Trump signed an order to end birthright citizenship. What is it and what does that mean?
President Donald Trump moved to end a decades-old immigration policy known as birthright citizenship when he ordered the cancellation of the constitutional guarantee that U.S.-born children are citizens regardless of their parents’ status.
Trump’s roughly 700-word executive order, issued late Monday, amounts to a fulfillment of something he’s talked about during the presidential campaign. But whether it succeeds is far from certain as attorneys general in 18 states and two cities challenged the order in court on Tuesday, seeking to block the president.
Here’s a closer look at birthright citizenship, Trump’s executive order and reaction to it:
/img
What is birthright citizenship? Birthright citizenship means anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. People, for instance, in the United States on a tourist or other visa or in the country illegally can become the parents of a citizen if their child is born here.
It’s been in place for decades and enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, supporters say. But Trump and allies dispute the reading of the amendment and say there need to be tougher standards on becoming a citizen.
What does Trump’s order say? The order questions that the 14th Amendment extends citizenship automatically to anyone born in the United States.
The 14th Amendment was born in the aftermath of the Civil War and ratified in 1868. It says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
Trump’s order excludes the following people from automatic citizenship: those whose mothers were not legally in the United States and whose fathers were not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents; people whose mothers were in the country legally but on a temporary basis and whose fathers were not citizens or legal permanent residents.
It goes on to bar federal agencies from recognizing the citizenship of people in those categories. It takes effect 30 days from Tuesday, on Feb. 19.
What is the history of the issue? The 14th Amendment did not always guarantee birthright citizenship to all U.S.-born people. Congress did not authorize citizenship for all Native Americans born in the United States, for instance, until 1924.
In 1898 an important birthright citizenship case unfolded in the U.S. Supreme Court. The court held that Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants, was a U.S. citizen because he was born in the country. After a trip abroad, he had faced denied reentry by the federal government on the grounds that he wasn’t a citizen under the Chinese Exclusion Act.
But some advocates of immigration restrictions have argued that while the case clearly applied to children born to parents who are both legal immigrants, it’s less clear whether it applies to children born to parents without legal status.
What has the reaction to Trump’s order been? Eighteen states, plus the District of Columbia and San Francisco sued in federal court to block Trump’s order.
New Jersey Democratic Attorney General Matt Platkin said Tuesday the president cannot undo a right written into the Constitution with a stroke of his pen.
“Presidents have broad power but they are not kings,” Platkin said.
Not long after Trump signed the order, immigrant rights groups filed suit to stop it.
Chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union in New Hampshire, Maine and Massachusetts along with other immigrant rights advocates filed a suit in New Hampshire federal court.
The suit asks the court to find the order to be unconstitutional. It highlights the case of a woman identified as “Carmen,” who is pregnant but is not a citizen. The lawsuit says she has lived in the United States for more than 15 years and has a pending visa application that could lead to permanent status. She has no other immigration status, and the father of her expected child has no immigration status either, the suit says.
“Stripping children of the ‘priceless treasure’ of citizenship is a grave injury,” the suit said. “It denies them the full membership in U.S. society to which they are entitled.”
In addition to New Jersey and the two cities, California, Massachusetts, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin joined the lawsuit to stop the order.
I noticed he made sure it was worded to protect his mail-order-bride delivered immigrant kids. We all know the smelania coin pushing porn star he drug into the white house was illegal as they get. An Einstein visa? Really, Donald?
Einstein Visa explained:
Melania Trump obtained US citizenship on a visa reserved for immigrants with "extraordinary ability" and "sustained national and international acclaim", according to a report in the Washington Post.
I guess her “extraordinary ability” is why they renegotiate their prenuptial agreement every year… smfh.
Yes, 38 state ratifications can make a law an amendment to the United States Constitution. This is because the Constitution requires that an amendment be ratified by three-fourths of the states.
Explanation
The process for amending the Constitution is outlined in Article V.
To propose an amendment, two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate must pass a resolution. Once the amendment is passed by Congress, it must be ratified by three-fourths of the states.
The Archivist of the United States is responsible for certifying each state's ratification and publishing the amendment in the Constitution.
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) is an example of an amendment that was proposed by Congress and ratified by 38 states. However, the ERA faced challenges in the ratification process, including a seven-year deadline that was extended by three years.
