State-Level Border Laws

Here’s an idea. Instead of a national immigration policy, why not devolve border control to the individual states? It’s clear that there will be no seeing eye-to-eye among the competing factions of whites who still exercise some control over the management and direction of America. So any national open borders policy, which is currently and has been for some time the de facto if not the de jure law of the land, is really an ethnic cleansing campaign orchestrated by one group, the ruling coastal corridor elite, against another group, the high trust heartland whites, for lack of a better encompassing term.

If it’s open borders the smug coastal leftoids really want, then give it to them, good and hard. Allow states to establish their own immigration laws, complete with state-level border enforcement. In time, what you’d expect to result from this decentralization of the central duty of the national government is an open door policy in leftoid blue states, like NY and CA, and locked-down borders in anti-leftoid red states like NC and OK. Stew for a few decades as the third world funnels into the open border states, and… voila!… Massachusetts is *magically* transformed into Mogadishu. There will then be heard, if all goes as planned, a tremendously loud snapping sound as the cognitive dissonances of millions of open borders cheerleaders finally and fatally tears free from tethering to bloated, self-righteous egos.

Putting this into practice shouldn’t be too hard. Just imagine each state as a separate national entity. Immigrants who stroll into a heavily graffitied Ellis Island — dat schmaltz! — should find no objection from their De Blasioed benefactors. Any complaints on the matter will be overseen by a jury of jurisprudentially diverse peers. Heh. Temporary visitor visas may be issued at the discretion of closed border states, and native leftoid Americans wishing to move away from the hell they unleashed in their home states will suffer no more inconvenience than automatically supplying their proof of citizenship, coded into a pass card, at highway toll booths or their favorite roadside bathhouses. But once in the red state of their choosing, they must abide the local immigration laws, which will be immanentized and permanentized.

Of course, none of this will happen. Liberals would never accept it. Their principles extend only so far as their ability to painlessly cash them in for scrumptious status whoring feels. Open borders isn’t really about rescuing the world’s poor; it’s about sticking the shiv in the flanks of non-elite white people by dumping, say, Iraqi Islamists in the middle of Kentucky.

It’s time for an old-fashioned American separation, before the heat builds up and explodes… again. When asked why we need this separation, cite irreconcilable differences. You’d be more right than you know.





Comments


  1. It certainly traps the open-borders folks into a conundrum.

    They either have to admit that excess immigration is a net cost, or else they have to pretend that they are more than happy to have the diversity all to themselves.

    If diversity = a wealthier, happier society, they should be glad to deprive evil conservatives of the benefits thereof.

    Enjoy the vibrancy.

    Like


    • The proposed “state immigration laws” are easy to impose: they’re called residency requirements. Review all the laws related to residency requirements, increase the time required (seven or more years) to establish residency, require integration via a host of licensing and property tax requirements, residence registration, and submittal of immigration records for non-citizens, expand the application of residency to many welfare benefits, including public education at primary and secondary level, as well as post-secondary education, where it is the norm, and expand residency requirements for professional registration, or at least require an “emergency response plan” for non-residents obligated to respond to state disasters in exchange for licenses.

      Others may have better ideas, but CH has finally stumbled into something I’ve advocated for years: a non-ethnic legal mechanism to protect against ethnic cleansing of Americans in the USA by non-Americans.

      Like


    • ALL immigration has either a positive or negative in the ledger. People that are makers help, takers hurt.

      Like


    • I know you pose this solution half-humorously, but it would be interesting to see it play out in practice.
      Only problem, you’d never be able to enforce against migration between states (as black and brown devolve their former host state into shit) once the immigrant is a US citizen.
      As for separation… it’s hilarious to watch Dark Enlightenment folks realize the logic behind the South’s succession. Centralized federal power, one size fits all government, and premature integration have proved disastrous. Those stupid racist rednecks in the Confederacy must have sabotaged it. lol
      I’d love to see a politician campaign on instituting Australia’s immigration policy. All the Mexicans can come that want to, as long as they have a 4 year degree or vocation and some savings= Problem solved. Insulates the politician from charges of racism, and insulates the populace from parasites. Win win.
      Watch the most recent episode of the Daily Show for an enlightening interview with a hispanic community leader. They discuss the demographic shift, and one fact I didn’t know that I was pleased with, Obama has deported more illegals than any other President (2 million). That’s change I can believe in. 😉

      Like


  2. on December 3, 2013 at 10:39 am Dr. Murray F. Rottencrotch

    Well, duh. But in the past the feds have sent their lawyer hordes to put the states back in line. Same thing happens when cities try to protect themselves–Lou Barletta had fed lawyer teams sicced on him in Hazleton.

