The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

On-Topic Ann Coulter Rips Marco Rubio Over Inmigration Reform.

First of all, to quote the HP as a source for an open discussion of immigration reform is like quoting the Pope for an open discussion on abortion.

I cannot stand Ann Coulter. That being said, she is correct on this issue. Marco Rubio is being a Cuban first and then an American second.

My thought is this. Before pushing for reform, why not trying enforcing the laws already on the books and see how that works. The immigration laws haven't been vigorously enforced for any lengthy period of time...ever. Immigration has become a political football. Republican administrations look the other way because immigrates are cheap labor for the big agribusinesses and hotel chains. These guys use the catch 22 "day labor" which allows them to submit a 1099, which let's be clear is vague at best. Democratic administrations look the other way because immigrates are quickly assimilated into the nanny culture where they queue up for taxpayer financed freebies. Democrats are the party of giveaways. Therefore, these people are more than likely to vote for Democratic candidates even though they technically are not capable of doing that legally in this country. (see last year's election)

I agree that immigration needs to be reformed radically. Most of today's problems come from Hart-Cellar and all the amendments to it through the years.

No other country in the world is as lax as is the U.S. with immigration policy, no one.
 
Benvolio said:
Rome lost its republican form of government at that point and never recovered it.
Click to expand...

That was because of Roman versions of George W. Bush leading the empire.. not because of immigration.

Durango95 said:
First of all, to quote the HP as a source for an open discussion of immigration reform is like quoting the Pope for an open discussion on abortion.

I cannot stand Ann Coulter. That being said, she is correct on this issue. Marco Rubio is being a Cuban first and then an American second.

My thought is this. Before pushing for reform, why not trying enforcing the laws already on the books and see how that works. The immigration laws haven't been vigorously enforced for any lengthy period of time...ever. Immigration has become a political football. Republican administrations look the other way because immigrates are cheap labor for the big agribusinesses and hotel chains. These guys use the catch 22 "day labor" which allows them to submit a 1099, which let's be clear is vague at best. Democratic administrations look the other way because immigrates are quickly assimilated into the nanny culture where they queue up for taxpayer financed freebies. Democrats are the party of giveaways. Therefore, these people are more than likely to vote for Democratic candidates even though they technically are not capable of doing that legally in this country. (see last year's election)

I agree that immigration needs to be reformed radically. Most of today's problems come from Hart-Cellar and all the amendments to it through the years.

No other country in the world is as lax as is the U.S. with immigration policy, no one.
Click to expand...

I'm totally with you on "enforcing the existing laws would be more than enough to seriously cut down on 'the problem'." I'm not with you on the part where you parrot Bill O'Reilly talking about how the reason people vote Democrat is all the giveaway freebies. Aside from a public college level education (which my parents have paid California taxes since before I was born) I have no real idea what giveaway you think Democrats en masse get for their vote, and I find the assertion both as disingenuous and offensive as me saying Republicans only vote Republican because they're going to get 39 virgins at the gates of Heaven from God when they die, even if they vote their own job overseas in the meanwhile.
 
Thanks for the DNC talking points. Like there is a lack of those on this forum.:lol:
 
It's been a sad desperate mudslinging attempt of the neocons for a while now, to try and paint the Democrats as some weird minority-rimming party that can only win on the backs of poor welfare queens. When in reality a solid chunk of the middle class votes Democrat, and MOST of college-educated young people as well.

In my school, I know of three Republicans. Nuff said.
 
Oops. Guess who isn't on ignore anymore ;)

But yeah, haters gonna hate. Clearly the propaganda machine is so strong and they're so used to warping reality to fit their claims, that now they see that warping everywhere. Statistics don't matter, numbers don't matter, polls don't matter. Only God's word I guess...
 
I have a sister that is a trauma nurse in the ER of a very large medical Center in a border state with a very high Hispanic population. She says at the end of the week when compiling reports for Medicaid, the same "child" with the same medicaid number will have had hundreds of procedures. This is not just one child by the way but hundreds of the same "children". The hospital has tried repeatedly to crack down on this but both the hospital administrators and the state boards were unwilling to do anything of use because they don't want to be seen as harming children.

I did not say the giveaways were legally obtained. What can you expect though from a group of people that are already breaking the law. I've heard the arguments that immigration law is somehow different. It is not. If someone will break one "kind" of law they will have little restraint to break another "kind" of law.

I take exception to the Bill O'Reilly comment. That man is a self serving miscreant. I am not a Republican. You assume a little too much.
 
Benvolio said:
Rome lost its republican form of government at that point and never recovered.


Caesar packed the Senate with his supporters, including Gauls, which was one of the acts of tyranny which Suetonius says, led to his downfall, but the damage had been done.
Click to expand...
 
xbuzzerx said:
You got what you said directly out of the mouth of Bill O'Reilly, care to actually back it up?
Click to expand...

Apparently you watch Bill O'Reilly far more than do I. I was unaware of his comments. Since I despise the man and do not watch him at all.

I find it so interesting that Fox is watched so much by people on this forum. The only thing on FNC I'll actually plan to watch is On the Record from time to time and Stossel when he has one of his specials.
 
Durango95 said:
Apparently you watch Bill O'Reilly far more than do I. I was unaware of his comments. Since I despise the man and do not watch him at all.