________________
Sometimes you need to ask, “How does government work?” Instead of getting all pearl clutchy and spouting off BS ‘cause MURICA!’, and try to reconnect with your critical thinking brain. I know you used to have one.
The whole timeline really seems to be a good summary of how our government functions.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
The 14th amendment was written and ratified to protect the citizenship rights of freed slaves from being abridged by southern democrats, not to give the rights and benefits of being an American to some criminal who has broken into our country and dropped a baby. In the 70’s, I believe Brennan added a footnote to a case ruling saying it should be applied equally to illegals.
That has never been tested in court as far as I can tell . I could not find any Supreme Court ruling beyond the initial remark by Brennan. It needs to be tested and now that we have an administration that believes in an American border and the preciousness of American citizenship it will be. Hopefully our Supreme Court will look at the original intent and abolish this stupid ruling.
So the words and what it says aren't important? This is about being born on American soil. A baby is not "some criminal who has broken into our country".
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I believe the courts look at intent. That is what I hope it is judged on. You clearly don’t care about that. Hopefully it will get across ruling in the next 12 months.
this amendment has been a thing for a while now..like 1972 awhile. but certain states refuse to ratify it. i don't understand how thats similar to what Trump just did.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
nah i know, im just wondering how this helps our birthrate issue. especially since kids that are born here easily integrate into our culture.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
this amendment has been a thing for a while now..like 1972 awhile. but certain states refuse to ratify it. i don't understand how thats similar to what Trump just did.
Not sure if you intended to reply to me, but I went back and read through the timeline of the 28th amendment. Basically, people struggle to get something that (in hindsight) is pretty straightforward. Opposition conjures up worst-case scenarios and reducto ad absurdem arguments. The process of getting the amendment across the finish line starts strong and then loses steam and gets held up in a couple states. The deadline is extended twice but not much progress is made in the remaining states. The deadline passes, and then a decade or two later a couple states randomly decide to ratify the amendment... because... reasons, I guess.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
The 14th amendment was written and ratified to protect the citizenship rights of freed slaves from being abridged by southern democrats, not to give the rights and benefits of being an American to some criminal who has broken into our country and dropped a baby. In the 70’s, I believe Brennan added a footnote to a case ruling saying it should be applied equally to illegals.
That has never been tested in court as far as I can tell . I could not find any Supreme Court ruling beyond the initial remark by Brennan. It needs to be tested and now that we have an administration that believes in an American border and the preciousness of American citizenship it will be. Hopefully our Supreme Court will look at the original intent and abolish this stupid ruling.
Quit with the Republican nonsense. Stop the Woe is me crap. It's the law. Deal with it. If he wants to change it, fine. Do it the right way., He has the House and the Senate. He can get things done and nothing anyone can say about it. Tell Trump to get off his lazy ass, Fire those around him that keep getting him to stupid arguments that only cause division and strife. Tell that idiot to grow up.
I expect that I'll hear nothing from you but more BS about how something is Unfair... or the like. Stop Crying.. Tell trump to do his freaking job....THE RIGHT WAY! That man and his followers are cry babies.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Tennessee Republican proposes amendment to allow Trump to serve third term Filip Timotija Thu, January 23, 2025 at 7:07 PM EST 3 min read
Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would allow President Trump to serve a third term in the White House so that the country “can sustain the bold leadership our nation so desperately needs.”
Ogles proposed an amendment on Thursday that says, “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than three times, nor be elected to any additional term after being elected to two consecutive terms, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.”
Like other U.S. presidents, Trump is barred from running for a third White House term by the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.
“President Trump’s decisive leadership stands in stark contrast to the chaos, suffering, and economic decline Americans have endured over the past four years,” Ogles said in a Thursday statement. “He has proven himself to be the only figure in modern history capable of reversing our nation’s decay and restoring America to greatness, and he must be given the time necessary to accomplish that goal.”
Trump floated the prospect of running for a third term in a joke to House GOP lawmakers during a meeting in Washington before the conference had internal leadership elections.
“I suspect I won’t be running again, unless you do something,” Trump said a week after winning the 2024 presidential election, The Hill reported. “Unless you say, ‘He’s so good, we have to just figure it out.’”
Following the meeting, House Republicans told reporters that the remarks were not serious and that they laughed when they heard them.
