• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

SOURCE: Feds to Bring in Riot Squad Against Illegal Immigration Protesters

Soupnazi630 said:
Neither do I you just wish to force others to do what you wish, I do not.
Click to expand...

Were all different. The small amount of our tax money used to help these children until something politically is worked out, be it citizenship or deportation is money well spent.
 
Texmex said:
Were all different. The small amount of our tax money used to help these children until something politically is worked out, be it citizenship or deportation is money well spent.
Click to expand...

Not when the government is refusing to enforce the law by spending said money.
 
Soupnazi630 said:
Not when the government is refusing to enforce the law by spending said money.
Click to expand...

Well, let's starve these children, that'll teach those politicians. :roll:
 
Texmex said:
Well, let's starve these children, that'll teach those politicians. :roll:
Click to expand...

No sign that they are in danger of starving. And if they were you and others like you could easily feed them without force
 
Moderator's Warning:
Both of you STOP.
 
Luftwaffe said:
Fail, one notion from 1886 does not equate to him believing in all notions from 1886.

In that case, let's throw out the constitution because it was made in the 1700's and let's bring back the slaves etc. <----- No, of course not.
Click to expand...

And if he had given any context as to WHY he felt that text was poignant and needed to still be the basis for immigration policy perhaps you’d have a point. Rather he just points to it and goes “that’s what it should be” with seemingly no explanation other than “This was an old thing that used to describe how we viewed immigration”.

If I reference the constitution I do so making reference to the fact it’s the supreme law of the land, the Statute of Liberty is not. Or I make reference to it explaining how it’s principles still fit the context of the world today.

In 1886 our population to land ratio was significantly smaller. There was a significant need for an increase in the population base within the country in order to allow it to grow and thrive. There was significant gaps within the work force that needed bodies to fill, both in the creation of jobs and businesses and the staffing of them. At that time we were not the economic engine of the world and a lone super power but rather a fledgling nation still building up and establishing itself.

Today, our population has skyrocketed. Our city centers bursting. Our job situation one where we have less than we can fill, not more. We are now the economic engine of the world, no longer struggling to grow. Where quantity over quality was once important for the context and goals of the country we have naturally shifted due to the way things have progressed over the past century.

In 1886 we were the start-up phase of what would become a fortune 500 company, where you’re grabbing anyone and everyone that can help. In 1886 we were the days of the NFL when a teacher could walk-on and make an NFL team. In 1886 we were an aspiring Director who’s having to work with the likes of June Wilkinson and Robert Robyn as your top billing actors.

In 2014 we’re that fortune 500 company that’s at the top of their industry that is able to pick and choose the best up and coming minds to fill their ranks. In 2014 we’re the NFL standing as a behemoth where anyone who isn’t a world class athlete or a college standout is unlikely to make a team. In 2014 we’re the Director whose able to tap Marlon Brando or Tom Hanks as our lead actors.

Much like some founder’s thoughts regarding voting rights being only for land owning white males is outdated and not realistic in the context of the situation facing this country today, the words on the statue of liberty also do not make sense in the context of our country today. And even in this instance, the founder’s particular words were at least LAW and required actual change…the Statue of Liberties words were just that, pretty words with no legal binding what so ever. They define not what “America is” but what it was at it’s earlier days. And it was what it needed to be. But it is no more necessary, intelligent, or reasonable to apply to today then the notion of owning slaves.
 
Dear dip****s:
These protests make it harder to deport illegal aliens.
 
Zyphlin said:
And if he had given any context as to WHY he felt that text was poignant and needed to still be the basis for immigration policy perhaps you’d have a point. Rather he just points to it and goes “that’s what it should be” with seemingly no explanation other than “This was an old thing that used to describe how we viewed immigration”.

If I reference the constitution I do so making reference to the fact it’s the supreme law of the land, the Statute of Liberty is not. Or I make reference to it explaining how it’s principles still fit the context of the world today.

In 1886 our population to land ratio was significantly smaller. There was a significant need for an increase in the population base within the country in order to allow it to grow and thrive. There was significant gaps within the work force that needed bodies to fill, both in the creation of jobs and businesses and the staffing of them. At that time we were not the economic engine of the world and a lone super power but rather a fledgling nation still building up and establishing itself.

Today, our population has skyrocketed. Our city centers bursting. Our job situation one where we have less than we can fill, not more. We are now the economic engine of the world, no longer struggling to grow. Where quantity over quality was once important for the context and goals of the country we have naturally shifted due to the way things have progressed over the past century.

In 1886 we were the start-up phase of what would become a fortune 500 company, where you’re grabbing anyone and everyone that can help. In 1886 we were the days of the NFL when a teacher could walk-on and make an NFL team. In 1886 we were an aspiring Director who’s having to work with the likes of June Wilkinson and Robert Robyn as your top billing actors.

In 2014 we’re that fortune 500 company that’s at the top of their industry that is able to pick and choose the best up and coming minds to fill their ranks. In 2014 we’re the NFL standing as a behemoth where anyone who isn’t a world class athlete or a college standout is unlikely to make a team. In 2014 we’re the Director whose able to tap Marlon Brando or Tom Hanks as our lead actors.

Much like some founder’s thoughts regarding voting rights being only for land owning white males is outdated and not realistic in the context of the situation facing this country today, the words on the statue of liberty also do not make sense in the context of our country today. And even in this instance, the founder’s particular words were at least LAW and required actual change…the Statue of Liberties words were just that, pretty words with no legal binding what so ever. They define not what “America is” but what it was at it’s earlier days. And it was what it needed to be. But it is no more necessary, intelligent, or reasonable to apply to today then the notion of owning slaves.
Click to expand...

"population to land ratio" Quit the bull****, the tiny island of England has 60 million.

All of Europe, Barely bigger than the U.S., has a population BIGGER than that of the U.S., amounting to over 700 MILLION.

In the entirety of the U.S. we are nowhere near even 400 million. Land is hardly an issue.
 
Deuce said:
Dear dip****s:
These protests make it harder to deport illegal aliens.
Click to expand...

No, they don't. In fact, today, the POTUS is walking back his talk of them staying and asking for a few billion to deal with the situation. I want the protestors and voters in general to keep the pressure on. Every time we let up the critters think we've forgotten and start talking amnesty again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom