THE OFFICIAL POLITICS THREAD

[JesusNEVERexisted]

It's HIGH time we get rid of the 2nd amendment! You notice EVERY OTHER western nation lives just FINE without a 2nd amendment? Over 6 BILLION people on ea. h live perfectly content without guns! WHY can't we??

Aren't 30,000+ gun deaths a year PLUS another 100,000 shot yearly MORE than enough?

Dude, you are the only person I know who advocates for a stronger border and gun control at the same time. That is not to say people like this do not exist. But it still surprised me.

We are the ONLY western nation with such horrific gun violence! 33 children killed EVERY DAY in America by guns! We have BY FAR the most gun deaths in the western world. We also have the most guns on EARTH at 300 million! See the connection?

Handguns are the biggest problem. I was reading how in Canada only police are allowed to have handguns hence only 3% of Canadians own handguns. It's no surprise their per capita gun death rate is FAR lower. Why can't we do that here??

[cprice12]

So Wings fan, Hannity, O'Reilly, Laura Ingraham, & Missouri ' s own Roy Blunt and Ann Wagner are all KKK members right? You are a MORON if you think having a strong border like most other western nations have is racist! I'm simply saying apply LEGALLY instead of breaking the law without documents!

We can do without the name calling. Or we can do without you.

Your choice.

[not_a_wings_fan]

We have LAWS for a reason! We don't simply have open borders where you can just walk in! I don't care if you are Swedish and the whitest person on earth but if you don't apply legally the LAW says you should be deported!

A nation is no longer a nation without borders!!

Okay, let me see if I understand your response.

You are not pursuing your analogy that Korea and Japan are relevant and are therefore conceding the point that our situation is different.

You don't dispute that the right is concerned about borders only for personal gain, again conceding this point.

Your position is that we need borders to be a nation and that we should enforce the laws or we will cease to be a nation.

We have laws, they are often enforced but they are not aggressively pursued because of the time, effort and resources needed to prosecute them. Would you advocate installing electronic surveillance into vehicles that would issue tickets each time you exceeded the posted speed limit by one mile per hour or is that a law that should be enforced with discretion and limited attention? Because if you position is laws must be enforced, then the current president has deported more people per month than any president in our nation's history, but you still aren't happy?

If you instead compare the two presidents’ monthly averages, it works out to 32,886 for Obama and 20,964 for Bush, putting Obama clearly in the lead. Bill Clinton is far behind with 869,676 total and 9,059 per month. All previous occupants of the White House going back to 1892 fell well short of the level of the three most recent presidents.

We wondered whether there might have been a surge of undocumented immigrants that explained the increase, but there wasn’t. During the first two years of Obama’s tenure, the Pew Hispanic Center estimated the illegal immigrant population nationwide at 11.2 million, compared to an average during Bush’s eight-year tenure of 10.6 million. And illegal immigration actually peaked late in Bush’s second term, at which point the recession hit and the numbers declined under Obama. Such patterns do not explain the 57 percent bump in monthly deportations that we found under Obama. Source

With the current budget issues and other pressing concerns, you would advocate spending huge amounts of limited resources keeping out people who are here to do jobs that most of America just won't do anymore? I would say there are huge economic benefits to the current situation, and if you asked a bunch of small business owners they would privately tell you the same thing. For example, have you put a new roof on your house lately? Any idea how much more that would cost and how much longer it would take if we didn't have cheap labor coming in from the South?

Immigration reform is a red herring; it is simply a way to rally the racists and xenophobes to a political cause that distracts from theft and graft by special interests.

So I am not sure what your problem is with immigration other than racist or political motivations. I would love to hear you make a real argument here and then stand by it, but I suspect I shouldn't hold my breath.

