PDA

View Full Version : Immigration number 1 issue for one in six Americans



Peter1469
07-17-2014, 06:33 AM
Immigration number 1 issue for one in six Americans (http://www.gallup.com/poll/173306/one-six-say-immigration-important-problem.aspx)

The flooding of the southern border with tens of thousands of migrant children is finally creating a back lash against the Administration that is much broader based than all of its other scandals (Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, Obamacare fail, etc). All of the rest of those have been a partisan concern. The left just didn't really give a crap.

With the child migration even the hard left has awaken. Not in my backyard is a pretty pitiful rallying cry, but you take what you can get.

The hard left is pissed: Discussed in this thread (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/28712-Protests-Against-Government-Preference-for-Illegals):

zelmo1234
07-17-2014, 08:06 AM
The left thought they an issue that would drive their voters to the polls, but it turns out that the legal immigrants don't like it either and now it is an issue that is working against them

It will be interesting to see if the Democrats turn on a dime and become the party of closing the border, or if they are to invested in the destruction of the country to have a change of heart!

just a little over 100 days to the election? it is getting close to the time period that people do not forget and the scandals abound on the part of the DNC

1751_Texan
07-17-2014, 08:27 AM
I hear a lot of people say...wait till the mid-terms. Really? Congress is about to go on summer break. Everyone is saying ..."This is an invasion". Can it wait till November?

I will give it to the GOP, they have kept the pressure on-- on a whole host of issues; but Now is time to act. Using this problem just as a campain issue will not work this time. People...republican rank and file...want action. Now the GOP has to deliver. Uh-oh...

Smaller government - less government does not work in all cases.

Peter1469
07-17-2014, 08:57 AM
I hear a lot of people say...wait till the mid-terms. Really? Congress is about to go on summer break. Everyone is saying ..."This is an invasion". Can it wait till November?

I will give it to the GOP, they have kept the pressure on-- on a whole host of issues; but Now is time to act. Using this problem just as a campain issue will not work this time. People...republican rank and file...want action. Now the GOP has to deliver. Uh-oh...

Smaller government - less government does not work in all cases.

The real term is limited government. Our Founders gave the federal government limited and enumerated powers (See, Art. 1, sec. 8, U.S. Const). Of course, if the federal government stuck to just that, it would be small. But the word small misses the point. It is all about federalism.

1751_Texan
07-17-2014, 09:01 AM
The real term is limited government. Our Founders gave the federal government limited and enumerated powers (See, Art. 1, sec. 8, U.S. Const). Of course, if the federal government stuck to just that, it would be small. But the word small misses the point. It is all about federalism.


Thanks for the heads up...I will correct the many that say..."smaller government".

Mainecoons
07-17-2014, 09:02 AM
If the government followed the Constitution it would be smaller.

A lot smaller.

We can grasp this just fine without your help. But we're happy to help you try and figure out the obvious.

Peter1469
07-17-2014, 09:11 AM
Limited is the correct term. ^^^

Mainecoons
07-17-2014, 09:12 AM
True, but one begets the other.

:grin:

texan
07-17-2014, 10:31 AM
Because it isn't number 1 doesn't mean it isn't a negative.

Kalkin
07-17-2014, 10:35 AM
Limited is the correct term. ^^^
I prefer constrained.

Common Sense
07-17-2014, 10:47 AM
If the government followed the Constitution, there would be no standing army.

Peter1469
07-17-2014, 11:19 AM
If the government followed the Constitution, there would be no standing army.

Why? From Art. 1, sec. 8, U.S. Const.


To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

The appropriation for two years is a fiscal law term and only means Congress must re-appropriate money at least every two years (for most purposes it is every 1 year).

Common Sense
07-17-2014, 12:20 PM
Why? From Art. 1, sec. 8, U.S. Const.



The appropriation for two years is a fiscal law term and only means Congress must re-appropriate money at least every two years (for most purposes it is every 1 year).

To some, it was clearly a limitation and was meant as a guard against standing armies...

