Full Version: HAS ANYONE NOTICED?
Neither candidate is talking about this border/immigration issue that threatens our sovereignty even more! Why are they avoiding this issue, why does nobody ask this question any more? The debate questions were all carbon copies of the first debate. The economy is not the greatest worry we as Americans face today. Government didn't have to get involved in it either. Is it just me?
I would consider the economy a MUCH bigger issue than immigration. I really don't care too much about the immigration issue, and consider it somewhat of a red herring, one of those 'hot-button' issues to inflame voters and get them to ignore more pertinent issues.
I agree that it is not at the top of my list either, but it does bother me a lot that they are not being questioned about this enough. It is an issue that is being ignored,..and on purpose! What would be "more pertinent issues" to you Mont?
As I said, the economy is a more important issue. The continuing Iraq war is as well. Social Security, which I seem to hear over and over is going into the toilet. Healthcare, both how to provide it to as many as possible and how to prevent unwarranted litigation against doctors and hospitals. Our education system, which I don't think stands up well compared to much of the industrial world. Even something like abortion, which is often used in the same way as immigration has been lately, to get people upset so they ignore other issues, is still more pertinent to me than immigration.
Perhaps most importantly, but least likely to have any real change, would be the corruption in politics and government. Along those lines would be the limitations of our two party systems. Both issues I think are and have been of high priority, but both issues those in power likely want as few people really thinking about as possible.
I guess it just seems to me that the furor over illegal immigrants goes against the whole 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses' idea. There ARE valid concerns about immigration, but for a country with such a large immigrant history as ours, they seem very overblown.
Perhaps most importantly, but least likely to have any real change, would be the corruption in politics and government. Along those lines would be the limitations of our two party systems. Both issues I think are and have been of high priority, but both issues those in power likely want as few people really thinking about as possible.
I guess it just seems to me that the furor over illegal immigrants goes against the whole 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses' idea. There ARE valid concerns about immigration, but for a country with such a large immigrant history as ours, they seem very overblown.
Actually, George Bush and the anti-regulatory antics of politicians both left- and right-wing, have cured our immigration problem.
They did this by the simple expedient of ruining our economy.
Now, we are no longer seen as a land of employment and opportunity, and far fewer people are crossing our border illegally in search of work.
GREAT JOB!
And another reason no one is talking about it now is that neither party wants to offend the Hispanic voting bloc.
They did this by the simple expedient of ruining our economy.
Now, we are no longer seen as a land of employment and opportunity, and far fewer people are crossing our border illegally in search of work.
GREAT JOB!
And another reason no one is talking about it now is that neither party wants to offend the Hispanic voting bloc.
Don't forget, it did not turn to shyt until the Democrats took over congress in 2006. Why do you people always look over this?
| QUOTE (McPrez @ Oct 22 2008, 04:50 PM) |
| Don't forget, it did not turn to shyt until the Democrats took over congress in 2006. Why do you people always look over this? |
If you'll read my post a little more carefully, you'll notice that I included left-wing politicians as sharing the blame for the current mess.
Also, the main body of de-regulation took place with the Republican congress of the last, what, 10-12 years; and the republicans in this congress have been blocking a lot of legislation. Of course, that will change soon as the Democrats establish a solid majority.
And the President who oversaw this mess belongs to...which party?
And finally you must admit that Phil Gramm was the prime mover in the legislation forbidding regulation (December of 2000) of those darn credit default swaps, which were "valued" at 63 trillion dollars. McCain's economic advisor is (wait for it) PHIL GRAMM!
Blaming the recent Democratic Congress, without a solid majority, means that even IF your observation were valid (shaky ground), Republicans could have stopped it if they really wanted to, using a filibuster. Or, convincing a mere 2 Democrats to vote with the Republicans.
Seems to me that it is you who is overlooking the facts.
You don't think Bill Clinton had anything to do with deregulation before Bush got into office? In fact, he says deregulation had nothing to do with the mess we are in.