    Like


    • Yes, devolution is smart. But let’s not limit it to border laws.

      And insofar as states would protect national borders, let them also protect interstate borders. This is how we ensure the voters of the SWPL blue model deal with the consequences of the blue model, rather than fleeing their handiwork like locusts to surrounding red states (CA to NV, MD/DC to VA, everyone to TX).

      It is sad commentary on the balance of powers, considering that border security is one of the few legitimate and constitutional tasks of the fed. But they have pulverized their credibility in so many ways that a new federalism jealous of states’ rights must be reconstructed on the ruins, and all powers are back on the table. THIS IS WHY WE CAN’T HAVE GOOD THINGS, AMERICA.

      Matt

      P.S. Lou Barletta is now a U.S. Congressman who rode the wave of 2010, which began in part thanks to his solitary stand. It’s no coincidence that he is part of the effort that suffocated the latest “comprehensive immigration reform” bill in the house.

      Like


      • Well said MattKing. Please don’t leave us few MD conservatives to the socialist and feminist wolves… can we at least be humble (albeit gun-toting) refugees in your state?

        Like


  3. At the end of the day, politicians belong to their elite constituents. More often than not, the elite interest goes against the middle class best interest. In California, the moneyed want cheap labor for agriculture and technology, which is why leaders there turn a blind eye to these injustices.

    Like


  4. jews control every state, so its a non starter. forget border control, we need jew control.

    Like


    • the anti Jew stuff, almost without exception, can be allegorical to the Gamma/Omega/Scalzi/Futrelle mindset with the ‘sphere. But dang it all to heck ma, it just aint ‘fair”….

      maybe you should deconstruct what they are doing and mimic it….

      now, blacks and Mexicans….. THATS a different story…biology abhors diversity and will defend segregation fiercely.

      Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 10:55 am Dr. Murray F. Rottencrotch

        You can only mimic a tribal/genetic character shaped over millennia to an extent.

        Like


      • exactly….those little fuckers are survivors too.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 12:51 pm Hilary Clinton

        Noel Igjewtiev says whites should commit suicide. Expect to see all the other rats of media and academia abuse and bully him the way they would a white saying his hateful and sneaky vermmin race should be thrown down wells and gased.

        Like


      • Protestants will never mimic their elected-office/government official seeking behavior. Because we have the New Testament, which taught us to “relax.” Yes, simply to relax. Now pause and consider what I have just told you. Only the New Testament part of the Bible, which they are missing, told us not to love money. And we don’t. Others have slandered that into saying we like to sit around and watch black people play football and that’s why no protestant has a prayer of being the Federal Reserve Chairman. lzozlzozlzl. True to an extent.

        BY DEFINITION any person who WANTS to hold elected office is CRAZY and power hungry. We are not that. We just want to be left alone to be with our families. Oh wait…they destroyed our families on purpose with their no-fault divorce laws and messages on their TVs telling girls they should desire to run feral and be as they are described on page 2 of the Bible. Hmmmm.

        lzozlzozozoz

        Like


      • Seriously, what is up with the moronic kike apologists everytime somebody correctloy points out that Kikes are the root of almost every problem, alternative right leaning people have with the mainstream. Jews are responsible for gay marriage, feminism, the myth of “white privilege” and also for multiculturalism. It couldn’t be more obvious or simple. No amount of sophistry and ad hominem is going to convince me otherwise.

        Lol at the manboobz analogy.

        Like


      • apologize hell….im tryin to capitalize homie!

        Like


    • OK, MT, WY? Who knew? Why yes of course Billings is a hotbed of Judaism.

      Like


  5. i’ve long held that this country is too big geographically to be effectively governed.

    everything, people, traditions, sensibilities, weather, ad infinitum in say Connecticut, is very different than Arizona or Colorado or Iowa……etc.

    Like


    • Which was the whole point of federalism

      Like


      • what we got though was “the View”.

        Like


      • The view which begat “The View” was imported, sinister, foreign, and antithetical to the governing of the only successful large federalist republic in history. Which wouldn’t have been imported under the proper border security.

