For those against dual citizenship, be aware that many politicians and those in government have dual citizenship. Let us begin there to deny dual loyalties as Australia has done.
David, I am not sure what you are talking about. I am not against dual citizenship per se.. I am against people in political office in this country holding dual citizenship. How does Melania and Barron fit in the conversation?
Concerning Dual loyalties, I think some people on here need to chose between Christ and Mammon. You cannot have two masters, yet some self pro claimed Christians side with Capialism over Catholic Social teaching.
The one overriding factor that warrants the removal of Maduro has not been mentioned. More so than the oil or the cocaine flow out of that country, the main reason was a security consideration. Not from the military might (or lack thereof) of Venezuela, it was the recent announcement/agreement coming jointly from Maduro and Putin. They were moving to place hypersonic missiles on the soil of our South American neighbor. No less than the threat of the Cuban missile crises for Kennedy.
Nick, I appreciate that you want to contrast your views to the contemptible Sneddon but you seem to be more alike than different. At best, your vision is a slightly more palatable form of the same ideology that is transforming once beautiful Santa Barbara into a place I would like to call my previous home. First, closure of State Street never made sense. Politicians always want to appear to be taking action even when that action is purely symbolic as in the case of the closure of State Street. I would like you to support your comment that the closure made sense during covid. One section of one street? More appealing to me would be a strong posture that the closure never made sense, that State Street should be immediately opened for the good of the businesses that have suffered. And please nix the feel-good platitudes about a balanced plan that restores circulation, supports businesses, and creates a safe, inviting corridor for everyone — not just those who can navigate a nine-block closure. On housing affordability, there are no government solutions. Santa Barbara is expensive because it has the best weather in the world, is beautiful and has the Pacific Ocean as a swimming hole. Desirable locations are always expensive and always will be, suck it up. While promising to make housing affordable through government intervention might win votes, it never solves the problem of affordability with one exception, by transforming a once desirable destination into a shithole. I applaud your almost soft maybe words suggesting opposition to rent control, the bigger problem is the rapid increase in construction of new housing and ADU's. On my street probably half of the homes have ADU's rented out which means that there is no street parking on a street of single family residences. If I wanted to live in a ghetto-ass neighborhood I would move to Isla vista. More ADU's and more housing will and is transforming Santa Barbara into the shithole I cant wait to leave. Government can fix housing cost by making a once desirable location into another ghetto in paradise. Why can't this town burp up a candidate with conservative values and a strong conservative voice? A candidate with business experience, a candidate who did not work in government, a candidate who signed the front of a pay check rather than receiving one with the statue of liberty printed on the front?
Jeff: Well, local government has made living more affordable... for those in government and/or serving government entities who, my gut tells me, get most of the rent-subsidised "workforce" housing. For the rest of the poor saps, suck it up!
Santa Barbara government employees compensation is obscene. I recall trying to find out if it was a code violation to stack firewood against a structure. Ten phone calls later and conversations with two fire chiefs (+300K compensation) I was finally able to get an answer but of the many "fire professionals" I spoke with none seemed to know the answer nor were they interested in putting any effort into getting the answer.
Jeff, do you live in any of the three districts that will have current council members termed out this year? If so you've got my vote.
And speaking of the election this year, now I have a hard choice in the race for mayor. Randy is doing a fine job but he's out voted on most major issues. Now Eric Friedman has announced he's running. . . I've known Eric for many years and believe he can be just as good as Randy. Maybe I'll flip a coin.
And I will work for free donating my compensation to the Santa Barbara Conservative Republicans. I am in district 2 and while in the starry eyed ignorance of youth I once imagined running for city council, I was quickly sobered after attending a council meeting. My brain would explode if I had to hang with the other council members and attend those meetings. Have you ever watched or attended one? Thank you Dan for the vote of confidence, I could count on you, my wife and myself for three votes.
You might not believe this but I worked John McCain in 1985, just before I moved here. Not only did I attend meetings in the US Congress but I had the honor to sit on the House floor. That was ages ago, in the mid 1980's.
I don't recall the Monroe doctrine having anything to do with deposing leaders, however corrupt, of Latin American nations. The Monroe Doctrine from what I recall was about keeping the then great powers, European Empires out of affairs in the America's.
