Angry: Kagan confirmed

[Bubblehead1980]

The Senate confirmed Elena Kagan to be the next US Supreme Court Justice.Now we have a good 20-30 years of her ahead to damage this nation.Really a sad day.The usual traitor Republicans voted for her.Snowe, Collins, Graham, Lugar, Gregg.Democrat Ben Nelson voted against her.I am young, about to start Law School in the fall and get my career going.I feel my country is disappearing while I'm working hard to make my own way in this country.I am scared to think what this great nation that men like my great-grandfather(who stormed the beaches at Normandy and turns 91 this month, fought for) will look like in 5-10 years.Millions of illegal immigrants legalized and sucking our system dry while people like myself who actually do something pay for it via higher taxes? Gay marriage legal everywhere? Nanny state? More radical, racist, dangerous people elected to the Presidency like Obama? More racist, bitter older women like Sonia Sotomayor or more Kagans on the court?

I am just angry right now.Hopefully November 2010 and 2012 will help us get back to where we are supposed to be, not off on the path to ruin.

[SteamWake]

Oh for a minute there I thought she had changed her name to Angry...

Meh this is not a supprise she was a lock.

To expect this administration to appoint a conservative is not really reasonable.

[Bubblehead1980]

I don't expect a quality nominee from the trash currently occupying the executive branch, just not possible for them to nominate a decent person.What I do expect though is the Senate to do it's job and not just rubber stamp a nominee for the highest court in the land.:damn:

[Platapus]

It will be ok.

Looking in to my crystal ball.... I predict that she will sometimes rule in agreement with your opinion and that she will sometimes rule in conflict with your opinion... and probably rule in ways that you don't have an opinion on.

But it will be ok

She was not my optimal nominee, but I am sure she will do a good job.

[Sailor Steve]

I am young,
Worse than that, you are limited and blinded by prejudices you don't seem to understand.

Do you know how many Supreme Court justices have disappointed the presidents who appointed them? Do you know how many of the good men who stormed the beaches at Normandy were liberals? Do you know that you are right?

Part of your anger is directed at what you believe to be true, and you don't even know for a fact that it is indeed true. You rail against illegal immigrants, yet you call others racist.

From your last line it sounds as if you are the one who is both bitter and racist.

I actually agree with you on most of your complaints, but your bitterness is more of a hindrance than a help. You see, most of the people you complain about are not evil. They believe that they are right, just as you do.

I say the same thing to them that I would say to you: You strongly believe your are right, but you don't know it. And that belief blinds you to any chance of actually progressing.

Did you know that the Constitution itself was the result of five months of arguing, wrangling, backstabbing and compromise? And in the end it was compromise that won out. Those men all had different beliefs, different opinions and different agendas. Yet they managed to piece together a system that we praise today as the height of governmental perfection.

I agree with you on the whole, but then I don't know for sure that I'm right. But neither do you, and you need to go into your future with that understanding. Otherwise you won't be able to truly see your way, and you risk giving yourself a stroke at an early age.

[Platapus]

Listen to the old guy :yeah:

[Diopos]

Let's all move to Canada! :D

No ? :hmmm:


.

[frau kaleun]

Let's all move to Canada! :D

Eh ? :hmmm:


Fixed.

[Sailor Steve]

Fixed.
And aboot time.

[frau kaleun]

And aboot time.

:haha: :up:

[JSLTIGER]

Just as an FYI Bubblehead1980, you do know that as a future attorney, you will have an ethical obligation to ignore race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. and dismiss those factors as irrelevant in representing a client, right? The court system can also appoint you to serve as an attorney for an illegal immigrant, and you will have an ethical obligation to carry out such representation with the same competence, diligence, and zeal requisite for any other representation you may engage in. I don't mean to burst your bubble, but as an attorney in the future you're going to need to put aside your own beliefs for ethical considerations from time to time.

Trust me on this, btw, I just took the Multi-state Professional Responsibility Examination this morning and am heading into my final year of law school.

[SteamWake]

You know ordinarly I might be upset but the fact of the matter is they are simply replacing one liberal activist judge for another.

It doesent really shift the balance as I see it.

[Bubblehead1980]

Steve-

I do not rail against illegal immigrants because of race.I rail because they are breaking the law then expect some type of help when the they are in situation is their fault for being here.I rail against them because I have seen the trouble so many of them cause and they have absolutely no right to be here.I rail against them because they come here and drop a few anchor babies who automatically become citizens and are thus entitled to ever expanding system of entitlements.I do not care if they are from mexico or canada etc , if you're an illegal immigrant, you have no right to be here, period.Quite franky, I am sick of people using the race card to try and deflect attention from the real issues.

I am aware that Liberals were present at Normandy but would bet a lot of money nearly all of them were not fighting so that radicals like obama could one day "transform" America.Anyway, the common GI, much like today, was not aware of the politics at the time or even after.I have talked with my grandfather about this, he was a Captain and said most really had no idea about the politics, they were just fighting for their country and wanted to stay alive.


I am well aware of past supreme court nominess who disappoint the Presidents who nominate them but this will not happen with Kagan.Kagan is a far left political hack that shares the overall view of America that the executive trash does.Kagan's positions on the first amendment are disturbing and lets not forget her banning military recruiters from Harvard Law School.I am also aware of the wrangling that went on to get us the US Constitution which people like obama, kagan etc have no respect for.


