Problems in our country that need to be dealt with?

Yeah, you keep on laughing when they replace football with soccer, ABC with Telemundo, and Budweiser with Corona. You say you like celebrating Halloween? Too bad! It's gonna be Los Dias De Los Muertos from now on. We'll see if you're still laughing when a tide of Mexicans floods our once proud white Nation. Me and my family are already heading for higher ground, i.e. Montana. We'll see if those wet-backs come up here to try to serve a meaningful role in the agriculture and service industries. The militia group we're forming along with some ex-Ruby Ridgers will make sure that some plot of the good ol' USA stay white, right, and Christian.

 

Umm... I'd like to say that this is not my viewpoint.

 

I can hardly imagine you voted for Bush because he's such a big proponent for "guess worker program", aka government-sponsored illegal immigration (of Mexicans).

 

No, I didn't vote for Bush.

 

We will never get rid of corruption until we bring our christian morals back. If you have no morals or nothing to fear, then there is not much of a reason to not be corrupt.

 

Sincerely,

Tom Delay

 

Why moral has to be religious?

I'd put cutting all faith-based government programs on the list.

 

I didn't mean to imply that it was, just saw an opportunity to make a joke. I'm sorry if I offended you. But, what exactly did you have in mind when you posted this:

There's always been a concern of whether or not immigrants will assimilate into our culture or be take it over. Bill the Butcher from "Gangs of New York" comes to mind... What exactly do you believe is going to happen if we don't stop immigration? The south didn't succeed in seceding and I don't think any state will be bolting for Mexico anytime soon...

 

A true free press is most important for this democracy to work. Right now, the press is controlled by interest groups.

 

Unless you are talking about bringing Mother Teresa to run the government, I do not see how you can make such a statement. Tell me if Bush is a Christian or not, is he corrupt? How about Cheany?

 

Okay - no prob. You didn't offend me, but it sounded like you might have been trying to put words in my mouth. Glad to hear that that's not the case

America is a fine mix of cultures, and I want to clarify something you said. I don't want to "stop immigration". Not at all. Hell, I'm half-Mexican. I said we must stop illegal immigration. There's a big difference.

Sometimes people forget that the US accepts immigrants from almost anywhere. But we have restrictions - we try to control the flow of immigrants. There are REASONS why we have these restrictions.

You ask what I think what will happen if we don't stop illegal immigration. Ask yourself, "why don't I live in Mexico?" What's you're answer? Maybe your answer is something simple, like...I don't speak Spanish. Or, the cities are filthy, unclean, overpopulated, and ridiculously dangerous. Or maybe your answers are bigger than that.. like, it's a two class society with a minute amount of rich people and a nation full of poor people. Or, their currency is complete wreck. Or their governement corruption runs from the president all the way down to the local police. Or, the schools and hospitals and other facilities are simple aweful.

If you think we have some, or many of those problems now in the US., they will be exponentially worse as we continue to fill our nation with illegal immigrants and as the existing illegals have millions and millions of kids (most of whom will be poor and will expand the lower class dramatically). Our nation will become Mexico.

 

1. Balanced budget constituitional ammendment (with no accounting slight of hand).
2. Line item veto constituitional ammendment.
3. Term limit Congress (like the President) constituitional ammendment.
4. Simplified tax code (flat income tax and VAT consumption tax)

In the long term, health care will have to addressed as a part of maintaining a balanced budget.