[glen a richter]

I don't necessarily agree with "illegal" immigration. I do agree that the process of getting the current individuals with illegal status out of the country would be costly, time consuming and probably impossible. We need a systematic way of getting these individuals resident status so they can pay their share of taxes like everyone else. We also need to put an end to the anchor babies. you come here, pop out a kid or ten and all of a sudden you're free to stay for the next 18 years? I call BS abuse of a system. Ideally, we would withdraw our troops from all non-combat zones and use them for border security and as marshalls on all domestic and international via U.S. planes and railways (kind of like how El Al has armed armed marshalls on all their flights and an impeccable safety record). Once things are sealed off, we can undertake the business of seeing what's what and sorting out who's who. Of course legal immigration will still be permissible and immigration officials available at all major airports. Having military marshalls on all flights and rails would serve double purpose, of course, by making things infinitely safer for our own citizens.

[not_a_wings_fan]

I don't necessarily agree with "illegal" immigration. I do agree that the process of getting the current individuals with illegal status out of the country would be costly, time consuming and probably impossible. We need a systematic way of getting these individuals resident status so they can pay their share of taxes like everyone else. We also need to put an end to the anchor babies. you come here, pop out a kid or ten and all of a sudden you're free to stay for the next 18 years? I call BS abuse of a system. Ideally, we would withdraw our troops from all non-combat zones and use them for border security and as marshalls on all domestic and international via U.S. planes and railways (kind of like how El Al has armed armed marshalls on all their flights and an impeccable safety record). Once things are sealed off, we can undertake the business of seeing what's what and sorting out who's who. Of course legal immigration will still be permissible and immigration officials available at all major airports. Having military marshalls on all flights and rails would serve double purpose, of course, by making things infinitely safer for our own citizens.

Wait, you want to deploy uniformed US Military personal on US soil to enforce domestic laws? A police state? Really? I am going to pass on that option, personally. It's not too much of a stretch for those same personel to be deployed against the citizenry, and that's pretty much the antithesis of this nation.

I have no issues with anchor babies. I would advocated not extending any sort of benefits to them unless their parents are documented and legal, but the idea isn't terrible to me.

How many Italians, Irish, Polish, and other European groups are here because of anchor babies 100 years ago? Is the difference simply that we were here first so (Frank) those guys? This isn't a new situation in this country but somehow it's now a crisis. What changed?

[glen a richter]

Documenting and legalizing every single illegal immigrant is a very difficult (impossible) task unless there can be a way to guarantee the temporary cessation of their entrance into America, at least in a way that's not presently illegal. Of course doing that would probably take a decade or more, so I guess it's irrelevant anyway.

[not_a_wings_fan]

Documenting and legalizing every single illegal immigrant is a very difficult (impossible) task unless there can be a way to guarantee the temporary cessation of their entrance into America, at least in a way that's not presently illegal. Of course doing that would probably take a decade or more, so I guess it's irrelevant anyway.

I totally agree.

I will state again, I really think this is a red herring issue. Our borders have always been porous, on some level it's simply a function of their size. We don't get much information about the borders in say Siberia or rural China, which would be on a scale similar to what we deal with here. I can't state how tight those borders are, but I know those regions of the world are not as densely populated as our borders. Nor is there a 6,000 mile long pipeline of people trying to get north for a better life feeding up towards either of those places.

Further, our nation has traditionally embraced the idea that immigrants are beneficial to the country economically.

My point, again, is not that illegal immigration is awesome, simply why is this a crisis worthy of all the attention it is currently getting? What is it about illegal immigration that is bringing the country to its knees or destroying the fabric of our nation?

If someone can give me good answers there I am open to changing my position. Until then, I will continue to assert that it is a wag the dog sort of thing to energize voters and polarize the electorate as a means of distracting us from real problems.

[glen a richter]

Something often overlooked about immigration is that yes, the adults are coming over to America for opportunity, but in many cases they're forcing their kids into an unfamiliar environment away from their friends and these kids very frequently don't want to be here AND don't want to conform to American societal norms. I see it every day with the kids at work, these kids are here some legally and some illegally, and a good number of them simply have no desire to be part of America. They're here against their will because they're kids and who were they going to stay with back home? So they attend American schools and have zero interest in actually becoming Americans. I don't fault the parents for wanting a better life for their families, but when my livelihood is threatened by a fairly large block of kids who can't hack it in an American school, or more likely just don't want to bother trying to hack it in an American school, it becomes a big issue.