I do know I am right Steve, based on clear evidence and looking back at history, since it tends to repeat itself.Again, I am not blinded by anything, my eyes are wide open and I have progressed.When I first became interested in politics as a teenager, I felt like I was prob a Liberal.I mean the liberal platform sounds so nice doesnt it? Equality for all, help the less fortunate etc the crap that Libs use to sell their views.What I didn't understand though was that in order to achieve this utopia, the things that make America great are pushed to the way side.High taxes to pay for welfare and other entitlements that actually harm people more because it's created generations on the dole.Reverse racism on white americans through things like affirmative action and so on that in the end does nothing but stoke the fires of race.The class warfare that Liberals play,as if having money and wanting to use it as one wishes(liberty right there) is a bad thing.The list goes on and on.This why I have conservative views.

Americans have a tendency to give people the benefit of the doubt even when evidence is clear, it's an inherent weakness in our culture.Pretty obvious obama is a sleazy, racist, corrupt left wing radical but many gave and some still give him the benefit of the doubt.Pretty obvious Kagan is a far left political hack who will vote to fufill obamas goal to try and transform this nation into a nanny state where individual rights are not important when it comes to "greater good" of society.I would love to respond more but I need to wrap this up, heading to the beach.

[Bubblehead1980]

JSLTIGER,

I am aware of the obligation to represent somone no matter their, religion etc etc which will be no problem because I am not racist.Again, just because I have issues with obama or illegal immigrants does not mean I am a racist.I will say you will not find me representing an illegal immigrant on an immigration matter, rather be disbarred than do that. You see I have this thing about standing up for what I believe in, not compromising my beliefs to make peace with others or for "ethical considerdations" that seems to be uknown in our line of work. Sounds like you bought into some of things professors say a little too much.Having said that, hope you did well on the exam and good luck on your final year.

[Bubblehead1980]

You know ordinarly I might be upset but the fact of the matter is they are simply replacing one liberal activist judge for another.

It doesent really shift the balance as I see it.


True it does not shift is right NOW.However, Ginsburg is getting old, is ill and doubt she will stick around until 2012.Scalia and Thomas are not exactly young men.A vacancy could happen any time.Obama's got two freebies thus far.Two radical, dangerous women who will be on the court for years to come.With some really important cases coming to the court in the next few years from healthcare to gay marriage etc we can not afford to have wrong people up there.They shouldve borked her and should any obama nominee to the court because he is not capable of putting forward a decent non radical nominee.If all else fails, fillibuster.Hopefully mid term elections will work out and Dems will lose their majority in Senate so no more dangerous justices to wreck this country for next 30 years.

[mookiemookie]

Two radical, dangerous women...

:roll: Hyperbole much?

[Platapus]

... we can not afford to have wrong people up there.

You mean people who may disagree with your opinion?

It is not wise to confuse your opinion with what is right or good.

[Sailor Steve]

Bubblehead:

I tried to gently point out a few things, but I guess I need to be more direct. What I'm seeing in all of your posts is a classic case of someone repeating a party line. Right or Left, to me it doesn't matter. You are repeating exactly what you've been taught, and you don't seem to be able to actually reason it out at all. Some of the things you believe may be true, but you have no room at all for the idea that some of them may not. You aren't thinking, you're quoting. If you can't look at all sides of any question, then you can't grow and you can't learn. You seem to think you already know everything. No one can do that, and no belief is ever right all the time.

I am well aware of past supreme court nominess who disappoint the Presidents who nominate them but this will not happen with Kagan.
And you "know" this how? If you were truly aware of this then you would know that it happens, not once, but all the time.

Kagan is a far left political hack that shares the overall view of America that the executive trash does.Kagan's positions on the first amendment are disturbing and lets not forget her banning military recruiters from Harvard Law School.I am also aware of the wrangling that went on to get us the US Constitution which people like obama, kagan etc have no respect for.
I was attempting to show that all politics is compromise, and without compromise we have no system, and no country. You immediately turn it into another flat tirade against those with whom you disagree. Please show in detail their lack of respect, and stop parroting the party line.

I do know I am right Steve, based on clear evidence and looking back at history, since it tends to repeat itself.
No, no one ever "knows" they are right, and people who are convinced they do are the most dangerous enemies to a free society. Please explain the "clear evidence" that you claim to know so much about.

Again, I am not blinded by anything, my eyes are wide open and I have progressed.When I first became interested in politics as a teenager, I felt like I was prob a Liberal.I mean the liberal platform sounds so nice doesnt it? Equality for all, help the less fortunate etc the crap that Libs use to sell their views.
What I didn't understand though was that in order to achieve this utopia, the things that make America great are pushed to the way side.High taxes to pay for welfare and other entitlements that actually harm people more because it's created generations on the dole.Reverse racism on white americans through things like affirmative action and so on that in the end does nothing but stoke the fires of race.The class warfare that Liberals play,as if having money and wanting to use it as one wishes(liberty right there) is a bad thing.The list goes on and on.This why I have conservative views.
I'm not questioning your views, as I agree with a great many of them. What I'm trying to point out is that when you start going on about "crap that Libs use to sell their views" you are not discussing the issues but are talking like someone who has been indoctrinated, not someone who has reasoned it out.

