How to destroy America.

wow. impressive display of using two separate and unrelated arguments.

the first you quoted, regarding who to "blame" in this mess, was a sarcastic rebuttal to his blaming the mexicans for all his problems. if he's going to blame someone, which it's clear he is because accepting responsibility is not in his bag of tricks, it might as well be the government.

the second was my personal opinion. i don't blame anyone, i put my head down and work for what i want in life and don't waste time bitching about whose fault it is that i got the lot in life i got stuck with.

but nice try. misquotes are awesome for putting the wrong words in people's mouths. and it seems you've got a good handle on that...

 

are...

you....

SERIOUS?????

while i agree with your argument, i came from a dirt poor family myself...

YOUR WHOLE ARGUMENT WAS BASED UPON THE MEXICANS...

who i really don't think are WEALTHY at all. how many contradictions can you fit into one thread?

so tell me. whose fault is it really that you don't have a job that utilizes your education: the mexicans or the wealthy? because they might as well be mutually exclusive. i'm still waiting for you to quitcherbitchin about the rest of the world and accept responsibility for your own troubles.

 

Maybe if your social skills weren't so lacking, someone might actually like you and think you'd be a great person to work with.

Go do some networking--why all of this victimization stuff. You're intelligent, you're willingly to work hard,you have 2 degrees, I don't understand your anger and underemployment.

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

The way I read it, that would be the moment you get up from the chair and pound your fists on the table! Kind of like those moments when you're at a meeting, trying really hard not to nod off, when all of a sudden, BAM, wakes you right up!

Awesome line! Spectacular delivery!

 

You got it man.

I'm the King of my life, master of my own domain, the Architect of my Matrix, the Neo of yours!

You don't like it?

Tough luck.

Want to do something about it?

As the great Duke Nuke 'em once said,

"Come get some...."

 

Man, there is some real anger going on in this thread. Just a few observations.

Lot's of arguments on both sides are full of raw emotion but lacking logical sense.

To the person who stated the past 37 years was under Republican Presidents. So what, the points you were making were about laws passed, congress passes laws, and the Congress has been Democrat far more years, it is only in the past decade that republicans have moved ahead.

President Bush has not sent a single job overseas, or anywhere for that matter. Laws were passed by Democrat congresses that allowed such "shipping of jobs".

Some people are making illegals and undocumented aliens the same as legal and documented. What is wrong with asking them to come over legally?

Just because you have a degree (or two or three) does not mean you can get a job exactly as you want it. I know lots of people who don't have the job they want....but they have a job. Are you willing to relocate? There are teacher shartages all over....but not where every other Tom, Dick, and Harry teacher wants to be.

This thread is full of the very reason rational discourse is currently in hibernation in America (SHAME on you for calling it AMERIKA and comparing us to Nazi's)...name-calling and marginalizing...demagoging (sp?) If someone questions a particular policy it makes them evil, or a liberal, or a right winger.

Everybody quoted, from Lamm to Eisenhower, to Ben Franklin....these quotes were just their OPINIONS...doesn't make them facts.

There aren't as many facts in this world (particularly about people and/or society) as we would like to think.

 

Pssst, if you don't want to hear what people have to say, don't say, "What say you?"

'That is crap' is a perfectly legitimate reaction. You DO know that you solicited reactions, don't you? Some of us are just better able to be concise.

You'll always be 'Mildkow' to me!

Damn, King of the Internet! I'm jealous! What's that pay?

 

:lol:

 

Don't give in to hate, Luke, that leads to the dark side.

 

:lol:

 

I'm that person. Schmika, do you not know how Federal laws can be/are made?

When people campaign for President, they want to be chosen to LEAD. That means "sponsoring" legislation. Yes, technically, only Congressmembers and Senators can introduce and vote on legislation. But the Prez candidate says, "If I'm elected. I'll do this, that, or the other. (Sometimes, in a nod to Congress, he/she will say "we will pass laws...". That's why voters support one candidate or another---because of the "agenda", the policy changes he/she will SUPPORT.

For the actual writing of the legislation, sometimes a President, using "advisors" (e.g., can be anyone---"think tank' person(s), Cabinet member(s), lobbyist(sss), "expert(s) in the field", spouse), will send a very specific set of policy goals "to the Hill", even to the point of being in the format of the piece of legislation. Then, supporters of the Prez introduce legislation that may or may not perfectly mirror those wishes.

