Obama decides to grant blanket amnesty
23 Aug 2011, 11:33 am
It seems to me that this thread is long on idealism and short on the practicalities of actually administering a government.
As you should all be only too aware, there are limited resources with which government can undertake interdiction and refoulement. It is far better, I suggest, for government to acknowledge that there are limited resources, and focus those resources on priorities.
_________________
--James
23 Aug 2011, 11:37 am
If that's the case and he does grant them amnesty I think it will be one of the best things (if not the best thing) he has done or tried to do in his presidency. I am not an immigrant but I do understand the tremendous benefit they add to our society. Without the hard work of immigrants we would be in much more serious trouble economically.
23 Aug 2011, 12:39 pm
Orwell wrote:
DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Orwell wrote:
cw10 wrote:
Obama is the "educated classes". He's doing great don't you think?
Better than Bush, at least.
From what I've read the war is worse under Obama than it was under Bush.
Which war? It's true that Afghanistan is going badly for us right now, but we're starting to get a handle on it. Iraq has been (relatively) quiet for several years now.
And it is only going badly because Bush pulled resources to start the war in Iraq before the first was really done. It could have been done by now if the right resources had been consistently applied, instead of all this stop start surge pull back nonsense. Or, at least, it would have had a fair shot at being done. Experts KNEW the loss of resources at that point in time was going to be costly in ways that would eventually force us back in and dim the long term prospects. I don't know that it is winnable anymore at all. JHMO, of course, which is limited to snippets I've read (I know I'm not a military person, but I do know who to read, and pundits are not it for something like this).
_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).
23 Aug 2011, 1:45 pm
DW_a_mom wrote:
Orwell wrote:
DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Orwell wrote:
cw10 wrote:
Obama is the "educated classes". He's doing great don't you think?
Better than Bush, at least.
From what I've read the war is worse under Obama than it was under Bush.
Which war? It's true that Afghanistan is going badly for us right now, but we're starting to get a handle on it. Iraq has been (relatively) quiet for several years now.
And it is only going badly because Bush pulled resources to start the war in Iraq before the first was really done. It could have been done by now if the right resources had been consistently applied, instead of all this stop start surge pull back nonsense. Or, at least, it would have had a fair shot at being done. Experts KNEW the loss of resources at that point in time was going to be costly in ways that would eventually force us back in and dim the long term prospects. I don't know that it is winnable anymore at all. JHMO, of course, which is limited to snippets I've read (I know I'm not a military person, but I do know who to read, and pundits are not it for something like this).
It's unlikely that the war would be over by now. The situation in Afghanistan presents unique challenges, and the failure to establish a successful democratic government there cannot be blamed entirely on Bush diverting resources to Iraq. Casualty rates have continued to mount through the Obama administration, in spite of the increased resources allocated to our efforts in Afghanistan.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
23 Aug 2011, 5:31 pm
JakobVirgil wrote:
cw10 wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Orwell wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
If I want to argue with "conservatives" I prefer to do so with one
that is honest and knows what he is talking about.
that is honest and knows what he is talking about.
Good luck finding one. You may need to enlist Diogenes' help.
Intellectual honesty and broad knowledge tend to disqualify one from being a "true believer" in any camp.
be it Objectivist or Marxist. Reality always confounds the panaceas.
It usually makes one a liberal is the truest and oldest sense.
a person who is generous.
You can argue all you want as the country burns. But take note, your house is still on fire.
that is not the statement of a conservative but an alarmist, and it has more in common with fascism than a defense
of the american way. Also it in no way engages what I said.
So new Guy thanks for reinforcing my belief that young conservatives are spineless disingenuous old women
who use emotional appeals instead of logical ones.
It's impossible to engage illogic. I am far from young. My age is listed on the forums. You're not only illogical but also unobservant which goes to my argument that you aren't paying attention to what's going on around you but stuck in your own little world.
John_Browning
Veteran
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range
23 Aug 2011, 6:59 pm
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
Mexico has tons of natural resources. However, their society is so screwed up that the only way to make that piece of real estate a functional part of America would be to get rid of all the Mexicans there. That's why I prefer to kick them out of the US, build a wall, and put a garrison along it. It's looking more and more like we are going to need some sort of military intervention there someday so it's best not to increase economic cooperation with them until that is all done with and we've re-established a functional government there again.
Your entire story is overly pessimistic. Mexico is legitimately a developing nation, not a stagnant economy and not a society without any potential for improvement. Many of the problems are shared with other developing nations, and thus likely will decrease as the nation gets more developed.
