And here is the reason that nothing gets fixed in this country. Voting for one side or the other based just on what letter is beside their name is ridiculous. Obviously most Americans don't like what the Obama administration is doing, but polls like this just make me .

I hope nobody here just blindly goes out and votes for their side regardless of who the candidate actually is.

(08-31-2010 07:50 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-31-2010 02:36 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(08-31-2010 12:37 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-31-2010 09:51 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  What, you liked his immigration policies?

What do you want to do about illegal aliens? Send them back to Mexico and deal with anarchy on our southern border?
That's what people don't realize. They cause fewer problems here than they would if they were back in Mexico, particularly from a national security standpoint. Think it through. Seriously. How do you see a good outcome resulting if we rounded them all up and deported them to Mexico?
I think we're better off with some sort of guest worker program, where we can at least get some kind of handle on the situation. I would not offer citizenship, at least not until after they jump through a LOT of hoops--full English fluency, oath of allegiance, ten year waiting period where one screw up and they're gone, that sort of stuff. Actually, I wouldn't offer citizenship to anyone on more lenient terms, just maybe a shorter waiting period for those who go through the process legally.

I sure a hell wouldn't give them any sort or color of amnesty. If they want to immigrate here, I want restitution of services they obtained while here illegally. Since they change their names like some change underwear, I want fingerprints and DNA. I want to know if they voted in elections illegally, its perjury to fraudulently obtain a voter registration card and a 2nd degree felony to actually vote, each occurrence. They should be punished for illegal use of SS#s, if that is the case. In other words, prosecute them to the full extent of their crimes, instead of turning a blinds eye to their illegal activities. And make them pay for the resources to process them for their transgression. Implement any of these and you will see self-deportation. There are way to get the desired action, its just do we have the stomach for it.

All of your points have merit, and that's why I wouldn't offer citizenship except through a very exhaustive procedure. It would be reasonable to put steps to address each of those points in some way. One problem is that they probably can't reimburse for prior services because if they had the money to do that, they wouldn't be here illegally in the first place.

I think the way to go is guest worker, get them into the system and get our arms around who they are and where they are, and tweak the solution once we know what we are really up against.

Two things that I don't think you can do:
1. Send them back
2. Make them citizens

Guest worker is about all you're left with.

I understand your frustration, I have the same, except I take the side of citizen and taxpayers, you feelings are for the illegal alien, and I also feel the illegal alien's abuse should not be tolerated either. But that is not an excuse for them breaking our laws. Citizen and taxpayers should not have their state and country bankrupted by invaders. Nor should their safety nets and services be forced to endure abuse.

In the criminal justice system, how often does the judge make rulings based on the defendant's lack of money? Or abundance of? He does not. Many of these people are not without financial resources.

I also believe a Temporary Guest worker program where they have to return to their country of origin after 18-24 months.

Citizenship should not be easy or cheapened by scofflaws.

How much would it cost us (in goods and services price increases) if we deported every illegal worker, and replaced them with U.S. Citizens?

I've heard different numbers and percentages bounced around. What do you guys think?

P.S. I'm trying to get a sense of pros vs. cons. I'm well aware of the immense cost of illegal immigration in terms of government services, criminal activity, etc. etc.

(08-31-2010 11:03 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  I understand your frustration, I have the same, except I take the side of citizen and taxpayers, you feelings are for the illegal alien, and I also feel the illegal alien's abuse should not be tolerated either. But that is not an excuse for them breaking our laws. Citizen and taxpayers should not have their state and country bankrupted by invaders. Nor should their safety nets and services be forced to endure abuse.
In the criminal justice system, how often does the judge make rulings based on the defendant's lack of money? Or abundance of? He does not. Many of these people are not without financial resources.

Nope, I'm looking at it strictly from the perspective of the citizens and taxpayers. All things considered, it's cheaper, and easier, and less of a threat to our national security to deal with them here than there. Agree on citizenship and access to welfare safety net. If you think illegal aliens are bankrupting us now, consider the cost of keeping three light infantry divisions on the Mexican border--because that's what it'll take if we send them back. And even that won't address all the threats.

And if you don't think the defendant's ability to pay is a major factor--in more ways than one--then you simply don't understand how our criminal justice system really works.

By saying "All things considered, it's cheaper, and easier, and less of a threat to our national security to deal with them here than there.", you may be right if we continue to leave the barn door open. However, other solutions may avail themselves if we seriously attack the problem. Do we need 3 IDs on the border, I don't think so. We need to do whatever is necessary to secure the border first. There may be other avenues.

I said, Judges don't make rulings based on a defendant's ability to pay. Lawyers make the criminal justice system a money sieve.

Percentage of deaths in the United States


Phrased another way ... your annual odds of being killed by lightning are 1 in 500,000. Your annual odds of dieing from a terrorist are 1 in 10,408,947.

Want to compare how much we spend preventing circulatory related deaths (more than 1 in 3 deaths) vs how we spend preventing terrorism deaths (1 in 10,408,947)?

(08-31-2010 08:03 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Largest lead for GOP in history of poll (started in 1942)

Who cares. When you put a face to the party, it all changes.

(08-31-2010 08:41 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The republicans haven't shown me much that appeals. But at least they should gridlock the Obama agenda. And that alone is reason enough to root for the republicans this time.

The republicans are pretty much going to have to disavow and repudiate Shrub before I can see supporting them as anything but the only way to stop Obama.