You feel strongly about what you believe in. This is a good thing. But you don't "know" you're right any more than they do, and a lot of them believe it just as strongly. I'm not saying you're wrong, as that would be implying that I'm sure I'm right, and I'm not.

Pretty obvious Kagan is a far left political hack who will vote to fufill obamas goal to try and transform this nation into a nanny state where individual rights are not important when it comes to "greater good" of society.I would love to respond more but I need to wrap this up, heading to the beach.
I put that phrase in bold to emphasize your use of it twice in one post. Nothing wrong with that, but you repeated it exactly, which implies to me that you are, as I said, so locked into a position that you aren't thinking about it at all, just copying what you've read elsewhere (and I don't mean plagiarizing, I'm referring to your apparent thought processes).

I don't like a lot of the Left's politics and policies either, but I also question a lot of the Right's. I especially question anybody who tosses me a party line, complete with standardized insults, without questioning any of it. You seem to have gone from one extreme to the other without stopping anywhere in the middle.

You say you "know" you are right, but have you ever questioned yourself at all? If you know everything you have no room left to learn anything.

[Tribesman]

If you know everything you have no room left to learn anything.
What struck me is that he is someone who has just left school and is going to study law at college he berarates someone who is just heading towards finishing college where they are studying law as they are listening to their professors too much.
It raises the question of why he is going to college to study law if he isn't going to listen to those who teach it as he thinks he knows it all already.

Plus with.....I will say you will not find me representing an illegal immigrant on an immigration matter, rather be disbarred than do that.....he appears to be wasting his time with law anyway since he is going to let his own hangups prevent him from following either the law or the professions code of conduct.

[Zachstar]

JSLTIGER,

I am aware of the obligation to represent somone no matter their, religion etc etc which will be no problem because I am not racist.Again, just because I have issues with obama or illegal immigrants does not mean I am a racist.I will say you will not find me representing an illegal immigrant on an immigration matter, rather be disbarred than do that. You see I have this thing about standing up for what I believe in, not compromising my beliefs to make peace with others or for "ethical considerdations" that seems to be uknown in our line of work. Sounds like you bought into some of things professors say a little too much.Having said that, hope you did well on the exam and good luck on your final year.

I look very much forward to you being disbarred (Or hopefully not being allowed into the law system)

[Platapus]

Well the bight side is that law school forces its students to look at issues objectively, to consider all the angles, especially angles one does not agree with. In short, law school is a school of critical thinking. A JD is less about knowledge but more about cognitive processes (Socratic method).

He will either change or fail out.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

I look very much forward to you being disbarred (Or hopefully not being allowed into the law system)

My guess is the latter is more likely.

[Tribesman]

My guess is the latter is more likely.
but you cannot write him off as a loser in that field before he has even stepped on the path towards that field.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

but you cannot write him off as a loser in that field before he has even stepped on the path towards that field.

Logic is the basis for the practice of law, and that is an ability he doesn't seem to possess in great abundance.

[Tribesman]

Logic is the basis for the practice of law,
Well yes and no

[Bubblehead1980]

Mookie, Not hyperbole, just calling out people with dangerous ideology that have no reservations about using their position say as President or A Supreme Court Justice to take America away from what it was intended to be.This applies to those on the left and right.Take Sharon Angle, the Republican Senate candidate in Nevada for example, she is a religious nut and going on her interviews she's not all that bright.I despise Harry Reid, he is part of the problem but would rather see him there than this religious nutjob who thinks god actually plays a role in what is going on.

Steve, not repeating or quoting, I am expressing my views not a party line.Being as I do lean to the Right bound to share many views with others.I am not indoctrinated, rather insulting to suggest that I am.I understand all your points and we usually agree on things but not everything.That is fine.


Oh yea, I know many Supreme Court Justices have disappointed the Presidents who nominate them, it does happen often.I do not see this happen with Kagan though as mentioned but time will tell as it already has with Sotomayor who as far as I know(and I keep up with SCOTUS decisions for the most part), has not disappointed obama thus far.

Platapus, I am well aware of how law school works.Sure I will listen and do what I must do to succeed but I will not waiver on my beliefs.That is what is wrong with a lot of people today, too willing to compromise their beliefs. As far as failing out, rather funny because pretty sure I'll be in top of my class as I was in college.

Tribesman, I was not berating him but some people my age think just because someone is a Professor, their word is gold.Sure I listen but I reason and think for myself as well.

What you call "hangups" are my beliefs, I have a spine and will not waiver on them.Illegal Immigrants are a huge problem in this country and an easy problem to deal with, but our government does not currently want to deal with it for various reasons.I would not enable an illegal with my services, they don't deserve them.Again not a race thing, don't care if it's a mexican or canadian etc, illegally in this country, no help from me. You are allowed to choose your clients after all unless working for the public defender or something, in that case not much of a lawyer anyway so be happy with the paycheck.

Zachstarr,

I wondered why you would take pleasure in such a thing then I remembered some of your past comments concerning illegal immigration.You must be part of the open borders crowd or have some connection to illegal immigration that skews your view.My view on illegal immigration is based on protecting my nation for the citizens not emotions such as empathy for people from poor nations etc.Some people seem to think that America has this responsibility to take people from other countries that are not doing well where they are.Perhaps once upon a time this but no longer, we just can't afford it and it's tearing us apart from within.Illegals who come here with nothing to offer really but some labor, have children, and expect some type of help (which of course comes from taxpayers such as myself) and a free pass such as amnesty because they've managed to avoid deportation for many years, get real.Many refuse to adapt, they expect America to adapt to them.Unfortunately the Liberal line of tolerance for others has prevented our society from being more stern and demanding they adapt to us.

