RE: The times will change (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Sanity -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 5:54:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles6682

It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge.


Think about your grotesquely flawed analogy for just one second and if you have half a mind you might realize your mistake

Here's a clue for you

Leftist regimes need walls to keep people in

Capitalist countries need walls to keep people out




dcnovice -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 6:11:56 PM)

quote:

I think we've had enough experience with US Presidents not telling the whole truth, haven't we?

Too true.

Interestingly, the recent President who most strikes me as a truth-teller is Jimmy Carter. Not sure how good it did him, though.


quote:

While the bill (after reading related articles) does seem to put those already here illegally at the back of the naturalization line, as you (and the President) claimed. But, what if naturalization isn't even a goal for those coming here illegally? What if the only reason they are here is to make money to send back to their home countries?

To be honest, those possibilities hadn't occurred to me. Need to do some more reading!




YouName -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 6:12:14 PM)

Check net emigration from Eastern Europe Commie era vs now. RIP Romania.





Marini -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 6:41:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5
quote:

ORIGINAL: enslaver

The only way times will change in Washington is if a nuke goes off there and we start all over. Face it people, both parties are failures, both are bought and paid for, enjoy your plutocracy.

Ditto. QFT.


The revolution will be televised.
[sm=applause.gif]
[sm=agree.gif]
Both parties are so similiar in many policies, I often can't see much difference at all, on the MAJOR issues.
I am becoming more and more disgusted with the Democrats, dare not vote Republican.
Damn them both, when I look at how they throw my hard earned tax money away.

Washington Post--Skimming White House spending bill, so you won't have to

[sm=river.gif]
I heard how a lot of my tax money is being thrown away, and I had to turn the radio off, I did not want to crash my car, I was so fucking mad.

Yet we can't have single pay insurance?
WTF??




enslaver -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 6:52:55 PM)

There is nothing inhumane about rounding these illegals up and deporting them, they have broken the laws. By your argument I suppose its inhumane to send a serial killer to prison too, he just broke a law too. I have no problem with LEGAL immigration. (IN reply to Charles)




Zonie63 -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 6:50:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles6682

It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge.


Think about your grotesquely flawed analogy for just one second and if you have half a mind you might realize your mistake

Here's a clue for you

Leftist regimes need walls to keep people in

Capitalist countries need walls to keep people out



What kind of "clue" is that? There was only one "leftist regime" which had a wall, and even then, they became wise and flexible to realize that it wasn't needed anymore, so they allowed its destruction. Capitalist countries don't seem to have the same level of flexibility, since many still believe that we're fighting the Cold War even 25 years after it ended.

As for this capitalist country, we don't have a real wall, because we never really wanted to keep people out. When NAFTA was passed, the wall (or fence or barrier or whatever it is) should have come down, since the intention was to allow more access across the border for reasons of trade and commerce - supported by the very same aforementioned capitalists. The capitalists were the ones who pushed for free trade, and they're the ones hiring and benefiting from the exploited labor of undocumented immigrants.

They can't have it both ways, and they're really the last people who should be calling for securing the border, since they're the ones who caused this problem in the first place. They're also the same ones benefiting from the illegal drug trade, even though the principles of capitalism dictate that drugs never should have been made illegal in the first place. Capitalist regimes never could get their stories straight.

Another thing to mention is that, at least leftist regimes know how to secure their borders, whereas capitalist regimes operate like a bunch of Keystone Kops when it comes to border security and immigration enforcement.





GoddessManko -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 7:02:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles6682

It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge.


Think about your grotesquely flawed analogy for just one second and if you have half a mind you might realize your mistake

Here's a clue for you

Leftist regimes need walls to keep people in

Capitalist countries need walls to keep people out


Two questions. How is capitalist synonymous with rightist? And also, name one country that lacks any form of socialism if you please and can actually work without it.




Musicmystery -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 7:09:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Capitalist countries need walls to keep people out

That's a pretty profound misunderstanding of both capitalism and global economics.