Why would I make positive comments, Justin? Do I exist to support your beliefs, politicians, etc?
If everyone else is already doing do, why must I? I'm the only one from the "right" who rebukes conservatives here.
Also the article you gave reads this exact line; "The doctrine formulated by President James Monroe was originally aimed at opposing European meddling in the Western Hemisphere. It has since been invoked repeatedly by subsequent presidents angling to justify U.S. intervention in the region."
“Through the centuries, much of that has included Venezuela, according to Jay Sexton, a history professor at the University of Missouri.
“Historically, Venezuela has been the pretext or the trigger for a lot of corollaries to the Monroe Doctrine,” said Sexton, author of “The Monroe Doctrine: Empire and Nation in Nineteenth-Century America,” citing instances from the late 1800s, all the way through Trump’s first administration.”
Constant rebukes, doesn’t it get tiring? Your last ignorant comment on the other one I wrote showed you just want to be contrary no matter the subject.
No thanks. I really don't care for Yanqui imperialism regardless. It's an excuse to bully around smaller powers and to install pro American regimes and placate businesses. I have no respect for America, Justin - the land belongs to Spain.
What's wrong with him calling you out on your neocon bullshit, Justin? I think it's you who is the 'Contrarian.' Write honest articles and he won't argue with them.
He definitely adds more value to the conversation than L. I used to appreciate his comments but lately he’s been making ignorant statements just to be contrary.
The Roosevelt Corollary is not the Monroe Doctrine as it originally was conceived. You are being dishonest here, Justin. And again, it's irrelevant if I don't believe America has a "right" to engage in such actions against another sovereign state all because it's inconvenient to business or political interests.
"Made it clear he is just here to troll"
I think the real issue is yoursel, why are you so offended someone doesn't share your views? It's childish to expect people to agree with you - on anything really.
You sound angry, cursing, calling me names, lol. He mentioned the Monroe doctrine. I showed him context for my opinion, he then admitted he was wrong. I had a lot more respect for him until the last few ignorant comments showed. He’s just trying to be contrary. On another thread, he claimed that Iran China and Russia didn’t care about Venezuela. You both hide your identities, I’m guessing so you can troll as hard as possible.
If you are against dual citizenship, as the letter stated, you are against the concept of the US Revolution. If you are a dual citizen, you are right, you can place a vote in the federal elections. Is that wrong? No. Why? Because you pay US taxes.
I think the letter writer's solution is renunciation of US citizenship. Maybe some would not want that, especially if you paid into SS.
Half of working Americans pay no federal income tax. I agree with you, they should not have the right to vote. That would undoubtedly fix our pesky Democrat problem.
I agree with most of what Mr. McCalMont said about dual citizenship but think it would be best to not use a statement like "rent-free in Rosie O’Donnell‘s low-I.Q. cranium". I don't know what Rosie O'Donnel's I.Q. is but I do know the Bible indicates Love is Not Rude--which seems to be the demeanor of the statement--and one, if said face to face to the person, would be taken that way. Best to keep Orthodox Christianity within the scope of biblical examples of the Apostles.
No dual citizenships period without loss of voting privileges. You’re loyal to this country only or have visitor status without voting rights in this country’s federal elections. Individual states (States Rights) may allow duals to vote for matters within that state.
The Founding Fathers of the United States did things all wrong. They should have established individual Countries instead of individual states. Each Country, such as the Country of California has its own President (now Governor) and laws. All the Countries are headed by a King of the Countries (now Trump) that collects taxes from all the individual Countries to maintain a military, creates country-to-country roads, air travel, stuff like that which countries must share. Get rid of the unimportant stuff like the CIA, FBI, Supreme Court and all the other Federal crap organizations we now have and don't need. Keep it simple. If a Country wants immigrants, no problem. It's a thought.
Bill R: interesting post. MN, CA and sanctuary ‘countries’ could do whatever they want, you post, if not a state. Yet, they already do as mere states, don’t they? The Fed government has limited enforcement authority beyond possibly withholding some categorical federal funding. National sovereignty, safety, culture, the rule of law must be maintained. How do we solve this mess?
Got a good point, the states act as "countries," but maybe they want to really be "countries" and not be tied to a political Federal government. Perhaps the "King" needs to see over the counties in a non-political manner. If at all possible, not have the "King" seen in a political way, but just a task handler. Currently, our President is very political and needs to be less political thinking. I can put in my mind comparing how different people would run things, such people as Rubio or Vance ... and they just might be better (appearing as less bullies) than the way Trump tends to appear as a "bully." I want to take much of the "law" and associated agencies away from the Feds that interacts with the states.
For those against dual citizenship, be aware that many politicians and those in government have dual citizenship. Let us begin there to deny dual loyalties as Australia has done.
Agree 100%.! No dual citizenship for anyone holding public office.
...or to be in this country legally to hold office...see Maryland, DC, San Francisco, Vermont...what a concept...
Bye BYE, Melania and Barron Trump.
They have dual citizenship.
David, I am not sure what you are talking about. I am not against dual citizenship per se.. I am against people in political office in this country holding dual citizenship. How does Melania and Barron fit in the conversation?
Fair enough.
Arnold Schwarzenegger has dual citizenship.
Bye bye Ted Cruz
Michelle Bachman has dual citizenship.
IIRC, there are about 5 or so current senators who have dual citizenship.
I do not remember if there are any in the house.
I may be wrong but I believe Ted Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship a number of years ago. If a law did come into effect that
denied duel citizenship of politicians I am sure we would lose some decent people but I think in the long run it would be for the best.
Monica, I respect that you are driven by principle.
Cruz renounced his dual citizenship for one reason and one reason alone: He wanted to run for President.
Correct - Ted renounced the Canadian
part in 2014.
Australia allows dual citizenship
https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/entering-and-leaving-australia/traveling-as-a-dual-citizen
Maybe you meant Austria?
Dual citizenship is permissible in Australia, except for politicians.
Ahh, I misread that first post. Yeah, if you're holding a public office, that makes sense.
Concerning Dual loyalties, I think some people on here need to chose between Christ and Mammon. You cannot have two masters, yet some self pro claimed Christians side with Capialism over Catholic Social teaching.
Agree: end dual citizenships.
Nice addition to sbcurrent.
Thanks
The one overriding factor that warrants the removal of Maduro has not been mentioned. More so than the oil or the cocaine flow out of that country, the main reason was a security consideration. Not from the military might (or lack thereof) of Venezuela, it was the recent announcement/agreement coming jointly from Maduro and Putin. They were moving to place hypersonic missiles on the soil of our South American neighbor. No less than the threat of the Cuban missile crises for Kennedy.
Nick, I appreciate that you want to contrast your views to the contemptible Sneddon but you seem to be more alike than different. At best, your vision is a slightly more palatable form of the same ideology that is transforming once beautiful Santa Barbara into a place I would like to call my previous home. First, closure of State Street never made sense. Politicians always want to appear to be taking action even when that action is purely symbolic as in the case of the closure of State Street. I would like you to support your comment that the closure made sense during covid. One section of one street? More appealing to me would be a strong posture that the closure never made sense, that State Street should be immediately opened for the good of the businesses that have suffered. And please nix the feel-good platitudes about a balanced plan that restores circulation, supports businesses, and creates a safe, inviting corridor for everyone — not just those who can navigate a nine-block closure. On housing affordability, there are no government solutions. Santa Barbara is expensive because it has the best weather in the world, is beautiful and has the Pacific Ocean as a swimming hole. Desirable locations are always expensive and always will be, suck it up. While promising to make housing affordable through government intervention might win votes, it never solves the problem of affordability with one exception, by transforming a once desirable destination into a shithole. I applaud your almost soft maybe words suggesting opposition to rent control, the bigger problem is the rapid increase in construction of new housing and ADU's. On my street probably half of the homes have ADU's rented out which means that there is no street parking on a street of single family residences. If I wanted to live in a ghetto-ass neighborhood I would move to Isla vista. More ADU's and more housing will and is transforming Santa Barbara into the shithole I cant wait to leave. Government can fix housing cost by making a once desirable location into another ghetto in paradise. Why can't this town burp up a candidate with conservative values and a strong conservative voice? A candidate with business experience, a candidate who did not work in government, a candidate who signed the front of a pay check rather than receiving one with the statue of liberty printed on the front?
