News Vote Republican: Support Senator Ron Paul!

[Geekster]

A lot of talk about his views or as you said "ideas he preaches". Out of curiousity, it's really easy to state opinions. What are his realistic plans to do anything he preaches about?

Edit: Wow, just went through his website and he doesn't explain how he would do anything, just a bunch of rhetoric, and honestly, it scares me that he's an elected official.

I guess you missed the part where he talks about the federal government NOT doing things. That is the ONLY thing he wants to do...

To do that he has stated he will get rid of things like the department of commerce, the FBI, the CIA, get the US out of the UN, get the US out of pro corporate trading practices like NFTA, and cut taxes and spending.

He will pull troops out just about as fast as is logistically possible.

He will slowly try to erase welfare, knowing that a full transition would take years for the government dependent people to get used to.

I think this speaks for itself.



http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/health-freedom/

You are only surprised because you expect the federal government to be handling issues it has no business handling.

Ron Paul knows that the key to cheaper health care is for government to get out of the way. That is the single best solution there is.

Sounds like if he were to be elected we'd all be wearing crystals and magnetic bracelets and living in vans with shag carpeting.

A lot of people do that already, in case you didn't realize it.

Although I would rather wear a magnetic bracelet than take any new FDA approved drug like say, vioxx!

At least a magnetic bracelet will not significantly increase my risk of a heart attack (keep in mind that the pseudo effect is real.) All the while our supper expensive bloated government giving the drug the go ahead...that bureaucratic house of worship really seems to work well the benefit of the public (sarcasm.)

Of course if we look at consumer protection groups like UL, we see a system that works as well as anyone can expect any system to work and guess what? It does not cost us a single tax dollar. Imagine that, a private consumer protection agency can actually work.

In other words, we do not need, and at least for me, do not want the government to go around trying to fix things like health care. We need them to get the hell out of the way so that a truly viable solution to our health care problem can come forward.

That is what Ron said he will do, and that is reflected in his voting record, and so that is exactly what I believe he will do.

And, that is the best thing for this country at this moment. I hope you agree...

That is unless you believe that more government, the same one that got us in the mess in Iraq, can make things better. Then by all means vote for a traditional candidate, republican or democrat. All in all they are mostly just two sides of the same coin so it is completely irrelevant which one you pick.

 

[Geekster]

For instance if you drive to work you are driving on a road built by public funds. Some of the people who helped pay for that road don't use that road and some don't drive at all but the common good determines their tax dollars should be used to help construct a transport system. If everyone took your attitude then you and your fellow commuters would have to personally pay for the roads you use and so the country would quickly grind to a halt. The same is true of health.

In reference to the bold text.

I don't disagree with your perspective...however, you do know that if a need for a road or service comes up that more often than not people in a local community will get together and form a cooperative effort to help pay for the required service.

If you don't believe me I would invite you to have a drive to the Midwest states of the US.

There you will find tiny towns without a large enough tax base to support much or any city infrastructure. Yet these people got together and formed things like farmers COOPS that were, or I should say, still are, needed for the common good.

Guess what Art? The Federal government didn't have to form a committee to review the problem and then form a department and then waste 30% of the funding on administration cost alone to get it done. It was accomplished without ANY government involvement.

So my point is that you are correct in saying that society does need certain infrastructures that are best paid for by everyone. But I believe that you are wrong to assume we need the government to accomplish that, and I believe that private citizens better understand the needs and so better understand how to deal with it in a cost effective and efficient manner.

 

[Maxwell]

As an immigrant myself (although a legal one.. from russia) I have to sympathize with these people, they are coming here to make a life for themselves. If you live in this country its pure hypocrisy to deny that right, considering this country's own origins. And for that matter if you call yourself a human effing being, you should show a little more compassion.

You're wrong once again. It is extremely hazardous to a country to allow it's borders to be uncontrolled. It can be severely damaging to a nation's sovereignty to allow undocumented people running around within its borders. The argument that Americans should be completely fine with illegals running around our borders because of our countries origins is nothing but complete nut-job talk. It's an insult to the many legal immigrants in this country.

 

[scpg02]

they are coming here to make a life for themselves.

