|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on May 17, 2006 23:28:05 GMT -8
I'm not sure how many times I have to explain my position before people accept it.
1) Make the border more secure by training more BPA. I'm not sure about the NG - I used to advocate that but I am wary of the military operating inside of the US.
2) Understand that we will never deport 11 million people. Just won't happen.
3) Further understand that 11 million people won't voluntarily leave. Without the welfare that they currently get, living conditions in America are still infinitely better than Mexico. Besides, most of these people have families and can't just uproot back to Mexico.
4) Realize that these people represent an integral part of our economy.
5) Realize that the problem isn't going to go away. A wall does nothing to solve our problems.
I support securing our border while at the same time reforming our immigration policy. I am against any forced deportation program and ANY plan to arrest business leaders or in any way hold them responsible for the failure of the government to defend our borders.
|
|
|
|
Post by MARIO on May 18, 2006 9:30:17 GMT -8
I'm not sure how many times I have to explain my position before people accept it. 1) Make the border more secure by training more BPA. I'm not sure about the NG - I used to advocate that but I am wary of the military operating inside of the US. 2) Understand that we will never deport 11 million people. Just won't happen. 3) Further understand that 11 million people won't voluntarily leave. Without the welfare that they currently get, living conditions in America are still infinitely better than Mexico. Besides, most of these people have families and can't just uproot back to Mexico. 4) Realize that these people represent an integral part of our economy. 5) Realize that the problem isn't going to go away. A wall does nothing to solve our problems. I support securing our border while at the same time reforming our immigration policy. I am against any forced deportation program and ANY plan to arrest business leaders or in any way hold them responsible for the failure of the government to defend our borders. I readily admit that I'm more concerned with securing the border right now than I am with mass deportations. However, I think there need to be severe penalties for those who have illegally entered our country. We need to see SOME deportations. Word is back in Mexico that the President plan is an amnesty. There are going to coming in an attempt to take advantage of this "amnesty." Your idea of more border patrol is a joke, and won't stop anything. We need a wall. We need more Border patrol, COUPLED with National Guard presence and ability to arrest illegals. These people represent an integral part of the criminal element in this country! So you admit that many of them are making use of our welfare system. As a Libertarian, you support this nonsense?? I'm sorry, but your plan DOES NOTHING to prevent more hordes of illegals from invading our country. It will only make this country worse off, james. |
|
|
|
Post by jfree on May 18, 2006 9:56:42 GMT -8
I am curious FF, you say you are wary of the NG operating inside the US, why? You are in the military, they already operate inside the country, they train here, they gaurd the military bases, the CG operates inside the US ALL of the time. I live next to the largest CG base inside the US, we don't have any problems w/them, other than as a teenager they often chased us off military property when we were caught fourwheeling and drinking, as they own a massive amount of land along our 35 mile road system. Believe me, when you are stuck on an island w/only 35 miles of road and a large military base, if there was going to be a problem it would have already happened. We also have rocket launching sites part of the "defense sheild" that has caused more problems than anything, but the problem comes from the private company running the facility and not the military. We also have a Navy Seal base here, again no problems unless you count domestic ones because somehow it seems a requirment for Seals to be hot to join.
|
|
|
|
Post by bounce on May 18, 2006 10:07:24 GMT -8
I am curious FF, you say you are wary of the NG operating inside the US, why? The knowledge that he's on the wall defending you gives you a warm-fuzzy feeling as you drift off to sleep doesn't it??? America and Americans are the fucking problem here! Can't you see that jfree??? |
|
|
|
Post by bounce on May 18, 2006 10:44:56 GMT -8
Rush had a great point yesterday.
He said that when something pisses off the Left, the base screams, yells, marches in the streets and becomes as much of a pain in the ass as possible (French style).
However, we never hear much out of the Right when they get pissed off. Because of that, many politicians miss the anger in the base.
Suddenly, on election day, they're totally surprised when they get their asses kicked!
The Left does things the way the French do them.
The Right protests on election day.
Based on how many hits this thread has gotten in such a short period of time (550 in three days), I think a lot of RINOs are going to go away in November.
If they can't see that coming, then FUCK THEM!
|
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on May 18, 2006 11:31:55 GMT -8
Call me crazy, but I kinda agree with the Founding Fathers that the military shouldn't be operating inside of America.
The only time that the military should be operating in the United States is when the National Guard is defending the interests of the state against the tyranny of the federal government.
See, I'm a true conservative. I support state's rights and a small federal government. At least, that's how conservatives used to think. I don't support the federal government using its military to pursue policy at the expense of the states. The military should only be used to curb foreign threats - not domestic ones. That's when the tyrannical federal government takes over.
I've got no problem with the military training in the US or having bases here - after all, we have to. But when we start operating in the country to pursue policy (e.g. using the military to round up illegals, for example) it's when I start to question the power of our federal government.
I support a semi-weak and small federal government, as most true conservatives do. Their only purpose should be to conduct diplomacy, set national policy (where needed) and defend the country from foreign threats. That's it.