You are being naive. The "silver or lead" doctrine Mexican officials are submitting to in order to save their lives is slowly turning Mexico into a failed state.
wcoltd wrote:
If that's the case and he does grant them amnesty I think it will be one of the best things (if not the best thing) he has done or tried to do in his presidency. I am not an immigrant but I do understand the tremendous benefit they add to our society. Without the hard work of immigrants we would be in much more serious trouble economically.
Alien invaders have cost the US $1,000,000,000,000 over the last decade, account for 630,000 felony prisoners in the US, 780 felony fugitives and take up 12,000,000 non-farm jobs. In the border states, they account for 53% of burglaries, 50% of gang members, 71% of car thefts, and 47-66% (varying by location) of drivers stopped by police for traffic violations are alien invaders. THEY AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE DRIVING AT ALL IN THE FIRST PLACE!! ! Even if they were to all stop committing crimes, they refuse to assimilate and their oppressed peasant in need of a benevolent banana dictator to give them free handouts mentality is never going to serve the best interests of the United States.
_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown
"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud
23 Aug 2011, 8:19 pm
JakobVirgil wrote:
cw10 wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Orwell wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
If I want to argue with "conservatives" I prefer to do so with one
that is honest and knows what he is talking about.
that is honest and knows what he is talking about.
Good luck finding one. You may need to enlist Diogenes' help.
Intellectual honesty and broad knowledge tend to disqualify one from being a "true believer" in any camp.
be it Objectivist or Marxist. Reality always confounds the panaceas.
It usually makes one a liberal is the truest and oldest sense.
a person who is generous.
You can argue all you want as the country burns. But take note, your house is still on fire.
that is not the statement of a conservative but an alarmist, and it has more in common with fascism than a defense
of the american way. Also it in no way engages what I said.
So new Guy thanks for reinforcing my belief that young conservatives are spineless disingenuous old women
who use emotional appeals instead of logical ones.
It is not the state of an alarmist when the assessment is accurate.
23 Aug 2011, 8:41 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
number5 wrote:
Orwell wrote:
blunnet wrote:
I mean, are there alternative systems that support freedom, human rights, social justice, reform and all that, that we can get from history, as that is what we get under democratic governments in the 20th century?
Enlightened despotism. Or some form of technocratic republic, eg one where involvement in civil government is restricted to the educated classes.
I used to think this was a bad idea. Now, I think you may be on to something. We've dumbed it down substantially. Every idiot with a twitter account is an 'expert' on something, and the real experts are dismissed as elitists. I don't go visit a high school dropout when I'm sick. By the same logic, I'd prefer not to leave the fate of our country to people who can't distinguish a government benefit from a paycheck. Perhaps you are wise beyond your years.
I fail to see how someone is an expert when they tamper with the recorded data just to get the results they want. I was taught that something of that nature was academic dishonesty.
I fail to see how your comment has any relationship to anything whatsoever that was said in the post you quoted.
I bolded the part to show you how it is relevent, when you have "real experts" doctoring their data to make their position seem valid, why should I believe those "experts."
Um... if they're doctoring data, then for the most part, they are discredited. Intellectual dishonesty happens in multiple groups, and it isn't as if Republican talk radio is known for a data-driven research program. I don't think anybody is considering intellectually dishonest experts to be the "real experts". Certainly not Orwell.
Quote:
Case in point, is a reply in which you bashed me instead of reading what I was quoting carefully, it doesn't take a freakin Einstein to figure out how what I said was relevent. Fact of the matter is you just replied that way because of your arrogant belief that I am somehow inferior to you, so you didn't stop and actually look at what I quoted.
Umm....... your post still didn't appear to directly follow at all. There is no legitimate way I, or anybody, could be expected to arrive at your response from what you quoted and how you quoted it.
23 Aug 2011, 8:48 pm
John_Browning wrote:
You are being naive. The "silver or lead" doctrine Mexican officials are submitting to in order to save their lives is slowly turning Mexico into a failed state.
And you're probably cherry-picking data. Do you really think that most emerging economies have perfectly clean governmental systems? They don't, and crime, corruption, and everything else tends to be common in those nations. The issue though is that economic growth will improve institutional well-being. Mexico is in a position where it can experience economic growth as they are a major trade-partner with the US. I mean, I suppose you could be claiming that the government will outright collapse, but that kind of claim usually isn't a very credible prediction.