CreativeDominant -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 10:04:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles6682

It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge.


Think about your grotesquely flawed analogy for just one second and if you have half a mind you might realize your mistake

Here's a clue for you

Leftist regimes need walls to keep people in

Capitalist countries need walls to keep people out



What kind of "clue" is that? There was only one "leftist regime" which had a wall, and even then, they became wise and flexible to realize that it wasn't needed anymore, so they allowed its destruction. Capitalist countries don't seem to have the same level of flexibility, since many still believe that we're fighting the Cold War even 25 years after it ended.

As for this capitalist country, we don't have a real wall, because we never really wanted to keep people out. When NAFTA was passed, the wall (or fence or barrier or whatever it is) should have come down, since the intention was to allow more access across the border for reasons of trade and commerce - supported by the very same aforementioned capitalists. The capitalists were the ones who pushed for free trade, and they're the ones hiring and benefiting from the exploited labor of undocumented immigrants.

They can't have it both ways, and they're really the last people who should be calling for securing the border, since they're the ones who caused this problem in the first place. They're also the same ones benefiting from the illegal drug trade, even though the principles of capitalism dictate that drugs never should have been made illegal in the first place. Capitalist regimes never could get their stories straight.

Another thing to mention is that, at least leftist regimes know how to secure their borders, whereas capitalist regimes operate like a bunch of Keystone Kops when it comes to border security and immigration enforcement.


That's rich...if we had border security like that, you'd probably be one of the loudest complainers. Much like those on the left when those who want to make the borders more secure try to do so.




mnottertail -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 10:46:27 AM)

The nutsuckers on the right have no actual desire to make the borders secure. The cheaper they can pimp labor the more they are loved by their corporate masters.


Draconian fines, lengthy incarceration, hell, even government siezure of the corporation for every CEO or owner down to the lowest manager for employing illegal aliens.

Pass that, fund the enforcement, over before the ink is dry.




YouName -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 11:09:35 AM)

You're wrong, If I understand the term "nutsucker" right. Those peeps definetly want to keep the border secure.
It's thier corporate masters whom don't and never will.

Legal schmegal. If that legal or illegal immigration ever fell below a certain level they would make more of it legal.
It has been US doctrine for decades to keep the machine going by importing educated peoplNe through free trade deals signed while thus exploiting third world countries and their scholarship programs for example. This is well known for the case of India.

But with poverty running rampant due to in part these trade deals and their brain drain you're gonna get the poor coming over your borders too. And isn't that great? The very wealthy get even cheaper cleaners and drivers then. The very wealthy have such a good setup that alot of them are openly critical of how good they have it. But some folk still refuse to listen.




mnottertail -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 11:24:27 AM)

I was a victim of those 'unavailable american skills' for those H1s from India, they didnt know shit about anything, there was a frontman (usually with a british accent) who sold the bills, and the clowns who were doing the work used to go to boards to have us teach them as they took our jobs.




YouName -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 11:30:25 AM)

Ah. Jolly good sir! Reminds me of that speech from Good Will Hunting!

Bow your head slave :-)
Here we play but out there most of us are owned and sadly it seems consensual for some.




YouName -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 11:37:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles6682

It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge.


Think about your grotesquely flawed analogy for just one second and if you have half a mind you might realize your mistake

Here's a clue for you

Leftist regimes need walls to keep people in

Capitalist countries need walls to keep people out


Two questions. How is capitalist synonymous with rightist? And also, name one country that lacks any form of socialism if you please and can actually work without it.


Certain countries have very little of "it". Paraguay and the autonomous territory of Svalbard are working examples of it(s lack). Although the first of those has been held up with a consecutive military dictatorships and the later one is a very cold, cold place where you certainly do not want to get stuck without money and where the majority is non-native payed and financed by corporations based in countries with various degrees of "socialism"within them.




Zonie63 -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 7:03:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles6682

It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge.


