire to do. The law is open to interpretation, and unfortunately when interpreted by liberal judges it can often be skewed to the detriment of the best and most reasonable outcome. After all, we had a Supreme Court that found a fictitious right in the Constitution, the right to privacy, to justify the rampant killing of millions of offspring. Certainly not in the interests of the offspring or children, that is for sure.
okie
 
  0  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 11:55 am
@parados,
Question parados, what would have happened to Elian if he and his mother would have made landfall without her dying and him having to be rescued? What if his mother had made it here and asked for asylum, which is what she was intending to do I think?
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 02:54 pm
@okie,
A minor child has to have a legal guardian. A parent is a legal guardian for a child until that parent's rights have been removed by a court.

She was free to request asylum for Elian and herself. Her husband was still free to sue to get Elian back under the law unless a court removed his parental rights. Are you arguing that when a parent takes a child overseas to another country that a parent that is in the US loses all rights concerning that child? The court would have decided the case on facts and the law not on political ideology. You want to substitute your political ideology for the law.

But you still haven't answered about the crap you posted. Did Castro force Elian to return to Cuba at gunpoint?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 02:55 pm
@okie,
Quote:
The law is open to interpretation, and unfortunately when interpreted by liberal judges it can often be skewed to the detriment of the best and most reasonable outcome.

So, it is a liberal interpretation that a parent has legal rights when it comes to children?
So.. let me ask you what you think the actual law is in your conservative world okie.
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 04:40 pm
Quote:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
The Declaration of Independence
(Adopted in Congress 4 July 1776)
The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
The Constitution of the United States of America
Effective as of March 4, 1789
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Article I
Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

Article VI
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

talk72000
 
  0  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 04:44 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty


You don't read too well. You are not engaging in domestic tranquility and ignoring general welfare.
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 04:56 pm
@talk72000,
Neither Americans or anyone else can ever "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty" by legitimizing the stealing of wealth some people earn in an effort to equalize wealth.

Thankfully there is nothing in the Constitution that grants any one or more branches of the federal government the power to steal wealth some people earn and give it to others who do not earn it in an effort to equalize wealth.
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 05:12 pm
@ican711nm,
So what are you doing in America? You don't believe in the Founding Fathers.
okie
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 05:32 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:

Quote:
The law is open to interpretation, and unfortunately when interpreted by liberal judges it can often be skewed to the detriment of the best and most reasonable outcome.

So, it is a liberal interpretation that a parent has legal rights when it comes to children?
So.. let me ask you what you think the actual law is in your conservative world okie.
I would have to research this, but frankly I don't have the time to do it. I hope my recollection is correct that the INS first handed over Elian to his uncle and family, along with guardianship, but this was later reversed by actions in the courts. And at first, I seem to recall that Elian wanted to stay here, but the courts had him ordered back to Cuba at gunpoint, with guardian ship to his father, a father by the way that didn't seem to care about him much before his mother fled to America with Elian. Anyway, at the time, I distinctly recall the opinions about this pretty much splitting down party lines, with Democrats favoring sending the kid back against his will to a communist country to be indoctrinated there and to live with a father that had never cared for him as he should have.

To sum it up, I disagreed with the decision, parados. I would have preferred that if the courts insisted upon giving guardianship to his father against his will, that at least they would have given him the choice to do that, but here instead of Cuba. That would have seemed like a fair compromise in the dispute. I think Elian was old enough that his preference should have been considered more strongly.
ican711nm
 
  0  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 05:44 pm
@talk72000,
Here again are quotes of the Founding Fathers which I most definitely believe in.

"IF EVER A TIME SHOULD COME, WHEN VAIN AND ASPIRING MEN SHOULD POSSESS THE HIGHEST SEATS IN GOVERNMENT, OUR COUNTRY WILL STAND IN NEED OF ITS EXPERIENCED PATRIOTS TO PREVENT ITS RUIN." -- Samuel Adams

"THE POWERS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ARE ENUMERATED; IT CAN ONLY OPERATE IN CERTAIN CASES; IT HAS LEGISLATIVE POWERS ON DEFINED AND LIMITED OBJECTS, BEYOND WHICH IT CANNOT EXTEND ITS JURISDICTION." -- James Madison

"WHEN THE PEOPLE FIND THAT THEY CAN VOTE THEMSELVES MONEY, THAT WILL HERALD THE END OF THE REPUBLIC." -- Benjamin Franklin

"THEY THAT CAN GIVE UP ESSENTIAL LIBERTY TO PURCHASE A LITTLE TEMPORARY SAFETY DESERVE NEITHER LIBERTY OR SAFETY." -- Benjamin Franklin

"REMEMBER DEMOCRACY NEVER LASTS LONG. IT SOON WASTES, EXHAUSTS, AND MURDERS ITSELF. THERE NEVER WAS A DEMOCRACY YET THAT DID NOT COMMIT SUICIDE." -- John Adams

"TO BE PREPARED FOR WAR, IS ONE OF THE MOST EFFECTUAL MEANS OF PRESERVING PEACE." -- George Washington
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 05:52 pm
@ican711nm,
The fundamental ones you don't believe in. You are cherry picking. You are better off with the Soviets.
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2010 06:20 pm
@talk72000,
Conservatism will reign over the land for many decades - Obama's failure set democrats back, way back.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 07/23/2025 at 04:20:00