You're THE man

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Then perhaps the government should nationalize the defense industry. After all, it is a proper function of government.

Even the Soviets were smarter than that.

Good times...~~~sniff~~~...good times.

[Mississippi Neck]

To get to a solution America will need to be re-evangelized with the Gospel, which has been lost, ignored, or totally diminished.
.


2. Borders - Use all necessary resources to build the wall on the southern border ASAP. In the mean time, as many military and guard units as possible need to be stationed at the border with orders to shoot to kill. Enough fuckin' around. The open border is KILLING this country. Bushice is right. We need to seal the country as best we can. Ports, airports, immigration laws, etc ....

.

Was it in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John where Jesus said "shoot to kill"? I cant find it. Chapter and verse please.

Live it or don't spew it.

[BSmack]

Was it in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John where Jesus said "shoot to kill"? I cant find it. Chapter and verse please.

Live it or don't spew it.

I think it was in Paul's Letter to the Texicans.

[poptart]

Neck, where are your ideas ... ?

Absent any input from you, one can suppose your version of 'living it' is following the two step Jimmah Carter model of surrender and suck 'em off.

I'm not in.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Neck, where are your ideas ... ?

Absent any input from you, one can suppose your version of 'living it' is following the two step Jimmah Carter model of surrender and suck 'em off.

I'm not in.

Bless the "new" American church.


So much foggy, unspecific mention of God in the abstract, so little actual Jesus.

[BSmack]

Neck, where are your ideas ... ?

Absent any input from you, one can suppose your version of 'living it' is following the two step Jimmah Carter model of surrender and suck 'em off.

I'm not in.

Let's go to the scripture...

Matthew 5-38:44

Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

It appears you and Jesus have a fundamental disagreement. I suggest you work it out. I'd recommend flagellation and an inside out camel hair shirt.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

I'd recommend flagellation and an inside out camel hair shirt.

Throw in a game of "Naked Twister" and that's an average Saturday night with Cuda.

Big whoop.

[poptart]

Bri, if you're intereted in talking Scripture then take it to the theology forum.
I'd be more than happy to engage you there.

You, Neck and all the other feet-behind-your-ears handwringers can revisit my border suggestion after terrorists enter our country through an open border and blow up one of our major cities.

Our government has no obligation to protect the citizens .... ?

'Shoot to kill' isn't for sport, asshead.

[Mississippi Neck]

Neck, where are your ideas ... ?

Absent any input from you, one can suppose your version of 'living it' is following the two step Jimmah Carter model of surrender and suck 'em off.

I'm not in.

I just think its a bit humorous that you say the country needs to be re-evangelized with the Gospel, then in the next statement you're saying "shoot to kill". Funny stuff dude.

[poptart]

Again, go ahead and offer your plan.
Driving by to take pot-shots at the people who have offered plans is cowardly.

Shoot to kill is a part of gov. protecting the citizens.
Right now the open border is a slow death to the country.
And one incident and it'll be MASSIVE death to our innocent citizens.

There will be no re-evangelizing the country when the country is gone.

[Mississippi Neck]

You, Neck and all the other feet-behind-your-ears handwringers can revisit my border suggestion after terrorists enter our country through an open border and blow up one of our major cities.

I didn't say that I agreed or disagreed with your suggestion. It was the way you presented your plan that I thought was a bit humorous.

[poptart]

Ok, in that case, glad I could entertain.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Right now the open border is a slow death to the country.

Famous last words of the First Nations.

Karma, bitches. Do unto others, and all that good stuff.

[poptart]

Another 'tard who wants to ankle-bite but offer no steps of his own.

Go ahead and give us 6 steps to cure our fucked up country, fahrner.

[BSmack]

Bri, if you're intereted in talking Scripture then take it to the theology forum.
I'd be more than happy to engage you there.

You were the one that said "To get to a solution America will need to be re-evangelized with the Gospel, which has been lost, ignored, or totally diminished."

I simply showed where your own politics run counter to the very same Gospel you feel has been lost. Maybe you might want to go looking for that Gospel in your own life before recommending it to others?

[poptart]

One can quite easily draw a verse or five out from the Bible and convince some people that it means something that it does not.
In looking at the Bible, there is context, big picture, and cross references to be aware of.

What you've cited there is a portion of the sermon on the mount, which is NOT the Gospel.
There is a big distinction between the two.

If you want to talk about either of those then I'll see you in the theology forum.

[Mister Bushice]

and finally
we eliminate all public assistance for able bodied individuals save for a one time only LOAN of $2,000 to cover moving expenses to the nearest lettuce patch. The money to be recovered by wage garnishment.

Good luck quelling those cross country inner city riots.

[BSmack]

One can quite easily draw a verse or five out from the Bible and convince some people that it means something that it does not.
In looking at the Bible, there is context, big picture, and cross references to be aware of.