“That was a joke. It was clearly a joke,” Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) said at the time. “I leaned over to somebody beside me, [Arizona Rep.] Andy Biggs, and I said, that’ll be the headlines tomorrow, ‘Trump trying to thwart the Constitution,’ which — there’s nothing further from the truth.”
Trump has previously told news outlets that he would not pursue a third term if he wins the 2024 White House election.
“I wouldn’t be in favor of a challenge. Not for me. I wouldn’t be in favor of it at all. I intend to serve four years and do a great job. And I want to bring our country back. I want to put it back on the right track,” Trump told Time magazine in April last year.
On Thursday, Ogles, a House Freedom Caucus member, praised a series of executive orders Trump signed since being sworn in on Monday, including those related to the handling of the southern border, energy production and withdrawing from the World Health Organization.
“In just a few short days, President Trump has already taken action to undo the catastrophic policies of the Biden Administration and put the United States back on the path to strength and prosperity,” Ogles said Thursday
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
See, that's where things do turn scary. I know that we often hear "You guys have TDS" or "You are just letting them troll you and falling for it" but then ish like that happens.
I would also like to add that the amendment was framed in such a way that would not allow Obama or W to run again either because they "served two consecutive terms."
And Swish is exactly right.
Stuff like this is where Republicans need to snap the chalk line on their own.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
See, that's where things do turn scary. I know that we often hear "You guys have TDS" or "You are just letting them troll you and falling for it" but then ish like that happens.
I would also like to add that the amendment was framed in such a way that would not allow Obama or W to run again either because they "served two consecutive terms."
And Swish is exactly right.
Stuff like this is where Republicans need to snap the chalk line on their own.
yep. he wrote it the proposal like you stated, knowing the last thing MAGA needs is a potential Trump vs Obama in 2028.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
See, that's where things do turn scary. I know that we often hear "You guys have TDS" or "You are just letting them troll you and falling for it" but then ish like that happens.
I would also like to add that the amendment was framed in such a way that would not allow Obama or W to run again either because they "served two consecutive terms."
And Swish is exactly right.
Stuff like this is where Republicans need to snap the chalk line on their own.
When you say "until ish like this happens" you act as if something actually happened. Nothing happened. Some crazy dude proposed something that has such a slim possibility of happening, we might as well call it impossible.
And then we should just gloss over this?
“I wouldn’t be in favor of a challenge. Not for me. I wouldn’t be in favor of it at all. I intend to serve four years and do a great job. And I want to bring our country back. I want to put it back on the right track,” Trump told Time magazine in April last year.
The very person it's proposed for is clearly, *clears voice* CLEARLY, not in favor of it.
I just looked... this has been introduced to congress 54 times since 1956 and has met bipartisan resistance every time. I think we're better off considering Elon as a Nazi, the chances are much, much higher. 🤣
I mean, laugh all you want. Trump has also made several references to running more than two terms, as well. Are they jokes/quips/etc.? Yeah, probably. Like Swish said, everything is a joke, until it's not.
Trump is really not even the issue here as much as his sycophants. Honestly, people he doesn't even really care about.
It wears on you over time, and this is the latest. It's mostly at the Representative level. Ads where people are running on sayings like "Trump Strong," taking flame throwers to RINOs, or introducing dumbass amendments like these.
He and Elon can troll all they want. Whatever. Idiots like this, though, are starting to push the narrative more into reality. I do appreciate you referring to him as crazy. I think there are fewer and fewer of you who would do that, though.
Speaking of Elon, I did see where he made more Nazi jokes, enough to upset the ADL this time.
I think that's the center of the issue. Trolling, joking, whatever........but when does it become too much? When is that threshold?
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
There are NOT fewer and fewer that would do that. I'm part of an overwhelming majority. You just can't see that because crap like this is given too much life. As innocuous as it may seem, just two dudes on DT, you're part of the problem. That's right, we're the useful idiots in this case. We're typing it, twenty-five people are reading it, one is repeating it on Twitter and three others on Facebook.
Look, we're ten years removed from learning to post a pic on the internet. In ten short years social media has replaced main stream media. We all seek according to our bias and the algorithms are more than happy to oblige. The people that make money on clicks know that we'll repeat it. The quicker we all understand this the less often we have to respond to utter stupidity with statements like "until ish like this happens". My analogy to first-graders whispering in each other's ears yesterday is spot on. The story morphs every time it is repeated.