I would not compare legal immigrants with the illegal ones who come across the border. They are the true racists. They hate whites and they hate this country. Did you watch the protests? It wasn't the American flag they flew over their heads. Only after it hit the news and they realized their mistake did they use the American flag.

 

[slugcountry]

You're wrong once again. It is extremely hazardous to a country to allow it's borders to be uncontrolled. It can be severely damaging to a nation's sovereignty to allow undocumented people running around within its borders. The argument that Americans should be completely fine with illegals running around our borders because of our countries origins is nothing but complete nut-job talk. It's an insult to the many legal immigrants in this country.

you have to survive any way you can... if the only thing sitting between me and a better life is a border fence, I'd hop it too.

 

[Maxwell]

you have to survive any way you can... if the only thing sitting between me and a better life is a border fence, I'd hop it too.

Well, if you want to view it that way, then that is your decision. However, just remember that allowed millions of people, who for all intents and purposes, do not 'exist' to the government is extremely dangerous for you, your family, and friends. If you had basically no identity and did not exist to the government, yet you lived in poverty, what would you do? How would you act? Recklessly - and not within the law - is guaranteed by at least a significant portion of the millions of illegal immigrants in this country. Some of them legitimately want to work, but you have to assume that there will be rampant crime whenever you allow millions of faceless, 'identity-less', people within our borders.

Nations must have laws and they must have borders. The safety and strength of our citizens should be paramount over any feelings I have for illegal immigrants who want a better life. I can understand they want to survive any way they can, but let be honest - when it comes down to the wire (and truthfully, much before that) - I'll take the safety of my family, and the sovereignty of my country, over the well-being of any illegal immigrant any day.

They'd do the same if the situation was reversed.

 

[slugcountry]

Nations must have laws and they must have borders. The safety and strength of our citizens should be paramount over any feelings I have for illegal immigrants who want a better life. I can understand they want to survive any way they can, but let be honest - when it comes down to the wire (and truthfully, much before that) - I'll take the safety of my family, and the sovereignty of my country, over the well-being of any illegal immigrant any day.

They'd do the same if the situation was reversed.

What makes you and your family, or the citizens of your country, more worthy of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness than an illegal immigrant? In the words of our own fore fathers these rights are inalienable. It is not the immigrants' fault that governments have this bull**** concept of citizenship. In the lead up to WW2 the US Government (along with every European power) DENIED sanctuary to Jewish refugees, literally condemning them to death.

If people want to come into this country and make an honest living for themselves they should be given that opportunity without question. Any argument to the contrary is simply an elitist and exclusionary construct in my view.

 

[Maxwell]

What makes you and your family, or the citizens of your country, more worthy of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness than an illegal immigrant?

When did I ever say that any people are more deserving of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? I never said that.

It is not the immigrants' fault that governments have this bull**** concept of citizenship.

And it is not the fault of the American citizens that the people of Mexico are not happy within their own country. It is not the fault of the American people that the Mexican government is not able to (or willing to) provide for and take care of their own people.

I understand that people want to enter this country. They are free to do so legally. Now, if you want to make the case that our immigration laws are not functional, I'm completely willing to have that debate with you. However, you are 'demonizing' the citizens of this country in order to pull on people's heart-strings and make a cheap point. I do not believe one group of people are more deserving of happiness than another. That is not the point of this discussion.

If people want to come into this country and make an honest living for themselves they should be given that opportunity without question. Any argument to the contrary is simply an elitist and exclusionary construct in my view.

If you allow EVERYBODY into this country a few things will certainly occur:

1) The overall quality of life in this country will absolutely plummet.

2) We will inherit the debt and poverty of other nations and become downtrodden and buried under the dead weight.

3) We will lose control of the citizenry and we will not be able to provide for them. Right now our health-care system needs reforming -- if we allow every single person into this country the health-care system will be absolutely destroyed. We simply can not care for that many people.

4) We will lose any sort of economic or technological power due to the amount of 'bottom-feeders' that will enter this country. We will have to feed and provide medical care for these people. We will have to redirect money that would have went towards scientific research and our military towards food stamps and other handouts.

There are many more arguments as to why a country needs to have AND enforce border laws. I wish I could cure cancer, feed the world, and get rid of AIDS. Unfortunately, life is not as simple as 'wishing' for a solution and having it appear. In a perfect world, every person would be able to enter any country and make a fine life for themselves. However, this is far from a perfect world and we must have priorities.