"President James Madison: “…to support the Constitution, which is the cement of the Union, as well in its limitations as in its authorities; to respect the rights and authorities reserved to the States and to the people as equally incorporated with and essential to the success of the general system;… to keep within the requisite limits a standing military force, always remembering that an armed and trained militia is the firmest bulwark of republics – that without standing armies their liberty can never be in danger, nor with large ones safe;…” – President James Madison, First Inaugural address, Saturday, March 4, 1809.

Thomas Jefferson: “Nor is it conceived needful or safe that a standing army should be kept up in time of peace for [defense against invasion].” –Thomas Jefferson: 1st Annual Message, 1801. ME 3:334

bladimz
07-17-2014, 12:42 PM
It amazes me that there are so many people (adults) who are willingly screaming at kids in a language that they do not even understand. Screaming at them to go home. Back to all the crap they escaped from. I understand that people are not happy about this; who would be? But what good is to come from the angry taunts, jeers and rants from a crowd of pissed-off people, aiming it all at kids? They're stuck between a rock and hard place... a little compassion would be nice. I know i'd appreciate it if it were me.

I'm not sure how this will all play out but dragging these kids back into the fire is not the answer.

Peter1469
07-17-2014, 01:42 PM
Right they didn't want standing armies. Congress had to revisit appropriations for the military ever two years.

In reality, today most DoD appropriations are redone every year. Not every two years.


To some, it was clearly a limitation and was meant as a guard against standing armies...

"President James Madison: “…to support the Constitution, which is the cement of the Union, as well in its limitations as in its authorities; to respect the rights and authorities reserved to the States and to the people as equally incorporated with and essential to the success of the general system;… to keep within the requisite limits a standing military force, always remembering that an armed and trained militia is the firmest bulwark of republics – that without standing armies their liberty can never be in danger, nor with large ones safe;…” – President James Madison, First Inaugural address, Saturday, March 4, 1809.

Thomas Jefferson: “Nor is it conceived needful or safe that a standing army should be kept up in time of peace for [defense against invasion].” –Thomas Jefferson: 1st Annual Message, 1801. ME 3:334

The Sage of Main Street
07-17-2014, 01:48 PM
The real term is limited government. Our Founders gave the federal government limited and enumerated powers (See, Art. 1, sec. 8, U.S. Const). It is all about federalism. Which led to secession, no funding for national unity, standing army replaced by separatist state militias, lack of infrastructure, inadequate protection for Western settlers, etc. "Federalism" is nothing but primitive tribalism.

Peter1469
07-17-2014, 01:52 PM
Go back are re-read Art 1, sec. 8 and rework this nonsense.


Which led to secession, no funding for national unity, standing army replaced by separatist state militias, lack of infrastructure, inadequate protection for Western settlers, etc. "Federalism" is nothing but primitive tribalism.

The Sage of Main Street
07-17-2014, 01:53 PM
To some, it was clearly a limitation and was meant as a guard against standing armies...

"President James Madison: “…to support the Constitution, which is the cement of the Union, as well in its limitations as in its authorities; to respect the rights and authorities reserved to the States and to the people as equally incorporated with and essential to the success of the general system;… to keep within the requisite limits a standing military force, always remembering that an armed and trained militia is the firmest bulwark of republics – that without standing armies their liberty can never be in danger, nor with large ones safe;…” – President James Madison, First Inaugural address, Saturday, March 4, 1809.

That attitude of Dolley's Lapdog got DC burned down. But to the Constitutionazis who worship Jemmy, that was a good thing.

The Sage of Main Street
07-17-2014, 02:00 PM
Go back are re-read Art 1, sec. 8 and rework this nonsense. I don't take orders from an anti-democratic manifesto written behind closed doors by lawyers for the colonial 1%.

