I live by the norther border. Its not much of a discussion point really is it? If the Canucks come down here, no one really cares.
Plus its WAY to big to effectively control. Thousands of miles instead of hundreds.
For the southern border, I really don't actually think that Bush is any more interested in securing the border than Vicente Fox is. Both benefit from lax enforcement. I think (and I know there are those who disagree) that lax enforcement benfits everyone.
Hispanics have more children than most ethnic groups. They are the future of America, like it or not. White folks dont have that many kids. Who is going to work in this growing economy? I mean it is growing slowly (3-6%/year) but it is still growing. Meaning more jobs, eventually.
Who is going to fill those jobs? The net growth is cumulative. if in year 1 the total is 103% of what it was last year (100). In year 2 the 3% is calucated against 103 not 100. In 0hter words, it goes up exponentially. Doubling every now and again.
Our workforce is getting older. The baby boomers are retiring. I think these are the realities that make immigration popular among politicians. But best of all they get to not do anything and get something done at the same time. Because it isnt popular to tell folks that yes, as a country, you will no longer be the white majority. The fact is, you wont. Every trend in the census tells us that. But we don't want to hear it.
The face of America is changing. How willing we are to acknowledge that is another thing altogether. We cannot wall ourselves out of this issue. No amount of effort will keep people who want to be here out. Setting up an orderly way to make this happen would be a great compromise, and save us all one hell of alot of money, effort, and anger.
If the immigration policy does not make room for the people who want to be here, they will come anyway. And no matter how much the politicans appease their opposition by doing this or that, the reality is that they need these people to do the work. And that if they were truly hurting the system, there would be a military border already.
In some ways, the non-policy was working ok. Work was being done, the economy was growing, and inflation was in check. Unitl we got all concerned about "security". Then the immigrants are the new target - make it a felony the house said - suddenly immigrants woke up, realized that although they work here and buy houses here, they were targets. Wouldnt you march too?
In other ways it wasnt working. Border towns were being innundated with illegals who were crossing property, strains on social systems, etc.
An orderly system is what everyone wants. But curbing the (now legal) immigration from mexico will make for some very interesting and potentially fatal errors.
Our growing economy will need workers, and we white folks are not having enough babies to keep up with demand.
FostonComment Posted By foston On 17.05.2006 @ 14:57
I honestly think this is one of the issues we should all be agreeing on. Conservatives and Progressives, Hawks and doves, should all agree that unchecked governmental power is not a good thing. It is a tinderbox of abuse ready to be lit. Just because Conservatives REALLY trust Bush to do the right thing, does not mean that we the people should not be engaged in the discussion about what is right and what is wrong. Governments should never be given this level of power and secrecy. NEVER.
FostonComment Posted By foston On 16.05.2006 @ 09:42
I really don't understand why the president, the NSA, and the FBI need a free pass on this one and I REALLY don't understand why Presidential apologists dont understand this issue.
Can we or can we not freely communicate with the press? What level of accountability is there in the government if no one can find out what is happening? I dont know that the abuses to date really add up to a Stalinist state, but there are some concerning trends...like unlimited detentions without access to lawyers, like torture, renditions, and a very very high level of secrecy.
To execute this plan, the government must control the press, lest its plans be made public. Some of the things listed above are unpopular, and I would argue, RIGHTLY SO.
The presidential apologists must remember that the Repulbicans are not garaunteed another win on 2008. You will not feel the same way when Hillary is president (intentionally said because of your collective hate of Hillary). You don't WANT to give that level of secrecy to the government, the NSA, The President.
You may all collectively love W. I don't. But the reason for my concern about giving the government this much power and sercrecy FAR EXCEEDS my dislike of this particular president. I would like to see a good progressive candidate. I know most here disagree. I dont care. But, I would not want said progressive candidate to HAVE THIS KIND OF POWER. It is a formula for abuse.
Whether or not that abuse is occurring now is certainly cause for debate. But you only get to debate it BECAUSE YOU F*ING KNOW ABOUT IT. To attack the press, to make it harder for them to find out about these things makes for an unaccountable system.
The people who are "traitors" are the ones risking their careers to bring up some alarming trends, and dangerous ones at that. You think they do this because they are commies? Better for them to stay silent all the time? Your ASKING for trouble, you are ASKING for abuse.
I am not saying this will happen, so be kind RWN, but what level are you willing to have everyone stay silent about? Mass deportation of all Muslims? Mass deportation of all Brown people? More survelliance of Brown people? Extra judicial executions of suspected terrorists? Mass execution?
Well, if the administration has its way on this, even if they dont do it (which of course they won't), we just wouldnt know it would we?
for all the talk I hear on RWN about "accountability", they dont seem to want to apply that to the government. They "trust" Bush so much that they are willing to give him free reign to do whatever to whoever to make sure that he takes care of our "terrorist problem".
Its one of these "sounded like a good idea at the time" moments.
FostonComment Posted By foston On 16.05.2006 @ 09:02
BTW, the Left does not think Hussein is better than Bush. Bush is just an evil idiot. Hussein is an evil madman, and was smart and effective, both things Bush has proben not to be.
In addition, this is America. Not Iraq. We expect more from our leaders, and Bush has not been much.
But no matter HOW JUSTIFIED you all claim this war is, that is only a political adjustment. Thats what you all claim AFTER the fact. Thats what you claim when we are still there after no substantial claims to JUSTIFY THE WAR IN THE FIRST PLACE have come true. Its a smart strategy, but don't think that people can't see through it. For most people, they simply dont care. It doesn't affect their life, and they don't "understand all that stuff". So maybe it will work. But its starting to stink. And I think enough has come out that, with enough bodies now that people might be rightly concerned that the PRESIDENT LIED TO US. His ass should be impeached.
Most likely people will just be concerned that we will lose.
The ends do not justify the means. The war was a lie. The intelligence was "sexed up" at best (Uranium Claims) to Fabricated at worst ("We know where they are")
We'll see how that passes the November test now won't we. They must think we are might F'ing dumb.
For the record, before you dismiss me as some lunatic ( I am sure it is too late for that). Of course, we must stay the course unitl we can rightly leave Iraq. So long as we are doing more good than harm. And Agreed that the press is a blood thirsty bunch who only want more conflict (whether political or actual blood) so they can continue to capture our attention and ratings.
BUT the PRESIDENT SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. HE LIED. HIS STAFF CRUSHED DISSENT.HIS STAFF LIED. And they are placing the blame on "bad intelligence". YA. No wonder the CIA is about ready for a coup.
Are you all gonna welcome this type of behavior from a president when HILLARY is in Charge?
Thought not. Its a 2 edged sword. And ALL OF US should be banding together to express concern.
YOU HAVE BEEN PLAYED.
FostonComment Posted By foston On 5.05.2006 @ 16:24
I love this place:
I have never seen more collective denial than in the Cult of Bush.
This war was a sales job. And the only dissent who was in power was Joseph Wilson, who as we see, was CRUSHED and his wife CRUSHED for daring to contradict the Cult leader.
Your congress, YOUR congress turned a blind eye to the obvious. They spent MONTHS selling us this war, making false claim after false claim. But rather than honestly looking into it, admitting that all this effort was a sham, they crushed wilson, planned a strategy and crucified him. Meanwhile, they took perhaps the most important speech of our lifetimes, the state of the union, and LIED OUTRIGHT to the American Public.
Your president: Compromised.
Your Congress: compromised.
Enjoy your November. Enjoy your Nuclear Iran.
FostonComment Posted By foston On 5.05.2006 @ 16:09
Pages (1) :