found this disturbing when i read it today

[nutz4sand]

Originally Posted by yummi

This is an interesting post. It is educational to see the outrage. An observation though; there have been very few suggestions as to a workable solution. Reactions; yes. Solutions; not so much. .

Interestingly the soulution <-(spelled wrong on purpose. Think about it.) is going to likely be a bigger event than the one listed below or seen before in history. Ths country was founded to prevent this from happening but the G-ment we have seems to ignore most of that to suit its needs.

Originally Posted by yummi

Let me preface this by saying I think stricter boarder enforcement must occur. Unfortunately it will take an “event” for that to happen. There will be, unfortunately, an “event.”

I agree.

Originally Posted by yummi

So, just to be contrary, I am going to throw some thoughts out there.

First, I believe that man has an innate desire to better himself. That is, if your family is hungry, then, you will likely do what needs to be done to rectify that situation. Who among us would not steal a loaf of bread to feed our family if we had no alternative? That is not unique to our American culture. That is part of the human condition.

Yes but one would hope that by this day and age that a person would not have to steal but could do SOME kind of work to feed themself or thier family. Worse to worse move into the mountians and live like people did way back when. (I know there are not very many places one can do this)

Originally Posted by yummi

Second, many people have made reference to the bill of rights in this thread. The question is: Does the bill of rights only apply to citizens? Do not all men have the same rights? Or, is there a class, in this case, “citizen,” that endows us with greater rights? My estimation? Citizenship does afforded greater rights. BUT, it also comes with a greater burden. Whether that is expressed in taxes, sacrifice, or service, citizenship does in fact come with a greater burden.

The bill of rights was payed for by all the lives of those who fought (and so many died) to allow it to be enacted into being. Thus illegal aliens do not fall under it so much. You and I may wish to be nice to all people and as long as they hold their share of the burden then they "should" be entitled to thier share of the pie. (By this I mean becoming a citizen legally. Paying FULL taxes I pay.etc. Speaking English HERE. I would not move to Mexico and wish english be forced upon them. I understand so many speak english and spanish for the need of it (Heck I wish I had took some spanish. Still might.) That said I cannot so much condone the way much of the Southwest of America (or a lot of it for that matter) was "gotten". I know this will piss a few off BUT walk a mile in thier shoes. If someone came in today and tried to take this land the way it was taken we would scream bloody murder.

Originally Posted by yummi

Finally, it is interesting to see the shift of blame from “self” to “illegal alien.” There is no apparent nexus between the lack of desire for our citizens to work, vs. the immigrant who is forced into the position to work. That is larger social issue that is unrelated to the immigration matter. Shifting blame is illogical. Convenient? Expedient? Simplistic? Sure. Logical? No. It did not work with the Nazis and it will not work with illegals and citizens. (No, I am not suggesting that if you oppose illegal immigration you are a racist, skin head, or a Nazi – I am making reference to a historical event. If you would like, you can use the word “Crusade” and blast the Christians. It is just a historical reference to a “purging” event.)

It is easy to find outrage on either side of this issue. The extremes each have their own agenda and that’s why they get labeled the “extreme.” What is a bit more difficult to find is reasoned solution. Part of that solution is to become involved. My guess is, while each of us may have posted their opinion on the thread, few, if any, of the posters here have actually contacted their representative and expressed their thoughts. Allow me to make being part of the solution a bit easier for you. This link will allow you to find your congressman and to email them directly. https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml. If you find you are in disagreement with your current representation, it is also my guess that few, if any, have supported a candidate who represents most closely your views on the subject. It is easier to be indignant.

I cannot argue above too much. The problem is getting involved take more time and money than most of us have. One would swear its designed that way "wink wink" to keep us little people out of "The works". By the time a person has worked a 40 to 50 (or more) hour week they are to tired to get involved. Not to mention the "legal talk" is designed so that it can be interpreted to whoevers way "they" wish. The Revoulution people got involved when guns were stuck in thier faces. I hate to see it come to that again but the day is peeking on the horizon if a change is not made the voting way. The sad truth is with some of the new tech the G-ment has even guns will be of little to no use soon (heck now) so what then? (I am refferring to energetics weapons (Google them. Seen those funny clouds lately?). Seen the crowd control Hummer? On high guess what happens to a HUGE crowd? Low makes you think your skins on fire. High takes out the think.

