You'll have to apologize for my tardiness. A computer error wiped out my first attempt at a response. This one is going to be a quickie because I am
not going to engage in an argument over your ridiculous tactic of claiming that I did not address points which I have in fact addressed. Anyone who
reads this thread will see that you are simply choosing to ignore that which you do not want to hear.
First things first, I’m not your typical liberal. I straddle the line rather unpredictably (although I generally follow some pretty predictable
principles, I still seem to surprise people). I consider myself a liberal by conservative means. That is to say that I believe in fiscal
responsibility, personal responsibility, and the sovereignty of America, but I believe that preserving these principles and others does not require
that I disown logic by denying the obvious value and/or necessity of certain humane/socially responsible programs or policies which are generally
considered liberal. In short, we can get the decent liberal thing done by sound conservative means. I’m not the whacko that O’Reilly has been
warning you about.
I call them illegal immigrants, not illegal aliens, not undocumented workers. That is the problem after all. The problem is not that they are alien,
in the foreign sense; this nation has profited culturally from its diversity. The problem is merely the strains created by an influx of people and I
use the term that describes that problem, because it best suits a discussion of how to address that problem, unlike illegal alien, which best suits
Speaking of fear of the unknown, I’ve never tried tofu and I probably never will, but it does not befuddle me.
Back to the topic now, I don’t support free medical aid. I support purchased medical aid, and that’s something that even many natural born
citizens can’t accomplish because our policy makers have not yet surrendered the ideological entrenchment that special interests require from them
and moved toward the middle to seriously plan and build an economically viable social health care plan that ensures that the shortcomings of our
successful but imperfect capitalist system do not create a society in which a person who contributes to our economy’s ability to produce the
necessities of life is not denied the necessities of life himself.
I do not support an unrestricted guest worker program. I believe that employers should be restricted in their ability to exploit workers, and that
when foreign and citizen workers are placed on a level field that the marketplace will naturally limit the demand for foreign workers, thus
discouraging any excess in immigration, legal or otherwise- an optimal solution.
I do not support unrestricted amnesty but I acknowledge the clear impossibility of removing them and thus I believe that there must be a path to
citizenship available for those who are already here, but which requires proof of long term contribution on their part, thus shoring up the above
described market check by making it clear that if there isn’t a market for you here, there won’t be an amnesty that lets you onto the dole until
there is a market.
I believe that every tax payer has a right to send their children to school. That isn’t free. All that need be done then is enforce our tax laws on
Social security is not free. You have to pay in sufficiently to earn your credits. Your question in this regard betrays ignorance on the subject.
I do not believe that all opponents of immigration are bigots but I know that many bigots are also opponents of illegal immigration. The test of
bigotry is quite simple. If one has arrived at his views reasonably, even by flawed reason, so be it. If one has reached a snap decision, especially
driven by fear rather than reason, he is a bigot.
I have countered you with statistics and I will not engage you further in substantial depth on issues I have addressed until you respond. If you are
quite certain that I have lost my head into some unsavory place, we can have a judged debate in the H2H forum where a neutral party can discern who is
ignoring evidence. All you need to is accept that challenge and I’ll see if we can arrange a judged debate. You should probably read what
MadnessinmySoul posted before you accept that challenge though.
I will briefly note however that your supposed support for the claim that gang violence equals Mexicans is entirely flawed since it cites outstanding
warrants rather than total criminal activity. Of course most outstanding warrants are for illegals. That is because for lack of identifying documents
they are hard to identify before release, and they have the right to enter and stay in Mexico when the US becomes unsafe for them. This is a problem
that can and must be addressed, but which can be addressed far short of mass deportations, and it is hardly evidence that crime in the US is for the
most part a result of illegal immigration.
Originally posted by Retseh
Too much evidence for you maybe, are any of these facts penetrating your socialist brain?
What evidence? All I see so far is evidence that the United States is exceedingly foolish to require hospitals to care for people in emergency
situations while not having a plan to pay for it. That’s half our fault. The rest of your “evidence” was patently absurd.
As for socialism, yes I believe that capitalism can and should borrow ideas from socialism in industries which fail to meet their purposes under pure
capitalism. You don’t have to be afraid of me because of that; I haven’t got any nuclear weapons in Cuba.
OK, so I was lying my butt off about being brief. My dad was from the windy city, what do you expect?