[Sailor Steve]

Steve, not repeating or quoting, I am expressing my views not a party line.Being as I do lean to the Right bound to share many views with others.I am not indoctrinated, rather insulting to suggest that I am.I understand all your points and we usually agree on things but not everything.That is fine.
I apologize for misstating myself. The problem with a rant like your first one is the old problem of "It's not what you say, it's how you say it". A rant like that doesn't add to the debate, nor does it really do anything but make the poster look like he doesn't know how to do anything but rant. You may be much better educated and more thoughtful than that shows, but all we could react to was the way it was written and the words themselves. In that one you came across as someone who doesn't think about it, and much of what you said does indeed follow a narrow party line.

Before you think I'm starting in again, I would like to refer everyone to your new thread on Anchor Babies. Your comments there are the diametric opposite of your original comments here. Not that you need my, or anyone else's approval, but most of us here like to have lengthy discussions and try to point out the good and the bad alike.

Two quotes from one of my favorite philosophers, Josef Joubert:

"It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it."

and

"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should be not victory, but progress."

Oh yea, I know many Supreme Court Justices have disappointed the Presidents who nominate them, it does happen often.I do not see this happen with Kagan though as mentioned but time will tell as it already has with Sotomayor who as far as I know(and I keep up with SCOTUS decisions for the most part), has not disappointed obama thus far.
Much more reasonable and reasoned, and it's true that only time will tell. It's also true that there is absolutely nothing we can do about it. The President recommends and Congress approves or declines. All we can do is talk about it.

Tribesman, I was not berating him but some people my age think just because someone is a Professor, their word is gold.Sure I listen but I reason and think for myself as well.
Good for you. On the other hand a lot of them know how to think as well, whether their conclusions are the same as yours or not. Take everything they say with a grain of salt, but don't make the mistake of dismissing them just because their ideology differs from yours. If you can, find out why they believe the way they do. They may not be anymore indoctrinated than you think you are.

What you call "hangups" are my beliefs, I have a spine and will not waiver on them.
But don't forget to have a brain as well. When I said before that I don't know anything and neither do you, it comes from several years of learning the hard way that much of what we think we "know" is really only what we believe.

Question everything, and I mean everything - even your most cherished beliefs. As I said, someone who "knows" something is incapable of learning anything new about it, and incapable of progressing beyond what he "knows". Being convince you're right gives you self-satisfaction, but what if you're wrong? You run the risk of never knowing, and then where are you?

Illegal Immigrants are a huge problem in this country and an easy problem to deal with, but our government does not currently want to deal with it for various reasons.
I agree, but in your first post you blame it on the liberals and the current administration. Several conservative administrations have also failed do deal with the problem, whether, as you say, from "not wanting to" or from not being able to. It might not be as easy as you think.


I would not enable an illegal with my services, they don't deserve them.Again not a race thing, don't care if it's a mexican or canadian etc, illegally in this country, no help from me. You are allowed to choose your clients after all unless working for the public defender or something, in that case not much of a lawyer anyway so be happy with the paycheck.
Again, good for you, and neither would I. As to lawyers, the court system needs Public Defenders. As John Adams said when he defended the Boston Massacre group, "Everyone deserves good counsel".

A question: You say the Illegal solution is easy. What would you do?

[The Third Man]

Well if she is anything like Sotomayor, Kagan lied to the Senate committee also and is open to impeachment like all other justices.

[Aramike]

I honestly have little complaint against Kagan other than her lack of judicial experience. On the other hand, I tend to prefer those with little government experience, so although I disagree with her on much, I refuse to cast myself as the hopeless hyprocrite.

If she were replacing a strict conservative justice this would be far more of an issue. Quite frankly I won't be surprised if she rules outside her party's line occassionally.

[The Third Man]

I honestly have little complaint against Kagan other than her lack of judicial experience. On the other hand, I tend to prefer those with little government experience, so although I disagree with her on much, I refuse to cast myself as the hopeless hyprocrite.

If she were replacing a strict conservative justice this would be far more of an issue. Quite frankly I won't be surprised if she rules outside her party's line occassionally.


If you were a teaparty member you would be called a Lindsey Graham RINO.

For me you are only calling it as you see it.

[Zachstar]

If you had read my previous comments you will know I am closed border. Because unlawful immigration causes labor worth to plummet.

However what you feel and your foolish views of a justice who we have enough reason to believe will be more right wing ruling than first thought is far different. People deserve a day in court and a defense. PERIOD.

You know I advocate for a thick hearty layer of drones on the border

[The Third Man]

If you had read my previous comments you will know I am closed border. Because unlawful immigration causes labor worth to plummet.

However what you feel and your foolish views of a justice who we have enough reason to believe will be more right wing ruling than first thought is far different. People deserve a day in court and a defense. PERIOD.

You know I advocate for a thick hearty layer of drones on the border

Is that meant for me?

[Zachstar]

Is that meant for me?

Pardon me.. I had thought I hit the quote button for Bubblehead1980 That is who the post was directed at.

[Aramike]

If you were a teaparty member you would be called a Lindsey Graham RINO.

