qman said:

Stonehenge said:

The democrap party is big and powerful and they do indeed want the Hispanic vote. You are way off on that part. O'stumble has many masters, none of them being the usa public, so he keeps giving amnesty to illegals with various tricks.

---

Yet, the Republican Party that's suppose to be against illegal immigration does NOTHING to promote the enforcement of the laws, why?  Because their money supporters also want the additional labor into the US economy.

How did it work for Cantor in a tiny election a few months ago?  Not so good.

---

zappaisgod said:

qman said:

Stonehenge said:

The democrap party is big and powerful and they do indeed want the Hispanic vote. You are way off on that part. O'stumble has many masters, none of them being the usa public, so he keeps giving amnesty to illegals with various tricks.

---

Yet, the Republican Party that's suppose to be against illegal immigration does NOTHING to promote the enforcement of the laws, why?  Because their money supporters also want the additional labor into the US economy.

How did it work for Cantor in a tiny election a few months ago?  Not so good.

---

Yep.  That is true.  They are whores

---

zappaisgod said:

The US is not and never has been a democracy

---

luvdemshrooms said:

Perhaps some of us are clever enough to recognize the difference between laws that regulate our personal behavior and laws that regulate our interactions with others.

Your Kumbayah crap about the world not having borders is a childish fantasy with no place in the world of reality.

---

qman said:

zappaisgod said:

The US is not and never has been a democracy

---

So why do you even give a fuck about a R or D?  Seems counterproductive.

---

The Ecstatic said:

luvdemshrooms said:

Perhaps some of us are clever enough to recognize the difference between laws that regulate our personal behavior and laws that regulate our interactions with others.

Your Kumbayah crap about the world not having borders is a childish fantasy with no place in the world of reality.

---

Doesn't mean nationalism isn't equally childish. An arbitrary line drawn as a result of (usually) some military conflict isn't a prerequisite for a culture or society.

---

zappaisgod said:

The Ecstatic said:

luvdemshrooms said:

Perhaps some of us are clever enough to recognize the difference between laws that regulate our personal behavior and laws that regulate our interactions with others.

Your Kumbayah crap about the world not having borders is a childish fantasy with no place in the world of reality.

---

Doesn't mean nationalism isn't equally childish. An arbitrary line drawn as a result of (usually) some military conflict isn't a prerequisite for a culture or society.

---

It is for a nation.  Ask Mexico about how it enforces its borders.

There is nothing arbitrary about borders drawn by conquest.

---

luvdemshrooms said:

It may not be a prerequisite but it's where we have wound up. Pretending otherwise or declaring a societal construct invalid because an ignorant few wish it to be, is past childish and not realistic.

---

The Ecstatic said:

Well obviously nobody spun a wheel and decided the sahape of the lines. I'm saying culture, ethnic groups, common political and religious identities are not confined to national borders, and in lots of cases, has divided them (culture/groups/religious sects).

---

specialpeopleclub said:

The way I see it, there are two sides, the open minded and compassionate side that recognises the right to strive for a better life, then the sode that thinks that this is 'how it si' and fights to protect the status quo, saddly. The world doesn't really have borders, people take their nationality too seriously. The legality argument is stupid too, especially here. You ever done drugs? Then shove that legality shit

---

The 'right to strive for a better life.'  Yes, there is.  That means the right to apply for LEGAL immigration.  As far as your specious argument about drugs, that's right, many of them are illegal.  You have a 'right' to use them.  But don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

With all the bull-shit about 'fairness' I hear, how about being fair to the people that worked their asses off and waited--sometimes years--to legally immigrate to the US?

These doesn't mean I lack compassion.  As far as the recent influx off people trying to cross the border to latch on to the Nanny-Teat, I've given quite a bit of money to an organization providing food and medical supplies to help these people in an emergency.  I always have and I always will because it is the humanistic thing to do.

But helping people out in time of need or emergency doesn't mean you let them walk all over you.

By the way, I would venture to guess that I've given more money recently to private charities than most politicians do.

But don't worry, they'll be glad to take YOUR tax money (and everyone else's) and give it away then claim they are being 'compassionate.'

EntheogenicPeace said:

Quote:

Most of the deaths of Indians were inadvertent from disease.

---

They most certainly were not inadvertent. For instance, the Poncas (northern Nebraska at the time of removal) who had always lived peacefulyl w/Europeans and who farmed, when their rich agronomic was coveted, they were removed at gunpoint to "Indian territory" whereby 25% of their tribe died from the brutal conditions of forced relocation in the 1st year, starvation & freezing (which weakens one's ability to fight disease, in case you didn't know) was the leading cause along w/malaria (since they were relocated to concentration camps further south from where they had lived, w/no medicine provided). Again, this was done to a peaceful tribe who had never fought the Europeans. The treatment was usually worse for those who did fight back. To call this inadvertent is just stupid if you really believe that foolishness.

Quote:

I'm part Indian myself.

---

I'm very skeptical of your claimed heritage.

---