        The calibrations must be precise for such a unique polity to exist, much less thrive. “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance,” and we were not vigilant, nor have we been for at least a century.

        Matt

        Like


      • Matt, the fact that you’re reluctant to specify those who are ‘imported, sinister, foreign’ speaks volumes for their real power.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 4:28 pm Carlos Danger

        Good point, but I think it’s mostly to keep Lily from coming back. We’ve had a lot of trolls here lately.

        Like


      • When Germany cracked down on communists in the later part of 1800s, they fled to America, specifically Wisconsin. Madison is still quite Red relative to the rest of America. Southern European immigrants also brought a different mentality towards government that turned into the New Deal.

        The concept of rights as understood by Englishmen are very rare in this world. Pretty much any mass immigration from any part of the world, save USUKCANAUSNZ will be antithetical.

        Like


      • MK has repeatedly shown that he knows whom we must not criticize. My reading is that he thinks there are bigger fish to fry.

        Like


      • Bigger fish to fry.

        That’s one way to put it. Another way is “the law of diminishing returns.” A monomaniacal focus on one (albeit crucial) facet of a world-comprehensive problem can skew your understanding and make you easily dismissible as a crank.

        What keeps us in cult status is our purity tests. Consistency in shared principle is of vital importance to any effort, but so too is expanding the circle of believers. If all it took were naming the Jew, Egypt would have taken care of this some 5,000 years ago.

        You need credibility in an anti-“anti-Semite” culture to, first, get people to listen long enough to consider your point. Attract them with beauty (or art), keep them coming back with virtue, and only then confirm them in explicit truth. The cultist gets this backwards, bludgeoning people with truth from the beginning and turning people away for their insufficiently instantaneous loyalty; consequently, his frustration is axiomatic, his mission tragic.

        Why do you think they are so good at expanding their own circle and capturing the great middle? It’s because they are not concerned with truth. It therefore doesn’t complicate their mission of powergrabbing. Whereas we allow it to destroy our salability, and worse, feel self-righteous in our failure for having maintained pureness of mind. Perfect becomes enemy of the good.

        I am not saying pander to the inherited leftist stupidities of the great unwashed middle. I am saying don’t spook the herd into trampling you. You disqualify yourself immediately whereas you should be smart salesmen, using the enemy’s words against them and concealing your instinctive disgust at lies. That great unwashed middle is highly persuadable if you take the slightest care and not hoist yourself (and your brothers) on your own petard.

        USUKCANAUSNZ

        Also known as the Anglosphere.

        Matt

        Like


      • They’re already here among us, watching us and interracting with us.

        Like


      • An alternative is to simply attack International Bankers, Debt Spending, Big Credit, Wall Street, the Fed, and media monopoly. They’re all tantamount to an attack on International Jewry as they were once called, without drawing the ire of equality folks, and you induct much of the left unwittingly (Occupy Wall Street for example) because they hate the symptoms despite not seeing the root of the disease.
        It’s really fun to watch Jon Stewart rail against many of these while oblivious that his folks culture have been driving all the above since the Rothschilds’ rise.
        It’s how I have reframed by debates when discussing the above on leftist sites, and they agree with you 100% of the time once you’ve removed Jew from the vocabulary. Once they actually research it, they’ll come to the rest of the equation on their own eventually just as they do when faced with real crime statistics and Blacks.

        Like


  6. on December 3, 2013 at 10:43 am RappaccinisDaughter

    +1 for using the verb “devolve” correctly. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

    As far as the post, I’d love to see it happen on a personal level, but it just wouldn’t pass Constitutional muster.

    Now, allowing citizen militias to police the borders *does* pass Constitutional muster. Whatever happened to the Minutemen, anyway? Did they finally get hounded and shamed and persecuted as “racist hate groups” until they gave up?

    Like


    • on December 3, 2013 at 12:48 pm Eliezer Ben-Yehuda

      >> it just wouldn’t pass Constitutional muster.

      Now let us examine the legal underpinnings of California’s agricultural quarantine laws, and extend them to the max.

      If California can do whatever it takes to protect its fruits and nuts (or is that fruitcakes and nutjobs?), then Idaho can also do whatever it takes to protect its citizens from statistically-valid threats.

      Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 12:54 pm RappaccinisDaughter

        The problem is that it’s going to be hard to sell the concept of illegal immigrants as the moral equivalent of grain rust to the general public. The leftoids have done such a great job conflating the duty to enforce our borders with racism that most people are going to be very gun-shy.

        Like


      • About half the general public is on board with that equation already, the rest probably a lost cause. The good thing about this argument is the blacks join the conservatives. Nothing makes them more nervous than competing with hispanics for those precious affirmative action slots.

        Like


      • This isn’t talking about the concept of illegal immigrants as the moral equivalent of grain rust, it is about leftism being the moral equivalent. The point here isn’t really to ban Mexicans from coming into your state, but leftists. This is all a white civil war.

        Like


      • Well said. It’s not the immigrants that are the problem, it’s the ideology which brought them here…

        Like


      • on December 4, 2013 at 7:08 am RappaccinisDaughter

        Yes, I imagine the people of Colorado are pretty upset about all the lefties from California who, having destroyed their own state, escaped into Colo. to begin the process anew there…

        Like


  7. Heartiste, remember the bleeding heart that was a knockout game victim and still tried to pin it on whitey?

    How about the white woman who was raped trying to save the world in Haiti, and blamed white men for it?

    There will be no separation from bloated egos. These people will defend their diversity until their dying breaths, when they themselves are finally diversified.

    Like


  8. “should find no objection from their De Blasioed benefactors. ”

    Bravo! Bravo!.

    Like


  9. Of course, the establishment would never let states control their own borders. Democrats keep losing the white vote so they have to replace it with something.

    As for me, I live less than 5 minutes from the Texas-Mexico border. It’s the most corrupt place in the state (notwithstanding other border towns…). Local cops are being paid off by cartels, judges are being paid off by attorneys. The US Attorney’s Office can’t even handle the workload.

    Meanwhile, pregnant Mexican women regularly come over here to have their babies to get food stamps and other gov’t benefits. I see it happen all the time. I’ve even seen Mexican women using fake Texas addresses to collect gov’t benefits for their American-born children… while they are living in Mexico.

    How do you turn Texas into a blue state? Open borders.

    Like


    • Well it worked in California.

      Like


    • The republicans have very little incentive to legalize the illegals. First off all, Texas gained 4 seats on the house of representatives because of the growth of Hispanic illegals having kids. These people don’t vote, so all those four seats went to the republicans. Second of all, the issue of illegal immigration drives conservatives to the polls, like how the fear of losing abortion rights drives liberal women to polls.
      And don’t forget, illegal immigration drives down wages, something business leaders salivate over.

      Like


  10. Such a scheme is unconstitutional.

    Like


    • Amend the constitution. Diversity-loving blue states will definitely vote to hand over border security to the states because then they can have all the vibrancy for themselves. Then, presto chango alakazoo, the scheme becomes constitutional.

      Like


    • According to which article?

      I see two candidates, in IV.iii and IV.iv, respectively:

      The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States. …

      The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion.

      These duties are not unalienable; they obviously can be delegated, or else we wouldn’t have seen the legislature essentially gut itself over the last seventy years to the increase of the executive and judicial branches via administrative regs and case law.

      And if you are going to cite case law, don’t bother. The judiciary needs to be taken down a few pegs, particularly with regard to their usurpation of the definition of “constitutional.” Every officer of the constitution swears an oath to defend it against all enemies foreign and domestic, not just our black-robed masters.

      Further, though the Constitution gives Congress power, it wouldn’t have dreamed of giving it exclusive power, or it never would have been ratified. The state border efforts may be technically supplemental. And the 9th and 10th Amendments seem to apply quite plainly here, not that our faggot jurists have the character to recognize the connection.

      Which is why, finally, like Lincoln and habeus corpus, we will likely have to transgress the Constitution in limited ways to keep it whole and protect it against the explicit enmity of those who would eliminate it.

      Matt

      Like


  11. It would need a constitutional amendment to do it. And although I like the justice of it, I’m not sure I’d like the hassle when traveling across the country. If it wasn’t a hassle, the states would leak immigrants as bad as they do now.

    Like


  12. “I’m not interested in things that don’t concern me.” – Vito Corleone

    Like


  13. Interestingly, in the past, each state did indeed have its own immigration laws, prompting the federal government to assert its jurisdiction on the matter:

    Shortly after the U.S. Civil War, some states started to pass their own immigration laws, which prompted the U.S. Supreme Court to rule in 1875 that immigration was a federal responsibility. In 1875, the nation passed its first immigration law, the Page Act of 1875, also known as the Asian Exclusion Act, outlawing the importation of Asian contract laborers, any Asian woman who would engage in prostitution, and all people considered to be convicts in their own countries.

    From History of immigration to the United States – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia – a very germane read considering the topic.

    Like


  14. We need the America for Americans, Israel for Israelis Coalition.

    Don’t like it? You’re an Anti-Semite!

    Don’t like it? Hitler!

    Like


  15. 1- it’s idiotic
    2- it’s unconstitutional
    3- there’s no way to enforce it (even less than nationally)

    Trite ‘feel good’ articles are for feminists.

    1) idiotic – ok, let’s say this is in effect. First idiot problem is that you’ve created a massive new bureaucracy for your states because they have to communicate between each other like foreign countries. The last place with papers to travel (state to state) in a restrictive manner like your describing was the USSR. I guess if you want to emulate Bolshevik efficiency, then this is for you. That’s just the top problem, and don’t pretend like we have anywhere near enough cops to patrol state lines. National guard won’t be much use for long either, they have jobs.

    2- Constitutionality – the full faith and credit clause will smack you in the rear. I won’t even go into the ‘born or naturalized’ portion of the constitution. Unless you want to be a selective enforcer of the hallowed document, then you fail here.

    3 – Enforcement – let us forget the above and pretend we can implement it. Do you have any idea how much shiat Alaska (or Texas, or fill-in-the-blank state) gets from other states. If you think the ‘leftoid’ states will buckle first, I’ve got a free hint: they won’t. Just like the south got it’s a$$ kicked before due to manufacturing it would here as well. Toyota (? Honda?) built a car factory in Canada rather than deal with Southern workers yet again. Requiring pictographs to train employees in the bastions conservatism is pathetic.

    You can’t enforce what you can’t control. They will use trade to devastate the south and sections of the Midwest. Most manufacturing states are blue states. Heck, even many of the grower states are ‘purple’.

    Gah, this article is as bad as leftoid perfect world mangina fantasy bullsh*t.

    Like


    • Are you seriously citing the constitution to tell us that something can’t be done? The constitution doesn’t really stop people from doing stuff anymore- or rather, it only stops the things that TPTB don’t like. The constitution is dead, dead, dead.

      I agree though that it’s a bad idea to maintain one nation, and simultaneously make state border laws. Bolshevik, indeed. It would be far better to just acknowledge that the people of the various states have such differences that they would be best served in nations of their own.

      One more thing:

      >Most manufacturing states are blue states.

      There’s not much manufacturing in the states at all, these days, and OH, IN and WI are probably not as ‘blue’ as you think they are. Besides IL and maybe PA, what are these *very* Democratic manufacturing states you’re referring to?

      Like


      • I don’t know where you live, but I work for a company that makes shiat all over the USA and it’s blue states that it has factories in. Now, intentional (politically speaking) or not, this multinational I work for has NO production in red states. A couple if repair shops is it. Yes, it’s Fortune 500 and NLT Detroit based.

        I do know that Textron-Lycoming (as an example) is in Kansas (et al) but go look at your large manufacturing plants (and yes we do still manufacture a lot of heavy shiat in the USA) even electronics manufacturing (you want to deal worn Chinese IP issues, they’re worse than the Japanese were!). Almost all blue states again.

        Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana are ‘bi-polar’ states. Wisconsin is the most blue of the bunch.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 12:41 pm Joachim Peiper

        Let’s see, Mercedes Benz in Vance that makes every Mercedes SUV sold in the world, Honda in Montgomery, Hyundai in Montgomery, Toyota in Decatur, which is expanding production, Airbus in Mobile, and the biggest steel mill in the world outside of Mobile. A new steel mill in Athens, Alabama, A new VW plant in Chatanooga, BMW in South Carolina, KIA in West Point Georgia, all built in the last ten years or so. Dream on union shill. If you hate us so much, just let us walk away. You can stay up there and suck on J*w cock all you like. Maybe they’ll buy you dinner and some new shoes.

        Like


      • Then why did you guys lose the new Toyota plant again? The new Textron plant? The new BMW plant? All of them to Canada? Canada offered less tax incentives and STILL got those plants? Mein Gott!

        Big steel isn’t anymore. We recycle steel now, so your ‘big’ plant is still tiny compare to the old monsters.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 2:46 pm Joachim Peiper

        Well Blue state genius, why didn’t they go to Wisconsin where they fart pixie dust and roses and everyone is smarter than in the South?

        Canada paid Toyota $34 million to create 400 jobs. That’s fewer jobs than the expansion of the Dectur Alabama engine plant, which cost the state of Alabama nothing at all.

        BMW and Audi are considering building plants in Mexico. I didn’t see anything about plants in Canada.

        http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/toyota-gets-government-funding-to-build-hybrid-car-in-canada-1.1390325

        https://www.bmwusfactory.com/bmw_articles/bmw-will-build-an-information-technology-research-center-at-clemson-universitys-new-research-campus-in-greenville-making-bmw-the-parks-first-non-academic-tenant/

        Maybe they think Harper is Ok. I like him myself. He has a lot of work to do after so many years of liberal misrule in Canada.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 4:26 pm Carlos Danger

        I don’t know. Why didn’t they go to Wisconsin instead of Canada? BTW, last time I checked, Wisconsin is full of guys wearing flannel shirts that drink too much beer and hunt a lot. How is that different from the South?

        Like


      • You know, that’s a great question Carlos.

        Why did they skip Walker’s ‘Open for Business’ Wisconsin and instead choose to build all those plants in the Socialist hellhole that is Canada with it’s Single-Payer Health Insurance, higher than USA taxes, and accept far less tax breaks / credits than Georgia (et al.) were offering?

        Why did KC abandon even more jobs in ‘Open for Business’ Wisconsin for Canada?

        Why did Oshkosh Corporation choose to shift some production to Canada rather than bring it into ‘Open for Business’ Wisconsin?

        Why did these huge companies either not consider, or flee, a Wisconsin that’s ‘Open for Business’ Carlos? Why didn’t they build in the ‘business friendly’ South?

        Don’t (to use the parlance) PWN yourself Carlos. You’re asking a question you don’t really want answered.

        I’ve answered it multiple times here for you guys. You can choose to stay ignorant, no skin off my nose.

        Like


      • on December 4, 2013 at 9:48 am Carlos Danger

        It is a good question and you haven’t answered it for me with innuendo because I know Canada also has weak primary education and no $2 dollar an hour labor pool like Mexico, the other site they’re looking at. Their infrastructure isn’t any better either. If what you say is so true, why didn’t they open these plants in Germany or Poland? The Leipzig area has plenty of land and high unemployment and a well educated and motivated German work force. Health insurance may be a reason, because of the unpredictability of ACA or it may have been logistical reasons. Why not New York or California or Massachussetts where things are governed as you wish them to be. Canada is also full of guys in flannel shirts who drink too much beer and hunt a lot. I’ve been there too. In googling this question, I also found two or three big companies considering Brazil and Mexico too. Your arguments don’t really stand on closer analysis. I think you’re a troll as well. All you’ve done is call people stupid for not reading your mind.

        Like


      • Are you seriously citing the constitution to tell us that something can’t be done?

        Most of what he says sounds like he’s a leftoid concern troll himself, but he does make a valid point there. If we didn’t have the 14th Amendment, we would undoubtedly have gotten rid of jus soli (birthright citizenship) by now by simply passing a law through Congress, like every single other Western European nation except Canada has.

        Like


      • I’m a big fan of modifying immigration to be more like Finland. You inherit your parents citizenship, but can gain it birth if denied by their home country. No country I know of denies citizenship this way to people born abroad. The exception exists to prevent ‘stateless’ people.

        Oh and you sound like a concerned idiot. Just because I took the plan and made it look stupid (from the way it was written) doesn’t make me a ‘leftoid.’ My friends and I have gone over this stuff for a while now, and yes, unlike the lefty appeasers or right-wing jihadists, we’d actually like a real solution that:

        Denies lawbreakers access
        Ignores race
        Denies corporate idiocy
        Encourages innovation

        We want to allow the real dreamers, thinkers, and makers into America. Diversity is good, when the diversity is from people who work.

        Like


      • Ignores race, Encourages innovation

        So, as stated above, lefty concern troll then, innit?