 

[slugcountry]

4) We will lose any sort of economic or technological power due to the amount of 'bottom-feeders' that will enter this country. We will have to feed and provide medical care for these people. We will have to redirect money that would have went towards scientific research and our military towards food stamps and other handouts.

LOL there is your problem right there. God forbid we lose the popularity contest! Oh my god! CUT OUR MILITARY SPENDING??!? NEVER!

You've never been downtrodden or you wouldn't spit such crap sorry and good night.

 

[Maxwell]

LOL there is your problem right there. God forbid we lose the popularity contest! Oh my god! CUT OUR MILITARY SPENDING??!? NEVER!

Excuse me? Did you ignore my entire post except for this single point? Who mentioned a popularity contest? You keep repeatedly going off topic. There is a lot more at stake than just popularity.

I said economic and technological advantages. These are extremely important for our country. A strong economy is one of the most important facets of any nation. One of the best ways to accomplish this, these days, is through technological strength. Just look at India and China.

I don't understand your way of thinking - you seemingly have no respect or care for this country. You ignored every single negative aspect (and some very horrible negative aspects, at that) and jumped on to a single point I made -- and you didn't even truly address it! You used my words and spun them completely.

You know, patriotism does not have to be a bad thing.

You've never been downtrodden or you wouldn't spit such crap sorry and good night.

What does that have to do with anything? How do you know anything about my past or station in life?

What I do have is respect for my country. I also have an extreme dislike for this new-age, non-thinking, new type of vitriol people have for this country. Especially coming from someone like you. You've mentioned that you are an immigrant yourself. How come you came to this country? If you truly dislike it so much, why don't you head back to Russia?

I'm sure the Russian government would have no problem with letting in every single person from downtrodden countries. I bet Putin would love to entertain the thoughts of downgrading his military and economic strength so that he can help the downtrodden people from another country.

Would you even be able to talk like this in Russia?

 

[slugcountry]

You know, patriotism does not have to be a bad thing.

Would you even be able to talk like this in Russia?

I don't mean to completely simplify your points like this but this is what it boils down to in my opinion.

Patriotism IS a bad thing. Standing for principles is good, standing for a nation, government or other power is BS.

50 years ago you wouldn't be able to talk this way in Russia, no. This is exactly my point, people shouldn't be forced to live in a ****ty place, let them come here and live a better life.

You talk of national economies and technological power but you're forgetting about PEOPLE... above all governments are SUPPOSED to protect people, not the other way around.

As for respect for this country... I have respect for the Bill of Rights and the pre-amble to the declaration for independence. Principles - Something the corporate paid leaders of this country forgot a long, long time ago.

 

[slugcountry]

If you truly dislike it so much, why don't you head back to Russia?

Real mature by the way.

You were born here with all the rights and privileges of being a US citizen. I worked my ass off and earned those rights.

Its very easy to talk about economic strength and denying opportunity to others when you're sitting King of the Hill.

In essence this is why there is STILL ethnic cleansing going on in Darfur - not that someone like you would give a S.

By the way... just to stay somewhat on the tppic of this thread... vote republican!? you'd have to be crazy. A little quote off CNN today:

In the book, Greenspan wrote that Bush essentially left an unbridled GOP Congress to spend money however it saw fit, and by not vetoing a single bill in six years, the president deprived the nation of checks and balances.

"The Republicans in Congress lost their way," Greenspan wrote. "They swapped principle for power. They ended up with neither. They deserved to lose."

 

[Maxwell]

I don't mean to completely simplify your points like this but this is what it boils down to in my opinion.

Patriotism IS a bad thing. Standing for principles is good, standing for a nation, government or other power is BS.

You talk of national economies and technological power but you're forgetting about PEOPLE... above all governments are SUPPOSED to protect people, not the other way around.

I think you're romanticizing the situation. You're absolutely correct -- governments are supposed to protect the people -- their CITIZENS. Now, this is accomplished through maintaining a strong economy so people are able to work, invest their money, and provide for their families.

The main idea is that we want people to be as self-sufficient as possible. And for those citizens who do need our help, we should be there for them. But if we allow every single person into the country, the logistics of trying to help everyone is just impossible.

