Quote:As the son of immigrants that came here the honest way the last thing I'll support is any legislation that gives the line jumpers a leg up. Screw them go home and do it the right way like the rest of us. I know guys that border jumped and then worked tax free for decades while my family paid their dues did the paper and waited my dad waited 15 years my mother 13 years and I can't even count the ways both families sacrificed to get here no love for the border jumpers from me.
Secondly Rubio is pretty big on moral legislation I have a problem with that.
It doesn't make much sense to me to avoid changing laws just because others suffered under the old law, especially if the new laws are an improvement.
Quote:Nobody is giving illegals a "leg up" under the plan that Marco Rubio was proposing (supported by both republicans and democrats). It's a common sense plan that actually deals with the problem in a realistic way. Sorry, nobody is going to "round up all of the illegals and send them home". It's just not realistically feasible.
Because that past version of amnesty passed by a republican did so much to curve illegal immigration and restrict border jumpers. Any path to citizenship for illegals only increases the incentive to come here illegally and wait for the next round of freebies.
The only way to end illegal immigration is to turn off the magnets. That means no access to our medical system, education or welfare. Anyone caught falsely aiding an illegal faces heavy penalties including employers. Take away the ability to earn tax free money and end their access to welfare free educations and free medical treatment and you don't have to round them up.
Quote:It doesn't make much sense to me to avoid changing laws just because others suffered under the old law, especially if the new laws are an improvement.
Where's the improvement in Rubios proposal?
Quote:However, being an "isolationist" isn't the way to go. Once again I'll point to North Korea. How has being an isolationist state worked out for them?
The other thing to consider is the fact that since we are one of the world's "super-powers" it is our duty to protect not only our interests, but those of our allies. The current President has failed miserably at doing this, and is leaving a huge mess for the next President to deal with.
Not only do we have the problem with ISIS, but there is also the issue of Iran and North Korea attempting to gain nuclear weapons. What happens if either one of those countries gains that kind of weaponry?
Then look at Russia and their attempt to conquer Ukraine. Which country might be their next target? What if our President ordered our military to attack and conquer Canada? Would that be something that is acceptable?
One of the many important factors involved when choosing our next President should be his/her foreign policy along with economic policy and immigration policy. Social policy (gay marriage, abortion, marijuana legalization, etc.) are way down at the bottom of my priorities when selecting my choice for President.
Disagree whole heatedly, let the Middle East and Europe deal with there own problems we've played the world police long enough.
It's funny how conservatives miss the link to war states and tyrannical regimes. If you really want to reign in government it starts with minimizing their purposes and their biggest excuse for existing is always the endless threat of war.
Close the bases bring our boys home secure the border and sit back.
I understand a true isolationist will never be president but damn I'm going to do my best to avoid another neo-conservative war hawk like Bush.
Quote:Where's the improvement in Rubios proposal?
Perhaps refer to my earlier post where the plan was outlined. What would you prefer? Should we "round up" all illegal immigrants currently in this country and send them "home"? How exactly is that going to take place and who is going to pay for it?
Quote:I don't think waiting 13 years, having to pay back taxes, learn english and having to keep out of jail is really all that much of a 'leg up'
I used to be pretty far right. Back then I'd have probably gotten along with everyone here a lot better except probably boudreaux. I thought we should send all the illegals packing.
The problem is... we say "Come here legally!" except... many of them can't. It's not like they think "I don't want to go to the US legally, because I can avoid paying taxes if I just go there illegally and live off the American's dime!" They want to provide a better life for themselves. They see America as an opportunity, and if they could come here legally they certainly would. Their options are incredibly limited. They either stay in poverty, or come to America to try to get out of it. A path to citizenship with those caveats listed above is, imo, totally fair. And I don't see why anyone would think otherwise.
Because those caveats are never enforced. And saying illegal immigration is the only way is crap we offer more work visas, student visas and refuge status then most of the world. We have embassy's in near every corner of the world for anyone that wants to start the process. Yes it's hard for low skill workers to legally migrate that's by design we don't have a need for them. The idea that someone in poverty in the third world just has to get over here and they won't be in poverty is exacatlly the problem they are in poverty because they are lacking in market skills that pay. Engineers doctors lawyers skilled labor they have no problem coming here. Farmers day laborers and ditch diggers are not going to get legal status we don't need them. That's how immigration works.
Quote:Because those caveats are never enforced. And saying illegal immigration is the only way is crap we offer more work visas, student visas and refuge status then most of the world. We have embassy's in near every corner of the world for anyone that wants to start the process. Yes it's hard for low skill workers to legally migrate that's by design we don't have a need for them. The idea that someone in poverty in the third world just has to get over here and they won't be in poverty is exacatlly the problem they are in poverty because they are lacking in market skills that pay. Engineers doctors lawyers skilled labor they have no problem coming here. Farmers day laborers and ditch diggers are not going to get legal status we don't need them. That's how immigration works.
If the problem is that it's never enforced, then the legislation
isn't the problem.
Enforcement is.
Quote:Disagree whole heatedly, let the Middle East and Europe deal with there own problems we've played the world police long enough.
It's funny how conservatives miss the link to war states and tyrannical regimes. If you really want to reign in government it starts with minimizing their purposes and their biggest excuse for existing is always the endless threat of war.