For me you are only calling it as you see it.Well in order to be a RINO one must claim to be a Republican, right? :03:

[SteamWake]

Well in order to be a RINO one must claim to be a Republican, right? :03:

How come I never hear of DINO's :haha:

Oh and party affiliation.. what is in a name?


Democrats running fake Tea Party candidates to split the Vote


http://www.examiner.com/x-46546-Boston-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m8d9-Democrats-running-fake-Tea-Party-candidates-to-split-the-Vote

[The Third Man]

How come I never hear of DINO's :haha:



http://i-love-cartoons.com/snags/clipart/Hanna-Barbera/Flintstones/Dino.jpg

[Bubblehead1980]

well steve, I was angry when I authored the first post.I get aggravated because a lot of people seem to be oblivious to the fact that the wrong people in power could bring this country down eventually.Many people seem to have the "never could happen here" syndrome but it could. Obama has spent his entire life associating with people who would like to see American much different than what it was founded as and has been, all in the name of "the greater good", now he has been able, without much objection really to appoint two dangerous women for life to SCOTUS that share his ideology and vision of America, which is not in line with what America is supposed to be.

What would I do about illegal immigration? Well this will prob make a Liberal's head spin around lol but it's a fairly simple that ignores the clouding effects of empathy and is a plan that could be implemented
easily for the most part.

1-Secure the US Mexico border.I would have this accomplished by building a no man's land of sorts.barb wire, land mines, watch towers in certain areas, warning signs in multiple languages dirting to nearest border crossings.Cameras, UAV's could also supplement the forces on border.If someone is stupid enough to still try to cross, well that is their fault.This may sound extreme but we have an extreme problem and this would work.

2- Stiff penalities for employers who hire illegals.This includes large fines that go into a fund used to pay for the illegal immigration crackdown, pay for more border patrol etc.Not more money for congress to just waste on entitlements.Prison time for individuals proven to have knowlingly hired illegals.People's bottom line and freedom are the biggest motivators that will keep from them hiring illegals.


3-Allow local police/sheriffs/state police/highway patrol to check on immigration status at their discretion in order to supplement ICE/Border patrol.This job is too large for just the feds to do.


4-Deportation.Feds actually deport the illegals in mass, no releasing them into the public, send them home.With the now secure border incredibly difficult to come back unless legally, which I would allow them to apply to return LEGALLY, I am not without mercy.I don't care if their anchor baby is an American citizen though , they can take it with them while wait to come back.Sure having an American citizen as a child won't hurt.

5-Cut off an all benefits to illegals.Talking no education, no welfare, no food stamps, no free health care with the exception of life saving care such as if mother giving birth, they will deliver the baby obviously and stablize her etc.Basic plan is make life so unwelcoming and miserable, they will beg to go back home whether it is to Mexico or any other country.


6- I have decided I would like to amend the US constitution to make birthright citizenship based on maternity.Paternity shouldnt matter in this case because often they are not sure sure who the father is and paternity testing would just suck resources.So if the mother is illegal and she has it here, child is not automatically a citizen.I was on the fence about tweaking the constitution but believe this is a neccessary move to help curb the problem.Anchor babies are a huge problem as well.


So six steps.Sure liberals and immigration advocacy groups would cry bloody murder but who cares, believe most americans would be behind it.



An alternative plan I have thought of is this:

1 Secure the border

2 A "probation" of sorts for illegals.A large campaign to make it well known that if they are an illegal, have ONE year from said date, for example September 2010 to turn themselves in.Providing they are not a criminal, will be allowed a temporary visa to stay.They must find a job, learn english, have no children while on this probatio, pay taxes, not send money back to home country while on probation, pass the naturalization exam, stay out of trouble, meaning no midemeanor or felonies.They violate this probation, their visa will be pulled and they will be sent back to their home country, no questions asked.

3 If illegal and found in the US after the one year time period is up, are arrested and deported with no questions asked.They have had a year to report and did not, they deserve no break and only to be sent back.


4 Constitutional Amendment to stop birthright citizenship for non citizens.Even if parent has the work visa, child is not a citizen unless mother is a citizen.


5.Working, tax paying, legal immigrants on probation will be elible for SOME assitance.

6.Allow local/sate law enforcement to supplement the Feds.


7.Secure the canadian border, they are a nuisance :har:

[Bubblehead1980]

If you had read my previous comments you will know I am closed border. Because unlawful immigration causes labor worth to plummet.

However what you feel and your foolish views of a justice who we have enough reason to believe will be more right wing ruling than first thought is far different. People deserve a day in court and a defense. PERIOD.

You know I advocate for a thick hearty layer of drones on the border


Hmm guess I mistook you for someone else.

Illegals do no deserve a defense and day in court for immigration violations, its pretty black and white.They know they are here illegally but they still choose to come.To clarify, if one is accused of murder etc, yes they deserve a defense, could be innocent and have a lot against them being illegal.Then they need to be put in prison if guilty, sent home after term is up or sent home if not guilty.

[The Third Man]

I get aggravated because a lot of people seem to be oblivious to the fact that the wrong people in power could bring this country down eventually.

What you are saying is racist.