Originally Posted by yummi

As to the referendum idea thrown out above; that will not occur. To do so would be changing the form of our current government. One that has worked extremely well for over 200 years.

I would ask you to explain this so I am sure I understand exactly where you are coming from. I think I got it but wish to be sure.

Originally Posted by yummi

Now, just a thought. Not my thread and I don’t want to hijack it.

But, as a challenge, turn the thread into one that devises a “solution.” Not a reaction, a well reasoned solution.

We all might realize that it is a bit more difficult than we think.

Yah nothing good is easy and the amount of money and power at stake here make this the toughest of all. Very good and interesting Yummi. But I fear that we have gone far beyond what our fore fathers forseen. Sometimes I feel for the children of this world and can only wonder what they will see happen. Heck I might not have to wait and wonder. But I still feel for them if it goes like it seems like it is going. Bill

[masterfabr]

The only solution necessary is to ENFORCE the laws already on the books.SIMPLE.

[Gene]

With respect to the "referendum" explanation this country does not have a constituional process for citizens to vote on any matter other than president. Even that is an indirect vote since the Electoral College represents your vote and can do whatever it wishes to do with your vote.

Congress represents Joe citizen in Washington DC. They can do whatever they want - and it is obvious they do exactly that.

We made a mistake when surveying the Southwest after winning that war. The surveyors got a little drunk, maybe got scared, made a wrong turn and screwed up. They intended to cut straight across rather than jog up. They could have taken all of Baja.

That is basically the way of war and how this country came to exist. The same is true of every country, really.

[yummi]

Originally Posted by nutz4sand

I would ask you to explain this so I am sure I understand exactly where you are coming from. I think I got it but wish to be sure.

We live in a democratic federal republic. Despite what they teach in grade school, it is not a democracy. We don’t even have a democracy at the school board level, maybe at the PTA, but damn sure not at the school board. Given the total population of the US, and, the daily requirements of the business of government, a pure democracy would not be feasible. That was suggested above as was a “referendum” or “proposition” of which there is no provision for at the federal level. Having watched the decay of various western states that embrace referendums, I would shudder if one were established at the federal level. My primary challenge with them is mandates without funding.

Originally Posted by nutz4sand

Yes but one would hope that by this day and age that a person would not have to steal but could do SOME kind of work to feed themself or thier family. Worse to worse move into the mountians and live like people did way back when. (I know there are not very many places one can do this)

Let me clarify, and in doing so, I will remove the moral implications of the “steal a loaf of bread.” You will see that “going to the hills” is exactly what I am describing.

Every organism, even the single cell ones we look at under a microscope in grade school, will migrate when forced OR facilitated to do so by environmental conditions. That is the most fundamental aspect of survival. Without the ability to migrate, the species dies.

Migration only stops when environmental conditions are not conducive to migration. Translation: A bigger fence, legislation or “enforcement of existing laws” only serves to impede migration, not stop it. One of the great paradoxes of migration is that the flow of resources, in this case human, working age, able bodied resources, stops or retards the development of assets at the point of origin. The reduction of human capital in Mexico is having an arguably bigger negative effect on the long term survivability of the Mexican economy than it is on our own economy. And again I will state I am in favor of greater boarder enforcement.

The best we can do with stricter enforcement or taller fences is to impede migration. We cannot stop migration of any organism unless we address the environmental conditions at the point of origin. That works for amoeba, kudzu, polar bears, humans, “Okies” during the dust bowl, (I am a descendant, I can say that) and the complete collapse of the “Raider Nation.” Pick it. Migration is all the same.

[yummi]

Originally Posted by Gene

We made a mistake when surveying the Southwest after winning that war. The surveyors got a little drunk, maybe got scared, made a wrong turn and screwed up. They intended to cut straight across rather than jog up. They could have taken all of Baja.

I don’t think that was a "mistake." I think that was by treaty to allow a “land bridge” to both portions of Mexico. I don’t think the entirety of the baja peninsula was ever in question.

[nutz4sand]

Wait..we get to vote on who is president? I am not on the supreme court. My vote does not count!..... Hmmm Bill

[nutz4sand]

Originally Posted by yummi

Given the total population of the US, and, the daily requirements of the business of government, a pure democracy would not be feasible.

I disagree with this. They can count us for thier reasons. They know whos pays taxes and how many. So for votes it should be so simple as COUNT THEM.
Sure counting EVERY vote would be a big job but its for a BIG matter so once evry four years somebodies got to count. Do it I say.


I do not think that voting should be a private matter. If you are ashamed of your vote then why did you vote for them? Plus the benefit would be anyone who wanted to could check with anyone to make sure the vote was counted for the side it was intended. Go to a web site and search for your name and bammo. There who you voted for.

I believe 110% that all the BS involved in the voting now is just so it can be manipulated to thier liking. Thats it and nothing more. There are NOT so many people who can and do vote that actually counting them would be any real issue other than doing it. ESPECIALLY with todays internet. Bill

[yummi]

Originally Posted by nutz4sand

I disagree with this. Sure counting EVERY vote would be a big job but its for a BIG matter so once evry four years somebodies got to count. Do it I say.

Bill,

I say this with all respect.

Do you really want to vote on if John Smith at the post office in Anchorage gets a raise? Or did we really need a public discussion on weapons funding for the Manhattan project when WWII was in full swing? Not so much.

Senator McCain has admitted to no real internet skills. Do we want to only allow participation by those who have a computer or the knowledge of how to use one?

Pure democracy; too time consuming and far too cumbersome.

[nutz4sand]

I guess I could have been a bit more clear. I meant for the President and then for each states congress "people". Not every single vote for every little thing. Just the top three. Pres, Senator, and Representitive. Bill

[masterfabr]

Originally Posted by yummi

We live in a democratic federal republic. Despite what they teach in grade school, it is not a democracy. We don’t even have a democracy at the school board level, maybe at the PTA, but damn sure not at the school board. Given the total population of the US, and, the daily requirements of the business of government, a pure democracy would not be feasible. That was suggested above as was a “referendum” or “proposition” of which there is no provision for at the federal level. Having watched the decay of various western states that embrace referendums, I would shudder if one were established at the federal level. My primary challenge with them is mandates without funding.



Let me clarify, and in doing so, I will remove the moral implications of the “steal a loaf of bread.” You will see that “going to the hills” is exactly what I am describing.

Every organism, even the single cell ones we look at under a microscope in grade school, will migrate when forced OR facilitated to do so by environmental conditions. That is the most fundamental aspect of survival. Without the ability to migrate, the species dies.

Migration only stops when environmental conditions are not conducive to migration. Translation: A bigger fence, legislation or “enforcement of existing laws” only serves to impede migration, not stop it. One of the great paradoxes of migration is that the flow of resources, in this case human, working age, able bodied resources, stops or retards the development of assets at the point of origin. The reduction of human capital in Mexico is having an arguably bigger negative effect on the long term survivability of the Mexican economy than it is on our own economy. And again I will state I am in favor of greater boarder enforcement.

The best we can do with stricter enforcement or taller fences is to impede migration. We cannot stop migration of any organism unless we address the environmental conditions at the point of origin. That works for amoeba, kudzu, polar bears, humans, “Okies” during the dust bowl, (I am a descendant, I can say that) and the complete collapse of the “Raider Nation.” Pick it. Migration is all the same.

We CAN stop migration.We CHOOSE not to.That's like saying we can't stop an infection by using antibiotics.The infection may RESIST but in the end with continued efforts most will stop or at least be controlled.ENFORCE OUR LAWS! When laws are not enforced-we fail.