Think about your grotesquely flawed analogy for just one second and if you have half a mind you might realize your mistake

Here's a clue for you

Leftist regimes need walls to keep people in

Capitalist countries need walls to keep people out



What kind of "clue" is that? There was only one "leftist regime" which had a wall, and even then, they became wise and flexible to realize that it wasn't needed anymore, so they allowed its destruction. Capitalist countries don't seem to have the same level of flexibility, since many still believe that we're fighting the Cold War even 25 years after it ended.

As for this capitalist country, we don't have a real wall, because we never really wanted to keep people out. When NAFTA was passed, the wall (or fence or barrier or whatever it is) should have come down, since the intention was to allow more access across the border for reasons of trade and commerce - supported by the very same aforementioned capitalists. The capitalists were the ones who pushed for free trade, and they're the ones hiring and benefiting from the exploited labor of undocumented immigrants.

They can't have it both ways, and they're really the last people who should be calling for securing the border, since they're the ones who caused this problem in the first place. They're also the same ones benefiting from the illegal drug trade, even though the principles of capitalism dictate that drugs never should have been made illegal in the first place. Capitalist regimes never could get their stories straight.

Another thing to mention is that, at least leftist regimes know how to secure their borders, whereas capitalist regimes operate like a bunch of Keystone Kops when it comes to border security and immigration enforcement.


That's rich...if we had border security like that, you'd probably be one of the loudest complainers. Much like those on the left when those who want to make the borders more secure try to do so.



No, not really. My only real complaint about the border is that how we're doing things seems incongruous and incoherent considering that Mexico is technically an ally and close trading partner of the United States, and both governments ostensibly want commerce and free transit across the border. Capitalists want that, too, don't they? So, what gives? We don't have a huge wall or security force at the Canadian border, largely because Canada has been a friend and trading partner. But then, so is Mexico. At least that's what our government says. It's also what the capitalists say.

But if they really did believe that Mexico was some sort of enemy nation and that the border should be secured at all costs, then isn't that what they should be doing? And if they're not an enemy nation, why are we acting like they are?




mirror88 -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 8:12:32 PM)

while there was a lot of anti-lib language and propaganda in the thread, I doubt you can find a dozen Congressional progressives who approved of the elements of Obama's behaviors and wars you are complaining about. The progressive in the house were about 60. They had little voice in anything. They were shouted down when they wanted Single Payer. Kucinich wrote bills of impeachment for Cheney and Bush and Pelosi tabled them.
Sure a lot of Dems are owned and operated by Wall Street, but a lot aren't. whereas in comparison, nearly all the GOP are owned by big money campaign contributors. Libya is such a good example. The uproar seems to have died down except someone in this thread is pretending its stilll ongoing. Be specific. Benghazi what? All the claims were laid to rest by REPUBLICANS. NONE OF THE CLAIMS WERE SUBSTANTIATED.
The worst parts of "Obama care" were inserted by GOP members of the gang of six. Its a gift to companies. Let's go on to the next issues. Your interest in running down the Dems seems to fail utterly when you examine who started the torture program. Cheney. Rumsfeld and Bush and Condi. No Dems in the lot .You own it MF's. after a quick international tribunal. oops. they do not have the death penalty in the The Hague. Ca we at least agree that since Condi was approving torture, she should not pick the football teams in the NCAA playoffs next time?




DesideriScuri -> RE: The times will change (12/12/2014 8:23:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
No, not really. My only real complaint about the border is that how we're doing things seems incongruous and incoherent considering that Mexico is technically an ally and close trading partner of the United States, and both governments ostensibly want commerce and free transit across the border. Capitalists want that, too, don't they? So, what gives? We don't have a huge wall or security force at the Canadian border, largely because Canada has been a friend and trading partner. But then, so is Mexico. At least that's what our government says. It's also what the capitalists say.
But if they really did believe that Mexico was some sort of enemy nation and that the border should be secured at all costs, then isn't that what they should be doing? And if they're not an enemy nation, why are we acting like they are?