The more life we give it, the more it breeds like the cancer it is. We all need to raise the bar of common sense a bit.
Maybe I'm being unfair, maybe people like you and Swish believe something like this can happen. I don't think I'm wrong though. I think we've been trained to understand (especially in this era of devisiveness) that the more dramatic we act in our response, the more we can attribute stupidity to an entire "side".
I do think we depart about the possibility. In the big picture, and considering Swish and I come from the generation that I think will actually have to start cleaning up the Boomer mess, we have grown up witnessing a steady de-evolution and degradation of our political offices.
It is easy to jump onto things because.........things have gotten so much steadily worse. We are in a time where our deficit keeps increasing. We are in a time where rhetoric is at an all-time high in terms of divisiveness, and you can't argue that POTUS and his close aides and friends haven't promulgated that. That bleeds all the way down to the cabinet posts, to Senators, to crazy ass reps like this, and to constituents that have absolutely zero clue.
Am I a useful idiot? Probably, sometimes at least. But how many more useful idiots believing that Trump should actually be able to serve more terms will this Rep idiot unlock and/or amp up?
So what's the solution? To not challenge idiocy? I suppose that could be the case, but it's also a dangerous premise to let it go unchecked. You could be right though that letting it die might be most prudent.
I'd like to discuss with you more about what overwhelming majority you are part of, but I am not quite sure of the context. I know that Trump won, but I would not call it an OVERWHELMING majority. If it's in the context of responses to people like this, perhaps it is that I don't see it, because I don't. I see what I see on this board, and you are the only Republican who I know for sure would call this out. I look at my rather large family and I watch them literally eat out of the hand of Trump. It's scary AF. I bet you might agree if you saw the way that they acted. Buying all his merch and whatnot. They used to be reasonable, but it was like a switch flipped in 2016. The back-and-forth I have had in this forum over the past 8 years has left my mind blown. When I used to have conversations during the Obama admin, it was almost all policy. There was a steep rise in what I’ll call “whackadoodlism” statements after his time. This level that we are witnessing now is unprecedented. Perhaps that does speak well of your inference to algorithms.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
First let me ask you, if Biden had continued to run in 2024 how would that change the fact that a president can serve two terms? It wouldn't. Once again you are making another false equivalency. And I know it's inconvenient for you to have to look at what the whackamoles keep doing and proposing on a daily basis. How trump signed an unconstitutional EO. And it's probably far from the only one. How people were warned he would act like a dictator once elected and has already signed over 200 EO's. He was just signing more yesterday.
Rep. Andy Ogles isn't the only whackamole in Tennessee. There are many and Tennessee isn't alone. Over 1500 of them were just pardoned. Many of theses whackamoles hold political office all across this nation. And their numbers have grown. All trump has to do is endorse them in most cases and they get elected. You seem to suggest people simply stay mute about it.
Fact is, the "would be king" warning is showing itself to be an accurate one. And your answer seems to be, let's just not talk about it. You call it "being given to much light". And hey, you're entitled to your opinion.
But that's only one way to look at it. By not showing these crazy things and all of this "wanna be king" stuff would be keeping it quiet. It would be ignoring what's actually going on. Not bringing light to something means keeping it in the dark. It means remaining silent about it. That's not going to work.
"If I were to remain silent, I'd be guilty of complicity" - Albert Einstein
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Hold on bro, now I'm a boomer?! And just who do you suppose will be cleaning up your mess. I suppose that will be Generation X Æ A-Xii, named after Musk's son after he completes his third term.
I didn't mean to sound so preachy, I'm just saying that a typical reaction to this story should be "what an idiot" not "see, this is what I'm talking about, it's staaaarting!!". To each his own, I suppose, that's just my opinion.
I want to be clear about the "overwhelming majority" comment though. I'm not speaking about election results, I'm talking about people that recognize this story as fodder for fake outrage with no chance of becoming reality. I'll grant you the steady decline, but I'll argue that my >20 years on you guys gives me more wisdom through retrospect. I was at the tail-end of hiding under a desk with my fingers interlaced behind my head because the Russians were about to hit us with nuclear warheads nearly fifty years ago. At that age, you were getting your first participation trophy. (I'm just ranting now because I love busting your balls lol)
I'm not saying you shouldn't have a reaction to a "story". Your feelings are yours and you have every right to express them. "With great power there must also come great responsibility". Your power is that you can influence judgment, you're intelligent and well-respected. If you read that story and believe what you posted, that's fine. I'm trying to adopt a step-back and think litmus test: "am I repeating this because I think it's true or am I posting this to elicit a certain reaction". Again, that's me, and probably more guilty of failing this test than you are.