QUOTE (artatlarge @ Oct 22 2008, 08:14 PM)
| QUOTE (McPrez @ Oct 22 2008, 04:50 PM) |
| Don't forget, it did not turn to shyt until the Democrats took over congress in 2006. Why do you people always look over this? |
If you'll read my post a little more carefully, you'll notice that I included left-wing politicians as sharing the blame for the current mess.
Also, the main body of de-regulation took place with the Republican congress of the last, what, 10-12 years; and the republicans in this congress have been blocking a lot of legislation. Of course, that will change soon as the Democrats establish a solid majority.
And the President who oversaw this mess belongs to...which party?
And finally you must admit that Phil Gramm was the prime mover in the legislation forbidding regulation (December of 2000) of those darn credit default swaps, which were "valued" at 63 trillion dollars. McCain's economic advisor is (wait for it) PHIL GRAMM!
Blaming the recent Democratic Congress, without a solid majority, means that even IF your observation were valid (shaky ground), Republicans could have stopped it if they really wanted to, using a filibuster. Or, convincing a mere 2 Democrats to vote with the Republicans.
Seems to me that it is you who is overlooking the facts.
You are correct Artatlarge. I blame both sides (republicans and Democrats) in the past for failing to fix this issue, and there is no solution to fix it with either of these two candidates we have before us now. It is going to bite us in the ass pretty hard, and maybe sooner than we expect.
Detmurds, this is why they fail to talk about this topic. I am sure that during all the debates, both candidates informed mediators what they didn't want to discuss. I admit, McCain sucks on immigration.
I somewhat retract from my past post, but this democrat congress has derailed some issues that mattered up front before they took the majority.
I wouldn't want to talk about it either. It's one of those political topics that is disasterous to a campaign. You are damned if you do and damned if you don't. The best thing is to avoid it.
I think we (republicans) have to be realistic about immigration. We can't possibly rid our country of all the illegals. We can try to stop the new ones from coming over but it's not feasible for us to deport all of them at this point.
I also think we have to be realistic about the humane aspect of it as well. I know this is going to sound soft, but we can't in good faith remove an established child and throw them back into their country they came from.
I think we (republicans) have to be realistic about immigration. We can't possibly rid our country of all the illegals. We can try to stop the new ones from coming over but it's not feasible for us to deport all of them at this point.
I also think we have to be realistic about the humane aspect of it as well. I know this is going to sound soft, but we can't in good faith remove an established child and throw them back into their country they came from.
I think it is a big time issue that needs some big time consideration. I am also discouraged by the two campaigns on this. 
| QUOTE (B-man @ Oct 22 2008, 10:14 PM) |
| You don't think Bill Clinton had anything to do with deregulation before Bush got into office? In fact, he says deregulation had nothing to do with the mess we are in. |
Just wanting to know what deregulating did he do? Clinton
QUOTE (LIBERATOR @ Nov 6 2008, 09:00 PM)
| QUOTE (B-man @ Oct 22 2008, 10:14 PM) |
| You don't think Bill Clinton had anything to do with deregulation before Bush got into office? In fact, he says deregulation had nothing to do with the mess we are in. |
Just wanting to know what deregulating did he do? Clinton
Uh, look it up Lib.
| QUOTE (Montrovant @ Oct 21 2008, 06:57 AM) |
| As I said, the economy is a more important issue. The continuing Iraq war is as well. Social Security, which I seem to hear over and over is going into the toilet. Healthcare, both how to provide it to as many as possible and how to prevent unwarranted litigation against doctors and hospitals. Our education system, which I don't think stands up well compared to much of the industrial world. Even something like abortion, which is often used in the same way as immigration has been lately, to get people upset so they ignore other issues, is still more pertinent to me than immigration. Perhaps most importantly, but least likely to have any real change, would be the corruption in politics and government. Along those lines would be the limitations of our two party systems. Both issues I think are and have been of high priority, but both issues those in power likely want as few people really thinking about as possible. I guess it just seems to me that the furor over illegal immigrants goes against the whole 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses' idea. There ARE valid concerns about immigration, but for a country with such a large immigrant history as ours, they seem very overblown. |
The economy is a mess because of the government. Private industry is the answer and without government intervention.
I think socialism is already here people! It appears that the only safe job, if that, is government jobs?