Jeff: Well, local government has made living more affordable... for those in government and/or serving government entities who, my gut tells me, get most of the rent-subsidised "workforce" housing. For the rest of the poor saps, suck it up!
Santa Barbara government employees compensation is obscene. I recall trying to find out if it was a code violation to stack firewood against a structure. Ten phone calls later and conversations with two fire chiefs (+300K compensation) I was finally able to get an answer but of the many "fire professionals" I spoke with none seemed to know the answer nor were they interested in putting any effort into getting the answer.
" If it's too hard, it's not worth doing"
-Homer Simpson
JB: We need you on City Council!
"If I wanted to live in a ghetto-ass neighborhood I would move to Isla vista."
True words.
That said it's a great place to hang out, go for a paddle, check out the scenery, and leave.
Jeff, do you live in any of the three districts that will have current council members termed out this year? If so you've got my vote.
And speaking of the election this year, now I have a hard choice in the race for mayor. Randy is doing a fine job but he's out voted on most major issues. Now Eric Friedman has announced he's running. . . I've known Eric for many years and believe he can be just as good as Randy. Maybe I'll flip a coin.
Dan- A known Democrat loyalist versus a non-Democrat and you flip a coin.
Wow you really don't know either one!
And I will work for free donating my compensation to the Santa Barbara Conservative Republicans. I am in district 2 and while in the starry eyed ignorance of youth I once imagined running for city council, I was quickly sobered after attending a council meeting. My brain would explode if I had to hang with the other council members and attend those meetings. Have you ever watched or attended one? Thank you Dan for the vote of confidence, I could count on you, my wife and myself for three votes.
You might not believe this but I worked John McCain in 1985, just before I moved here. Not only did I attend meetings in the US Congress but I had the honor to sit on the House floor. That was ages ago, in the mid 1980's.
"Removing Maduro invokes the Monroe Doctrine"
I don't recall the Monroe doctrine having anything to do with deposing leaders, however corrupt, of Latin American nations. The Monroe Doctrine from what I recall was about keeping the then great powers, European Empires out of affairs in the America's.
Do you ever make positive comments? You should put “Contrarian” in your bio also lol.
https://fortune.com/2026/01/04/what-is-the-monroe-doctrine-us-foreign-policy-latin-america-trump-ouster-maduro/
Why would I make positive comments, Justin? Do I exist to support your beliefs, politicians, etc?
If everyone else is already doing do, why must I? I'm the only one from the "right" who rebukes conservatives here.
Also the article you gave reads this exact line; "The doctrine formulated by President James Monroe was originally aimed at opposing European meddling in the Western Hemisphere. It has since been invoked repeatedly by subsequent presidents angling to justify U.S. intervention in the region."
And you stopped reading there?
“Through the centuries, much of that has included Venezuela, according to Jay Sexton, a history professor at the University of Missouri.
“Historically, Venezuela has been the pretext or the trigger for a lot of corollaries to the Monroe Doctrine,” said Sexton, author of “The Monroe Doctrine: Empire and Nation in Nineteenth-Century America,” citing instances from the late 1800s, all the way through Trump’s first administration.”
Constant rebukes, doesn’t it get tiring? Your last ignorant comment on the other one I wrote showed you just want to be contrary no matter the subject.
I literally can't read the article because it's behind a paywall...
And I'm not paying for news.
Does constant praise and affirmations not get tiring to you? Do you want an echo chamber?
There’s no paywall, I don’t subscribe either. Scroll down.
No thanks. I really don't care for Yanqui imperialism regardless. It's an excuse to bully around smaller powers and to install pro American regimes and placate businesses. I have no respect for America, Justin - the land belongs to Spain.
What's wrong with him calling you out on your neocon bullshit, Justin? I think it's you who is the 'Contrarian.' Write honest articles and he won't argue with them.
He admitted he was wrong and made it clear he is just here to troll. Why you so angry?
I think Theo provides too much content to call him a troll. He might be mostly negative to your views... is that a problem?
He definitely adds more value to the conversation than L. I used to appreciate his comments but lately he’s been making ignorant statements just to be contrary.
“being only partially correct on my understanding of the Monroe Doctrine matters not.”
The Roosevelt Corollary is not the Monroe Doctrine as it originally was conceived. You are being dishonest here, Justin. And again, it's irrelevant if I don't believe America has a "right" to engage in such actions against another sovereign state all because it's inconvenient to business or political interests.