Why do you hate America?

(09-01-2010 11:36 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-31-2010 08:03 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Largest lead for GOP in history of poll (started in 1942)

Who cares. When you put a face to the party, it all changes.

Keep up the denial junior. Your party is headed for a bloodbath come November if this trend holds.

Hopefully it will drive you to make the world a better place. I have a suggestion on how you can do that by the way.

(08-31-2010 08:41 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The republicans haven't shown me much that appeals. But at least they should gridlock the Obama agenda. And that alone is reason enough to root for the republicans this time.

The republicans are pretty much going to have to disavow and repudiate Shrub before I can see supporting them as anything but the only way to stop Obama.

+1..

I'm something between a Libertarian and a conservative (yes there is some overlap there) so eight years of Bush + the GOP was enough to sour me on the Republicans, at the same time two years of Obama, Pelosi, and Reed is enough to swear me off of the Democrats.

(09-01-2010 12:29 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-01-2010 11:36 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-31-2010 08:03 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Largest lead for GOP in history of poll (started in 1942)

Who cares. When you put a face to the party, it all changes.

Keep up the denial junior. Your party is headed for a bloodbath come November if this trend holds.

Hopefully it will drive you to make the world a better place. I have a suggestion on how you can do that by the way.

Still living in Faux fantasyland I see. It probably would drive me to making this world a better place if the righties took power. I would do more to kick the damn conservatives out of power(left and rightwing versions) by voting for REAL Democrats.

(09-01-2010 12:51 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(09-01-2010 12:29 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-01-2010 11:36 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-31-2010 08:03 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Largest lead for GOP in history of poll (started in 1942)

Who cares. When you put a face to the party, it all changes.

Keep up the denial junior. Your party is headed for a bloodbath come November if this trend holds.

Hopefully it will drive you to make the world a better place. I have a suggestion on how you can do that by the way.

Still living in Faux fantasyland I see. It probably would drive me to making this world a better place if the righties took power. I would do more to kick the damn conservatives out of power(left and rightwing versions) by voting for REAL Democrats.

You know the level to which your stupidity rises amazes even me. It's a foregone conclusion that if things don't improve in the economy (which they are very unlikely to do) that dems are going to lose a large number of seats. This is the consensus on whatever network you watch, even MSNBC.

It's hilarious to me that you are so moronic that you really think your party isn't going to get trounced in November given the outlook as it stands today. The amount of denial, combined with lunacy, it takes to believe that is staggering.

But then again we are talking about you, so I guess it shouldn't be surprising.

Fool.

(08-31-2010 08:41 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The republicans are pretty much going to have to disavow and repudiate Shrub before I can see supporting them as anything but the only way to stop Obama.

Somewhat prophetic of you Owl.

Republican Young Guns Denounce Bush

(09-05-2010 07:54 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(08-31-2010 08:41 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The republicans are pretty much going to have to disavow and repudiate Shrub before I can see supporting them as anything but the only way to stop Obama.

Somewhat prophetic of you Owl.

Republican Young Guns Denounce Bush

Paul Ryan voted for TARP. It's nice he's going after entitlements, but it also clearly shows he doesn't practice what he preaches.

If they can put forth a clear set of ideas around limited government and fiscal conservatism, avoiding the social conservative issues, it could serve as a great asset during the elections. The country is there from an attitude standpoint as it is.

(09-05-2010 09:14 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  If they can put forth a clear set of ideas around limited government and fiscal conservatism, avoiding the social conservative issues, it could serve as a great asset during the elections. The country is there from an attitude standpoint as it is.

Yeah. THe country wants us to get rid of SS and Medicare. Just wait until a good portion if your base(old white people) finally understand what the Republicans platform really is. Unfortunately, they may find out after these programs are gone because they are too naive to understand what they are voting for.

(09-05-2010 09:56 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(09-05-2010 09:14 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  If they can put forth a clear set of ideas around limited government and fiscal conservatism, avoiding the social conservative issues, it could serve as a great asset during the elections. The country is there from an attitude standpoint as it is.

Yeah. THe country wants us to get rid of SS and Medicare. Just wait until a good portion if your base(old white people) finally understand what the Republicans platform really is. Unfortunately, they may find out after these programs are gone because they are too naive to understand what they are voting for.

Whistling past the graveyard.

Today Rasmussen has it up to +12% for the Republicans. IMO, if the Republicans can make it to +14% on the week before Election Day, the Senate will flip as well, given the Republican organization and higher expected Turnout.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 48% of Likely Voters would vote for their district's Republican congressional candidate, while 36% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent. The survey data was collected on the seven days ending Sunday, September 5, 2010.

This matches the largest advantage ever measured for the Republicans. Three weeks ago, the GOP also held a 12-point lead.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c...nal_ballot

If Christine O'Donnell wins in 9 days, the country might survive the Lame Duck. If Mike Castle a RINO, wins he will assist the dems in a destructive lame-duck session like this country has never seen.

(09-06-2010 10:44 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  If Christine O'Donnell wins in 9 days, the country might survive the Lame Duck. If Mike Castle a RINO, wins he will assist the dems in a destructive lame-duck session like this country has never seen.

This lame duck session will probably be one of the worst in history. Who knows what those liberal morons will pass without the penalty of voter backlash? The way I see it, law makers are offically fired once they lose an election - so why do they continue to f'ck things up for another 90 days?