I'd like to add here that BHO is simply following what Saul Alinsky states in his book "Rules For Radicals" ~ to bring about "change" to any system, one must overload it to make it collapse.

Keep in mind, Alinsky isn't the one who thought of that idea, it was actually proposed earlier by two numbskulls: Cloward & Piven. Here's a synopsis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward%E2...

Thank you, Teri. I will look for it

Ha! Good point.

Jan

Borders, language, culture.
These are the but three that define a nation.
#1: Secure the borders. Even a human cell knows to do that.

I think that it is in "For the New Intellectual"... but you might have to dig a bit.
20 years of reading Ayn and my threads all run together.

When people are up to their chins in excrement, a public shower looks damn good to them. If Scotty were to beam you up would you be grateful if you found out that he will beam you back down into the dystopian crap-pool only this time the man in charge comes by with a motor boat every now and then. The nice, clean citizens line up to receive the benevolence of the Big Daddy Polyfather. To their surprise, they must provide the fodder for the machine before receiving its largesse.

Am I getting too symbolically satirical for you? Here's the bottom line translation: Allowing illegals to become part of the nation will eventually turn good citizen bad as they see the lawbreakers getting a better deal than they were born to receive.

"If you do not like the situation, introduce a variable."

In the US, we are desperately trying to get a hold of our freedoms and our economy. Now we have tens of thousands of people crossing the border to put further stress on both of those goals.

I do not support Law for the sake of Law, and I will be willing to discuss whether or not a given law is a good one. But neither am I an anarchist: And one of the laws I think is a 'good idea' is to control our borders. I feel that this variable of massive illegal immigration has been deliberately introduced to obscure the pursuit of individual freedom and the introduction of economic controls on our government.

Jan

I thought the congress had a say in this like saying we are now bringing impeachment hearing against you. silly me they only impeach presidents who dabble in sex that has no affect on any other citizen of the country.

the illegals from Central and Southern North America
are invading and changing the culture to permanent
Democrat voters and, unfortunately, supporters of
the fascist power mongers. -- j

This goes further than what I've seen so far. Has anyone thought maybe all those people could demand a plebiscite to retro-cede the American Southwest to Mexico?

no one here suggests current laws are helpful. What they disagree with is lawlessness. We have a procedural process for changing laws. That has not happened. We have a rogue President who is leapfrogging the system, flooding a behemoth welfare system with immigrants, particularly from one region of the world, who tend to not assimilate in US culture. It is their (one worlders/dems) stated plan. They want that, just like they like to keep American indians on reservations. Promise those communities goodies and then eventually take over water rights, then land rights. see Montana. See Alabama. see Arizona and Nevada.

what I do find absurd is that many in the Gulch seem to have a knee jerk reaction to defending our immigration laws - while usually at least questioning many of our other laws - like welfare for instance. This could result in it at least appearing there is a xenophobia attitude among those contributors.
My guess is that many here hate the welfare / socialist setup so much (which I completely agree with) that they do not have an open mind on what "legal" immigration should be.

You do not see many (any?) postings here defending of welfare because we all must " FOLLOW THE LAW", yet it seems that common
appeal to authority is used by many on immigration.

I never saw that about "pockets of freedom". Do you know where I might find it?

Where this post has gone is a fine example of one goofball with some ridiculous statements bringing the best out of the others contributing to this site. Some of the responses are not only really enjoyable, but enlightening as well. Well done.

Ayn Rand said that eventually there would be "pockets of freedom" in this country.
The Gulchers are preppers.
What a prophetess!

I suffer from cancerous creepy crawling, cunning and commie obamanationclowpivenpinkoruinationphobia.

hear, hear

I'm with you, uncommon sense. But it does work with a lot of sheeple. If you call me a racist, I don't give a flip what you think of me

Name calling doesn't work with me. When the opposition resorts to calling you names, it means you are correct or the truth and facts supporting you are irrefutable. The burden of proof to prove you wrong is on them thus, all they can do is label.

It's the sheeple on the fence who have to decide who to believe.

I agree AJ. "Willfully turning aside from the truth is treason to ones self." (Wizards 10th rule).

Calling us xenophobic shuts us up. Calling us racist shuts us up. Calling us homophobic shuts us up, and so on, and so on, and so on.
So far it's been an effective strategy.

Getting illegals on the public dole (that would be your $$ too) is absurd. That's not the argument. But what do you, yes you, do when the conspiracy "theory" is proven true?

What then? I find your questioning over the truthfulness of the facts listed odd. It seems you place waaay too much confidence that the gubbermeant wouldn't lie to your face or conspire to put you in economic chains while illegals are benefitting gleefully.

Stop it with the PC xenophobia nonsense. Nobody here is afraid of Mexicans or have some sort of sick mentality that they are superior to Mexicans. Such sickness reeks of elitism and you won't find that here in the Gulch.

You want to come to the United Socialist States of America? You have potential to bring something to the table, economically-speaking? Cool. Come here LEGALLY. There's nothing xenophobic about that. FOLLOW THE LAW. How is that xenophobic?

There you go again.

Government welfare should be abolished. Churches, which are practically on every street corner here in Phoenix, should be doing what they are supposed to. I mentioned this to a client (a church) and was told they worry about liability should hey open their worship halls to allow homeless to sleep on the pews. Go figure.