EPT1) Close the back door (Eliminate illegal immigration).
2) Open the front door (Give our more visas to people who want to come here).
3) Make it particularly easy for educated/skilled workers to immigrate here.
Republican nominations - Page 136
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
1) Close the back door (Eliminate illegal immigration). 2) Open the front door (Give our more visas to people who want to come here). 3) Make it particularly easy for educated/skilled workers to immigrate here. | ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
On October 26 2011 04:51 xDaunt wrote: Immigration is a really easy issue to fix. Fundamentally, it only requires three steps: 1) Close the back door (Eliminate illegal immigration). 2) Open the front door (Give our more visas to people who want to come here). 3) Make it particularly easy for educated/skilled workers to immigrate here. Step 1 is easy to fix? Well fuck me running, they should have just asked you! Why, we'll just *prevent* them from coming here if it's illegal! Why has no one ever tried this before? In the history of the planet...ok, maybe it's coming on too thick... EDIT : Now I can look like a major d-bag because I didn't see the word "fundamental" my b dawg! Obviously we need to make it easier and more efficient to immigrate here, obviously. So, what..we fast track those with an education or skills? If so, not necessarily a bad idea. Now, how do we decide which countries educational institutions can provide the "best" education in order to establish this rating scale of varying educations and skilled labors? | ||
|
BioNova
United States598 Posts
“On occasion, scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead,” he explained. “I think that’s a wonderful thing, candidly.” The former Pennsylvania senator, who in January declared that life was a civil right, is also prepared to celebrate the death of scientists in other counties. “I think we should send a very clear message that if you are scientist from Russia or North Korea or from Iran, and you are going to work on a nuclear program to develop a nuclear bomb for Iran, you are not safe.” U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta probably won’t find the candidate’s remarks very helpful while he is in South Korea this week seeking to end North Korea’s nuclear program Video in the link Source | ||
Falling
Canada11583 Posts
Who Decides? One thing I don't really get with this primary system is how top tier candidates are decided. It almost seems a self-fulfilling prophecy. Candidates are considered top tier from the outset, so they are given more media time, more debating time so they look like they are top tier because that's the position they are given. Because straw polls don't seem to be the deciding factor on who's top tier and seem pretty flighty depending on who shows up. Bachmann had a couple early successes. And recently Ron Paul stomped all the candidates in Iowa straw polls. Ron Paul wins straw polls (He got 82%) So it's not that. But what is it? While there are some things that Ron Paul says that I like, I think there's a lot that is far too extreme/ detrimental so I'm no rabid Dr Paul fan. However, I don't get it. Rick Perry is considered top tier before he even runs. Same with Chris Christie and a couple others. But how and why whom? While someone like Ron Paul is never considered top tier because he not perceived to be top tier? In the Canadian system, the people have no say on who'll be Prime Minister, people run to be the leader of the party and whoever wins the support of the party becomes leader and Prime Minister if his party wins. (Solves some of the deadlocking of Liberal leader with Conservative house I think.) America tries to separate it out a bit and let the people decide their chief executive, but seems that an inordinate amount of power has been given to something else, maybe the media to decide who is top tier or bottom tier. Am I wrong? Is there a method to the madness or is this an unforeseen development of mass media role as kingmaker? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
BioNova
United States598 Posts
On November 01 2011 06:08 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Herman Cain just made things worse, he contradicted himself during today's press conference and the interview with Fox that will air later tonight. In all fairness, he said he was for,then just joking, and then yeah joking and all for it at the same time on the electric fence. All new meaning to 'on the fence'. Colbert Report did a mockup of that. At any moment, during serious questioning over his 'missteps' I fully(saracsm to follow) expect him to bust into the cosby dance, puckerface included and head for the exit while tossing hot pizza(shaped like Ubeky becky becky stan) at the reporters. Probably couldn't get more fun if annonced Sarah Palin as his vice nom before he has the nom himself. Well, I don't know, he could suddenly be totally for, and equally against the FeD, and pick Newt because of that movie aliens. Aliens? Electric Fence! Want some pizza? /end sarc Cain call on himself over sexual abuse to take heat off his ridiculous policies? Ron Paul wins straw polls (He got 82%) So it's not that. But what is it? While there are some things that Ron Paul says that I like, I think there's a lot that is far too extreme/ detrimental so I'm no rabid Dr Paul fan. However, I don't get it. Rick Perry is considered top tier before he even runs. Same with Chris Christie and a couple others. But how and why whom? While someone like Ron Paul is never considered top tier because he not perceived to be top tier? I was impressed CNN had it in top stories. Even had a Ron Paul is starting to make sense video. Had trouble finding it on Fox and don't remember if MSNBC ran it or the other story Fox had on Cain. I called a local media outlet myself(saw a post about them on the daily paul) on their news story tipline. That was a hoot, as I got a live-body, not a answering machine. She was very nice  I was too!Perry is playing with fire dancing around about not participating in further debates, while plowing forward. Fine get out and give Gary Johnson a podium. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 01 2011 06:08 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Herman Cain just made things worse, he contradicted himself during today's press conference and the interview with Fox that will air later tonight. I get the sense that these sexual harassment charges are seriously trumped up and a load of crap. If he actually did do something serious, Politico would have reported it instead of being as vague as they have. We'll see though. That said, it's rather sad to see how often Cain has stumbled over the past few weeks. He has a real problem getting his story straight. I can't help but think that these failures will eventually translate into reduced polling numbers. | ||
|
Promises
Netherlands1821 Posts
Also, just to adress the point of atheism being a religion. If atheists proclaim they know for sure there is no god, then you are right, that is an unfounded belief. However most atheists (at least the ones I know) say that there is no reason to believe there is a god, and as such find it unlikely that there is one. Atheism itself is a strange and wrong term, as it defines a group by something they do not do. Adults are probably all Asmurfists, but it seems a meaningless term. It is also because of this defenition that people say things like "but Stalin was an atheist and look what he did", while true it does not mean much. If someone does something because of the convictions of his philosophy then that's something you can point to, like people suicide bombing because they believe they'll get into heaven/become martyrs etc. As far as I am aware no attroceties has been commited because someone was a firm rational thinker. Do not put religion and rationalism in the same class, it's horribly missinformed. | ||
|
Golem72
Canada127 Posts
| ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On November 09 2011 02:21 BestZergOnEast wrote: Herman Cain just isn't a credible candidate. There's no way a black man can become president. I don't get the joke... Anyway, this story about Cain is sounding more and more absurd the more I hear. What kind of woman is naive enough to think that a rich and powerful man who invites her to dinner and gets her a hotel room and upgrades the room and offers to help her find a new job isn't perhaps expecting something else to happen as well? I mean if you want to discuss a recommendation from your boss, you do it in his office at noon on a tuesday, not over dinner with a paid hotel room... And this idea that Cain out of the blue forced himself on this girl, and her response was, "I have a boyfriend." Ok, so in other words it's ok if this man tries to pull your head to his crotch if you are single, but you aren't, and that was the first thing that came to mind to say? And then this guy who just tried to have his way with her suddenly says, "Oh, you have a boyfriend? Ok nevermind let me drive you home." Yeah he's got no problem with suddenly grabbing at a woman's parts and pulling her head down, but if she says she's taken, you turn into a gentleman. Oh, and she remembers exactly what everyone was wearing 14 years ago. I guess because it was so traumatizing, which explains why she never mentioned it until he started running for office. God, it's blatant paid character assassination and everyone knows it, but all the talking heads in the media go along with the soap opera. When Perry was the front runner, the media jumps on a rock on some hunting ground. When Romney was the front runner, everyone starts talking about Mormonism. Now that Cain has been leading they are going after him. It's so predictable and sad at the same time, the media in this country is a joke. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On November 09 2011 02:52 jdseemoreglass wrote: I don't get the joke... Anyway, this story about Cain is sounding more and more absurd the more I hear. What kind of woman is naive enough to think that a rich and powerful man who invites her to dinner and gets her a hotel room and upgrades the room and offers to help her find a new job isn't perhaps expecting something else to happen as well? I mean if you want to discuss a recommendation from your boss, you do it in his office at noon on a tuesday, not over dinner with a paid hotel room... And this idea that Cain out of the blue forced himself on this girl, and her response was, "I have a boyfriend." Ok, so in other words it's ok if this man tries to pull your head to his crotch if you are single, but you aren't, and that was the first thing that came to mind to say? And then this guy who just tried to have his way with her suddenly says, "Oh, you have a boyfriend? Ok nevermind let me drive you home." Yeah he's got no problem with suddenly grabbing at a woman's parts and pulling her head down, but if she says she's taken, you turn into a gentleman. Oh, and she remembers exactly what everyone was wearing 14 years ago. I guess because it was so traumatizing, which explains why she never mentioned it until he started running for office. God, it's blatant paid character assassination and everyone knows it, but all the talking heads in the media go along with the soap opera. When Perry was the front runner, the media jumps on a rock on some hunting ground. When Romney was the front runner, everyone starts talking about Mormonism. Now that Cain has been leading they are going after him. It's so predictable and sad at the same time, the media in this country is a joke. To