My opinion of that matter is that kids who come here by choice or by force, either way, should not be held to a four year graduation requirement. They should be immersed in English language education, and nothing else, until they've mastered enough to succeed at the high school level. If it takes them 6 years or 8 years to graduate, so be it. Imagine going to Japan and being pushed directly into 11th grade because of your age and told you had to graduate in 2 years and, by the way, everything is in Japanese.

Also, they have to put an end to this college for everyone baloney. Not every kid is college material, as unpopular as that may sound. I've had kids who want to be plumbers or mechanics and getting them to even make an effort in an academic class is like pulling teeth out of a tiger. Forcing kids who don't want to be in an academic track into an academic track is a recipe for disaster for everyone else who does want to be there. Likewise, forcing kids who don't speak the language at all into a class that's language intensive is also a recipe for disaster. I see it all the time. The pressure to get non-English speakers and non-academics to succeed is downright insane. It's like being told you have to make a plane fly without wings by noon tomorrow or you're fired.

I see I've gotten way off topic, oh well. Had to get that off my chest. Whichever politician will make the right changes to the education system gets my vote.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

COME ON Wings fan. You can't possibly compare a harmless speeding ticket to MILLIONS of illegals who place a tremendous burden on so many aspects of society from health care to housing to education! Read below to see the very damaging effects of illegal immigration:


Illegal immigration is destroying not just the fabric of our nation, it’s destroying the very foundation of our nation.  Public schools, and we’re not friends of public education, are at the point of the spear when it comes to the destructive impact of allowing illegals to flood into the US.

Illegals aliens bring their children, so-called DREAMERs, into the country, and thanks to Democrats, we require that schools accept every child in their district without regard to the immigration status of the child or the family.  Like their parents, these illegal alien children can’t speak English, and are uneducated in their home language.  That means that tremendous resources must be used to “mainstream” these kids into the classroom.  That does two things.

First, it takes resources away from kids who are, and whose families are, US citizens.  For the most part, these families pay the taxes to run the schools and their kids are getting robbed of any chance of a decent education by the flood of illegals taking up classroom resources.  Second, it slows down the learning process for the entire class, because these kids can’t be just put into a special needs classroom until they’re able to keep up, because that might “scar them.”  Rather than call attention to the fact that they have no business in a regular classroom, educators mainstream them and slow down the whole class.

What’s the impact on your city or town?  We would guess it’s a lot like the impact on Lynn, Massachusetts, or it will be shortly since the Obama administration is busily relocating the flood to random towns in red states.

Lynn, MA Mayor Judith Kennedy (R) said that she received “no notice” before over 200 illegal immigrant children were sent to her town in a phone conversation on Fox News Channel’s “Your World with Neil Cavuto” on Wednesday.  “I have had to increase my school department budget 9.3 percent and have had to cut all of my other city budgets between 2 percent and 5 percent to make up for the influx of the unaccompanied children.” Kennedy stated.








http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/20 ... ?fromt=yes

[glen a richter]

I'm sorry to say, but JNE is right.

[not_a_wings_fan]

Yes, I am making that comparison and I have yet to see how the two are different from any of your posts.

More people die in traffic accidents each year than in gun violence OR from illegal immigration, but I don't see you railing against cars. Laws are laws. Your point was that we need to have strict enforcement and I don't see the rationale for how you pick and choose which ones you think need to be enforced. If danger and economic impact are the issue, then speeding is worse than guns or illegals.

You link to an op ed piece from a blatant conservative blog which cites a woman who called fox news on the phone? Please.

If you believe or read that trash I would be happy to sell you my interest in a certain New York bridge for a very reasonable price. That's an opinion piece, it's not evidence - but that's your m.o. it would seem. "So and so said it so it MUST be true!!!!"

Can you show me some other evidence of this relocation program?

Btw - copy and paste of an entire piece to this site is a violation of the tos.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

Wings fan, I didn't copy the entire piece & you're in DENIAL! Don't you realize the incredible burden MILLIONS of illegal immigrants place on our nation's health care, education, social services, and welfare agencies? Many illegals have no way to pay for basic needs so the burden falls on us! You sound like an open borders person who wants to let EVERYONE in! Thankfully even Obama doesn't agree with that!

