The problem is illegals should not be walking into DMV and getting driving anything. They should be getting arrested on the spot and deported back to where they came from. If I break the law and have a warrant out for my arrest if I walk into DMV I get cuffed and hauled away. Instead we are ignoring the law and rewarding these people.
I wish more people thought with that common sense and realized the drag on our system they cause. I just love paying 5-600 a month in health ins for my family while they fill the ER for free primary care. I also love paying the high taxes to pay the cops to show up for their gang problems,domestic disputes,rapes by the 45 men living in the houses etc. Ahhh,the good le USA. Where the innocent will bare the burden for the guilty whether it be illegal immigration,or terrorism... The funniest one is where Granny goes through a TSA patdown flying out at Xmas time,and 5 turban bearing muslims get to walk around because we can't profile. . Also,how can they be so concerned about terrorism to the point of prying into OUR phone calls,yet they leave the borders wide open?
Undocumented workers are no more breaking the law than you are when you speed and there isn't a cop looking. Our system of allowing highly valued workers in with Green cards and grunt workers in through an unsecured border has worked out very well for the US. In the case of these unskilled undocumented workers, many of whom work their ass off and contribute to our economy we give them no legal standing and can send them back any time we want, in the meantime they leave voluntarily when jobs are scarce and come in droves when we need them. Seem like the State registering their vehicles and making sure they can drive and have insurance is all good as is their paying into SS and Medicare through payroll taxes.
Nevada especially needs illegals to function... Construction and Hospitality need them badly... From a GOP perspective, since business is first, makes sense to accommodate them... All countries need an illegal alien population to thrive... US uses Mexicans, Europe uses North Africans, Middle east uses Asians, etc...
The turban bearing Muslims aren't the ones we need to worry about. It's the guys wearing baseball caps and other western attire that might be up to something. Granny on the other hand could use a good pat down. She's the one who keeps voting for people who then vote for things like the Patriot Act. It makes sense for her to get a real feel for what that actually does in practice. It's easy to snoop electronically and then use a bunch of algorithms to hone the search down. It's hard to figure out how to effectively seal the borders, especially given the fact that the people giving the most to political campaigns right now don't want the borders sealed effectively. They want cheap labor.
You have been brainwashed very well. The fact that you argue against your fellow peasants speaks to it. Don't forget to listen to "news" radio and watch your "favorite" news programs to know what your opinion is.
Time for the useless lawsuits...Here's the first one: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/nsa-phone-lawsuit/?cid=co8729634
There's a point there, it's just not thunk-out very well. The issue is cheap labor, not whether or not there's a healthy population of "illegal aliens." The connection is accidental.
The powers that be are trying to put the genie back into the bottle. The problem is that the government is doing a lot of spying on the citizenry and that's a genie that isn't going to go back into the bottle willingly. I think we've finally seen the issue that is going to begin the Obama approval death spiral. The fact that the Republicans aren't jumping all over this (because too many of them are actually closer to the issue than the President) doesn't change the fact that the issue is going to take a lot of people down in the end and Obama is likely to be one of them.
while i would get great joy out of seeing BO and his apostles go down, IMO, it isn't likely. the current powers at be (both dems and repubs) have been walking a very very fine line on multiple issues for years - most of which go thru the voting publics brains like a water thru a strainer. go take a walk thru roosevelt long island and ask about the current policies and who they voted for. do the same in muttontown long island and see what answers u get. guarentee most of the answers are based on race and topic headlines that are fed by most of the network media. the powers at be are experts at creating multiple smokescreens and diversions - downplaying the severity of certain things and upgrading the obvious non-sense for public consumption. IMO obama and his crowd are at the head of the pack with this approach. generally speaking, the dems will continue to have very favorable demographics moving forward so whats a little constitutional haze gonna do.
Turns out that Clapper the Director of the NSA lied to the intel committee of Congress when asked directly about this issue. http://seeker401.wordpress.com/2013...g-on-nsa-assange-praises-hero-edward-snowden/ If the NSA is willing to lie to the Intel committee, I'm sure they are willing to lie to the FISA court. The claim of oversight, which doesn't on it's face make this legal, should be taken with a grain of salt, or perhaps a double dose of Malox. Obama and the Democrats fully support the Police State the Republicans have legislated into law.