Sometimes the Prez only offers "general outlines" of what he/she wants passed. There may have already been a few or several attempts to introduce similar legislation in the past---in fact, safe to say there usually are. Sometimes a "senior member" of the House or Senate who has had a longtime special interest in a particular new law, or change of direction, is given latitude to write it herself/himself, with whatever input they have been able to muster (often lobbyists).

Then, after it's introduced, it's fair game. Lobbyists, if they haven't already had great input into the legislation, swarm all over it. (Cheney notoriously had "private meetings" with the lobbyists for energy producers before introducing the 2005 Energy Act, and they basically wrote the legislation for him. Technically, it was introduced by a Senator and a Representative, but sometimes a bill is pretty much a "done deal" by the time it's even introduced.)

Input also comes from many other sources, including you and me, possibly through our favorite organization (NRA, ACLU), or even a letter or e-mail.

But to say "Congress makes laws, Prez only enforces them" is totally naive and misinformed.

Back to the point: Republicans have had it totally within their power, regardless of who was Prez, and whether or not they had a majority in either or both houses of Congress at a given time, to sponsor/introduce legislation affecting immigration, secure border enforcement, etc. Those Republican Prez had a special opportunity to send such legislation to Congress.

BUT: all elected officials usually take into account who their "constituencies" are when they consider introducing legislation. AND, there's a long process called "consensus building" toward a certain goal, which may take 20-30 years (as we are now building a consensus in favor of a nationally-administered system of health care---last year for the first time the AMA dropped its opposition "in principle"---now it's a matter of building a consensus for either a "single-payer" system or one that gives a greater role to the insurers.)

Republicans in recent history have supported in Congress only well-publicized---but token---efforts at increased border enforcement. A new bill is being formulated right now to do that again, this time including a "wall". But there is by no means any consensus on an "all-out determination" to "seal" the border with Mexico, in either party. Main problems? Relations with Mexico---and those long-time constituencies (conservative growers <---> laborers, of course, but there are others).

No Prez has the authority to "send a job overseas". But the multi-national corporations who are doing so AND which are largely American-controlled ARE an important traditionally Republican constituency, though some Democrats are in that picture, too. Who campaigned loudest against "outsourcing"? Kerry. Who ducked the issue? Bush. Yet both style themselves as favoring "free trade".

And Bush has had four straight years to "support"/introduce any damned legislation he wants.

 

.

Facism is alive and well in this country: http://www.pipeline.com/~rgibson/fascism.html

 

It's important to discuss mmigration and immigrant issues. Applause to Wildkow for posting the topic.

How about some stats and info from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), an independent, non-partisan, non-profit research organization that studies immigration, to help clear the air?

http://www.cis.org/index.cgi

***

There is a difference between immigrant policy and immigration policy.
"...in formulating an immigration policy that makes sense, it is important that it not be confused with immigrant policy.
Immigrant policy is concerned with how we treat foreigners living in the United States. Barring legal immigrants from using some federally funded welfare programs, as Congress did in 1996, is an example of a change in immigrant policy, a change that was neither effective nor fair.
Immigration policy, in contrast, is concerned with the question of who may come and how many. And it is here that the changes are needed."

The numbers are considerable.
"During the 1990s, an average of more than 1.3 million immigrants, legal and illegal, settled in the United States each year. Between January 2000 and March 2002, 3.3 million additional immigrants have arrived. In less than 50 years, the U.S. Census Bureau projects that immigration will cause the population of the United States to increase from its present 288 million to more than 400 million.
The foreign-born population of the United States is currently 33.1 million, equal to 11.5 percent of the U.S. population. Of this total, the Census Bureau estimates 8-9 million are illegal immigrants. Other estimates indicate a considerably higher number of illegal immigrants.
Approximately 1 million people receive permanent residency annually. In addition, the Census Bureau estimates a net increase of 500,000 illegal immigrants annually.
The present level of immigration is significantly higher than the average historical level of immigration. This flow may be attributed, in part, to the extraordinary broadening of U.S. immigration policy in 1965. Since 1970, more than 30 million legal and illegal immigrants have settled in the U.S., representing more than one-third of all people ever to come to America's shores.
At the peak of the Great Wave of immigration in 1910, the number of immigrants living in the U.S. was less than half of what it is today, though the percentage of the population was slightly higher. The annual arrival of 1.5 million legal and illegal immigrants, coupled with 750,000 annual births to immigrant women, is the determinate factor or three-fourths of all U.S. population growth."

