1 - 10 Next
Agree with posts like r27cj: To grant citizenship to those who broke the law is a HUGE mistake.Only encourages future illegals. The border must be secured first. Republicans should continue to press this as a stand alone item. Let Dems explain why we shouldn't secure the border in the post-9/11 world. Grant legal resident status to those have not further broken the law while here but absolutely NO welfare, in-state college tuition or other rights or citizens and NO citizenship: you can stay and work, period. Do that and some of the illegals will go home on their own. If someone wants to be a citizen they must go home and apply LEGALLY to come here. They would be behind others who were already LEGALLY waiting. Jail, then deport anyone who commits any serious crime, including DWI, permanantly. Let's assume that the government is wrong, as usual, when estimating figures and that the true illegal total is + 20 million. If each of those newly legalized brings in just one extra family member (got to be compassionate and get some dude's fourth cousin in!) that would be + 40 million newly entitled, block-voting, privilege-demanding, social security-receiving new citizens. Does that sound like a good idea? Give preference for future legal immigration to those who have real skills, want to invest in the U.S. or relocate a business here. Learn English before you come here--no fluency, no entry.
In response to:

One California for Me, Another for Thee

Dave4933 Wrote: Apr 03, 2014 7:53 AM
Mr. Hanson, As usual, a very good article that points out the important facts. Thanks for the outstanding writing. Unfortunately, there are so many who benefit from the largesse of the state or who, as you point out, don't care about the consequences of their actions, that it is hard to see how this will ever get turned around without a total collapse of the state economy. But, unlike say Michigan, California has so many resources that no matter how badly the state is managed the economy manages to keep its head above water.
Agreed. I know Lesnar was the real deal (saw him win his NCAA title) but when he was physically unable to do MMA fights anymore due to his medical condition, he was still able to "fight" in the WWE. Don't blame him for taking the big money from WWE
He is an experienced actor, not an experienced fighter. WWE is to MMA as Sylvester Stallone is to real soldiers who went to Vietnam. MMA guys actually practice hitting, choking and kicking. WWE lives at the gym, use steroids and rehearse the script for that night's "match". There is a reason Brock Lesnar went back to WWE after his career in MMA was over.
It's hard for Bloomberg not to sound like an elitist snob since that is what he is. However, he is right about the idea of not assuming that every person (or society as a whole) will benefit from marching more people off to college. A shockingly large percentage of teaching done at public universities is actually remedial coursework to get students ready to handle introductory college classes. Too many students graduate with a degree only to take a job that doesn't require one. Many students who are pushed to college when not qualified or ready drop out owing large debts in exchange for nothing. Society is harmed in that tuition at public universities only reflects a portion of the cost to educate a student. The taxpayers make up the rest in direct state aid to the schools and federal and state student assistance. Wouldn't these students be better off getting a real skill and earning a living instead of piling up debt and not accumulating any genuine skills? If they want to go later, after they have matured and know what they really want to do, great. I have seen people who barely got through high school go to college years later and earn dean's list honors. One even told me he would almost certainly have flunked out if he had gone to college straight out of high school because he wasn't ready and had no idea what he wanted to do, except party.
In response to:

The War on Pot: Not a Safe Bet

Dave4933 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 1:04 AM
Hard to believe that regular use isn't dangerous to the lungs since you are breathing in unfiltered smoke. But....that the real issue is freedom. Caffeine is a drug, as is alcohol. Why should some be legal and others not? While I find the stoner culture tiresome in the extreme, I value freedom. It is not anyone else's business if someone wants to use drugs. Taxes on the product could be used to treat those who suffer harm instead of being paid for as it is now by taxpayers.
If this was a success, I would hate to see a failure. The car companies tens of billions of dollars that will never be paid back. If they had done a "prepackaged" bankruptcy, which is very common, the taxpayers wouldn't have gotten skinned and the car companies would still be producing cars. The taxpayer dollars were a handout to the UAW.
I know this is dogma on the left, but can you provide one example of deregulation from Bush 43 that caused the housing/wall street meltdown? Bush 43 added regulations at a frightening rate. This was an example of moral hazard, not deregulation run amok. I asked a banker friend if he would have made the no document (liar) housing loans to those with no/poor credit if Fred and Fan weren't buying them. Answer: An unequivocal NO.
In response to:

Let Sleeping Germans Lie

Dave4933 Wrote: May 21, 2012 12:07 PM
So now we have TWO sets of low countries?
In response to:

Let Sleeping Germans Lie

Dave4933 Wrote: May 17, 2012 11:37 AM
While the odds of an armed conflict are, at best, remote at this time, the odds of a political/economic war are far greater. What if the Germans decide they have had enough of their neighbors' profligacy and begin to move away economically (Euro) and politically (EU) from Western Europe? Mercedes and Beetles can sell in Asia just as they do in Europe. Imagine the situation if the Germans refuse to make further loans and demand repayment from the destitute EU countries. What a mess.
1 - 10 Next