I'm not surprised George W-"Dick Cheney" Bush started this train in motion, but I am surprised that Obama hasn't reigned it in. Bitch move on his part
The Republicans have been looking to manufacture scandals against Obama since the first Presidential run in 2008. The irony is that the really big scandals, the ones they could use to really damage him, were off limits because they were scandals of a neo-con nature, created by a paranoid administration that was not confident in its ability to keep things together without sledgehammer tools and tactics. Now those scandals have begun to break due to the actions of third parties. It's open season on the people who decided somehow that having everybody spied on was the way to go after a few guys in a cave got through our extraordinarily leaky security and perpetrated one very high profile atrocity. I flew to Detroit in August 2001 with my sister and brother-in-law. The occasion was a memorial for my grandmother. I hated flying by that point, having flown quite a bit for my job over the previous 5 years. The occasional pat down was annoying (and yes we did these before 9/11 just not in such a regimented way.) The restrictions on what you could carry on board were less so, since I didn't generally carry Bowie knives with me and have never owned a handgun. Just getting everybody to the gate on time with the proper ID and such could be a pain in the ass. Then I flew to Detroit with two other people with a different last name than me. There were these cool little kiosks where you could get your boarding passes by sliding the credit card that you used to purchase the tickets. I did this. The kiosk asked me if I wanted boarding passes for my sister and her husband also. I punched Y without thinking about it too hard. Then as we were sitting in the plane I wondered who else had gotten on board without anybody ever sizing them up or seeing their ID. A month later we discovered what that particular loophole could lead too. In the process we lost a significant amount of personal privacy and began the spiral down into a police state. We're not quite there yet but the harbingers are there. All it would take is for a right-wing militia to start making the kind of noise that lead to Oklahoma City and we'd be there.
Yes, this is a huge scandal. This has the potential to be as big as Watergate. The question is whether there's going to be a cover-up that dramatically expands the scope of the criminality involved.
Some things have momentum that is hard to check. Other things are convenient and easy ways to do things that are otherwise very difficult to accomplish. Then you have the question of whether or not the current administration isn't just as predisposed towards tight control as the previous one. This scandal fits in neatly with the over the top prosecutions of leakers. Food for thought: How easy is it to stop an unlawful practice that is normal procedure by the time you take office and has hundreds of people, some in very high places, implicated in unlawful behavior?
Do you guys believe that they are doing these things because they are really concerned about terrorism ? Or is terrorism the vessel that allows them to achieve their goals?
They can't stop it without doing due diligence. They have to talk to the high level people managing the processes. Without that they don't know what they're stopping. They don't know what it does and they don't know how it goes about doing it. So they send out a directive to the people involved telling them to assemble the information for a briefing. Those people, BTW, are not their appointees, they're holdovers from the previous administration and career officers hired by the two previous administrations. Then they get their first briefings from the brass in each department. These people have already argued most of this out at length in the previous administration (you would hope.) They have pat answers to the tough questions. They're likely in favor of the policies or at least not hostile to them because otherwise they'd already have left the service. So the advice is generally that the processes have passed the usual scrutiny and been found justified and lawful, or in some cases have been ok'd under emergency powers and then grandfathered in as circumstances permit. There's a broad act of the government, The Patriot Act, that seems to justify many of the questionable activities. The specific activities have not been broadly challenged in the courts yet, because they are not specifically described anywhere, including The Patriot Act, but they must be legal because we have all these Federal Judges signing off on them, right? To top all of that off the person sitting in front of you isn't going to tell you that they believe there is a possibility that they have been complicit in un-Constitutional acts over a period of years. There's no play in that for them unless they were a detractor to start with and the Bush administration was noted for not allowing detractors on to the team. I can easily see how the Obama administration might have folded right in and marched alongside the previous administration without looking too hard at this particular area of the security infrastructure. They were already rolling back the rules that allowed for torture, kidnapping, black helicopter rides to the places that tortured, etc. There was a lot to fix in 2009 and I can see this being an area that was low priority at the time. We had that whole economy-crashing financial crisis thing also and two wars ongoing.