According to the CIS, certain states (e.g., TX, CA, NJ) bear the brunt of immigrant support (health care, education) while the federal taxes paid by immigrant workers results in a positive cash flow at the federal level.

In some industries (small farms, salmon and other fisheries, restaurants, landscaping), business owners claim they cannot afford to stay in business unless they can use low paid migrant workers.

***

It's a huge and complex problem, tied with what we consider American values ("give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses") to give a volatile mix.

The most effected amongest native-born Americans? Under-educated and unskilled workers, since they are most in direct competition with the majority of immigrants. Their wages reflect what is paid to immigrant workers.

 

I AM the dark side.....

B)

 

As an employer I have become a good reader of people. I am willing to be that he wears that hatred on his face when he interviews.

I am learning Italian just because I will go there to visit my daughter. I am hoping that it will improve my knowledge of Spanish as well. If learning another language can improve any part of my life, including getting a job then why not? Our current "boss" is an MSW. She has this annoying habit of correcting people's grammar. This includes our english/spanish speaking maintenance crew. She can only speak one language.

 

I just had a vision:

MS is driving the only Prius in the world with a 'Fear This' sticker!

 

Dude, that's soooooo passee....

More like Calvin pissing on the word "everybody"

:twofinger:

:lol:

 

Meanwhile on planet earth.....

Where does it say in the law that the act is illegal unless you have a good reason? How many illegal Mexican workers are fleeing persecution? One man's extreme poverty is another's getting by. Where does it say it is illegal to enter this country unless you have a good excuse?

The law is full of absolutes. You enforce the law or you change it. You don't just ignore it or turn a blind eye. You also don't make a law and not enforce it and then someday, sometime decide Okay NOW I'm going to enforce it.

 

We're already there.

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

"It's not who casts the votes, it's who counts the votes." - J. Stalin

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." Joseph Goebbels

"What difference does it make if a few political minorities are put in prison without due process, what difference does it make if some extremists are tortured into telling the truth, what difference does it make if a few of our freedoms are exchanged for state security? Its only a passing phase, these measures will be discarded sooner or later. Out country is at war, we need this protection for our people and our country." Joseph Goebbels.

"We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -Franklin Roosevelt

"Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no
religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation
is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived
from faith.... We need believing people."
-- Adolph Hitler, April 26, 1933

Danger signs of fascism:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. Rampant sexism.
6. A controlled mass media.
7. Obsession with national security.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
9. Power of corporations protected.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
14. Fraudulent elections.

"The administration says the American people want tax cuts. Well, duh. The American people also want drive-through nickel beer night. The American people want to lose weight by eating ice cream. The American people love the Home Shopping Network because it's commercial-free."
--Will Durst

 

To all the staunch right-wingers out there, you can't have it both ways. Is this country on the path to destruction or is the current administration doing a damn fine job with economy getting stronger and better for all like they would have you believe? :huh:

Wildkow,
Fine, I'll retract my example of China's Great Wall having anything to do with a period of isolation and stagnation. Can you give me any example of countries that have constructed barriers, whether physical or in policy, that could be models for the US? East Germany, perhaps? Or maybe Russia's Iron Curtain should be our model, or Japan prior to WWII, wonderful successes in all cases.

What exactly is this article you quoted trying to say we should do? To say, I welcome diversity but we need to force cultural unity is meaningless unless he spells it out how to achieve this. Is he saying get rid of differences in religion or get rid of religion all together, that certainly would be one of the single biggest ways to achieve this?
How about we make it illegal to speak foreign languages? He points out that this is a big problem so that should wipeout that problem.
How about we execute those that don't attend our cultural unity rallies and show the proper amount of enthusiam? Bingo! That's all we really need to do right there. :lol:
I'm not arguing that the world wouldn't be a better place if everybody thought the same way and agreed on everything (perfect unity) but that is fantasy. When we start to realistically talk about ways to force unity how far are you willing to go? Who gets the to run the Unity Establishment Board? Let me force my idea of what we should all agree on on you and you will just lie down and take it for the sake of achieving this country's only hope for salvation? Agreed?