[razark]

Obama has spent his entire life associating with people who would like to see American much different than what it was founded as and has been, all in the name of "the greater good", now he has been able, without much objection really to appoint two dangerous women for life to SCOTUS that share his ideology and vision of America, which is not in line with what America is supposed to be.
Isn't that why we have a representative government? If enough people think the country should change in a certain way, we vote for people who will change it in that way? Also, this is the reason for the amendment process for the Constitution. (I'm not saying that any particular direction is the right one, just that the system is set up to allow movement.)

2- Stiff penalities for employers who hire illegals.This includes large fines that go into a fund used to pay for the illegal immigration crackdown, pay for more border patrol etc.Not more money for congress to just waste on entitlements.Prison time for individuals proven to have knowlingly hired illegals.People's bottom line and freedom are the biggest motivators that will keep from them hiring illegals.
That's one thing I don't see often enough in these discussions. If you hit the people hiring illegals hard enough, they'll stop hiring them. If there's no jobs, they don't have much to come here for.

[Platapus]

That's one thing I don't see often enough in these discussions. If you hit the people hiring illegals hard enough, they'll stop hiring them. If there's no jobs, they don't have much to come here for.

Forget fines, make hiring an undocumented worker punishable under the criminal code. Once some of these business owners (and it should be the owner, not some minion manager) spends a few years in prison, others will be more willing to follow the law. :yep:

Nothing cuts your ROI down faster than a trip to the pokey.

[The Third Man]

I hate hearing people saying illegals do the jobs US citizens won't do.

The truth is US citizens won't do the jobs illegals do...at that price.

The minimum wage laws do much to attract illegals, and allow employers to hire them.

[Zachstar]

Bingo. If employers are heavily heavily fined for hiring unlawful immigrants. They will have to start hiring citizens and visa holders. And few visa holders come here to work on a farm.

So when there is few people willing to work for minimum wage they will have to offer benefits and increased pay. Then Americans WILL work the jobs.

[Sailor Steve]

I get aggravated because a lot of people seem to be oblivious to the fact that the wrong people in power could bring this country down eventually.
And now we're back to "The wrong people". You know that some folks said the same thing about Jefferson?

Many people seem to have the "never could happen here" syndrome but it could. Obama has spent his entire life associating with people who would like to see American much different than what it was founded as and has been, all in the name of "the greater good",
And how do you know that in the long run they aren't right? I don't think they are either, but once again you don't "know", you only believe. Trust me, I'm not trying to change your mind here, just your way of expressing yourself. Condemning and railing doesn't help anything.

now he has been able, without much objection really to appoint two dangerous women for life to SCOTUS that share his ideology and vision of America, which is not in line with what America is supposed to be.
Which is how the system works, and how it was meant to work.

A quick side note: What in your opinion is America "supposed to be"?

What would I do about illegal immigration? Well this will prob make a Liberal's head spin around lol but it's a fairly simple that ignores the clouding effects of empathy and is a plan that could be implemented
easily for the most part.

And once again you fail to write without bringing in useless derision. Insults don't help you, me or them.


So six steps.Sure liberals and immigration advocacy groups would cry bloody murder but who cares, believe most americans would be behind it.
Your ideas are good ones, though the 'Land Mines' part is a bit extreme; right up there with another poster's (now banned) suggestion of making illegal immiigration a capital crime.

An alternative plan I have thought of is this:
Also a good set of ideas, except for your lack of historical context on this one:

7.Secure the canadian border, they are a nuisance :har:
I remember Vietnam, and the folks who went north to avoid the draft. If anybody wants to close that border it's the Canadians! :O:

[Sailor Steve]

Illegals do no deserve a defense and day in court for immigration violations, its pretty black and white.They know they are here illegally but they still choose to come.To clarify, if one is accused of murder etc, yes they deserve a defense, could be innocent and have a lot against them being illegal.Then they need to be put in prison if guilty, sent home after term is up or sent home if not guilty.
A valid point. If they are already proven to be illegal then they deserved to be punished, the punishment of course being a return trip home. It is of course the accused who deserve their day in court, not the already convicted.

[Sailor Steve]

What you are saying is racist.
I fail to see how the quote you supplied qualifies for that label.

[Tribesman]

1-Secure the US Mexico border.I would have this accomplished by building a no man's land of sorts.barb wire, land mines, watch towers in certain areas, warning signs in multiple languages dirting to nearest border crossings.Cameras, UAV's could also supplement the forces on border.If someone is stupid enough to still try to cross, well that is their fault.This may sound extreme but we have an extreme problem and this would work.


Not the first one to suggest that here, so again the same questions. How wide will the strip of land have to be, how much will that cost to obtain all the land and should the government be allowed to sieze the peoples property for a federal project of dubious worth?


I have decided I would like to amend the US constitution
So in one breath you are warning of the "wrong people" changing America and in the next you are proposing changing America.
Are you sure you are not one of the "wrong" people" yourself?
3-Allow local police/sheriffs/state police/highway patrol to check on immigration status at their discretion in order to supplement ICE/Border patrol.This job is too large for just the feds to do.

And how do you intend to do that without violating constitutional rights?
Amend the constitution again?
Its funny as you are on about preserving America as it was "meant" to be and warn of others changing it, yet seem to want to embark on some rather radical changes to America yourself.

They amended the constitution over here on citizenship to address the illegal immigrant issue, it made bugger all difference to the problem really apart from severely complicating issue for legal aliens.

@3rd man
The truth is US citizens won't do the jobs illegals do...at that price.