Redrose
07-17-2014, 02:37 PM
It amazes me that there are so many people (adults) who are willingly screaming at kids in a language that they do not even understand. Screaming at them to go home. Back to all the crap they escaped from. I understand that people are not happy about this; who would be? But what good is to come from the angry taunts, jeers and rants from a crowd of pissed-off people, aiming it all at kids? They're stuck between a rock and hard place... a little compassion would be nice. I know i'd appreciate it if it were me.

I'm not sure how this will all play out but dragging these kids back into the fire is not the answer.

It's my understanding they did not flee oppression and political persecution, they were sent here by their parents who were told they would be welcomed with open arms and given all the benefits of the USA, including citizenship.

It's unfortunate that most are children, but what they did is no different than looting during and after a storm or riot, taking something they have no right to. Their breach of our sovereign border is a crime, illegal. This has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with immigration. We have immigration laws. These interlopers are breaking our laws and must be dealt with accordingly.

We should feed, clothe, give medical care if needed and send them back to their home. There are several international agencies that work with these poor nations.

What happens if ships or plane loads of people from every corner of the world, start storming our shores?
Not thousands, but millions. What then? The message our government is sending to the world is we will not enforce our border or "legal" immigration laws. The lack of action to this crisis is setting a precedent, that will effect us for years to come.

There is a humanitarian crisis, but it is not on the border, it is the poor in the USA, who live here, who are legal citizens. They are taking a back seat to this new liberal cause.

You can't scream compassion for one group, while you show no compassion for others and burden them with the care.

Peter1469
07-17-2014, 04:09 PM
I don't take orders from an anti-democratic manifesto written behind closed doors by lawyers for the colonial 1%.

Democracy: 3 wolves and one lamb voting on what is for lunch.

The Sage of Main Street
07-18-2014, 09:21 AM
It's my understanding they did not flee oppression and political persecution; they were sent here by their parents who were told they would be welcomed with open arms and given all the benefits of the USA, including citizenship.

what they did is no different than looting during and after a storm or riot, taking something they have no right to. Their breach of our sovereign border is a crime, illegal.

We should feed, clothe, give medical care if needed and send them back to their home. There are several international agencies that work with these poor nations.

What happens if ships or plane loads of people from every corner of the world, start storming our shores?
Not thousands, but millions. What then? The message our government is sending to the world is we will not enforce our border or "legal" immigration laws. The lack of action to this crisis is setting a precedent that will effect us for years to come.

There is a humanitarian crisis, but it is not on the border, it is the poor in the USA, who live here, who are legal citizens. They are taking a back seat to this new liberal cause.

You can't scream compassion for one group, while you show no compassion for others and burden them with the care. It's not "liberal" at all. Our ruling class of thieves and traitors know how the rich live in Mexico and Central America. They also know that it is the fault of the oppressed, who are slavish, fatalistic, and apathetic. So the plutes want these economic cowards to replace White people, who still have enough pride left to sometimes stand up to our looting Greedhead parasites.

The Sage of Main Street
07-18-2014, 09:25 AM
Democracy: 3 wolves and one lamb voting on what is for lunch. So you think the majority of American people are predatory wild animals? A republic is one wolf appointed by his owners to represent 99 sheep.

Cigar
07-18-2014, 09:32 AM
http://whatwouldjackdo.net/images/newerimmigrants.jpg

Captain Obvious
07-18-2014, 09:38 AM
We need to get over the "we are a country of immigrants" thing.

Tank's full, try next door.

Cigar
07-18-2014, 09:42 AM
http://www.creators.com/editorial_cartoons/14/29770_thumb.jpg

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/EaganT/2014/EaganT20140718_low.jpg

The Sage of Main Street
07-18-2014, 10:35 AM
We need to get over the "we are a country of immigrants" thing.

Tank's full, try next door. That was only temporary, because there was a shortage of labor and immigrants were needed. Now they just steal our jobs because they are submissive to the rich parasites and are willing to undercut us on wages.

Cigar
07-18-2014, 10:37 AM
That was only temporary, because there was a shortage of labor and immigrants were needed. Now they just steal our jobs because they are submissive to the rich parasites and are willing to undercut us on wages.