be fair, Mormonism is far less of a liability than alleged racism or a history of sexual harassment. They're going after Cain because people want more information about the front runner. Is the media only supposed to report on trivial things like his favorite pizza? It's not like we're in the dark about his policies. | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On November 08 2011 23:29 Promises wrote: On the whole "voting for religious reasons" discussion: the ideas aren't by definition to be discarded because they are religious ideas or ideals, they are to be discarded because they often have no logical basis, ie no arguments explaining why that rule should be enforced or that view should be taken other then "it's in the bible". Assuming we want laws to be made according to logical discussion and reasoning, that is why these ideas should be discarded. Gay marriage? It doesnt hurt or infringe on anyone else's right, and I can't see a reason to not allow it. Abortion is a more debatable subject, as to the fetus being a sentient being or not (altho there is plenty scientific data to show that it really isnt more then a blob of cells, and can by no means be called a sentient person yet), but at least I can see where debate would arise there. Also, just to adress the point of atheism being a religion. If atheists proclaim they know for sure there is no god, then you are right, that is an unfounded belief. However most atheists (at least the ones I know) say that there is no reason to believe there is a god, and as such find it unlikely that there is one. Atheism itself is a strange and wrong term, as it defines a group by something they do not do. Adults are probably all Asmurfists, but it seems a meaningless term. It is also because of this defenition that people say things like "but Stalin was an atheist and look what he did", while true it does not mean much. If someone does something because of the convictions of his philosophy then that's something you can point to, like people suicide bombing because they believe they'll get into heaven/become martyrs etc. As far as I am aware no attroceties has been commited because someone was a firm rational thinker. Do not put religion and rationalism in the same class, it's horribly missinformed. Sorry, but there is no logical basis for any morality. It is all either based upon human emotion or subjective reasoning or religious doctrine. If we did things on a purely rational cost/benefit analysis, then most of the people living in nursing homes or mental institutions would be dead right now. And do you honestly think the only reason people oppose gay marriage is because of the bible? Edit: Oh shit, I'm a tank now! | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On November 09 2011 02:52 jdseemoreglass wrote: When Perry was the front runner, the media jumps on a rock on some hunting ground. When Romney was the front runner, everyone starts talking about Mormonism. Now that Cain has been leading they are going after him. It's so predictable and sad at the same time, the media in this country is a joke. Really? Because one would think that people who name their property Niggerhead and boast with the number of people they've executed, believe in magic and the supernatural, and quote Pokemon song lyrics as a work of a great poet (among other things) are the actual joke here. | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On November 09 2011 03:07 Talin wrote: Really? Because one would think that people who name their property Niggerhead and boast with the number of people they've executed, believe in magic and the supernatural, and quote Pokemon song lyrics as a work of a great poet (among other things) are the actual joke here. Just because you agree with character assassination doesn't mean the media in this country isn't a joke. I expect all kinds of ad hominem attacks against politicians on TL with very shoddy evidence or reasoning, but I shouldn't expect it on CNN. | ||
|
BioNova
United States598 Posts
On November 09 2011 03:16 jdseemoreglass wrote: Just because you agree with character assassination doesn't mean the media in this country isn't a joke. I expect all kinds of ad hominem attacks against politicians on TL with very shoddy evidence or reasoning, but I shouldn't expect it on CNN. I agree the media is a circus. Gloria Alred really zinged Cain's ass, true or not, with the Stimulus press conference. Which Jon Stewart later added an inquisitive..'Do you wanna occupy Ball Street?' to the clip. For Cain, it's most likely all over except the crying, and the jokes, and jokes. Good ole Lawsuits too, maybe divorce. After that, a job at Fox. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On November 09 2011 12:56 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Personhood Amendment in Mississippi has been defeated. Every single GOP candidate with the exception of Huntsman backed it. The sad thing is I doubt this will have any real impact on the nominations. Policy and principles tend to get drowned out by whatever gaffe someone may or may not have said at some point in their political history. Public backing of a defeated amendment hardly registers. Similar process is happening down here and the consequence is a whole lot of jaded voters, like me  | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
"The Romney my friends, is blowin in the wind. The Romney is blowin in the wind" Even with this he is the only one that looks presidential. Yes, the Paul supporters will shout from the rooftops, but the guy looks like he is half way to parlor and probably won't make it. Even with this lackluster group of condidates, Obama is having trouble, imagine what happens if they find someone reasonable? Who knows, the next US president could be out there, still waiting to be found. | ||
| ||