The minimum wage laws do much to attract illegals, and allow employers to hire them.
Could you clarify that as it doesn't seem to make sense?

[Bubblehead1980]

What you are saying is racist.



Nothing I said is racist.Addressing an issue that may primarily deal with onc group of people is not racist.Having said that, illegal immigration does not apply only to hispanics, I feel the same about ALL illegal immigrants.So how is what I said racist? Can't wait to hear this one.

[Bubblehead1980]

Tribesman, I am sure if part of the fence would go on private property the owners would be more than happy to allow the "wall" to be on there land to help keep illegals , drug smugglers etc off their property.Although I dislike eminent domain, I suppose if the owner was being a real pain could go that route, it is constitutional.

As far as how wide the wall would be, well I can't give specifics at moment without some research but no wider than necessary, meaning they couldnt take up a bunch of extra land not needed for the wall.


I am positive I am not one of the wrong people.The wrong people are those who think there is something wrong with America and that it needs to be "fundamentally changed" The wrong people are those who think those who have made it in life owe something to those who havent and instead of charity believe taxing someone is a better way.The wrong people are those who bow to saudi kings, call America arrogant, buddy up to people like Hugo Chavez etc then give allies such as Israel the cold shoulder.The wrong people are those who believe that a white police officer who arrests a combative, intoxicated man who happens to be black is automatically racist.The wrong people are those who believe a latina woman will reach a better conclusion than a white man simply because she is a latina.The wrong people are those who ban the military from a law school campus because she does not like a policy that is there to maintain morale, she does this because she has no understanding of the military.The wrong people are those who refuse to prosecute radical black panthers because they are black.Need I say more?

I mentioned a lot of specific things Barry O has said/done as well as Sotomayor/Kagan because their actions represent how much of the hard left see things.Their actions and views go beyond political differences to a real disdain for America as it is and has been.Their radical backrounds and associations are the most troubling.I'm sure Lenin and his people wanted to fundamentally transform Russia and they did, look what it got them.I'm not saying Obama wants that but they do want a post American European style nanny state nation, it's pretty obvious.


Simply allow the states to pass an Arizona style law so that once officers make contact for another reason such as a traffic stop, if they suspect that someone is an illegal, they can investigate.This would supplement the feds and would not be unconstitutional.The outcry over AZ law is just bleeding heart crap, not a legitimate constitutional issue.

The changes I want are not radical.I want to get away from the big government, nanny state we are on the road to that US was never intended to be and get back to what we were founded as.this is not radical, it is simply getting back to the basics that made us a great nation.

Amending the consitution is difficult as it was designed to be, but is there to correct things that are wrong.Slavery was abolished by an amendment.Prohibition was enacted and reppealed by constitutional amendment.Unfortunately, federal income tax was enacted by amending the constitution and should be reppealed in the same manor, but thats a different issue.I am generally not one to just change the constitution but there are some glaring problems with amendments such as the 14th.When the 14th amendment was authored, illegal immigration was not an issue, it was meant to protect ex slaves.They never imagined the anchor baby thing being such an issue but it is now and unfortunately I believe a constitutional amendment is needed to prevent it being easily changed back in the future.

Another amendment that says if your mother or father are not CITIZENS of the United States, you are not automatically a citizen just because you are born here.Maternity should be used as the primary way to determine if someone is a citizen at birth but if a claim is made that the father is a citizen and mother is not, paternity must be established via appropriate testing, no honor system.The amendment should be clear, so there is no doubt as to it's intent.Very simple.This does not complicate the life of legal residents.

[Tribesman]

Tribesman, I am sure if part of the fence would go on private property the owners would be more than happy to allow the "wall" to be on there land to help keep illegals , drug smugglers etc off their property.Although I dislike eminent domain, I suppose if the owner was being a real pain could go that route, it is constitutional.

You are aware that towns and cities straddle the border, thats a lot of peoples property you will have to buy.

As far as how wide the wall would be, well I can't give specifics at moment without some research but no wider than necessary, meaning they couldnt take up a bunch of extra land not needed for the wall.

You talk of a no mans land , so its not just a wall its a wide strip of cleared land plus fences plus access and service roads for all its nearly 2000 miles, thats a whole big pile of land the taxpayer is going to have to buy and maintain.

I am positive I am not one of the wrong people.The wrong people are those who think there is something wrong with America and that it needs to be "fundamentally changed"
But you are on about some very fundamental changes yourself.

The wrong people are those who believe a latina woman will reach a better conclusion than a white man simply because she is a latina.
OMG I don't believe you came out with that crap. How is it that you have just finished school yet have no understanding of the word "context"?

The wrong people are those who ban the military from a law school campus because she does not like a policy
Errrrr....that never happened, did you get lost in the hype?

Simply allow the states to pass an Arizona style law
You mean a law thats going to be completely ineffective yet expensive which panders to kneejerk populism while remaining unworkable?
Sorry but you must be joking.

The outcry over AZ law is just bleeding heart crap, not a legitimate constitutional issue.

:har::har::har::har::har::har::har:

The changes I want are not radical
Actually they are, but I think thats because you are a young idealist who hasn't really thought them through beyond cheerleading the party line.


An example of not thinking it through....
This does not complicate the life of legal residents.
....that would all be dependant on all the various citizenship laws of the countries in the world, even more so as you are on about deportation.