Or basically, what it says in the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
Post by jfree on May 18, 2006 11:51:36 GMT -8
I dont think you are reading what I am saying. The military already operates w/in our borders everyday. The Coast Gaurd is always out patrolling and actually is part of regulating the fishing industry in the entire country. They behave sort of like a police force and have done so for a long long long time w/out any major fubars.
In the state of Alaska the military has been active since WWII, we were after all invaded by the Japanese and w/in a rocks throw from the Soviet Union. On this island, you can't go anywhere w/out running into military bunkers, old jeeps, road systems and housing all from the military. There are islands on the Aleutiun Chain where you aren't allowed to even get off your boat because of all the "Star Wars" crap. This state has had active military prior to statehood and to this day. We rarely if ever have problems between the state gov and the military, I can only think of once and it had to do w/ beach access, no dead civilians.
|
|
|
|
Post by 101ABN on May 18, 2006 16:48:19 GMT -8
"Understand that we will never deport 11 million people. Just won't happen."
Take away the bait and they'll self deport.
"Besides, most of these people have families and can't just uproot back to Mexico."
Makes you wonder how they managed to get here, doesn't it?
"Realize that these people represent an integral part of our economy."
Cite your evidence for this. How can you support your claim that a blackmarket in workers earning substandard wages is a benefit to the economy?
A wall makes illegal entry more difficult by placement of a ohysical barrier. I guess you never lock your doors? Gonna leave that new bike on the street with the key in the ignition?
" I am against any forced deportation program and ANY plan to arrest business leaders or in any way hold them responsible for the failure of the government to defend our borders."
This is about the dumbest statement I've ever heard you make. For all your talk of individual rights and responsibilities, you don't want to hold employers accountable to obey the law and you want no sanction against those who illegally enter the country.
It's way easier to blame it on the government, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
Post by bounce on May 18, 2006 17:11:50 GMT -8
I addressed this. If there was ANY truth to this, Fox would be constructing his own wall (Berlin wall style) to keep all that cheap labor IN!
No fucking shit!
It's in someone else's economic interests to simply do what it takes to sell it below market rates.
Why should we want to prevent that???
After all, there's no stopping it and it's just going to happen anyway, right???
Fuck the bike, we have our capitalist "principles" at stake!!!!!
101, you and jfree don't "get it." You can't comprehend that America IS THE PROBLEM!
Normally I'd say "vomit" about now. But in honor of Cameron, I will say "Barf" instead! lol
|
|
|
|
Post by 101ABN on May 18, 2006 17:32:17 GMT -8
Normally I'd say "vomit" about now. But in honor of Cameron, I will say "Barf" instead! lol  |
|
|
|
Post by bounce on May 18, 2006 17:41:07 GMT -8
Normally I'd say "vomit" about now. But in honor of Cameron, I will say "Barf" instead! lol OMG... That is just WAY too funny. |
|
|
|
Post by MARIO on May 18, 2006 20:23:24 GMT -8
Normally I'd say "vomit" about now. But in honor of Cameron, I will say "Barf" instead!
LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by MARIO on May 19, 2006 21:34:17 GMT -8
Cameron, here's the evidence: "Based on Census Bureau data, this study finds that, when all taxes paid (direct and indirect) and all costs are considered, illegal households created a net fiscal deficit at the federal level of more than $10 billion in 2002. We also estimate that, if there was an amnesty for illegal aliens, the net fiscal deficit would grow to nearly $29 billion."www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalrelease.htmlAnd, believe it or not, some sanity from Economist Paul Krugman: "First, the net benefits to the U.S. economy from immigration, aside from the large gains to the immigrants themselves, are small. Realistic estimates suggest that immigration since 1980 has raised the total income of native-born Americans by no more than a fraction of 1 percent.
Second, while immigration may have raised overall income slightly, many of the worst-off native-born Americans are hurt by immigration - especially immigration from Mexico. Because Mexican immigrants have much less education than the average U.S. worker, they increase the supply of less-skilled labor, driving down the wages of the worst- paid Americans.
The most authoritative recent study of this effect, by George Borjas and Lawrence Katz of Harvard, estimates that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration."Paul Krugman? That absolute twit is on your side and I am in opposition to you, and that doesn't give you pause to think. Instead you gleefully post that morons thoughts. If Krugman was on my side I wouldn't bring to anyone's attention. If I would have seen this first I would have used it to prove your thinking is faulty. Hahahaha ;D Funny how you just skipped over the other source. Tankey is on the right side of this issue and you're not, and that doesn't give you pause to think? Hell, even CRW is on my side! Besides, as I noted, most liberals have made the same arguments you keep making. The vast majority of them are with you on this. They NEED to import voters in order to maintain their political power. |
|
|
|
Post by bounce on May 20, 2006 9:39:27 GMT -8
That's what happens when you abort a significant number of your "would be" progeny.
|
|