I'm pretty sure the "big picture" Jesus was looking at did not involve shooting down poor people trying to cross the border.

What you've cited there is a portion of the sermon on the mount, which is NOT the Gospel.
There is a big distinction between the two.

WTF? The book of Matthew is no longer one of the 4 Gospels?

[poptart]

Short answer, unless you want to take it up elsewhere.

Matthew is one of the 4 Gospels, yes.
In order to 'classify' it, that is what it is called -- the Gospel of Matthew.

THE Gospel is what Paul spoke of in I Cor. 15: 1-8.
That being, simply, the Christ has come.

All the words, stories, history, and information written within Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are not THE Gospel.




In the sermon on the mount Jesus was instructing the disciples on how to conduct themselves in light of the coming persecution they would be facing.

He wasn't giving instructions on how to handle a border situation.

He told them in verse 37, which you did not choose to include, "But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."

So do you think that anyone speaking words is doing evil ... ?

Jesus says we're all supposed to walk around as mutes.

[Mississippi Neck]

He wasn't giving instructions on how to handle a border situation.

I'm guessing "shoot to kill" would not be his instructions.

You must be reading the Jim Jones New Standard Version.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

He wasn't giving instructions on how to handle a border situation.

I'm guessing "shoot to kill" would not be his instructions.

You must be reading the Jim Jones New Standard Version.

Yes.

I believe that's the version where Jesus instructs His disciples to "git 'er done".

[BSmack]

Short answer, unless you want to take it up elsewhere.

Matthew is one of the 4 Gospels, yes.
In order to 'classify' it, that is what it is called -- the Gospel of Matthew.

THE Gospel is what Paul spoke of in I Cor. 15: 1-8.
That being, simply, the Christ has come.

All the words, stories, history, and information written within Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are not THE Gospel.

Well there's a new twist. Believe in Christ but don't follow any of his teachings?

In the sermon on the mount Jesus was instructing the disciples on how to conduct themselves in light of the coming persecution they would be facing.

He wasn't giving instructions on how to handle a border situation.

He told them in verse 37, which you did not choose to include, "But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."

So do you think that anyone speaking words is doing evil ... ?

Jesus says we're all supposed to walk around as mutes.

Hey, you're the one that thinks public policy should be based on "re-evangelizing" America with the Gospel. Should we pick and choose what parts of the teachings of Christ we should obey?

[titlover]

Neck, where are your ideas ... ?

Absent any input from you, one can suppose your version of 'living it' is following the two step Jimmah Carter model of surrender and suck 'em off.

I'm not in.

Let's go to the scripture...

Matthew 5-38:44

Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

It appears you and Jesus have a fundamental disagreement. I suggest you work it out. I'd recommend flagellation and an inside out camel hair shirt.

i'm pretty fucking sure he was referring to interpersonal relationships, not international diplomacy.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Should we pick and choose what parts of the teachings of Christ we should obey?

"Sounds like a plan."

Sincerely, Catholics.

[Mississippi Neck]

He wasn't giving instructions on how to handle a border situation.

I'm guessing "shoot to kill" would not be his instructions.

You must be reading the Jim Jones New Standard Version.

Yes.

I believe that's the version where Jesus instructs His disciples to "git 'er done".

More like "drink the kool aid"

[poptart]

i'm pretty fucking sure he was referring to interpersonal relationships, not international diplomacy.

Bingo.

And in the sermon, he was specifically giving disciples instructions on conducting themselves in light of coming presecution.

According to the standard some of y'all have come up with, a Christian president ought never order his country to engage in military action because people will be hurt and killed.


Bri', I never said public policy should be based on re-evangelizing America with the Gospel.
I said that America needs to be re-evangelized and that any policy we come up with will be a band-aid.

[PSUFAN]

Should we pick and choose what parts of the teachings of Christ we should obey?

"Sounds like a plan."

Sincerely, everybody who converted to Christianity by choice.

ftfy

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

... a Christian president...

Bush is a Christian?

Could've fooled me, what with him practically never invoking the name of Jesus and all.

Lots of talk of some small-g "god" though.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

I think I brought this up a while ago...

“National Christian leaders received hugs and smiles in person and then were dismissed behind their backs and described as ‘ridiculous,’ ‘out of control,’ and just plain ‘goofy,’” Kuo writes.

...and...

Kuo, who has complained publicly in the past about the funding shortfalls, goes several steps further in his new book.
He says some of the nation’s most prominent evangelical leaders were known in the office of presidential political strategist Karl Rove as “the nuts.”

[Mississippi Neck]

i'm pretty fucking sure he was referring to interpersonal relationships, not international diplomacy.

Bingo.

And in the sermon, he was specifically giving disciples instructions on conducting themselves in light of coming presecution.

According to the standard some of y'all have come up with, a Christian president ought never order his country to engage in military action because people will be hurt and killed.


