Divisive issues to decide 2008 elections

[kach22i]

This is also a national security issue, shortly after 9/11/2001 just about everyone would agree.

Publication: Airline Industry Information
Date: Thursday, December 13 2001

Salt Lake City airport workers charged over illegal immigrant status.
http://www.allbusiness.com/operations/shipping-air-freight/828768-1.html
AIRLINE INDUSTRY INFORMATION-(C)1997-2001 M2 COMMUNICATIONS

Some 69 workers at Salt Lake City International Airport, USA were arrested on 12 December for lying about their illegal immigrant status.
Salt Lake City will serve the Winter Olympic Games and the workers were arrested under an anti-terror security crackdown. The workers included security staff and all had unrestricted access to the airport`s secure areas. All but eight had top-level security clearance according to PA News.
Of those arrested, six were accused of having lied about their criminal backgrounds, while all had entered the US illegally and had lied about their status in order to get their jobs. The United States Attorney for Utah, Paul Warner, stated, "These are people who have misrepresented who they are. Through their use of false information and altered or counterfeit documents, they were able to obtain security badges that put them one-swipe away from access to the most secure areas of the airport."
The mayor of Salt Lake City Rocky Anderson has stated that the workers` illegal status could have put them at risk of being bribed by terrorists.

Form my memory, there is at least one example of Arabs (potential terrorist in this case) trying to illegally enter the US through Mexico. From what I understand once the Mexicans entered the US they informed and pointed out to the authorities the non-hispanics.

Why would the Mexicans want to have a good thing blown? They are the last ones to want to see a crack down or a wall built. Having terrorist enter though the southern border is not something they want.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by mattdavis11

Well it aint the #1 issue in my book and I'm going to be a 1 issue voter this time. Until the Democratic candidates understand that people kill people, not guns, it makes for any easy vote.

Someone understands you.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Bill_Richardson_Gun_Control.htm
No guns for mentally ill or those with criminal background

Attack poverty at the core of gun violence

Endorsed by NRA for governor; would accept endorsement again

The 2nd Amendment is precious

Endorsed by NRA; has his own concealed carry permit

Bill Richardson, Gov NM

[legion]

Originally Posted by mattdavis11

Well it aint the #1 issue in my book and I'm going to be a 1 issue voter this time. Until the Democratic candidates understand that people kill people, not guns, it makes for any easy vote.

I find a person's stance on the 2nd Amendment to be a pretty good proxy for how they stand on personal responsibility in general.

Those who want individuals to be subserviant to the state don't like guns and only want agents of the state to wield them.

Those who believe people are responsible for themselves tend to have no problem with guns in the hands of the general public...

[stevepaa]

a gross mischaracterization that only supports your viewpoint, like this one.

Those who like to kill people have no problem with guns in the hands of the general public.
Those who prefer non lethal resolution want to restrict guns from general public.

[DanL911sc]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

I think everyone of the Muslim nuts we've caught here could get picked up by the Border Patrol in AZ and be mistaken for a Mexican. Local cops surely wouldn't take them seriously if they thought they were just illegal aliens. In fact, in many places, those cops would not be allowed to even check on legal status.

Point is there hasn't been a single terrorist attack by someone who walked across our southern border. Hiking across the border from Mexico is already too much trouble for extremists who can already fly anywhere in the US (because they haven't committed their attack yet). How did the WTC, Pentagon, etc. terrorist enter America? Not through Mexico...

Seriously, if you had the resources to assemble an attack in the US, would you waste time with the deadly Arizona desert?

Its a red herring and a looming boondoggle... not to mention a barrel of pork for CA, AZ, NM, and TX.

[DanL911sc]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

A wall would work amazingly well if it ever got built and was guarded with vigilance. How many suicide bombings have you heard about since Israel built their wall? How many people make it across the DMZ in Korea or physically made it across the Berlin Wall? The combined number is probably less than those who cross our southern border illegally in one day.

Heh... when was the last time Mexico sent their army across that border? We have an invasion of cheap labor, not soldiers or terrorist. Not much incentive to defend against that!

No really, don't come and do this work for cheaper! Really, I want to pay more!!

[DanL911sc]

Originally Posted by legion

I find a person's stance on the 2nd Amendment to be a pretty good proxy for how they stand on personal responsibility in general.

Those who want individuals to be subserviant to the state don't like guns and only want agents of the state to wield them.

Those who believe people are responsible for themselves tend to have no problem with guns in the hands of the general public...

I find a person's ability to cast a complex issue into simple black and white to be a good indicator of how strong their preconceived notions are, and how unwilling to challenge them they are.

[legion]

Here we go again.

"Challenge your ideas." = I'm right. You're wrong. Have you ever thought to challenge your own ideas? I didn't think so.

