Luckily, I wasn't talking to you.

 

Tone down the snark, he basically made my point for me.

Luckily, I wasn't talking to you.

Are we 10?

 

What's next, "I'm rubber you're glue..." :lol:

3.No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws. I actually have an alternate perspective on this. I think that we should offer those here illegally the possibility of a path to being here legally. This can be levied via garnishing of wages and such and higher taxes on those here illegally. Those who fail to do so will risk deportation or solitary confinement.

 

I agree to a certain extent, how would you determine who should be offered the path to be here legally? Personally, that seems impossible to dictate who should stay and who should go.

 

End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong. I don't agree with this completely, I think that birthright citizenship should continue only for those naturalized citizens or those here legally. Any who fail to comply will risk the same penalties as above with regards to being here.[/QUOTE]

 

I see where you are coming from. However, illegals will continue to come here if their children are granted citizenship for being born on U.S. soil. That has to be changed in some way. I partly agree with you.

Tone down the snark, he basically made my point for me.

 

I toned it down, short temper, can't help it.

I agree to a certain extent, how would you determine who should be offered the path to be here legally? Personally, that seems impossible to dictate who should stay and who should go.

 

End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong. I don't agree with this completely, I think that birthright citizenship should continue only for those naturalized citizens or those here legally. Any who fail to comply will risk the same penalties as above with regards to being here.[/QUOTE]

 

I see where you are coming from. However, illegals will continue to come here if their children are granted citizenship for being born on U.S. soil. That has to be changed in some way. I partly agree with you.

 

 

 

Any illegals here and currently employed would be offered the path, all others must leave.

 

Considering it would require a constitutional amendment to get that to happen, it wouldn't be worth the trouble politically. I say leave that one be and work on the rest.

Are we 10?

 

What's next, "I'm rubber you're glue..." :lol:

 

Don't take it personally, I wouldn't want to hurt your feelings.

 

My condolences .

Don't take it personally, I wouldn't want to hurt your feelings.

 

My condolences .

No biggie, we're fine.

Eliminating non-military items in bills for military spending I support. Cutting R&D support for military items I have issue with, I do agree though that much in regards to military spending needs to be reformed. We are already locked into the F-35 boondoggle which it would have been prudent to drop and continue with the F-22 program along with upgrading/updating considerably the current air fleets. Cutting into things like the advanced destroyers and cruisers for the USN I have issue with.[/QUOTE]

 

"Under my presidency, the United States will still spend more money on defense than President Bush did in FY 2005. America will still spend four times more on defense than China and more than all the countries of Western Europe combined. We will continue to maintain our status as the most dominant military force on the planet, but we will do so with a much more sensible and sustainable foreign policy."

 

I definitely see where people disagree with the bolded (along with other military programs) but he won't put our national security at threat. That's where people have the wrong impression. I'll find some statistics on exactly what he wants to cut out & why.

Such as?

 

I like every one else would like to see taxes cut. Don't see how it can be done like he wants. Haven't ever heard what he would do with folks who are uninsured. Don't agree with his views of the Patriot Act. Especially when he brought up Timothy McVey in a recent debate. As Newt Gingrich told him, Timothy McVey won. Letting Israel take care of itself would cause more harm than good IMO. He doesn't believe there needs to be a war on drugs. Especially along the mexican border. He just strikes me as a guy living in the 50's. I've been told that I'm a 70's guy, which might be true. I'm not running for President.

Any illegals here and currently employed would be offered the path, all others must leave.

 

Considering it would require a constitutional amendment to get that to happen, it wouldn't be worth the trouble politically. I say leave that one be and work on the rest.

 

What seems ideal, in my mind, would be to grant citizenship if you were born from a legal citizen. Allowing an illegal's newborn to have citizenship for merely being born on U.S. soil attracts illegals, wouldn't you agree?

I like every one else would like to see taxes cut. Don't see how it can be done like he wants. Haven't ever heard what he would do with folks who are uninsured. Don't agree with his views of the Patriot Act. Especially when he brought up Timothy McVey in a recent debate. As Newt Gingrich told him, Timothy McVey won. Letting Israel take care of itself would cause more harm than good IMO. He doesn't believe there needs to be a war on drugs. Especially along the mexican border. He just strikes me as a guy living in the 50's. I've been told that I'm a 70's guy, which might be true. I'm not running for President.

 

Has the war on drugs worked? Has the prohibition of marijuana worked at all? Or is it safe to say it's in comparison to the prohibition of alcohol? Capones vs. Cartels? His point on that issue isn't making it legal, but not making it illegal federally. Let each individual state decide.

Has the war on drugs worked? Has the prohibition of marijuana worked at all? Or is it safe to say it's in comparison to the prohibition of alcohol? Capones vs. Cartels? His point on that issue isn't making it legal, but not making it illegal federally. Let each individual state decide.

 

I am no expert on the war on drugs BUT the border is far from safe. I don't think it stems from just smuggling marijuana across the border. There's a lot of that stuff within the borders of Kentucky. What the candidates are talking about goes way beyond mary j. To think thats what the war on drugs is about is a 50's way of thinking. Isn't it?

I am no expert on the war on drugs BUT the border is far from safe. I don't think it stems from just smuggling marijuana across the border. There's a lot of that stuff within the borders of Kentucky. What the candidates are talking about goes way beyond mary j. To think thats what the war on drugs is about is a 50's way of thinking. Isn't it?

 

I already elaborated on the border. See post 16. I'm not saying it is just the war on drugs, I was using it as one example. His whole view on the war on drugs is letting the states decide what is legal/illegal. His philosophy is you don't need the Federal government protecting you, especially from drugs. i.e. If heroine was deemed legal tomorrow, would you go out and try it?

I do agree that the states need more say on a lot of things...

I already elaborated on the border. See post 16. I'm not saying it is just the war on drugs, I was using it as one example. His whole view on the war on drugs is letting the states decide what is legal/illegal. His philosophy is you don't need the Federal government protecting you, especially from drugs. i.e. If heroine was deemed legal tomorrow, would you go out and try it?

 

I am a 70's guy. Who says I haven't ?