Bri', I never said public policy should be based on re-evangelizing America with the Gospel.
I said that America needs to be re-evangelized and that any policy we come up with will be a band-aid.

I'm not saying that good Christians should never take up self-defense. Even Jesus told his disciples to pick up a sword. But a blanket shoot to kill order is not in keeping with the teachings of Jesus.

[Diego in Seattle]

I think I brought this up a while ago...

“National Christian leaders received hugs and smiles in person and then were dismissed behind their backs and described as ‘ridiculous,’ ‘out of control,’ and just plain ‘goofy,’” Kuo writes.

...and...

Kuo, who has complained publicly in the past about the funding shortfalls, goes several steps further in his new book.
He says some of the nation’s most prominent evangelical leaders were known in the office of presidential political strategist Karl Rove as “the nuts.”

Republican just used the thumpers to get elected???

[poptart]

Let's look at my border policy again, which, btw, is not my re-evangelize America concept.
Some folks are confusing the two.


2. Borders - Use all necessary resources to build the wall on the southern border ASAP. In the mean time, as many military and guard units as possible need to be stationed at the border with orders to shoot to kill. Enough fuckin' around. The open border is KILLING this country. Bushice is right. We need to seal the country as best we can. Ports, airports, immigration laws, etc ....


We begin construction of a wall -- indicating we are SERIOUS about the illegal and dangerous invasion that is taking place.
Which, btw, we damn sure ought to be.
The Mexicans know we are now serious.
How many Pedros do you think will get gunned down before they stop and REALLY think about whether or not they should attempt to break into our country .... ?
The stream of invaders thins.
The government is doing what it OUGHT to do to protect the citizens.

Perhaps you don't view this dangerous invasion with the level of concern you ought, Neck.

Do you, because of some 'be a good Christian' view you have, propose to continue with the capture (a miniscule pct) and release endlessly policy .... ?

Or do you have some other idea ... ?
You've given nothing.


In the sermon on the mount, Jesus said to turn the other cheek.
In following Jesus' teachings, let's have no military.
There is no reason for it.
Someone wants our land, we capitulate.
To be 'good Christians' we must follow those Words spoken by Jesus.
He said it very clearly.

How many innocent Iraqi's have been killed because of Bush's decision to go to war there ... ?
Oops, you were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
In the border case, the dudes crossing illegally are KNOWINGLY doing wrong.
And yet you find cry foul.


The action we take depends on the level of seriousness you see with our border situation.

To me it is extremely serious.

[PSUFAN]

We begin construction of a wall

So...the employers start using helicopters to bring them in?

Come on, pops

[RadioFan]

This thread has already been sidetracked way off topic so fuck it ...

Do you guys have any concept at all of what a monumental undertaking -- not to mention cost -- it would take to build a wall across the southern border? The East Germans had one around only one city, had shoot to kill orders and still weren't able to keep absolutely everybody from crossing.

I think Savage is entertaining, but some of his ideas are simply impractical, if not impossible to implement. The immigration problem is a complex issue that has to be addressed on several fronts, including finding ways of engaging Mexico to improve its own economy and allow foreign investment/ownership. Right now that isn't even part of the public debate, when it should be. But I also think there's an element of bigotry with many in this country who are screaming the loudest about illegal immigration, just as there ALWAYS has been whenever a new influx of people have come to this country.

When people talk about the illegal drug problem, there's both the supplier and the user side of the equation, not simply one or the other. This notion of simply "building a fence" as a solution to illegal immigration is like someone saying they're going to live in a gated community as a solution to crime. In a word, idiotic.

As for security, I understand the concerns about terrorists passing through the borders, but I'm more concerned -- much more concerned -- with our port security (and every other country's for that matter) and a large device ending up on some cargo ship registered in Panama than I am about suitcase nukes passing through the southern border.

[poptart]

But I also think there's an element of bigotry with many in this country who are screaming the loudest about illegal immigration, just as there ALWAYS has been whenever a new influx of people have come to this country.

Legal immigration = No problemo for this hombre


But Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has said a wall running the length of a border would cost too much. A 2,000 mile state-of-the-art border fence has been estimated to cost between four and eight billion dollars. Costs for a wall that would run the entire length of the border might be as low as $851 million for a standard 10-foot prison chain link fence topped by razor wire. For another $362 million, the fence could be electrified. A larger 12-foot tall, two-foot-thick concrete wall painted on both sides would run about $2 billion. Initially it was estimated that the San Diego fence would cost $14 million -- about $1 million a mile. The first 11 miles of the fence eventually cost $42 million -- $3.8 million per mile, and the last 3.5 miles may cost even more since they cover more difficult terrain. An additional $35 million to complete the final 3.5 miles was approved in 2005 by the Department of Homeland Security -- $10 million per mile.