        Let me show you the last ~300 years of innovation. Use your pulsing, throbbing, erudite, massive Fortune 100 brain to see if you can find any connection between the two…

        http://www.whitehistorytoday.com/

        And lastly, braniac, all your super smarty mcsmart smart workers in the blue states. How, pray tell, are they going to EAT to make all these nifty things when their food supply is cut off? You would fucking marvel at how fast people revert to the reptilian mean when food is exhausted. Or is the food made in Massachusetts too?

        Like


      • Heh. If we chose a system that ignores race and encourages innovation, heck, we should end up with mostly Europeans anyway. Canada at least has the right idea, but the problem there is that they’re getting lots of Asians. They’d have to tighten things up to keep out the cheating unimaginative hordes, and put an end to “refugee” immigration completely.

        Then, the main problem would be keeping the leftoid complaint industry off our backs.

        Like


      • Nope, just because I don’t think we should have stateless people (in case your an idiot, the Finnish law is if your parents are Mexican, and you gain Mexican citizenship at birth (true!) then you are Mexican, not Finnish. Only people that would become stateless without Finnish citizenship would gain it at birth if their parents are foreign born.

        I happily admit that (much) immigration will be stop from certain countries. Ironically enough, that doesn’t bother me in the least. I want people who want to work here. I want people with ideas here. That means educated people. What the fuck do I care what race they are if they are makers? I know plenty of lazy ass, toothless, white trash. Does race matter to me? Fuck no. I would gladly throw an ignorant fucker (white) on unemployment out just as much as an ignorant black, blue, brown, yellow, or a person that was orange with pink fucking polka dot skin. Don’t waste my time with race.

        Like


      • Actually, many blue states grow their own food. Prices would rise, supply would become more limited, but good luck with water there boyo in them there drought states. Have fun with hurricanes too.

        Nobody would have a great time, but blue states (to this day) have better infrastructure because they tax for it. I know, I know, the truth hurts.

        Like


      • Nope, just because I don’t think we should have stateless people (in case your an idiot, the Finnish law is if your parents are Mexican, and you gain Mexican citizenship at birth (true!) then you are Mexican, not Finnish. Only people that would become stateless without Finnish citizenship would gain it at birth if their parents are foreign born.

        It’d be an improvement over what we have now.

        I know plenty of lazy ass, toothless, white trash. Does race matter to me? Fuck no. I would gladly throw an ignorant fucker (white) on unemployment out just as much as an ignorant black, blue, brown, yellow, or a person that was orange with pink fucking polka dot skin. Don’t waste my time with race.

        You don’t seem to grasp the concepts of probability and statistics. Statistically, a white person is much more likely to be able to think outside the box and innovate than even an Asian, despite the Asian’s higher (maybe) IQ. Bringing up Kentucky hillbillies doesn’t help your case. What would help your case is if you could point to an example of successful African rocket engineers.

        Like


      • Anonymous: “Don’t waste my time with race.” Nobody forced you to read or post here. Looks like you’re “wasting” your own time. How often do you go to La Raza’s website and “waste” your time saying “Don’t waste my time with race”?

        “Don’t waste my time with race” is just code for “whites don’t exist therefore it’s OK to genocide them”.

        Like


      • @Corvinus

        I was referring to the asshole whites around me that are lazy fucking bums on the dole. Plenty of them near me, and I would gladly trade 10 of them for 1 hardworking person of any other race.

        I don’t care about race anymore than death gives a shit about race. I want builders. I want (in Republican parlance) makers not takers. That’s of ANY race.

        Statistically, I’ll happily agree that many other races are on the dole in higher percentages. I’ll gladly throw them out as well. I don’t want them, I might want their neighbor, if they work.

        Again, to me race is irrelevant. What a person does, their work ethic, is what is relevant to me.

        Like


      • Anonymous: “Some whites are lazy. Therefore whites can’t have a home.”

        That means a future with no white people. That’s genocide.

        Like


      • @eyeslevel, this is only true if the white women refuse to breed with the white men (still plenty of us) and mudshark instead.

        Like


      • I answered you at the bottom of this page @ 2:41 pm.

        Like


      • I’ll just add that no race will ever be “perfect” in the sense of having a 0% bum rate. It ain’t gonna happen. But at least white bums are our bums. We don’t need to import moochers from the third world.

