-
Posts
3,239 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by paxamericana
-
Canada slips into recession as economy stalls
paxamericana replied to CdnFox's topic in Federal Politics in Canada
Canada is making recession great again -
GREATEST PRESIDENTIAL PRESIDENT EVER!
-
No it won’t, it’s cheaper actually. Light crude is the easiest to refine. A heavy oil refinery just wouldn’t use its its Coker capacity. Meaning under utilized capacity not inability to.
-
It is strategic, just not for American interests any longer, ever since we became a net oil exporter. You know who will be taking over in the not too distant future? India. Yes they will be the primary customer for Middle East oil.
-
If we can’t have it, no one can.
-
It still is; we're simply modifying the plan. Removing Russian and Middle Eastern oil production from the equation actually increases reliance on American output. The broader strategy was to pursue green energy domestically — cutting demand at home while ramping up oil production for export — thereby reinforcing dependence on the petrodollar. Stable genius at work.
-
World currency reserve. Means we can print Monopoly money. Speculation
-
Birthright citizenship
paxamericana replied to paxamericana's topic in Federal Politics in the United States
No you’re a 51ster come this fall -
Birthright citizenship
paxamericana replied to paxamericana's topic in Federal Politics in the United States
No, If “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” just meant physically present in the U.S., it adds nothing to “born in the United States.” The phrase only does real work if it means something more — i.e., allegiance. The word “jurisdiction” was borrowed from international law of the era, where it carried allegiance connotations -
Birthright citizenship
paxamericana replied to paxamericana's topic in Federal Politics in the United States
Jurisdiction doesn’t mean culpability for crimes. It means allegiance. -
Birthright citizenship
paxamericana replied to paxamericana's topic in Federal Politics in the United States
Like I said, a Canadian tourist who comes here to give birth still owes allegiance to a different country and has not formally been declared a subject of the united state;and therefore not eligible for birth right citizenship. -
It’s factually true. While it’s fair to say inflation is on the ballot, that hasn’t answered the question of who is going to do a better job. Democrats don’t have a proposal other than orange man bad. And do what? Get JD Vance for president? Clearly they don’t have a deep state inside man like VP pence that would be their new puppet. Serves no purpose.
-
Birthright citizenship
paxamericana replied to paxamericana's topic in Federal Politics in the United States
That’s a blatant lie. The Supreme Court later interpreted that way in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) . Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan introduced the citizenship clause language in 1866. He explicitly stated on the Senate floor that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was meant to exclude: • Children of foreign diplomats • Members of Native American tribes (who were considered under separate tribal sovereignty) • Children of aliens who owe allegiance to a foreign government Senator Lyman Trumbull (chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee) defined jurisdiction as meaning “not owing allegiance to anybody else” — suggesting full, exclusive allegiance to the U.S. was required. The Primary Purpose The clause was chiefly designed to: • Overturn Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) • Guarantee citizenship to formerly enslaved Black Americans, who were born in the U.S. with no other national allegiance Freed slaves fit perfectly under either the broad or narrow reading — they had no foreign sovereign to whom they owed allegiance. -
“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.” The original intent was to exclude children born of foreign diplomat , native Americans, and children of Aliens who has allegiance to a foreign government like the undocumented migrants or pregnant tourist. It was meant for children of slaves who does not have allegiance to other countries. By the original intent it is clear cut children of undocumented parents say a Canadian who gives birth in the United States is not entitled to birth right citizenship. Congress would need to amend the constitution to include children of foreign aliens.
-
Alberta Referendum & Pierre Trudeau
paxamericana replied to August1991's topic in Provincial Politics in Canada
Alberta has two option should secession succeed. 1) Negotiate a better trade deal as an independent country than it current has as a province . 2) Join the US, in which case it would still be a net contributer to uncle sam coffer but not as severe as it would be as a province currently. This is before the added benefit of becoming a petrol dollar world currency reserve status. -
Delaying and reversing demographic destiny
paxamericana replied to paxamericana's topic in Religion & Politics
I’m not here to educate the uninformed. Do your own homework. Come back with real talking points. -
Uh huh. That’s your premise? Well keep on going, the US doesn’t age like the rest of the world. This decline is happening at a much higher rate to the world than America. Which is why you get Trump. Don’t see it that way, we’re the only game left. Everyone else aged out. That’s the point. Why do you think investment in America is skyrocketing. You need more work in the decline theory there. Sure other countries may not like America but they’re in a much rougher position and is now, more dependent on American energy as well as market access. I suggest you do some homework.
-
Doesn’t matter in the western hemisphere now does it? Your ass Canada, belongs to America. Ofcourse they will, they’re perpetually wrong. They picked the wrong side since 1775 and has continued the losing streak ever since. Why we put up with you all is one of life’s mysteries.
-
Uh huh, no one is going to risk angering the US to help aid Canada. Your fate is up to America. We just happen to not have any interest in using our hard power on Canada, out of the kindness of our big American hearts of-course. Fighting Canada would be akin to having a civil war is how America sees it. Well, shall we do it the easy way then or would you rather one of the provinces secede and drag it out a little bit longer?
-
Delaying and reversing demographic destiny
paxamericana replied to paxamericana's topic in Religion & Politics
Sounds like religious ethno state is the only other option then. -
And you lot think cheering them does what exactly? China is collapsing economically and soon, politically. See Beijing maintains control by bribing every local politician, that only works so long as the money flow. When it doesn’t, everyone suddenly have their own interest. Historicaly, China as a unified nation is an anomaly not the norm. I never understood this Chinese sentiment as a hedge against American hegemony. Betting on the Chinese to spite America is the worse bet you can make. Instead accept reality for what it is, America is the undisputed super power and will remain so for the foreseeable future. We’re not going away anytime soon. So best you Canucks get with the program and accept your destiny as a future state.
-
Two known path currently exist. Option 1, mass immigration. Option 2, become a religious ethno state. The US is currently experimenting with both option simultaneously. Religious communities like the Amish has always maintained a higher birth rate than general population as well as the migrant population who make it into the US. Argue below.