50 years ago you wouldn't be able to talk this way in Russia, no. This is exactly my point, people shouldn't be forced to live in a ****ty place, let them come here and live a better life.

If we let everyone come here, then EVERYONE will end up living in a ****ty place. That's why it's important to define borders and regulate who can enter the country -- so we can help those citizens who do need help.

As for respect for this country... I have respect for the Bill of Rights and the pre-amble to the declaration for independence. Principles - Something the corporate paid leaders of this country forgot a long, long time ago.

It's nice to see you respect those documents -- I do as well. The beautiful thing about this country is that despite who is in power at the time, if the citizenry is truly upset, we can make the necessary changes over time.

But in general, I have respect for this country as a whole. It has been very hospitable for my family.

Real mature by the way.

My statement about returning to Russia may have seemed more hostile than I meant it to. I'm not one of those people who believes that any person who disagrees with the current policies of this country should leave. You are entitled to say and feel however you want.

You were born here with all the rights and privileges of being a US citizen. I worked my ass off and earned those rights.

That doesn't make your argument any more valid. I admire your hard work, but I don't believe that your arguments are stronger because you were not born in the U.S.

Its very easy to talk about economic strength and denying opportunity to others when you're sitting King of the Hill.

It's not easy -- it's necessary. To be very blunt: my loyalty is first to this country and it's well-being. I want this country to be as strong and healthy as it can be so my family is safe (in all facets of the word, health care-wise, etc) and prosperous.

It may seem selfish, but it's honest. And if you asked any other person in the world the same question, they'd always tell you they want the best for their family. I care very much about other people -- my first concern (after my family) is the well-being of the citizens of this country.

In essence this is why there is STILL ethnic cleansing going on in Darfur - not that you give a S.

I do care about the situation in Darfur. I really, really do. However, I don't see what my position has to do with the ethnic cleansing going on in the Sudan.

Are you implying that by being concerned with the status of undocumented people running around in this country I am somehow contributing to the ethnic genocide in Darfur?

 

[slugcountry]

i'm far too lazy to address every thing you just said I'm not gunna lie, but as for your last point it is your indifference to other people's struggles that implies you don't care about what's going on in darfur... I'm sure you DO care about what's going on, but you see the parallel I'm sure... most nations are denying sanctuary to refugees from darfur.. in fact israel is the only country ACCEPTING them. Why? Again, because Jewish refugees were condemned to DEATH when many countries INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA refused to grant sanctuary to refugees of a GENOCIDE.

FFS I have compassion for people all over the earth, not just those living in America. I certainly don't believe that an American life is worth any more than an African one just because America is economically better off. Life is life.

And take this last point as you will but as someone who earned my citizenship, I can appreciate what it actually means. And as someone who immigrated to this country I have a more worldly perspective. This is pretty evident in the way you seem to value Americans as more worthy of a good life than other people.

 

[Maxwell]

i'm far too lazy to address every thing you just said I'm not gunna lie, but as for your last point it is your indifference to other people's struggles that implies you don't care about what's going on in darfur... I'm sure you DO care about what's going on, but you see the parallel I'm sure... most nations are denying sanctuary to refugees from darfur.. in fact israel is the only country ACCEPTING them. Why? Again, because Jewish refugees were condemned to DEATH when many countries INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA refused to grant sanctuary to refugees of a GENOCIDE.

Well, you aren't going to provide statistics,but I'd be curious as to how many refugees from Darfur have been turned away from the US. I'd wager it's not many, if an at all.

However, this is all beside the point. We are discussing the USA's immigration policy. We aren't discussing genocides. Again, you're pulling out the heart-string tugging red herrings.

FFS I have compassion for people all over the earth, not just those living in America. I certainly don't believe that an American life is worth any more than an African one just because America is economically better off. Life is life.

I have compassion for people all over the Earth too. I NEVER said I believe an American life is worth more than an African one. That is not for me to say.

However, ignoring your straw-man genocide comments, I can say that on the list of priorities, maintaining a strong immigration policy is very important to the US. We can not just let in every single person who wants to come here.

These are two separate issues -- refugees from the genocide and allowing any person to enter the US whenever they want -- and you're just using the situation in Darfur to provide a red-herring to take away from the main issue here.