23 Aug 2011, 10:03 pm
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
number5 wrote:
Orwell wrote:
blunnet wrote:
I mean, are there alternative systems that support freedom, human rights, social justice, reform and all that, that we can get from history, as that is what we get under democratic governments in the 20th century?
Enlightened despotism. Or some form of technocratic republic, eg one where involvement in civil government is restricted to the educated classes.
I used to think this was a bad idea. Now, I think you may be on to something. We've dumbed it down substantially. Every idiot with a twitter account is an 'expert' on something, and the real experts are dismissed as elitists. I don't go visit a high school dropout when I'm sick. By the same logic, I'd prefer not to leave the fate of our country to people who can't distinguish a government benefit from a paycheck. Perhaps you are wise beyond your years.
I fail to see how someone is an expert when they tamper with the recorded data just to get the results they want. I was taught that something of that nature was academic dishonesty.
I fail to see how your comment has any relationship to anything whatsoever that was said in the post you quoted.
I bolded the part to show you how it is relevent, when you have "real experts" doctoring their data to make their position seem valid, why should I believe those "experts."
Um... if they're doctoring data, then for the most part, they are discredited. Intellectual dishonesty happens in multiple groups, and it isn't as if Republican talk radio is known for a data-driven research program. I don't think anybody is considering intellectually dishonest experts to be the "real experts". Certainly not Orwell.
Actually, a lot of you do. You can start with the left-wing drive by media, the climate scientists, etc. People still believe them, even when it has been proven that they have been totally dishonest.
Example: Sll the accusations towards Glenn Beck about half a year ago about him preaching violence, and then it gets debunked when I found the full clip.
Example 2: I'll let you find this for yourself but Ed Schultz tried to smear Governor Rick Perry as a racist, when the full speech clearly shows Perry was referring to the National Debt.
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Quote:
Case in point, is a reply in which you bashed me instead of reading what I was quoting carefully, it doesn't take a freakin Einstein to figure out how what I said was relevent. Fact of the matter is you just replied that way because of your arrogant belief that I am somehow inferior to you, so you didn't stop and actually look at what I quoted.
Umm....... your post still didn't appear to directly follow at all. There is no legitimate way I, or anybody, could be expected to arrive at your response from what you quoted and how you quoted it.
Maybe you should ask for clarification next time.
23 Aug 2011, 10:17 pm
DW_a_mom wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Obama never granted amnesty to my blanket.
ruveyn
ruveyn
Bring it over to my house. I'll give it a job.
While our immigration system needs reforms, that does not excuse the fact that they came here illegally.
Furthermore, I should point out that this is partially due to the man that was in the DoJ when a young Cuban refugee had a gun shoved in his face by a SWAT team, and taken back to Cuba where he was brainwashed.
That seems to tell me that this is about politics, and it wouldn't surprise me if they won't suddenly be able to vote too, and able to draw on our entitlements, ensuring the re-election of Obama, and wrecking the country further in the process.
23 Aug 2011, 10:17 pm
@ Inuyasha
Do you think the family of a serving soldier should be deported? That would be pretty disrespectful of their commitment. Perhaps you ought to read the history of the 442nd Infantry Regiment.
_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.
23 Aug 2011, 10:21 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Actually, a lot of you do. You can start with the left-wing drive by media, the climate scientists, etc. People still believe them, even when it has been proven that they have been totally dishonest.
Example: Sll the accusations towards Glenn Beck about half a year ago about him preaching violence, and then it gets debunked when I found the full clip.
Example 2: I'll let you find this for yourself but Ed Schultz tried to smear Governor Rick Perry as a racist, when the full speech clearly shows Perry was referring to the National Debt.
Example: Sll the accusations towards Glenn Beck about half a year ago about him preaching violence, and then it gets debunked when I found the full clip.
Example 2: I'll let you find this for yourself but Ed Schultz tried to smear Governor Rick Perry as a racist, when the full speech clearly shows Perry was referring to the National Debt.
Inuyasha, nobody has ever claimed that the entire field of climate science has been proven dishonest. That level of dishonesty could not even exist, not even getting into the issues of climate-gate not being considered a failure of integrity by outside investigators: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_R ... #Responses (which I assume you are referring to)
The latter two aren't matters of expert opinion, thus would not be covered by the situation. Experts can be discredited, and other experts will be aware of this. The public is not necessarily aware though, as seen by the various bogus experts.
Quote:
Maybe you should ask for clarification next time.
I'd only do that if it seemed reasonable that I had misinterpreted something, not that you had made a random comment.