===============
Something crazy occured to me in 2016. Trump couldn't keep his mouth shut for five seconds, yet we were starting to wake up to the reality that he may actually win the presidency. He said so much crazy ish that the media couldn't even keep up. The news cycle became a never-ending vortex of "Trump said, Trump did, did you see who Trump just blasted, he said that dude's an idiot, he said she's ugly". It served to make sure that we never stopped talking about Trump. Did he entice the tail to wag the dog in order to win a presidency?? History may say yes. If so, we're the doodle that got whacked, and we all provided our own hammer.
First let me ask you, if Biden had continued to run in 2024 how would that change the fact that a president can serve two terms? It wouldn't. Once again you are making another false equivalency. And I know it's inconvenient for you to have to look at what the whackamoles keep doing and proposing on a daily basis. How trump signed an unconstitutional EO. And it's probably far from the only one. How people were warned he would act like a dictator once elected and has already signed over 200 EO's. He was just signing more yesterday.
Rep. Andy Ogles isn't the only whackamole in Tennessee. There are many and Tennessee isn't alone. Over 1500 of them were just pardoned. Many of theses whackamoles hold political office all across this nation. And their numbers have grown. All trump has to do is endorse them in most cases and they get elected. You seem to suggest people simply stay mute about it.
Fact is, the "would be king" warning is showing itself to be an accurate one. And your answer seems to be, let's just not talk about it. You call it "being given to much light". And hey, you're entitled to your opinion.
But that's only one way to look at it. By not showing these crazy things and all of this "wanna be king" stuff would be keeping it quiet. It would be ignoring what's actually going on. Not bringing light to something means keeping it in the dark. It means remaining silent about it. That's not going to work.
"If I were to remain silent, I'd be guilty of complicity" - Albert Einstein
First, I have no idea what that first paragraph means.
Second, why so many "whackamoles"?
Third, this is typical chicken-little-with-a-blindfold when you say "all this wanna be king stuff" attributed to one idiot from Tennessee, yet completely ignore this...
“I wouldn’t be in favor of a challenge. Not for me. I wouldn’t be in favor of it at all. I intend to serve four years and do a great job. And I want to bring our country back. I want to put it back on the right track,” Trump told Time magazine in April last year.
Who should I trust more on the subject of whether or not Trump wants to be president a third time?
yea bro, not even 5 years ago, conservatives were saying we had TDS because Roe v Wade was never gonna be overturned.
it went from that, to the same guys having to go "well yea it's overturned but that's a good thing", pretending like they didn't just call us dumb and fearmongering over what was supposed to be "settled law".
its a joke, until it isn't. then people come out to argue why it's a good thing.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I guess that depends on which trump you believe. trump talks out both sides of his mouth. He says one thing then says another. I suppose you have determined which time he was telling the truth and which time he was lying? Because that's what you would have to do in this case................
And then you have his usual "heads I win, tails they lose" BS. Just in case he lost.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Hold on bro, now I'm a boomer?! And just who do you suppose will be cleaning up your mess. I suppose that will be Generation X Æ A-Xii, named after Musk's son after he completes his third term.
I didn't mean to sound so preachy, I'm just saying that a typical reaction to this story should be "what an idiot" not "see, this is what I'm talking about, it's staaaarting!!". To each his own, I suppose, that's just my opinion.
I want to be clear about the "overwhelming majority" comment though. I'm not speaking about election results, I'm talking about people that recognize this story as fodder for fake outrage with no chance of becoming reality. I'll grant you the steady decline, but I'll argue that my >20 years on you guys gives me more wisdom through retrospect. I was at the tail-end of hiding under a desk with my fingers interlaced behind my head because the Russians were about to hit us with nuclear warheads nearly fifty years ago. At that age, you were getting your first participation trophy. (I'm just ranting now because I love busting your balls lol)
I'm not saying you shouldn't have a reaction to a "story". Your feelings are yours and you have every right to express them. "With great power there must also come great responsibility". Your power is that you can influence judgment, you're intelligent and well-respected. If you read that story and believe what you posted, that's fine. I'm trying to adopt a step-back and think litmus test: "am I repeating this because I think it's true or am I posting this to elicit a certain reaction". Again, that's me, and probably more guilty of failing this test than you are.
===============
Something crazy occured to me in 2016. Trump couldn't keep his mouth shut for five seconds, yet we were starting to wake up to the reality that he may actually win the presidency. He said so much crazy ish that the media couldn't even keep up. The news cycle became a never-ending vortex of "Trump said, Trump did, did you see who Trump just blasted, he said that dude's an idiot, he said she's ugly". It served to make sure that we never stopped talking about Trump. Did he entice the tail to wag the dog in order to win a presidency?? History may say yes. If so, we're the doodle that got whacked, and we all provided our own hammer.
Aaaaand my post got deleted again as I was responding. The boomer thing was mostly a joke. I'm 41, at the vanguard of the millennial generation. I'm the youngest of six kids with all my siblings being between 13 and 20 years older than me. I used to get so much grief from them about being in this generation until I once said "Hearing you guys talk about how we're irresponsible is like watching someone rack up a huge bar tab, tell his buddy about how he needs to be more responsible, and then walking out and leaving him with the tab."
I would normally be with you on the reaction being "What an idiot." and moving on. Like Swish just mentioned, that would have been my reaction a decade ago. My family is where I started seeing the creepy change first, and that had an impression on me that started scaring the ish out of me. I fully anticipate receiving a text out to the family where they will say "I could get behind this" or something along those lines when it comes to this Amendment.
Let me "read" you the last text my sister sent out on politics: *Sharing a link to the story on renaming Denali to McKinley* "I thought it was awful when they changed the name of this mountain. It was an insult to Ohio." Ten years ago, I would have seen that article linked and laughed, thinking "Man, this guy is a nut." Not anymore, though, because people like her, and I'm sure people in the Tennessee constituency get mobilized by this stupid stuff.
That's the kind of ish that I see that gets me to react more and more. She wasn't always this way. My family wasn't always that way. It's gotten a lot worse over the last decade. Sure, it happens on the other side, too, but I think theirs is more of a problem of ineptitude and chickens coming home to roost on their double-speak and disingenuousness.
Frankly, I don't know what to do about it, moving forward. I just know I'm not excited about where things are headed, as a whole.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
yea bro, not even 5 years ago, conservatives were saying we had TDS because Roe v Wade was never gonna be overturned.
it went from that, to the same guys having to go "well yea it's overturned but that's a good thing", pretending like they didn't just call us dumb and fearmongering over what was supposed to be "settled law".
its a joke, until it isn't. then people come out to argue why it's a good thing.
The RvW conversation is a good point that you have. I don't want to make it about the substance of RvW, but that conversation you mentioned lines up with my recollection as well.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
yea bro, not even 5 years ago, conservatives were saying we had TDS because Roe v Wade was never gonna be overturned.
it went from that, to the same guys having to go "well yea it's overturned but that's a good thing", pretending like they didn't just call us dumb and fearmongering over what was supposed to be "settled law".
its a joke, until it isn't. then people come out to argue why it's a good thing.
Fair enough. Nothing's impossible.
I really cringe at the never-ending "the same people" though. It's not always the same people. Maybe some are the same, but it's not some slow-moving amoeba trying to eat up "everything liberal" like it's made out to be.
Looking back, how about that Supreme Court leak just ahead of the mid-term "red wave"? I bet it was "the same people" that created the Russia hoax and hid the laptop under the desk.
who says it can't be the same people. you and i both know better than to believe the CIA run ops everywhere around the world BUT here. who knows?
but in general, it does tend to be the same people (individuals americans) that will defend things they previously laughed at others for believing.
it's funny you brought up the Russia hoax, seeing as how again, conservatives were dragging others for saying that Russia is gonna invade Ukraine, and then Russia invaded. some* of the same people who clowned others over the belief have been trying to deflect for Putin and claimed he was right in invading. Tucker Carlson, for example.
FATE, not even 10 years ago, conservatives were referring to Obama as King over the # of executive orders, whining that he was trying to bypass congress. Look at how many EO's trump has signed day 1. combine that with conservative logic, and what should they be calling Trump?
but, they aren't calling Trump that, are they? it's "different", and it's actually a good thing Trump is passing all these EO's...