Yes, a huge and expensive project.

I've read estimates of illegals costing just California 9 billion dollars a year.
JUST California.

And this number will obviously do nothing but go UP as time goes by and more and more illegals flood in.

Do you think we can afford NOT to build a fence .... ?

[RadioFan]

But I also think there's an element of bigotry with many in this country who are screaming the loudest about illegal immigration, just as there ALWAYS has been whenever a new influx of people have come to this country.

Legal immigration = No problemo for this hombre

That's a bullshit argument. Not because I think you're a bigot, pop, which I don't, but because the whole "it's not legal" is a copout. 'Sup us not even letting displaced Iraqis into this country, up until recently? That argument is like saying, "Well, marijuana is bad because it's illegal." Or, "you can't have a beer at age 18 because it's illegal." I'm not suggesting that we open up the borders, but the quota of allowing 100,000 or so people in here legally a year is ridiculously low, and the red tape is a nightmare. It encourages illegal immigration.

It's pretty clear that those who favor free markets ('sup Savage) have a big problem/contradiction with this entire issue, given that there is an obvious economic need for illegals. There has to be some sort of compromise.

But Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has said a wall running the length of a border would cost too much. A 2,000 mile state-of-the-art border fence has been estimated to cost between four and eight billion dollars. Costs for a wall that would run the entire length of the border might be as low as $851 million for a standard 10-foot prison chain link fence topped by razor wire. For another $362 million, the fence could be electrified. A larger 12-foot tall, two-foot-thick concrete wall painted on both sides would run about $2 billion. Initially it was estimated that the San Diego fence would cost $14 million -- about $1 million a mile. The first 11 miles of the fence eventually cost $42 million -- $3.8 million per mile, and the last 3.5 miles may cost even more since they cover more difficult terrain. An additional $35 million to complete the final 3.5 miles was approved in 2005 by the Department of Homeland Security -- $10 million per mile.


Yes, a huge and expensive project.

And government costs never, ever go up, right?



Besides, there are parts of the border that should never be fenced, EVER. Highway 170 from Lajitas to Presido, Texas, for starters. Arguably one of the most scenic highways in the United States, this side of the PCH.

I've read estimates of illegals costing just California 9 billion dollars a year.
JUST California.

Do those same "estimates" take into account how much illegals pay into the economy through lower wages and the purchasing of goods?

[Terry in Crapchester]

Back on topic . . .

I'm going to deviate a little bit from poptart's instructions, and limit my suggestions only to two. With all due respect, I think everyone to pipe up so far has put the cart ahead of the horse.

1. Abolish all paid political advertising. I'd replace it with a requirement that all TV and radio stations, as a condition of their (limited) FCC license, give a certain amount of free airtime to candidates for elected office.

2. Reform HAVA to require a paper receipt for all ballots cast. If the voting machine records a vote incorrectly, allow voters a challenge procedure.

Good government begins with good elections. That system is hopelessly broken right now. We need to fix it before we can fix anything else.

Not that I'm holding my breath about these suggestions passing anytime soon.

[BSmack]

I've read estimates of illegals costing just California 9 billion dollars a year.
JUST California.

Do those same "estimates" take into account how much illegals pay into the economy through lower wages and the purchasing of goods?

Yes it does, you fucking moron. The economic "benefit" of 12 million busboys and lettuce pickers is grossly overstated.

Try arming yourself with facts instead of feelings next time.

Then I guess producing the raw data and methodologies for those studies should be no problem?

[Terry in Crapchester]

Good government begins with good elections. That system is hopelessly broken right now.

Says who?

Anyone with a brain. Oh wait . . . that would exclude you, obviously.

Go fuck yourself, idiot.

Ahh, the old GED-honed debating technique.

[Dinsdale]

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has said a wall running the length of a border would cost too much.

This shit kills me.


Time to take this country back, dumbasses.





So...call up a local fencing contractor of your choice, and get an estimate to put a 15' chain-link fence around your yard. Now, extrapolate a cost per-foot, and multiply that by 2000 miles.



Warning -- doing this experiment may make your asshole feel sore, and may make you very angry.

If it's a tripled-up fence, as has been mentioned, some very quick (and possibly quick enough to be wrong) math tells me I can buy the materials at retail price for well under $100,000,000. And it really doesn't take much time, effort, or money to erect chain-link fence.
I guess Halliburton must have come up with the "8 billion" figure. And it's worth 400 billion to protect Iraq, but not 8 billion to protect the US?


So, since the powers-that-be are clearly LYING about the fence and border enforcement in general, what's the motivation?


The rich get richer, the poor get poorer....you guys are really reaping a good, fair reward for voting for a traitor.


"Thanks for the votes...now, piss of and starve to death, peons!"



Yet you tards won't demand better, and make excuses for acts of treachery...ponderous.