Below are some some immigration summary points from Numbers USA:


The most important factor in federal immigration policy is the numbers – the annual level of immigration.Annual immigration should be set at a level that allows the stabilization of U.S. population and long-term sustainability of the American quality of life.

U.S. immigration policy should serve the national interest and prioritize the admission of spouses and minor children including adoptees, workers with extraordinary skills, and asylees and refugees.

U.S. immigration policy should support American workers, especially the most vulnerable, by preventing wage suppression and unfair competition for jobs.Congress, through legislation, and the Executive branch, through enforcement policy, bear the burden of blame for—and the responsibility to correct—problems associated with current immigration policy.

Immigrant bashing, xenophobia, nativism, and racism are unacceptable responses to federal immigration policy failures. Race and ethnicity should play no role in the debate and establishment of immigration policy.

[not_a_wings_fan]

You still haven't proven the alleged relocation program. I love how you make a point, get schooled, and then think up something else. You don't defend your source so I must assume you conceded the point.

Those are great talking points, but I don't see the relationship to your previous points or how they prove your position. I don't see a way that they propose to "seal" the borders. That's the issue here - all the reform in the world is bullshit talking points. How is it enforced and what does it cost. The issue here is NOT immigration. That's the point I am making. I am not arguing for or against it.

One more time: why is it suddenly a crisis? It is NOT a new phenomena. The answer is the right doesn't make money off it and the left does. That's the political issue. That and that alone. (Frank) both parties. Stop focusing on Mexicans and start looking at the men and women behind the curtain in Washington. There's your problem and your solution. IF they solved this "problem" they wouldn't have anything to talk about next election. There's only interest in getting paid and getting re-elected to get paid more. That's it.

As far as enforcement, it isn't hard, but no one wants the political and economic fallout. When you get tired of cleaning bird shit off your patio you take down the (Franking) feeder. It's that simple.

You put businesses who hire illegals out of business through criminal and civil penalty (call it treason, I don't care), deny access to any US medical or healthcare services except for tax paying citizens or legal visitors, and don't educate anyone who isn't a legal entrant to the country then this problem is solved and people stop coming here. We don't need to reform immigration - we need to reform our country's Christian ideals about taking care of people...or we don't and continue with the status quo. I suspect you aren't going to get too much support for letting immigrants die in the streets or we would have already solved our "health care crisis" as well.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

Wings fan, YOU are the one who has been schooled but you are just in DENIAL! WHY do you think practically EVERY western nation has tough immigration laws and border security? It would destroy the economy and social structure of a society if you simply had open borders and let people walk in!

I know someone trying to get a work permit to the EU and it's very hard! He can only get a 6 month tourist visa and he is a good American citizen like the rest of us! It's because they have strong immigration laws!

You want to destroy America by letting anyone just walk in here! You can't name a single nation on earth that has such a foolish open borders policy! Especially not in the west since that would destroy our standard of living!

[not_a_wings_fan]

Wings fan, YOU are the one who has been schooled but you are just in DENIAL! WHY do you think practically EVERY western nation has tough immigration laws and border security? It would destroy the economy and social structure of a society if you simply had open borders and let people walk in!

I know someone trying to get a work permit to the EU and it's very hard! He can only get a 6 month tourist visa and he is a good American citizen like the rest of us! It's because they have strong immigration laws!

You want to destroy America by letting anyone just walk in here! You can't name a single nation on earth that has such a foolish open borders policy! Especially not in the west since that would destroy our standard of living!

I don't know if you can actually read, because your post above has nothing to do with anything I have said in my posts. Nada.

Quote me where I say "let anyone in" please. Quote where I advocate for "open borders." You can't. I have never advocated for changing the laws, amnesty, or anything other than examination of the status quo in America. Just looking at where we are right now, right here.

We are not talking about "Every Western Nation" in this discussion. They have socialized medicine in most Western Nations too, are you for that as well? Their economies by and large lag behind ours, you want that too? You cannot draw a direct parallel from Europe or anywhere else to prove your point here. You need to look at our unique nation, its laws, its geography, and its history; the specific relevant conditions of our immigration issues.

