11 Million Illegal Immigrants

[tallcal101]

Let history reflect your views.I'm to tired tonight.I just have one question.If I don't agree with you and your views on immigrants,am I scum as well?I'm serious.Oh,by the way,I was one of those mis-guieded
souls helping to end the war(and we did,and saved many lives)in the late sixties.I believe it's called the right to peacefully demonstrate against,let's see,Nixon.I know,compared to Jimmy Carter,Nixon was just a prince of a man.A real fine fellow,an outstanding American,and I'm sure one of your idols.
Who p*****ed you off so much Greg?

 

[cheri1122]

Sorry to disappoint, JoeBob, but I'm too tired for fireworks at the moment. (Although, I just now read the post where you called me "cute", which I haven't been since I was 5, & offered to pinch my cheeks - try it, & you'll get fireworks, ok?)
I am not a member of either party - they both make me sick. While I usually side with TallCall, on immigration, I'm with Leo & Greg. I mean, what part of "illegal" immigrants doesn't our political leadership get? I don't buy the argument that they take jobs Americans won't, just like I don't buy the argument that wages can't be raised for those at the bottom of the pay scale, because it would force companies to raise prices, & reduce hiring, & cut the meager benefits they offer. None of those things stop them from hiking the top end of the pay scale - I just read in USA Today that the average wage earner's pay has gone up by 3% - but the pay at the top rose by 25%. (From outrageous to simply ludicrous!) While minimum wage hasn't been raised in how many years?
I am sorry that their lives are so poor in their home countries, but we can't solve every problem on Earth - we can't even solve most of our own. The system is broken, (not to mention broke, in debt up to it's expensive hairstyle), and we really need to focus on what our citizens need first. We need jobs that pay enough to live on, affordable housing & healthcare, education, (both higher & vocational) - the list is endless. What we get instead, is a culture of greed, led by the example of business & government.In America today, money talks - but only to other money. Taxpayers have become like children were once treated: seen, but not heard.
As for our President- before he was elected the first time, I said he was going to lead us in a direction we don't want to go, through his dangerous arrogance (he doesn't seem to appreciate how big a part dumb luck has in his being born into a family of wealth & position - he acts as if he's earned it!) and people said I was nuts. Now I'm reading pretty much the same thing, from many others, in the newspapers.
I hope the next President, whoever it is, can put the needs of all American people first. We could use a leader like that.

 

[joebob1_30132]

Well Cherri, I think most times people on both sides wan to get to the same place.. good life and Prosparity for all, its just a matter of approach I tend to believe in peoples ability to solve their problems,rather than the government to do it... My father worked for the gov civil service for 35 yrs ..other relatives in the post office.. None of them would not touch a government run program to save their lives(health care).. you think the Dmv is bad..Remember The gov have guns ..they will take your money, property at gun point. With private corps you can always walk away do somthing different. although capitolism can be harsh,slow greedy, it is the best way..I tend to blame peoples appathy for not holding their politicians accountable. Unfortunatly I cant distinguish G bush from his democratic friends (taking my money And spending though the roof) on education waste.. Its been done for 40 years and we ar sinking ..The gov canot run education , they cant run anything. They cant run health care .. The arrogance of gov to claim they have the answers and know whats best for us is crazy talk I tell ya..I would rather sit across from you over a couple cups of coffe (or some shots of jaggermister) and figure outs whats best for us and do it ..

 

[greg334]

It is not whether you agree with me or not, my question is simple; do you support people breaking the law and all the problems related to looking the other way when they do or would you rather support legal immigration where these people get a fair chance to make a good living in our country and become part of our culture? – I respect you opinion either way and that is why I am asking it. Think you are scum?? No way! I honestly think that you don’t want to answer the question.

As for the protesters and the 60’s stuff, look unless you saw what I saw, there was little peace with some of the ‘peaceful’ demonstrations I remember. I remember the talk of violence, the talk of over throwing the government, knowing the crimes that they committed to support their little war again society, watching people fight with the cops over the war and ending up (both of them) in the hospital. Peaceful – maybe over there but surely not here.

I am not singling you out by any means; I am talking about a group of people who all claim to have a common bond – protesting the war, so please get that straight.

I never said Nixon was great, but the protest started under LBJ’s administration – not Nixon and LBJ was still president in the late 60’s. I got to hand it to Nixon though, he did wander over to the Lincoln memorial one night and met with the protestors without notice, without the press and without the entire secret service in tow – I understand he was there for a couple hours talking to the protestors. Yea I know you will bring up that nut who sat in Texas but really this is not a W thing - it is a Nixon comment. As for Carter, I think he is a disgrace to the country for his comments and actions.

I got to ask something I asked a lot of the 60’s feel good types – why do they cling onto this idea the Kennedy and LBJ should not be hated as much as Nixon and other Republican presidents? You know Kennedy help German spies and LBJ used extortion to get things done in the Senate – they both acted arrogant and both of them got us involved in the Vietnam War, which was all about the money. This is a legitimate question and again I just want your opinion, not to disagree with it or impugn your answer.

Oh what p*ssed me off was not you, sorry to trample on the 60’s again but it was listening to some kids repeating c**p that I heard back then, it just was at the same time I was writing the post. I apologize if I offended you.

Well back to immigration and invaders, I find my question legitimate and worthy of an answer.

 

[tallcal101]

Joe Bob,
One difference between dubya and Clinton,in fact one difference that goes to the heart of your comment about not be able to tell them apart when it comes to spending and education.

Very simple,Clinton paid the national debt down,left dubya a surplus,business thrived and education,state by state,showed significant increse's in test scores.

Under dubya,well,it all pretty much speaks for itself.
So,you may need to quit rubbing your feet when you read the New York Times(I know you don't get your news from USA Today or worse yet FOX),as you sound bright and well informed.

 

[greg334]

>Very simple,Clinton paid the national debt down,left dubya a
>surplus,business thrived and education,state by state,showed
>significant increse's in test scores.

Yep, it seems that this has been beaten into the ground - sorry everyone and sorry TallCal101.

But 'Very Simply' Clinton didn't give us a thing when it came to the national debt - the press reported that there was a surplus but left out the fact that 1 - this was a projected surplus, not an actual surplus and 2 - failed to mention that a republican congress was the one who passed the budget, again please understand that the president is limited to what he can do. You need to know who the federal budget and line item accounting actually works.

I give Billy Boy a lot of credit being a politician - working with the republicans to get things done but since there is so much hatred in congress against President Bush, the Dems should be ashamed with some things they have done - BUT before you say anything all of them should be ashamed for ignoring us.

Oh no answer to my question?

 

[tallcal101]

Excuse me Mr. Smarty Pants!My God Greg,your are simply putting in too much lay over time!Tell em' to get you some runs,your mind is spinning out of control!!I don't even want to bring up what the Republicans did to Bill,and the venom that they have for Hillary(who,by the by has raised a cool 6 Mil without trying).
Yea buddy,the deeper dubya sinks in the mirk,the more outlandish you sound.This is actually getting fun!!

 

[greg334]

Outlandish, ok - I guess. Mr. smarty pants, wow thanks!

By the by I have been on the road and back already. It is slow and I am trying a new thing today – doubt it will work but got to try.

Well for the sake of everyone I am going to only reply to the budget stuff and move on.

Ok the deficit and the federal budget is something that the press likes to beat up on republicans but with democrats they look the other way. This thing with the budget it is a complex thing that confuses a lot of people who have to work with it and more importantly most who are voting on it or provisions of it can’t even begin to understand it. The press interprets it for us and prints things that are rather untrue at times. If you want to believe them, well you can.

Surplus, no surplus – it was a projection, there is no facts behind our accounting model that supported a real surplus which even the GAO came out one of their congressional reports and said in 2000 that Clinton was wrong by announcing something that didn’t actually happen. They did concur that the deficit could be effectively wiped out if there is 0 spending increases (including the standard 3 to 5% budget baseline increase) and if inflation is kept in check – the deficit can go away in 20 years. The fact that ‘W’ wasn’t in office when this so called surplus evaporated – congress and Clinton increased spending a lot for the 2001 FY budget, the election was in November 2000 and they passed the 2001 FY budget just after the election on 11/19 and it was signed into law the following week. BUT when you can explain to me what line item spending is and how the budget works, I will believe that you are right about everything you say.

I love how you avoid the questions I ask and obfuscate the subject at hand – illegal immigration - a.k.a invaders. So please answer the questions – you can even PM me so no one else can say anything.

1 – Do you support people breaking the law and all the problems related to looking the other way when they do or would you rather support legal immigration where these people get a fair chance to make a good living in our country and become part of our culture?

2 – Why do people cling onto this idea the Kennedy and LBJ should not be hated as much as Nixon and other Republican presidents? (of course in the context of the Vietnam war and their behavior.)