All Activity

I bet that if some of these IL players were reverted back to their minor league pay while they are injured, we’d see them get healthy very quickly.

I could ve put this in one of the other many topics but decided to make it its own just for the sake of clicks/views not looking for commentary but just wanted to share……what most already know. just a reminder of how flawed the system is and wasteful spending…...and that’s on both sides of the isle

[Hidden Content] It was a surreal scene at the Federal Reserve construction site, with President Trump and Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, standing next to each other in hard hats. The president presented Powell with a new, higher, cost of the project. “It looks like it’s about $3.1 billion, it went up a little bit or a lot,” Trump said. Powell closed his eyes and shook his head, explaining that the additional cost was related to the Martin Building, a different Fed office that was renovated five years ago.

Libs don’t care one bit about legal immigration, so they need to stop flashing our constitution in our faces. Being an American is special. Not everyone can be an American. Our constitution IS a special document which is what makes us Americans. If you hand over our precious rights to anyone who comes here, it takes away our freedoms as Americans, rights that our kinfolk fought and died defending so that we would enjoy those freedoms, not hand them over to invading enemies. Whining over illegals inheriting our American rights simply by invading our country is ludicrous. Saying they are coming here to better themselves AND ASSIMILATE into society is the biggest lie the libs have going.

This was just an old fashion ass whoopin’. Every team experiences this. Ask the Dodgers. Hershiser claimed we were cheating. Lmao. Hitting is contagious and the A’s had an epidemic. No need to panic.

Imagine that, someone trying to scientifically figure out an Aggie joke, when ridiculousness is what they’re all about. Now if only he would address the rest of my post.

He needs someone to turn the ladder. If he could walk the other direction he wouldn’t need help.

I think BU Band will be much better. They had a new band director last year so this year will be his second. I hear that the numbers are up. And from what I’m told, there’s a group of talented kids there this year. We’ll see though.

Only if his mother was an illegal alien. Did she sneak into this country?

He’d walk the other direction. Teasips…

Like anatomy

Ready to be told by the resident Debby Downer of how many Astro players need to be released and that "if" they continue to play like this ONE game they will miss the playoffs.

How would the guy holding the bulb rotate around the receptacle if the whole house was turning? Are you an Aggie?

What a crazy stat line. Also crazy that he’s a 22-yo rookie batting .305 with 23 homers

These folks don’t accept much science, Big Girl.

Yep. My dad told me that joke when I was a kid.

11-2 top of 8 Kurtz 5 for 5 with 3 dingers 5 rbis. Over before it started. Now go for split. Top 9 Kurtz dinger number 4 8 RbIS 6 FOR 6 15-2 Final 15-3

Right now taking an old fashion Whupping 9-0

How do you think polls are done. They use a sample. They don't contact everybody in the US

Astros have claimed infielder Logan Davidson off waivers from the A's and have optioned him to AAA Sugar Land for the 40 man roster.

Name calling is childish. Grow up.

I hate to think that they are manipulating the roster some way. I hope not. They are going after Suarez at Arizona.

What’s the citizenship status of the children of illegal aliens? That question has spurred quite a debate over the 14th Amendment lately, with the news that several states—including Pennsylvania, Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia, and South Carolina—may launch efforts to deny automatic citizenship to such children. Critics claim that anyone born in the United States is automatically a U.S. citizen, even if their parents are here illegally. But that ignores the text and legislative history of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 to extend citizenship to freed slaves and their children. The 14th Amendment doesn’t say that all persons born in the U.S. are citizens. It says that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are citizens. That second, critical, conditional phrase is conveniently ignored or misinterpreted by advocates of “birthright” citizenship. Critics erroneously believe that anyone present in the United States has “subjected” himself “to the jurisdiction” of the United States, which would extend citizenship to the children of tourists, diplomats, and illegal aliens alike. But that is not what that qualifying phrase means. Its original meaning refers to the political allegiance of an individual and the jurisdiction that a foreign government has over that individual. The fact that a tourist or illegal alien is subject to our laws and our courts if they violate our laws does not place them within the political “jurisdiction” of the United States as that phrase was defined by the framers of the 14th Amendment. This amendment’s language was derived from the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which provided that “[a]ll persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power” would be considered citizens. Sen. Lyman Trumbull, a key figure in the adoption of the 14th Amendment, said that “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. included not owing allegiance to any other country. As John Eastman, former dean of the Chapman School of Law, has said, many do not seem to understand “the distinction between partial, territorial jurisdiction, which subjects all who are present within the territory of a sovereign to the jurisdiction of that sovereign’s laws, and complete political jurisdiction, which requires allegiance to the sovereign as well.” In the famous Slaughter-House cases of 1872, the Supreme Court stated that this qualifying phrase was intended to exclude “children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.” This was confirmed in 1884 in another case, Elk vs. Wilkins, when citizenship was denied to an American Indian because he “owed immediate allegiance to” his tribe and not the United States. American Indians and their children did not become citizens until Congress passed the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. There would have been no need to pass such legislation if the 14th Amendment extended citizenship to every person born in America, no matter what the circumstances of their birth, and no matter who their parents are. Even in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the 1898 case most often cited by “birthright” supporters due to its overbroad language, the court only held that a child born of lawful, permanent residents was a U.S. citizen. That is a far cry from saying that a child born of individuals who are here illegally must be considered a U.S. citizen. Of course, the judges in that case were strongly influenced by the fact that there were discriminatory laws in place at that time that restricted Chinese immigration, a situation that does not exist today. The court’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment as extending to the children of legal, noncitizens was incorrect, according to the text and legislative history of the amendment. But even under that holding, citizenship was not extended to the children of illegal aliens—only permanent, legal residents. It is just plain wrong to claim that the children born of parents temporarily in the country as students or tourists are automatically U.S. citizens: They do not meet the 14th Amendment’s jurisdictional allegiance obligations. They are, in fact, subject to the political jurisdiction (and allegiance) of the country of their parents. The same applies to the children of illegal aliens because children born in the United States to foreign citizens are citizens of their parents’ home country. Federal law offers them no help either. U.S. immigration law (8 U.S.C. § 1401) simply repeats the language of the 14th Amendment, including the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The State Department has erroneously interpreted that statute to provide passports to anyone born in the United States, regardless of whether their parents are here illegally and regardless of whether the applicant meets the requirement of being “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. Accordingly, birthright citizenship has been implemented by executive fiat, not because it is required by federal law or the Constitution. We are only one of a very small number of countries that provides birthright citizenship, and we do so based not upon the requirements of federal law or the Constitution, but based upon an erroneous executive interpretation. Congress should clarify the law according to the original meaning of the 14th Amendment and reverse this practice. [Hidden Content]