Your friend is trying to immigrate legally, which is hard to do here too, btw. It is not easy to get a work visa in the USA if you aren't a refugee. This is exactly why so many people immigrate illegally. Did you know that despite their "strong immigration laws" they have issues with illegals in Europe as well? A law doesn't solve shit. We have laws against speeding, you know people who speed all the time. Did the strong law stop it?

The USA always has been, and always will be, a unique situation with respect to immigration. Part of it is how successful we are versus pretty much everything South of us for 6k miles. No really, it's pretty much a destitute shithole from Brownsville, Texas (which, I will confess, is a shithole too, tbh) to Ushuaia with a couple of bright spots in between. Chile isn't too bad, actually; nice folks there. So these people need to go somewhere and for lack of better options they work to get here. Some make it, some don't. This isn't a new phenomena, and that's what you are missing. We had waves of people immigrate from Europe... many of them were illegal as well... and they (Franking) built this nation into what it is today.

But if you are interested, you can find a concise history of US immigration laws here. Of note is the following passage:

In 1965, Congress abandoned the quota system and based immigration acceptance on the relative "need" of each applicant. Under the new system, a certain number of people were allowed entrance for labor, family unification and political asylum. The new system greatly restricted immigration from Mexico and Central and South America, and led to an increase in illegal immigration.

I know this is subtle, but I am asking you to step outside your bias and look at the current situation, the status quo. We already have, by your own admission, millions of illegals in this country. Is our economy destroyed already? Where is this doomsday you promise? Were there no illegals in the country until the last 50 years? Why is this a problem NOW?

I don't see the destruction caused by immigration; show me where it is. My stock portfolio had a fantastic year, which, by your logic, would be impossible with all these damn immigrants sucking us dry. Violent crime continues a downward trend. I got a nice raise last year at work. We are doing well around my neighborhood. I am not seeing this cataclysm you promise.

What I do see is the low price on my high quality new roof, tasty cheap fast food, and quality lawn care at an affordable price. Not to mention there's a SWEET new taqueria opened up down the road (no, really, that shit is tasty as all hell, man).

Immigration reform is a red herring.

[dmiles2186]

My take on politics: A bunch of gray issues that people split up into black or white and then yell about incessantly instead of discussing like actual human beings.

Not saying that of anyone here, but just generalizing politics as a whole. Social media hasn't helped one bit with this.

[cprice12]

My take on politics: A bunch of gray issues that people split up into black or white and then yell about incessantly instead of discussing like actual human beings.

Not saying that of anyone here, but just generalizing politics as a whole. Social media hasn't helped one bit with this.

24 Hour "News" networks, blow hard radio personalities, and the internet in general (asinine social media discussions, bloggers pretending to be experts, etc.) have done a huge amount of damage.
My Grandma forwards me political emails all of the time...and each one is full of shit, but you can't convince her of that no matter how many facts you present to her. She is dug in...and a lot of people are like that, which is a shame.

[glen a richter]

The 24 hour news cycle is the biggest culprit for our political climate. Unfortunately it's also not going anywhere anytime soon.

The best thing to do, which I haven't done in a long long time because obviously work and family obligations take priority, is to sit down and watch c-span when they have congress on and just watch what actually happens. When you see what they're saying first hand, you don't need the news to spin it for you.

[glen a richter]

A guy I'd like to see run but who won't would be Brian Schweitzer. There's a guy with the personality and ability to bring both sides together (force both sides together?) and get things done. He's fairly centrist, and having him and a guy like Jon Huntsman on the same ticket would be mighty hard not to vote for. Two basically centrist guys from opposing parties who have a history of working with the opposing parties. That would produce at least four very productive years and maybe breed a sensible middle third party that can be viable down the line.

[cardsfan04]

Speaking of 24 hour news, do any of you watch BBC or Al Jazeera at all? I still default to CNN because it's what I'm used to, but their sensationalizing gets really old sometimes. I don't always have an interest in the stories they are reporting, but I like how they both report news better than CNN/Fox/MSNBC.