[Moneyguy1]

Simple answers to compex questions don't work. Categorizing all people into a few slots also doesn't work. THe world is far mor complex than some of you are willing or capable of admitting.

Example:

I do not own any firearms

I support the right of people to own firearms

I believe that not all people are responsible and that certain restrictions on ownership are necessary for purposes of public safety

I also support the idea that not all types of firearms should be owned by the public


So.....Which slot do you put me in?

[legion]

Originally Posted by Moneyguy1

Simple answers to compex questions don't work. Categorizing all people into a few slots also doesn't work. THe world is far mor complex than some of you are willing or capable of admitting.

Example:

I do not own any firearms

I support the right of people to own firearms

I believe that not all people are responsible and that certain restrictions on ownership are necessary for purposes of public safety

I also support the idea that not all types of firearms should be owned by the public


So.....Which slot do you put me in?

Is point #2 really true given points #3 and #4?

Who do you propose is able to own types firearms that "should not be owned by the public"?

[jyl]

Illegal immigration is a more important issue than gay marriage.

However, it is a complicated and difficult issue, and the way it is being addressed will make a workable solution harder to find.

The Republican primary voters are forcing the candidates to out-do each other in taking hardline positions. A hardline solution (impenetrable wall on border, wholesale deportation, no legal migrant worker program) will hurt a lot of US businesses, and probably wouldn't get through the legislative process. Meanwhile, the hardliners block middle-of-the-road solutions, such as the Bush proposal of earlier this year. And the wackiest hardliners are even saying we should block all immigration, including legal.

[red-beard]

This election, like all the others, will be about the economy. Voters vote on their wallets. period.

[legion]

Increasingly, that means borrowing from the future to make political payoffs now.

[DanL911sc]

Originally Posted by legion

Is point #2 really true given points #3 and #4?

Who do you propose is able to own types firearms that "should not be owned by the public"?

This guy should not own any type of firearm. Thug culture is probably the single greatest threat to the 2nd amendment.

[DanL911sc]

Originally Posted by legion

Increasingly, that means borrowing from the future to make political payoffs now.

Funny, I see a wall along our southern border as fitting that description exactly.

[legion]

We have illegal immigration because we have a minimum wage.

We have placed a floor on the price of a commodity (labor). A black market has developed as a result. This is Econ 101 folks.

[DanL911sc]

Originally Posted by legion

We have illegal immigration because we have a minimum wage.

We have placed a floor on the price of a commodity (labor). A black market has developed as a result. This is Econ 101 folks.

Ok, I get that minimum wage leads to labor black market. Now, how does this black market lead to illegal immigration? Citizens can participate in the black market just as easily as illegals, after all...

EDIT: Maybe your conclusion is correct, but your reasoning is incomplete. The price fixing of minimum wage will reduce demand for labor and increase supply. The increased supply must come from outside the current economy, hence the impetus for immigration (both legal and illegal).

[pwd72s]

My guess? The Democrat party will go onto the economy...it worked for "Clinton I" the first time around... the "what should be up is down" speech was a lie...but nobody cared. If it worked once, why not do it again? Just stress all bad economic news while ignoring the good. A simple formula.

The media just helps in this sort of campaign.

[legion]

Originally Posted by DanL911sc

Ok, I get that minimum wage leads to labor black market. Now, how does this black market lead to illegal immigration? Citizens can participate in the black market just as easily as illegals, after all...

EDIT: Maybe your conclusion is correct, but your reasoning is incomplete. The price fixing of minimum wage will reduce demand for labor and increase supply. The increased supply must come from outside the current economy, hence the impetus for immigration (both legal and illegal).

It was really a thought I just had that really hasn't completely developed.

Now, what is the solution?

I see two possibilities:

1) Abolish the minimum wage.

2) A real illegal immigration solution

For solution #2, I think the following step will need to be taken:

1) Secure the border. Build a wall, step up patrols, whatever. Make it really hard to get in here illegally.

2) Deport anyone/everyone who is here illegally. Penalize employers who hire illegals.

3) Create a guest worker program. Guest workers are tracked. Bad guys are kept out. Guest workers are not subject to minimum wage. (Basically legalize and regulate the black market in labor.)

[Hugh R]

Originally Posted by nostatic

its gonna be a looooooong wall.

Well, until you're paying $5 for an apple, but don't mind that.

Now whose exaggerating! The cost of producing and picking an apple, or a head of lettuce in the grocery store is a small percentage of the retail price. If an apple costs $0.50 today, then the cost of paying "legal" workers a true market clearing wage will probably add about 10% or less to the cost. I'll recoup that in lower taxes..... wait! I want to rephrase that, I'll recoup that in my taxes not going up anymore,.... no wait, that didn't come out right either. Oh, never mind.