I find it so interesting that Fox is watched so much by people on this forum. The only thing on FNC I'll actually plan to watch is On the Record from time to time and Stossel when he has one of his specials.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that you despise someone who mirrors your views almost word for word. Did you also totally despise George W. Bush while voting for him twice?
 
rubio has no intention of ever following through with immigration reform. he's grandstanding now hoping to build a faux resume on the subject for his run in 2016. he has (and other republicans) so many caveats that he knows they will never be met. he's a sorry excuse for a human being.
 
Benvolio said:
If we cannot limit immigration coming into the country, we make progress against poverty.
Click to expand...

I suspect that sentence doesn’t say what you intended it to say.


Benvolio said:
http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=48520
Click to expand...

I have completed a review of your source links.

The Catholic Online article doesn’t provide much in the way of information, but does draw attention to the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) recently introduced by the US Census Bureau and which seems potentially useful in developing future policy. The SPM is more complicated, but is not the official measure of poverty and currently only includes calculated (or estimated) data from 2009 to 2011. This alternative method is based more on cash flow than income, does not take assets into account, and redefines “family.” Anyone interested should visit the link below for more information.


Other than noting variations introduced by the SPM, the Catholic Online article attributes increases in recent poverty numbers to the Great Recession.
 
GiancarloC said:
By the way that whole tidbit about medicaid and using one child's name... I bet citizens have done that before themselves... and engaged in fraud. Thanks for that WEAK example.

And for one who despises O'Reilly and Bush, seems to espouse the same viewpoints.
Click to expand...

I'm sure U.S. citizens have perpetrated Medicaid fraud. That fact changes nothing.

The thing that always fascinates me is that an American citizen would defend and uphold those that flagrantly break our laws. I am assuming you are an American citizen. If you aren't then that changes everything.

You are simply espousing the views which will benefit you and those of your ilk. You are probably breaking the law as we speak.

As to the other point, to not be a registered Democrat you seem to spew forth their talking points with invariable regularity.
 
Durango95 said:
You are probably breaking the law as we speak.
Click to expand...

And you are probably violating the Posting Guidelines for this sub-forum as we Umm~ tap the little plastic squares. Please refer to the section titled “Courtesy & Respect.”
 
Durango95 said:
I'm sure U.S. citizens have perpetrated Medicaid fraud. That fact changes nothing.

The thing that always fascinates me is that an American citizen would defend and uphold those that flagrantly break our laws. I am assuming you are an American citizen. If you aren't then that changes everything.

You are simply espousing the views which will benefit you and those of your ilk. You are probably breaking the law as we speak.

As to the other point, to not be a registered Democrat you seem to spew forth their talking points with invariable regularity.
Click to expand...

Nobody here has said abusing medicare or whatever else is a good thing. The only difference is that yourself and every virulently anti-immigration person argues from the point of view that immigrants come in, sit down, do nothing and suck out services. Immigrants do the hardest work in this country, frequently for the longest hours with the poorest pay and typically nonexistent benefits. And there are people, everywhere from the industries and business owners employing that labor, to the people who shop at Wal*Mart or eat cheap food, who reap a financial benefit from that.

In any other discussion the same virulently anti-immigration crowd are the first to talk about how horrible unions are and how terrible and incompetent well-paid, well compensated American workers are in unionized work and yet unions would be springing up all over the country if Americans somehow were pushed into filling all of these jobs tomorrow.
 
Irish and Italians particularly were infamous for remitting money back to their families at home. It failed to destroy our economy.

I find it interesting you care so much what really poor people are doing with their money and not what billionaires and multinational conglomerates are doing with Cayman Island billing centers and Swiss bank accounts.
 
I would hate to live in the world of some of those that post on this forum. In that fantasy world there is either their way or nihilism, which of course everyone correctly identifies as elitism.

Nowhere in this forum have I stated I am anti-immigration. I will state that I am against people breaking the laws of our country for any reason. It is unfortunate that these people have failed to make a success of their native country. I cannot see where that is any fault of any citizen of the U.S. Well maybe the U.S. citizens that are drug addicts are to blame for some of it.

I keep hearing about tearing families apart and denying people employment. The facts are the families would be intact if the respective father or mother or other family member did not CHOOSE to leave. As to the other point, perhaps if they stayed in their own country and worked to build it in some constructive way they would have employment.

No one is against immigration. Most Americans are against people breaking our laws and coming here and then demanding we change our laws to suit them specifically. Most Americans are against another foreign country, even a neighbor, trying to manipulate our laws to soften our sovereignty.

I say enforce the laws already on the books vigorously. That should lessen the problem significantly. The funds could be diverted from social programs which should have less strain if these people were not here or were complying with the laws fully.

Another viable solution would be to simply absorb Mexico as a protectorate. That way U.S. sovereignty would remain in tact. Mexico would have to give up its sovereignty. They shouldn't have a problem with that because that is what they have wanted from us for years.
 
Benvolio said:
We have passed the point that any politician who attempts to limit immigration will likely lose. We have lost our ability to limit it.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that if the citizens choose to elect representatives that do no limit immigration, the absence of limitation becomes a demonstration of the will of the citizens. The fact that a minority of citizens may disagree with that course of action is noteworthy, but in our representative form of government elected representatives are expected to fulfill the will of the people. In any case, we are debating a hypothetical, because the law currently limits immigration.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top