And take this last point as you will but as someone who earned my citizenship, I can appreciate what it actually means. And as someone who immigrated to this country I have a more worldly perspective. This is pretty evident in the way you seem to value Americans as more worthy of a good life than other people.

Again, being an immigrant is not the only way to get a worldly perspective.

Let me give you this spin -- because I was born here, and my family has been here for a long time, this is not just a place I ran to when times were bad in my home country. This is not a country where I am just staying until things get better in my homeland. This is a country I cherish, through the good times and bad, and I have a lot of stock in how this country fares. My children will live here, and their children after them. I have a very vested interest in how this country does in this world. That's why I am passionate about the issues regarding this country. That's why I don't want every single downtrodden person in the world to enter this country.

My children do not need to inherit the debt and poverty of the world. We can lend help to foreign countries so that they can provide for their citizens -- I am not a complete isolationist -- but I believe we must protect this country.

If you are not going to reply to my entire posts, at least read and consider them them, please.

 

[slugcountry]

Let me give you this spin -- because I was born here, and my family has been here for a long time, this is not just a place I ran to when times were bad in my home country. This is not a country where I am just staying until things get better in my homeland. This is a country I cherish, through the good times and bad, and I have a lot of stock in how this country fares. My children will live here, and their children after them. I have a very vested interest in how this country does in this world. That's why I am passionate about the issues regarding this country. That's why I don't want every single downtrodden person in the world to enter this country.

See this is what I'm talking about. You don't understand the commitment of citizenship at all. This isn't just something I'm doing "until things get better" in my home country. Citizenship is a serious thing, and in taking it on I take on all the responsibilities you've mentioned. I even make myself vulnerable to a draft if this bull**** in Iraq ever comes down to that. I've been living here for 17 years now. Believe me I have a pretty vested interest in how this country fares. I however don't believe it has the right to deport people like (for example) elian gonzales because he was from cuba. or mexicans coming across the border for better economic opportunity. I'll say it again: Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness. Inalienable rights. That means even the U.S. Government shouldn't have a say in who gets them and who doesn't.

 

[Maxwell]

See this is what I'm talking about. You don't understand the commitment of citizenship at all. This isn't just something I'm doing "until things get better" in my home country. Citizenship is a serious thing, and in taking it on I take on all the responsibilities you've mentioned. I even make myself vulnerable to a draft if this bull**** in Iraq ever comes down to that. I've been living here for 17 years now. Believe me I have a pretty vested interest in how this country fares. I however don't believe it has the right to deport people like (for example) elian gonzales because he was from cuba. or mexicans coming across the border for better economic opportunity. I'll say it again: Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness. Inalienable rights. That means even the U.S. Government shouldn't have a say in who gets them and who doesn't.

One -- I was not talking about you in the quoted section.

If you were truly vested in the interests of this country, you would not be spouting empty rhetoric arguing for complete anarchy within these borders.

Two -- Have you not been listening to what I've been saying? It is unreasonable and ridiculous to allow untold amounts of people into ANY country. The logistics of caring for all of them would destroy this country.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is a right that all citizens of this country are guaranteed. It is not an argument for completely destructing the borders of this country. If we allowed every single person into this country, life and liberty would be completely annihilated and no one would be able to pursue happiness.

What you want is not practical. It's something that we can both agree would be nice, but this is reality.

 

[Art]

Out of curiosity anyone know what % of the US's total population of American citizenship holders are descended from immigrants or are themselves naturalized immigrants?

 

[slugcountry]

Out of curiosity anyone know what % of the US's total population of American citizenship holders are descended from immigrants or are themselves naturalized immigrants?

are you kidding? 99.999% the remainder are native americans who are sadly a dwindling minority (largely due to U.S. government efforts to wipe them out... i think ending about a hundred years ago though I'm probably wrong on that).

The U.S. was birthed from immigrants that came from Europe...

 

[Art]

are you kidding? 99.999% the remainder are native americans who are sadly a dwindling minority (largely due to U.S. government efforts to wipe them out... i think ending about a hundred years ago though I'm probably wrong on that).

The U.S. was birthed from immigrants that came from Europe...

Presumably it is that 0.001% who are complaining so much about all these new immigrants as surely people would not be so hypocritical as to deny the same opportunity to others as was afforded to them and their forefathers? What happened to "Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."?

The same arguments touted today to oppose immigration are the same baseless arguments used many times before as each successive wave of immigrants hit America's shores. The Irish, the Italians, the Germans, the Vietnamese etc... Yet all of these people integrated into American society very quickly and contributed immensely to the growth of America as a nation both economically and when necessary militarily.

The final recourse of those who would deny others the opportunities they themselves have availed of is to hide behind the illegality issue of the immigration. Well the slaves who escaped through the underground railway acted illegally and those Jews who fled persecution in Nazi Germany acted illegally but history shows it wasn't them but rather the laws which were wrong.

 

[slugcountry]

Presumably it is that 0.001% who are complaining so much about all these new immigrants as surely people would not be so hypocritical as to deny the same opportunity to others as was afforded to them and their fore-fathers?

Indeed.. presumably

 

[BobG]

Presumably it is that 0.001% who are complaining so much about all these new immigrants as surely people would not be so hypocritical as to deny the same opportunity to others as was afforded to them and their forefathers? What happened to "Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."?

The same arguments touted today to oppose immigration are the same baseless arguments used many times before as each successive wave of immigrants hit America's shores. The Irish, the Italians, the Germans, the Vietnamese etc... Yet all of these people integrated into American society very quickly and contributed immensely to the growth of America as a nation both economically and when necessary militarily.

The final recourse of those who would deny others the opportunities they themselves have availed of is to hide behind the illegality issue of the immigration. Well the slaves who escaped through the underground railway acted illegally and those Jews who fled persecution in Nazi Germany acted illegally but history shows it wasn't them but rather the laws which were wrong.

Whether the arguments are hypocritical or not is irrelevant to their validity.

You could say the same thing about the eco-fanatics on Easter Island that tried to prevent residents from cutting down the last few remaining trees (if eco-fanatics did exist on Easter Island). It would be unfair to deny trees to current residents because of the poor planning of past residents.

You could say the same thing about Social Security recipients. It would be particularly dastardly to require them to support yesterday's old via taxes for their entire working life and then deny or cut their Social Security benefits because today's young don't like devoting such a large chunk of their paycheck to supporting today's old.

In fact, you could say the same thing about many US companies. They promised pension benefits in the future to settle labor disputes in the present, then claim they can't afford to abide by the promises they made yesterday. It's flat out criminal for them to back out on those promises today, but keeping those promises means going out of business resulting in both current jobs and the promised benefits going up in smoke.

 

[proton]

Presumably it is that 0.001% who are complaining so much about all these new immigrants as surely people would not be so hypocritical as to deny the same opportunity to others as was afforded to them and their forefathers? What happened to "Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."?

The same arguments touted today to oppose immigration are the same baseless arguments used many times before as each successive wave of immigrants hit America's shores. The Irish, the Italians, the Germans, the Vietnamese etc... Yet all of these people integrated into American society very quickly and contributed immensely to the growth of America as a nation both economically and when necessary militarily.

Theres a lot of opposition to ILLEGAL immigration. I got no problem if all those mesicans came here LEGALLY, but theyre not. If the illegal immigrants can come into this country so easily, then so can terrorists. Plus, the illegals don't plan on integrating into american society, hence they wave mexican flags during their protests. They just want to use America as a means to feed their starving families.

 

[slugcountry]

They just want to use America as a means to feed their starving families.

Yeah how evil of them.

 

[BobG]

Theres a lot of opposition to ILLEGAL immigration. I got no problem if all those mesicans came here LEGALLY, but theyre not. If the illegal immigrants can come into this country so easily, then so can terrorists. Plus, the illegals don't plan on integrating into american society, hence they wave mexican flags during their protests. They just want to use America as a means to feed their starving families.

If the US does a better job screening those coming here legally, then the threat of terrorists sneaking in over the border might become a realistic threat. So far, most terrorist attacks in the US have been by Americans and any attacks by foreigners have been by those here in the US legally.

Your major terrorist groups in the US:

KuKluxKlan could probably be considered in the same league as terrorists, though they're usually considered to be a hate group (not sure of the difference).