[Bubblehead1980]

I am aware of the border towns etc, yes it will cost but could divert wasted money such as that for Michelle Obama's security while in Spain(meaning she shouldnt be there) or obamacare to help pay for the wall.Yes the 2000 plus miles of no mans land and what not would be costly but in the long run it would save the country money.



The changes desired by myself and many who share my views are based on the constitution and how America was founded, for the most part.Things like changing the 14th amendment would be to help curb the illegal immigration problem we have.Obama's fundamental changes are not based on the constitution, most on his side believe it is outdated and meaningless.Their views are based in...well I'll say it, socialism.I'm sure you'll argue that but 55% of americans I believe the poll i saw on MSNBC of all networks(Presidents number 1 cheerleader) now feel Obama has socialist views or is a socialist, some polls i've seen.I have felt this since he became a serious contender and I began loooking into him, it's pretty obvious given his backround, friends, actions and views but he got a pass from the media.

Sotomayor's comment was not taken out of context.I am well aware of what context is.However, context is often used by people as an excuse to try and wrangle out of trouble when something they said is causing them problems.I saw the entire video multiple times, this bigot was simply saying that a "wise latina" will reach a better conclusion than a white man who has not lived her life.That is just racist, pure and simple.Imagine if a white guy had said that? Would have been crucified, but then again it would have just been taken out of context right? LOL:har: further proof of her racism, look at her ruling in new haven firefighter case, which the supreme court reversed but she still voted same way she did when the case was before her in a lower court.I do recall a hispanic male judge who worked with her making comments about her bias on a talk show once she was announced as a nominee.she is racist and shares a skewed view of things as I said, the end.


True, she did not specifically ban recruiters but she continued the policy and when allowed went back to an earlier policy while publicly rebuking the military's policy of don't ask don't tell.I will put an article below the explains the situation.However, it is a bit of friendly view from a former colleague of hers.
http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB1000142405274870388030457523650295305 5276.html


The AZ law is constitutional and will work.Problem is most people who have no clue about law and law enforcement are worked up on it thinking racial profiling, give me a break.

Lets take Florida for example.Until last couple years police could not pull you over for not wearing a seat belt, they could only ticket you for the seatbelt after stopping you for something else(known as a primary) such as speeding.

Basically the AZ law is same thing.The locals can not pull you over because they think you are an illegal.Typical encounter under AZ law would be something along the lines of: Police Officer/Deputy Sheriff/Highway Patrol Officer spots a car driving erractically, suspects possible DUI, follows and establishes pattern, makes stop.Vehicle stops, Officer makes contact.Driver has no DL, no insurance etc, broken english etc can't answer simple questions. Well not racist , just common sense to think huh illegal or wanted, both ? well I can check on that. Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its usually a? yep a DUCK.

Please tell me how it's unconstitutional?


Well if you consider a return to the basic things America was founded on in lieu of a obama's socialist agenda, I guess it's radical. Barry Goldwater said it best, extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.No party line, my views, thanks.

I am not talking about citizenship of various countries of the world, I am talking about US law.

[Tribesman]

yes it will cost but could divert wasted money such as that for Michelle Obama's security while in Spain(meaning she shouldnt be there)
Is there any particular reason the first lady should not visit Spain?
Seems like just another pile of Limburgh rubish you are rep-eating.


The changes desired by myself and many who share my views are based on the constitution and how America was founded
Thats the document you want to change isn't it.

Sotomayor's comment was not taken out of context.
Really??????:har::har::har::har::har::har:
Given the question it was a response to and the whole statement the "offensive" line came from then the only way to make it seem an objectionable line is to ignore entirely all of that and remove the words from their context and present them as something they were not
Faux outrage again.

True, she did not specifically ban .....
So it isn't true
However, it is a bit of friendly view
You mean a view that isn't simply a lie?

The AZ law is constitutional and will work.Problem is most people who have no clue about law and law enforcement are worked up on it thinking racial profiling, give me a break.

Oh dear, you know that racial profiling is unconstitutional and that the police and legislature still havn't worked out how to carry out this law yet without violating the constitution so it ids laughable for you to say its constitutional.
Just look at the problems NY has had trying to get their simple stop and search laws working withinthe constitution....which of course can also be an example of how the AZ won't work.
But for a better example of how it won't work look at the law and explain to me at what stage AZ can actually hand its illegals over to the federal govt. for deportation?

Lets take Florida for example
I don't believe it, are you really trying to compare a plainly visible offence like not wearing a seatbelt with the immigration law????:doh:
When is it you are going to start learning law? September perhaps? I see its going to be a very hard education process for you.


Please tell me how it's unconstitutional?

Because its widely open to profiling which is unconstitutional puts undue burden and threat of illegal detention on citizens(and legal aliens) which is unconstitutional plus its breaking the constitution by usurping the federal authority.

Well if you consider a return to the basic things America was founded on in lieu of a obama's socialist agenda
Socialist agenda:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:

I am not talking about citizenship of various countries of the world, I am talking about US law.
As I said, you have a hell of a lot to learn come september,if you cannot see how one is affected by another over this issue you are going to get very very stuck with your studies.
It is rather simple, deportation from a country has a mirror in another country called repatriation.
Can you see how another countries citizenship laws comes into play when you want to change your birthright citizenship laws to deport certain people to other countries?