[Nanodik]

You mean like the Israelis are doing, giving voting rights to Palestinians,

This is not a good analogy. In fact, I don't even know why you brought this up. But while we're at it let me say I support the US protecting US interest abroad. That does not involve handing ANY aid of any kind to any govt. What we need to do is the proverbial "walk softly and carry a big stick". The world already knows if we put our sites on them, we can kick their ass all day long and barely break a sweat.

As for the Jihadist, immigration policy is within the purview of the federal govt. Were it me, I would change the policy to Muslim need not apply. I feel sorry for the good Muslims out there but quite frankly we cannot separate the wheat from the chaff so we need to error on the side of the American people. But this does no good if we are unwilling to seal the border to the south which your beloved 2 party system is too inbred with other interest to do anything about.

[sinkspur]

But this does no good if we are unwilling to seal the border to the south which your beloved 2 party system is too inbred with other interest to do anything about.

And your Libertarian Party would?

[Constantine XIII]

This country will always have a two party system. One or both of those partys might change in the future, but there will always be two. Our system forces this to happen. It is the direct result of winner take all elections.

It appears to help keep politicians moderate, preventing wingnuts from either end of the spectrum fron getting anywhere near the levers of power, unlike multi-party parliamentarly systems like Germany or (gasp!) France.