 

1. I'm willing to wager everythign I've got in the bank that sexual orientation is not the kind of choice you say it is. Do you "choose" the kind of women you're attracted to? No, it's what innately appeals to you on a subconscious level. People who are homosexual are naturally inclined to be so. No one woke up one morning and said "wow, I'd love to be attracted to the opposite sex so I can be denigrated and discriminated against and never feel like a real person." Sure, people can suppress their feelings or be maniuplated through culutral influence, but do you seriously believe that Carson from Queer Eye decided to be gay? Sure, like breathing or eating, they could "choose" to not do it, but the vast majority of gays and lesbians are acting in the way that comes naturally to them.
2. You make reproduction the morally relevant difference between gay couples and heterosexual couples. So if a heterosexual woman is infertile or a heterosexual man is impotent do they not have the right to marry because their having sex cannot produce offspring? If a couple is using birth control or decides to never have sex should they not be allowed to marry? I don't think that the ability to produce children should determine whether or not you should be able to adopt a child or receive health benefits.
3. Since when is marriage simply about procreation? I've never heard any people make wedding vows on the basis of fertility and offspring. Should a man be able to divorce a woman on the basis that she cannot bear children? Is marriage now simply a means for some sort of state regulation of poplualation like in China?
4. You say that no anmial has reproduced through homosexual intercourse, yet you don't deny that homosexuality occurs in nature, i.e. that it's a natural occurence. Why does that fact that a baby isn't produced make an act "unnatural." Seems to me if it occurs in nature, across the vast majority of species, phylum, and what have you, it is a natural act.
5. Even if it isn't natural, why does that mean we should rail against it? What would be so bad about two people being able to live their lives with the same comfort and privileges that everyone else in the country enjoys? What would happen that would be bad about this other than you feeling uncomfortable? Wouldn't you be willing to feel a little uncomfortable for the sake of millions of people feeling like second class citizens?

 

How do you see this one working out? I know the Republicans passed a law allowing it during Reagan's term but then freaked out when Clinton took office. I think it would be cool if you could cut out riders to bills or perhaps single out passages to be put to a vote on the Senate floor again. E.g. Trent Lott sticks in funding for 3 air craft carriers the Navy insists it doesn't need and then the Senate floor could vote on that pork. Seems like it would cause an awful lot of gridlock though...

 

Line item veto in DC would work just like it does in most states. Pork would be put in and the chief executive (President, Governor) would take it out. The people who put the prok in could say "as least I tried".

 

1. overturn Roe v. Wade and outlaw abortion
2. eliminate the minimum wage, pay people what they are willing to work for
3. establish a doctrine of military intervention based on humanitarian concerns, not neccessarily national security
4. eliminate social security, people can set aside x% of their income on there own, the government doesn't need to run it at a horrendous rate of return
5. legalize drugs - all drugs
6. move from an income tax system to a sales tax system
7. drastically reduce the size of government by eliminating most government programs
8. make English the official language of the US
9. get rid of the filibuster

That's enough for now.

 

OK I've skimmed this thread so here a few quick comments.

1. The political system of this country was not founded on Christian ideas. It was founded on ancient Roman and Greek ideas. Democracy isn't a Christian idea since the Bible endorses the divine right of kings.

2. Related to the above point and as a segue. The ancient Greeks not only tolerated homosexuality but celebrated it. Some of the giants of western thought were notorious buggerers. I totally agree that homosexuality doesn't lead to procreation but then again neither does eating a peanut butter sandwhich the point is that we do a lot of things that have nothing to do with purely biological drives so what is the point of discriminating against something legally if it harms no one and is being done consensually by adults.

3. In regard to gay marriage I'm generally with Bullard4life that I think marriage shouldn't be mandated by the government. More specifically I think it should be a state issue and left for the states to decide.

4. I think the idea that we are being overwhelmed by a wave of illegal immigrants is far more myth than fact. Illegal aliens provide massive economic and social benefits to the country by keeping labor costs down while providing valuable services. Yes they do take up services but I bet they generate far more interms of revenues than they use in services. I've heard that without them the agricultural and construction sectors of many parts of this country would collapse.

 

And what would be the standards for requiring humanitarian intervention? This either a recipe for endless war since there's some sort ethnic or other brutality going on somewhere every day or for bald face hypocrisy if the standards are interpretted so narrowly that only another Holocaust triggers intervention.

I would say that is very shortsighted. The Congress is a narrow Conservative majority and its very likely to change. If the Congress was dominated by liberals I bet you would think differently.

 

Wow, um, do you favor a return to child labor too?