Posted on 12/05/2004 2:58:36 PM PST by AdamSelene235
ping
They Just Don't Freaking Get It BTTT
They get it. There's an agenda working here. They claim to be conservatives, but advocate the laws of the United States be ignored and our nation's values, language and sovereignty be forfeited. I don't have much stomach for it.
Go Home.
Sorry, but the author of this article is trying to appeal to the squishy side of my brain. That side closed when Pablo crossed the border illegally. The non-squishy side of my brain realizes that Pablo is a drain on social services, and a tool in the Mexican government's GDP plan.
Go Home!
Y'all are blaming the victim.
The "entire point" is that we have an immigration system that is so willfully broken as to be nonexistent.
That's what you should be bitchin' about and there's where the solution has to be.
The "entire point" is that we have an immigration system that is so willfully broken as to be nonexistent.
Enforcement against organized car insurance scams is virtually non-existent, but once in a while a perp gets caught, and his kids don't get to keep the proceeds of his illegal enterprise. Kids suffer when their parents break laws. Rewarding kids for their parents lawbreaking would only encourage more parental lawbreaking.
The solution to a broken system is not to break it more.
Then deport him. The violin-playing sob story that follows is superfluous and doesn't change the fact he doesn't belong here.
I prefer to bitch about both points rather than ignore one.
I'm a Senior Researcher in field of laser physics. I spend much of my time designing laboratory experiements.
BTW, we aren't discussing a scientific matter here.
You do not believe in entitlements of any kind. If illegals demand entitlements, should they be deported?. If so, how?
Its much easier to withdraw entitlements than to deport those who claim entitlements (the overwhelming majority are unfortunately citizens). One is needlessly coercive while the other is not.
Perhaps we should stop behaving like socialist imbeciles.
With the exception of the extortionists, I agree.
If he wants to stay in the USA then either pay the price expected of an out-of-country student or go back to Mexico and go to college there.
Making wages in the US, I think his parents could afford to send him to a college in Mexico.
You mean, of course, the laws both of our proud political parties refuse to enforce.
How 'bout taking a time out on the cheer leading after our "victories" and vent some of this anger on those that deserve it .... instead of on a decent, law-abiding, hardworking, intelligent kid.
I didn't see a smiley face on this, so may I presume that this article would have been perfect for you if only the kid had been a gang-banger?
Oh, boo hoo. The kid's an illegal. You don't put any pressure on politicians by getting squishy. Squishy is their excuse.
The failure to enforce the law against illegals is the responsibility of both parties, but they are forever pointing to people like yourself as poster children for their claim that "Americans lack the will to see the laws are enforced."
I'll pass on your invitation to scientism.
Recent philosophy manifests two tendencies, on the face of it radically opposed to each other, which both result in part from our adaptation to a "research ethic" more appropriate to the sciences than to the humanities: scientism, i.e., linking philosophy too closely, or inappropriately, to the sciences; and radical critique of the sciences as no more than ideology masked by rhetorical bullying in the form of appeals to "rationality," "objectivity," and so forth. The former is the effect of envy, the latter of resentment, of the success of the sciences. -Susan Haack
We get legislation drafted by politicians with ties to special interests, often influenced by ideology, who do not use the kind of logic and analysis required to do science or engineering when they formulate public policy.
LOL...I'll defer to Susan again.
One manifestation of science-envy is the mathematical or logical pseudo-rigor with which much recent philosophical writing is afflicted. This, to speak bluntly, is a kind of affected obscurity. Not that recourse to the languages of mathematics or logic never helps to make a philosophical argument or thesis clearer; of course, it does. But it can also stand in the way of real clarity by disguising failure to think deeply or critically enough about the concepts being manipulated with impressive logical sophistication. And it has come to be, too often, what Charles Sykes calls "Profspeak" -- using unnecessary symbols to convey a false impression of depth and rigor.
You are missing my point...again.
Ive suggested that philosophy be logically consistent within itself. If you disagree with that position...find me a reputable and influencial philosopher who disagrees with that. At no point have I advocated pseudo-scientific 'philosophy', or as you refer to...as scientism.
I think logic and analysis is good. I like logic and reason. We want to use logic when we formulate public policy. I like to think rationally. If you disagree...then you are quite different than most of the physicists I have known.
But the basis of this discussion is not philosophy. That is YOUR schtick. Im trying to formulate a rational public policy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.