"Made it clear he is just here to troll"
I think the real issue is yoursel, why are you so offended someone doesn't share your views? It's childish to expect people to agree with you - on anything really.
“Iran? China? Russia? Bro you act like Venezuela matters to any of these actors. Suppose they control oil - okay? And?”
That is totally dishonest. You are you so stupid? I never said I was 'angry.' You should have showed this side of yourself during your campaign.
You sound angry, cursing, calling me names, lol. He mentioned the Monroe doctrine. I showed him context for my opinion, he then admitted he was wrong. I had a lot more respect for him until the last few ignorant comments showed. He’s just trying to be contrary. On another thread, he claimed that Iran China and Russia didn’t care about Venezuela. You both hide your identities, I’m guessing so you can troll as hard as possible.
"Venezuela!" Yeah I'm not concerned with major power battles, if China or Russia control Venezuela so be it. That's not being contrarian.
"But, but-" why? Why should anyone care? It's Venezuela, not America? It'll help their economy? Wow it'll be a drop in the bucket, big whoop.
Like the periodic format Jim...
If you are against dual citizenship, as the letter stated, you are against the concept of the US Revolution. If you are a dual citizen, you are right, you can place a vote in the federal elections. Is that wrong? No. Why? Because you pay US taxes.
I think the letter writer's solution is renunciation of US citizenship. Maybe some would not want that, especially if you paid into SS.
Half of working Americans pay no federal income tax. I agree with you, they should not have the right to vote. That would undoubtedly fix our pesky Democrat problem.
19 of the 20 poorest states are Republican, Mr. Barton. Careful what you wish for.
I would take that risk.
Well given your contempt for the poor it's not surprising.
I don’t have contempt for the poor, just learn a trade dude.
I heard a rumor that Maduro had a private bank and that GOP 16 congressman And 60 plus Democrats had deposits in the bank
Fake news or a juicy sandal
I agree with most of what Mr. McCalMont said about dual citizenship but think it would be best to not use a statement like "rent-free in Rosie O’Donnell‘s low-I.Q. cranium". I don't know what Rosie O'Donnel's I.Q. is but I do know the Bible indicates Love is Not Rude--which seems to be the demeanor of the statement--and one, if said face to face to the person, would be taken that way. Best to keep Orthodox Christianity within the scope of biblical examples of the Apostles.
No dual citizenships period without loss of voting privileges. You’re loyal to this country only or have visitor status without voting rights in this country’s federal elections. Individual states (States Rights) may allow duals to vote for matters within that state.
Justin is wrong about Venezuela. Again.
Let’s hear your take, explain what I’m wrong about. Or is this just a blanket hate comment.
I submit pieces to the liberal media all the time.
Still waiting on your rebuttal. You obviously don’t like me, your comments are out of hate with no context.
The Founding Fathers of the United States did things all wrong. They should have established individual Countries instead of individual states. Each Country, such as the Country of California has its own President (now Governor) and laws. All the Countries are headed by a King of the Countries (now Trump) that collects taxes from all the individual Countries to maintain a military, creates country-to-country roads, air travel, stuff like that which countries must share. Get rid of the unimportant stuff like the CIA, FBI, Supreme Court and all the other Federal crap organizations we now have and don't need. Keep it simple. If a Country wants immigrants, no problem. It's a thought.
Bill R: interesting post. MN, CA and sanctuary ‘countries’ could do whatever they want, you post, if not a state. Yet, they already do as mere states, don’t they? The Fed government has limited enforcement authority beyond possibly withholding some categorical federal funding. National sovereignty, safety, culture, the rule of law must be maintained. How do we solve this mess?
Got a good point, the states act as "countries," but maybe they want to really be "countries" and not be tied to a political Federal government. Perhaps the "King" needs to see over the counties in a non-political manner. If at all possible, not have the "King" seen in a political way, but just a task handler. Currently, our President is very political and needs to be less political thinking. I can put in my mind comparing how different people would run things, such people as Rubio or Vance ... and they just might be better (appearing as less bullies) than the way Trump tends to appear as a "bully." I want to take much of the "law" and associated agencies away from the Feds that interacts with the states.