EXATLY :wink:

Captain Obvious
07-18-2014, 10:38 AM
That was only temporary, because there was a shortage of labor and immigrants were needed. Now they just steal our jobs because they are submissive to the rich parasites and are willing to undercut us on wages.

We used to own slaves but that didn't define us in the long run.

We're full.

Mister D
07-18-2014, 10:43 AM
We used to own slaves but that didn't define us in the long run.

We're full.

I got rid of mine too. They're lazy. I may as well do the shit myself. :grin:

Captain Obvious
07-18-2014, 10:47 AM
I got rid of mine too. They're lazy. I may as well do the shit myself. :grin:

And they're smoking all your pot too!

:biglaugh:

Mister D
07-18-2014, 10:50 AM
And they're smoking all your pot too!

:biglaugh:

Can't keep a chicken for more than a day. If I don't eat it it will disappear.

Professor Peabody
07-18-2014, 02:12 PM
Immigration number 1 issue for one in six Americans (http://www.gallup.com/poll/173306/one-six-say-immigration-important-problem.aspx)

The flooding of the southern border with tens of thousands of migrant children is finally creating a back lash against the Administration that is much broader based than all of its other scandals (Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, Obamacare fail, etc). All of the rest of those have been a partisan concern. The left just didn't really give a crap.

With the child migration even the hard left has awaken. Not in my backyard is a pretty pitiful rallying cry, but you take what you can get.

The hard left is pissed: Discussed in this thread (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/28712-Protests-Against-Government-Preference-for-Illegals):

Unemployment by Age:

16 to 19 years - 21%
20 to 24 years - 10.5%
25 to 34 years - 6.5%

http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea10.htm

Those numbers are much worse for African Americans. Most of the Immigrant Blitz Kreig are late teens and 20 something males.

Peter1469
07-18-2014, 04:17 PM
So you think the majority of American people are predatory wild animals? A republic is one wolf appointed by his owners to represent 99 sheep.

A republic has rules that protect minorities from the majority.

The Sage of Main Street
07-19-2014, 01:21 PM
We used to own slaves but that didn't define us in the long run.

We're full. We're full of wage slaves for Wall Street parasites. A stock certificate is just a piece of paper a real man would put his fist through. If They Own a Man's Work, They Own the Man.

The Sage of Main Street
07-19-2014, 01:28 PM
A republic has rules that protect minorities from the majority. The controlling minority, the 1%, enables their pets, pawns, and attack dogs in order to disenfranchise and demoralize the majority. It is a Zero Sum; saying it isn't won't make the truth disappear. Minority rights infringe on majority rights, so we should avoid what harms the greatest number.

lynn
07-19-2014, 01:41 PM
We are at a point where not only do we need to enforce illegal immigration but also stop legal immigration. Our current system cannot support the numbers we have in jobs, social benefits, etc.

Peter1469
07-19-2014, 02:37 PM
The controlling minority, the 1%, enables their pets, pawns, and attack dogs in order to disenfranchise and demoralize the majority. It is a Zero Sum; saying it isn't won't make the truth disappear. Minority rights infringe on majority rights, so we should avoid what harms the greatest number.

Then maybe our republic was stolen and replaced by a plutocracy.

The Sage of Main Street
07-20-2014, 11:49 AM
Then maybe our republic was stolen and replaced by a plutocracy. A republic is a plutocracy. The Founding Fodder were lawyers for that era's 1%.

Peter1469
07-20-2014, 01:05 PM
A republic is a plutocracy. The Founding Fodder were lawyers for that era's 1%.

False, a republic is not a plutocracy. They aren't even spelled the same- that is a hint. :smiley:

The Sage of Main Street
07-21-2014, 02:09 PM
False, a republic is not a plutocracy. They aren't even spelled the same. :smiley: A republic is set up to fit only a hereditary plutocracy. It's like a fraternity house having democratic rules for the degenerate preppies, but it treats the maids and lawn-service workers with utter contempt.