63 replies to this topic

[katinka]

Currylegends, nice sum-up of Huckabee (or at least his negative aspects). I don't think he can ban homosexuality, though-- he may want to, but the supreme court said that two consenting adults can do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home (Or, in Senator Craig's case, a public restroom). And most people living with HIV/AIDS don't like being called "victims".

My major worry isn't which of the republicans will get the nomination-- its that if a republican-- ANY republican-- wins the general election, we're screwed for 20 years. I love John Paul Stevens, but I don't know if he can last one more year, let alone 5. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is very frail, too, and if anything should happen to them under a republican president they will stock the court with a solid majority of "Strict constructionist justices" to last for decades. Its not just about one man (or woman), it's about the Court for many, many years.

[currylegends]

True Katinka i totally agree with you. If you look at it from a idealogical or partisan point of view if the Democrats really need to win to keep those two seats. The bench is already on many cases voting on idealogical lines as there have been many more 5-4 rulings in supreme court cases. if the two judges retire as they will it will be a conservative court as you said. Hopefully Congress can start holding more harsher confirmation hearings like the ones joe biden did during the late 80's that would make sure we elect teh right judges. The senate should also consider impeaching clarence thomas: in his memoir my grandfather's son he relates the democratic party to the KKK which makes no sense and still has bitter hatred over the anita hill allegations

Also the only good things huckabee really have is Chuck Norris and that he knows how to play the guitar.

[PinKkFloyDd]

EndocrineFlippa, on Jan 8 2008, 12:08 AM, said:

wow, ignorance at its best.

first of all, illegal immigrants don't leech off the government, they work here as hard if not harder than other Americans. They take jobs that other Americans won't take, like picking oranges. Did you know that last year they had a shortage of workers in some farms because of stricter border enforcement? People from Mexico were afraid to come over and pick the crop so a lot of it rotted. Where were all these legal Americans who want to pick fruit for hours then? huh?

and people need to draw conclusions for themselves, and not simply absorb every piece of information that a biased news personality gives them.

You do realize farming only takes about a month's worth of time out of the year. About two weeks planting season and two weeks picking season. And how about jobs such as construction? Yep, no one wants construction jobs. And you're ignorant if you think Mexicans are the only illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants come from all over the world, and YES, they do leech off the government.

http://www.immigrationcounters.com/

But hey, if you like your tax dollars being wasted, go find an illegal immigrant and just pay them everything they want. And if you really do support amnesty, then I see you have no value for national security. Let's let everyone in, that won't have any negative effects on our society at all!

[PinKkFloyDd]

z2z007, on Jan 9 2008, 09:51 PM, said:

Responding to your points...

Your estimates place illegal immigrants as 4-6 % of the population. It is a small percentage albeit a sizeable amount.

In regards to the security issue, I'm pretty sure any amnesty program would require a rigorous background check, much like the current legal immigration process. Documentation from their original country can be used for this process. I don't think it is impractical to get their information. If you don't have faith in the documentation, that is a different issue. If you can't trust documentation in this situation, how can you trust documentation for anyone immigrating or even traveling?

I never thought that the point was to offer amnesty every 20 years or so. I felt that the idea was to address the situation that has been overlooked for so long and cut the flow of any future illegal immigration (at least, stem it the flow significantly). That worker visa suggestion I had was my idea for filling the void for the illegal immigration has been filling. A tough crackdown on employers employing illegals is utmost necessary because, if the opportunities are not there, the less likely immigrants would immigrate illegally.

Face it, we need their labor. Deporting everyone is not the answer.

We really wouldn't need other sources of labor if we didn't outsource all our factory jobs and participate in NAFTA.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, capitalism in America ran rampant because it wasn't "held in check". Back before the 90s companies actually looked out for the interests of Americans. But now corporations only care about their profits and not for Americans, thus resulting in outsourcing and use of illegal immigrants. And as a result the American working man is a bad and ever declining state.