Puerto Rican nationalists attempted to assassinate Truman, stormed the House of Representatives, and conducted the first airline hijacking in the US. They wound up killing 4 in one bombing in the '70's.

You also had the Weathermen, the Black Panthers, and SLA (of Patty Hearst fame). They committed a number of attacks, but all were pretty small scale.

You also had the flakes - a scattering of individuals that committed terrorist acts. Eric Rudolph bombed abortion clinics and bars frequented by gays. Who knows what Kacynski's cause was - I don't think he had one.

You also have the Animal Liberation Front and the Earth Liberation Front, two groups that use some pretty extreme measures in pursuit of their goals even if they don't outright kill people.

The second most significant terrorist attack in US history was Nichols and McVeigh - two Americans that bombed the Murrah building in Oklahoma City in protest of the government's siege of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, TX that resulted in the group burning down their compound with them inside. You had 205 deaths due to terrorist acts between 1980 and 1999 and 168 of those deaths were in the single Oklahoma City bombing.

Then, of course, you had the World Trade Center bombing, the Empire State Building sniper, and 9/11, which were conducted by Middle Eastern foreigners legally in the US.

That doesn't mean terrorists couldn't sneak over the border as easily as Mexican immigrants or that we should ignore border security. It just means that it hasn't been a problem in the past because it's been so easy for them to enter the US legally. Of course, the reason for that is because foreign terrorists entering the country by any means has been a rarity. I believe that natural rarity has been the key component in Bush's success in protecting us from foreign terrorist attacks since 9/11.

That same trend extends world wide. Terrorist acts are a lot more likely to be committed in a terrorist's own country than traveling to a foreign country to kill someone. If you want to cut down on terrorism (you can never eliminate any chance of a terrorist attack), make sure all of your subgroups within the country have an opportunity to achieve some kind of success. That divides the subgroup between those who want to strike out and those that want to make a coordinated effort to increase the number of the subgroup that succeed by plain old hard work.

(And, I have to agree with slugcountry - your argument, "They just want to use America as a means to feed their starving families" was a pretty ineffective argument.)

 

[proton]

Yeah how evil of them.

what I mean by that is that those mexicans should do something about THEIR government, instead of relying on us to help them out. They should be having all their protests demanding that THEIR government do a better job instead of complaining about how we americans arent doing enough to help them.

it is NOT our job to take their of them

 

[animalcroc]

He didn't say "all", he said "most". And the fact of the matter is that a very high fraction of poor people are poor by their own bad choices. The most telling sign is the extremely high corellation between education and income. Most poor people are poor simply because they chose not to finish high school.

Poor people in Nigeria, Brazil, or Afghanistan do not have a choice. Not even in America. It's called life. Trust me, I grew up the poorest of the American poor and I'm now attending UCSD. Being poor, it was harder because life gets in the way. You won't know how something feels unless you walk a mile in that person's shoes.

 

[animalcroc]

Its clear who gains from this, and it isn't the general population.

Illegals effectively destroyed my home; where I grew up in L.A. The last time that I visited it was hardly recognizable.

The rich benefit from illegal immigration and the lower class suffer. ONly 5 percent of illegal immigrants work in agriculture. Illegal immigrants compete with Americans in skilled labor such as masonry, plumbing, pipefitting, contruction, etc.

Yes, I agree LA is a dump. I think illegal immigration has definitely had its impact there.

As long as people are selfish punks and long to gain at the expense of others, then illegal immigration, poverty, environmental degradation, etc will continue to exist.

 

[animalcroc]

I don't mind helping pay for people who really need the help, but I hate thinking about paying for someone's smoking habit or some kids broken spine doing a jackass stunt. Why don't we have universal car insurance too?

Because car insurance is a scam. You pay them monthly but when you get in an accident and try to have insurance cover it, they either make you pay ("deductible" lol) for it or threaten to raise your rates. This makes you sue the person who causes the damage. What's the point of insurance if we don't need it? Answer: dirty politicians and business (which is always dirty)

 

[Skyhunter]

I am paying attention to Senator Ron Paul and I *LOVE* this guy.

I am registered "decline to state", so I can request any primary ballot I want. (only one) I have already decided to vote for him in the California primary. He is the only one so far in the Republican debates who is speaking the truth abut the war.