Close the bases bring our boys home secure the border and sit back.
I understand a true isolationist will never be president but damn I'm going to do my best to avoid another neo-conservative war hawk like Bush.
LOL. You sit there and preach about you being a libertarian, yet you want to practice communist tenants (isolationism).
So we close every military base over-seas and "bring our boys home", then what? Do we shut down all commerce with European/middle eastern/Asian countries? Do we allow say Russia to take over whatever countries that they choose? Do we allow a country like North Korea to bomb say Seoul South Korea or Japan? Do we allow a country like Iran to gain dominance in the Middle East and take control of say the Straits of Hormuz or the Suez Canal?
What is that going to do for our isolationist selves? Just off the top of my head, our current vulnerable economy really tanks due to product shipments not being brought over, and gas prices spiking.
Here is a little test for you. What brand/make is your computer? What about the monitor? What brand/make is your television? How about your smart phone? What about appliances, other electronics in your home and other devices? I guarantee you that much of it was made in foreign countries that rely on us to protect them. What about your vehicle(s)? I would bet that even if you have a "'merican made'" vehicle it has many parts that are developed and made over seas.
Quote:Carcetti.
White guy runs for mayor of Baltimore with an eye to the governorship. Sounds like O'Malley to me. The Wire was based on a lot of real events in Baltimore.
If I'm not mistaken O'Malley thought the character was a shot at him, though Simon said the character was based on a lot of people. Then again Simon gave a pretty good interview like a month ago about Baltimore, and didn't seem to speak well of O'Malley.
Quote:LOL. You sit there and preach about you being a libertarian, yet you want to practice communist tenants (isolationism).
So we close every military base over-seas and "bring our boys home", then what? Do we shut down all commerce with European/middle eastern/Asian countries? Do we allow say Russia to take over whatever countries that they choose? Do we allow a country like North Korea to bomb say Seoul South Korea or Japan? Do we allow a country like Iran to gain dominance in the Middle East and take control of say the Straits of Hormuz or the Suez Canal?
What is that going to do for our isolationist selves? Just off the top of my head, our current vulnerable economy really tanks due to product shipments not being brought over, and gas prices spiking.
Here is a little test for you. What brand/make is your computer? What about the monitor? What brand/make is your television? How about your smart phone? What about appliances, other electronics in your home and other devices? I guarantee you that much of it was made in foreign countries that rely on us to protect them. What about your vehicle(s)? I would bet that even if you have a "'merican made'" vehicle it has many parts that are developed and made over seas.
For staters I'm a registered libertarian but by no means are all my views exclusive to libertarian. That said you don't know the libertarian platform outside of what Fox News has labeled it if your surprised a registered libertarian is against foreign intervention.
Isolationism as I was referring to it was on regards to military engagement don't pretend the world economy stops if we're not directly involved in every conflict world.
I'm not sure where you pulled the whole isolationist is communists from other then the neoconservative default response, I don't agree you must be a communist!
I think you need to research the libertarian party a little more were a bit different then republicans perhaps look beyond what fox calls libertarian.
Non-intervention is a pretty big deal with us, war is only waged with congressional approvals, and we're against police state and federal spy programs all of that is a direct result of the constant war state.
Quote:Where's the improvement in Rubios proposal?
A specific proposal is beside the point. You seem to be against immigration reform because it will make it easier for immigrants to gain entry than it was for your parents.
Quote:A specific proposal is beside the point. You seem to be against immigration reform because it will make it easier for immigrants to gain entry than it was for your parents.
If by reform you mean a path to Citizenship for border jumpers yes.
If by reform you mean streamlining the process to make immigration faster then no.
Yall gonna be salty as hell when Hillary stomps whatever schmo opposes her lol
Quote:Yall gonna be salty as hell when Hillary stomps whatever schmo opposes her lol
Bill gonna be one helluva first lady. What will he be called anyway? First gentleman?
Wait for it
I'm waiting till Rick " do my glasses make me look smarter" Scott.
Jeb " I would have, no wait wouldn't have, well mabe invaded " Bush
Scott " I'll handle ISIS like I did the govt Unions" Walker
Then see which one takes Carly " HP, Hardly Presidential" Fiorina as their VP.
Maybe ol Bernie can pull one out by free Ben n Jerry's for everyone. Like a huge ice cream " social"
O' Malley? St Paddys Day a national holiday? Oops...racist? He's just feeling out the market for the future.
Hillary? Wild Bill would be Sweet William now...but don't think ol slick won't have influence. Is that a bad thing? maybe not. Oh..still stuck on the Monica glitch? Well maybe Hill can get payback now. Does Monica have a brother?
Quote:
So with the addition of yet another Republican candidate for President today, I thought that we might start a discussion regarding who might be a good fit, and who would not. I'll try to keep this post updated as more candidates "throw their hat into the ring". I'll make a separate post with my thoughts regarding each candidate. Feel free to add your own. Please refrain from personal insults towards any candidate that you may not like, and please try to stick with facts.
Democrat Candidates that have announced.
Hillary Clinton
Bernie Sanders
Martin O'Malley
Republican Candidates that have announced.
<div>Ben Carson
Ted Cruz
Carly Fiorina
Mike Huckabee
George Pataki
Rand Paul
Marco Rubio
Rick Santorum
</div>
Feces by another name would smell as foul