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Hold on bro, now I'm a boomer?! And just who do you suppose will be cleaning up your mess. I suppose that will be Generation X Æ A-Xii, named after Musk's son after he completes his third term.
I didn't mean to sound so preachy, I'm just saying that a typical reaction to this story should be "what an idiot" not "see, this is what I'm talking about, it's staaaarting!!". To each his own, I suppose, that's just my opinion.
I want to be clear about the "overwhelming majority" comment though. I'm not speaking about election results, I'm talking about people that recognize this story as fodder for fake outrage with no chance of becoming reality. I'll grant you the steady decline, but I'll argue that my >20 years on you guys gives me more wisdom through retrospect. I was at the tail-end of hiding under a desk with my fingers interlaced behind my head because the Russians were about to hit us with nuclear warheads nearly fifty years ago. At that age, you were getting your first participation trophy. (I'm just ranting now because I love busting your balls lol)
I'm not saying you shouldn't have a reaction to a "story". Your feelings are yours and you have every right to express them. "With great power there must also come great responsibility". Your power is that you can influence judgment, you're intelligent and well-respected. If you read that story and believe what you posted, that's fine. I'm trying to adopt a step-back and think litmus test: "am I repeating this because I think it's true or am I posting this to elicit a certain reaction". Again, that's me, and probably more guilty of failing this test than you are.
===============
Something crazy occured to me in 2016. Trump couldn't keep his mouth shut for five seconds, yet we were starting to wake up to the reality that he may actually win the presidency. He said so much crazy ish that the media couldn't even keep up. The news cycle became a never-ending vortex of "Trump said, Trump did, did you see who Trump just blasted, he said that dude's an idiot, he said she's ugly". It served to make sure that we never stopped talking about Trump. Did he entice the tail to wag the dog in order to win a presidency?? History may say yes. If so, we're the doodle that got whacked, and we all provided our own hammer.
Aaaaand my post got deleted again as I was responding. The boomer thing was mostly a joke. I'm 41, at the vanguard of the millennial generation. I'm the youngest of six kids with all my siblings being between 13 and 20 years older than me. I used to get so much grief from them about being in this generation until I once said "Hearing you guys talk about how we're irresponsible is like watching someone rack up a huge bar tab, tell his buddy about how he needs to be more responsible, and then walking out and leaving him with the tab."
I would normally be with you on the reaction being "What an idiot." and moving on. Like Swish just mentioned, that would have been my reaction a decade ago. My family is where I started seeing the creepy change first, and that had an impression on me that started scaring the ish out of me. I fully anticipate receiving a text out to the family where they will say "I could get behind this" or something along those lines when it comes to this Amendment.
Let me "read" you the last text my sister sent out on politics: *Sharing a link to the story on renaming Denali to McKinley* "I thought it was awful when they changed the name of this mountain. It was an insult to Ohio." Ten years ago, I would have seen that article linked and laughed, thinking "Man, this guy is a nut." Not anymore, though, because people like her, and I'm sure people in the Tennessee constituency get mobilized by this stupid stuff.
That's the kind of ish that I see that gets me to react more and more. She wasn't always this way. My family wasn't always that way. It's gotten a lot worse over the last decade. Sure, it happens on the other side, too, but I think theirs is more of a problem of ineptitude and chickens coming home to roost on their double-speak and disingenuousness.
Frankly, I don't know what to do about it, moving forward. I just know I'm not excited about where things are headed, as a whole.
I keep a notepad open and copy/paste as I go as soon as a post becomes lengthy, particularly before I "preview". There is nothing more frustrating here, not sure why it happens but it happens a lot and always has.
Siblings 13-20 years older? Sounds like your nickname should be "Oops!" 🤣
We all have our own reality. I can see where you're coming from. I just voted for Trump again... and for the second time, I wasn't voting for him as much as what I was voting against. Watching the last four years of a shadow presidency had me more worried about our future than I've ever been. Sounds crazy, I'm sure, but that's my reality.
Haha, my dad said my name should have been Ira. We're not Jewish, but he needed to use his IRA to account for a kid he didn't plan on... dude was 50 when I was born.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
That's funny. The "last" kid was about to hit the teens and your dad looked at your mom and said "we did good". A few weeks later he was like "what the hell are you talking about... do you have another test???"
I suppose that will be Generation X Æ A-Xii, named after Musk's son after he completes his third term. 