We don't need a Northern border wall. Canadians don't want to come down here. Their beer is better. [:D]

Trade, commerce, etc. don't pay much mind to border walls. The walls will have openings for the roads the trucks use (which are the same roads they are using now). We have a right to know who is coming into our country. The only ways for that to happen is if everyone coming in does so in a legal manner, or we control our borders so legal means are the only ways. Since it's obvious all people won't be coming into our country legally, we need to control our borders.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, we need to reform our immigration and naturalization process to make it faster, easier, and accept a greater number of immigrants. But, it still needs to be controlled.




Zonie63 -> RE: The times will change (12/13/2014 10:46:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
No, not really. My only real complaint about the border is that how we're doing things seems incongruous and incoherent considering that Mexico is technically an ally and close trading partner of the United States, and both governments ostensibly want commerce and free transit across the border. Capitalists want that, too, don't they? So, what gives? We don't have a huge wall or security force at the Canadian border, largely because Canada has been a friend and trading partner. But then, so is Mexico. At least that's what our government says. It's also what the capitalists say.
But if they really did believe that Mexico was some sort of enemy nation and that the border should be secured at all costs, then isn't that what they should be doing? And if they're not an enemy nation, why are we acting like they are?


We don't need a Northern border wall. Canadians don't want to come down here. Their beer is better. [:D]


Well, some might say that Mexican beer is also better than ours, but that may be another topic.

quote:


Trade, commerce, etc. don't pay much mind to border walls. The walls will have openings for the roads the trucks use (which are the same roads they are using now). We have a right to know who is coming into our country. The only ways for that to happen is if everyone coming in does so in a legal manner, or we control our borders so legal means are the only ways. Since it's obvious all people won't be coming into our country legally, we need to control our borders.


If it was easy to get across legally, then there wouldn't be very many people crossing illegally. What strikes me is that, at least around here, it's not simply a matter of climbing a fence or getting around (or under) some sort of barrier. It also involves trekking through miles and miles of desert, rocky terrain, over mountains. They risk heat exhaustion, dying of thirst, rattlesnakes and other hazards. It's not exactly a walk in the park out there. The logistics of actually securing the border can be difficult as well, mainly due to the terrain, along with the distances and wide area involved. Not to mention all the tunnels that they find. We're talking 2000 miles (3218.69 km) of border through mostly inhospitable terrain. The Border Patrol has to cover quite a range of territory, not just at the border but quite a significant area inside the border as well - some of which is also private property, which can be an irritant for the some of the ranchers. I've talked to some who say that the illegal border crossers will just pass through and be on their way; they cause very few problems compared to the Border Patrol who come in like gangbusters, knocking down fences, scaring cattle, etc.

I agree that we have a right to know who is coming into our country, but does anyone really stop to consider what a monumental undertaking it would be to build a Berlin Wall along the border? A lot of conservatives talk it up about how incompetent and wasteful government can be (a point which I actually agree with), and yet, they want to add a task like this for the government to do? It doesn't seem practical or cost-efficient.

quote:


I've said it before, and I'll say it again, we need to reform our immigration and naturalization process to make it faster, easier, and accept a greater number of immigrants. But, it still needs to be controlled.


I would also point out that many of those here illegally didn't necessarily enter the country by sneaking over the border. They could have entered legally and overstayed their visa, or they could have entered through a legitimate port of entry using false ID or posing as someone else. They've caught people who work at the Motor Vehicle Department and other government agencies involved in producing fraudulent IDs but are in the computer system and would show up as legitimate in any checks they would make. It goes beyond someone making false IDs in their garage. Criminal and terrorist organizations have the finance and means to be able to do these things, and these are the people we're ostensibly trying to secure the border from.

So, all in all, the idea of establishing a maximum security barrier along the border won't really work, and it won't make us any safer than we were before.




Charles6682 -> RE: The times will change (12/13/2014 12:43:41 PM)

Well said


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

The nutsuckers on the right have no actual desire to make the borders secure. The cheaper they can pimp labor the more they are loved by their corporate masters.


Draconian fines, lengthy incarceration, hell, even government siezure of the corporation for every CEO or owner down to the lowest manager for employing illegal aliens.

Pass that, fund the enforcement, over before the ink is dry.





DesideriScuri -> RE: The times will change (12/13/2014 12:57:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
We don't need a Northern border wall. Canadians don't want to come down here. Their beer is better. [:D]

Well, some might say that Mexican beer is also better than ours, but that may be another topic.


Another topic? You mean where we talk about how wrong some people can be? lol

quote:

quote:

Trade, commerce, etc. don't pay much mind to border walls. The walls will have openings for the roads the trucks use (which are the same roads they are using now). We have a right to know who is coming into our country. The only ways for that to happen is if everyone coming in does so in a legal manner, or we control our borders so legal means are the only ways. Since it's obvious all people won't be coming into our country legally, we need to control our borders.

If it was easy to get across legally, then there wouldn't be very many people crossing illegally. What strikes me is that, at least around here, it's not simply a matter of climbing a fence or getting around (or under) some sort of barrier. It also involves trekking through miles and miles of desert, rocky terrain, over mountains. They risk heat exhaustion, dying of thirst, rattlesnakes and other hazards. It's not exactly a walk in the park out there. The logistics of actually securing the border can be difficult as well, mainly due to the terrain, along with the distances and wide area involved. Not to mention all the tunnels that they find. We're talking 2000 miles (3218.69 km) of border through mostly inhospitable terrain. The Border Patrol has to cover quite a range of territory, not just at the border but quite a significant area inside the border as well - some of which is also private property, which can be an irritant for the some of the ranchers. I've talked to some who say that the illegal border crossers will just pass through and be on their way; they cause very few problems compared to the Border Patrol who come in like gangbusters, knocking down fences, scaring cattle, etc.


And, there are some who don't just "pass through and be on their way." We completely agree that if it were easier to gain legal entry, there would be less illegal entry. That's also why I'm all for immigration reform to make it easier, quicker, and more efficient.

quote:

I agree that we have a right to know who is coming into our country, but does anyone really stop to consider what a monumental undertaking it would be to build a Berlin Wall along the border? A lot of conservatives talk it up about how incompetent and wasteful government can be (a point which I actually agree with), and yet, they want to add a task like this for the government to do? It doesn't seem practical or cost-efficient.


What is the cost to preventing illegals from crossing the border?

The Secure Fence Act of 2006 passed the Senate 80-19 (25 D's in support) and the House 283-138 (64 D's in support). That bill would have built 700 miles of fencing at a cost of $1.2B, though some critics claim it would have taken $6B to fund. So, maybe it would cost $20B to build it 2000 miles. Obama (earlier in the year) wanted $3.7B to help deal with the flood of child immigrants coming across. That wouldn't have been a one-time thing, either. Building the fence would have been a one-time thing (with more money for repairs), and would likely reduce the amount of illegal immigration (reducing the amount of money it would cost to deal with illegal immigrants). That would also make it easier for the USBP to do their jobs, too.

quote:

quote:

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, we need to reform our immigration and naturalization process to make it faster, easier, and accept a greater number of immigrants. But, it still needs to be controlled.

I would also point out that many of those here illegally didn't necessarily enter the country by sneaking over the border. They could have entered legally and overstayed their visa, or they could have entered through a legitimate port of entry using false ID or posing as someone else. They've caught people who work at the Motor Vehicle Department and other government agencies involved in producing fraudulent IDs but are in the computer system and would show up as legitimate in any checks they would make. It goes beyond someone making false IDs in their garage. Criminal and terrorist organizations have the finance and means to be able to do these things, and these are the people we're ostensibly trying to secure the border from.
So, all in all, the idea of establishing a maximum security barrier along the border won't really work, and it won't make us any safer than we were before.


Sure it will. There are "bad guys" who do sneak across the borders. It won't be perfect, or 100%, but aren't we told that just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean it shouldn't happen?




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625