        Like


      • @eyeslevel

        So apparently you are pro-welfare? I don’t give a shit about race. You’re lazy? GTFO of America. We don’t need lazy fuckers like you here, regardless of race.

        Like


      • @Corvinus

        There’s no such thing as ‘our bums’. There’s makers and there’s takers. (Republican parlance again) I don’t mind any race’s makers. I will welcome them. I will despise takers, and race doesn’t matter.

        Anything less and you are supporting laziness.

        Like


      • Problem is, there are a lot of people who are disabled and cannot work even if they wanted to. The mentally retarded, for example, are automatically “takers”.

        Also, remember how crappy the economy is. Many people are forced into being “takers” because they have no way of making a living because of how our economy was run into the ground — by ostensible “makers”. Many of these “takers” aren’t takers out of choice. They’d be makers if given the opportunity.

        But instead, the wealthy business class (which you seem to be a member of) prefers to score brownie points with the libtards and assuage their own leftoid tendencies by hiring nonwhites from overseas and importing them, leaving their own people with crappy job prospects.

        Like


      • “@eyeslevel

        So apparently you are pro-welfare? I don’t give a shit about race. You’re lazy? GTFO of America. We don’t need lazy fuckers like you here, regardless of race.”

        So, you admit you’re pro white genocide?

        Like


      • I think you protest too much. People who keep professing that they don’t care about race tend only to do so as a defensive measure, as to not sound racist. Face it, people of difference races tend to divide themselves along those lines regardless of their social status. This notion that if we’ll all get along if we work hard/love America or something is really just an idealist fantasy.

        Like


      • Corvinus nailed it.
        Tang nailed it.
        The antiracist has been outed.

        Like


      • I admit I’m pro-work. Are the percentages going to favor sub-Saharan African immigration? Hell no. Am I pro-illegal immigrant deportation? Fuck yes. We’d see a sharp (near cliff-like) drop off in immigration under my plan. I’d mass arrest illegals and drop them at the nearest border or ship them home. I don’t know how to work it exactly, probably a modified point system based on age, skills, family (if they are married not if they’re related to someone here), et al. Race wouldn’t factor into it at all.

        Like


      • Grim: “this is only true if the white women refuse to breed with the white men (still plenty of us) and mudshark instead.”

        Forced integration is genocide regardless of what white women do. Whites are already less than 50% of births in the USA. Obama announced he was going to use HUD to target white neighborhoods for forced integration.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 4:21 pm Carlos Danger

        What happens if Mexico doesn’t recognize the kid born in Finland?

        Like


      • They do, but: Finnish law grants citizenship to people born there IF their parent’s birth state does not. I don’t know of any nation states (of immigration importance, FFS even Iran & NK recognize births abroad)

        Like


    • +1 – and re #1 above, that’s the first thing I thought of too- the Soviet Union, whose practice of checking documents at internal borders, requiring residence permits to rent apartments, and registering people with the police at hotels, etc., was a way to monitor the population and control the movements of the people. Not a great model.

      Like


      • 100% agreed, Maurice. I have no desire to carry papers on my person when doing something as innocuous as crossing a state line. Live in one state and work in another, and on your way to and from work every day, the train stops and border agents come in and demand passports/IDs from everyone on board? Fuhgeddaboutit.

        Like


    • I would also point out that enforcement would be a bitch, in some states like north dakota, that is why i propose a system of fencing. with cameras and sensors. i would even be in favor of AWACS mounted strategically on the fence. heh

      Like


    • “You can’t enforce what you can’t control. They will use trade to devastate the south and sections of the Midwest. Most manufacturing states are blue states. ”
      There is virtually no manufacturing in the US any more. That trend isn’t going to change anytime soon. As agriculture is more difficult to outsource to third world slaves, it will be the only remaining product we actually make. Therefore, the South and the Midwest are not remotely in the same position as in the civil war era. As time wears on, it will likely be the exact opposite. Service sector and welfare state Blue areas, Wealthy agricultural and manufacturing (Mercedes and Kia seem to like it down here just fine) Red areas. Not to mention, without the same aforementioned Red states, the Blue ones starve.

      Like


  16. I think it’s a great idea; I’ve promoted it before, even though I know it can never happen. If we had had state-level immigrant control a long time ago, maybe I would’ve never had to leave my native Texifornia. That state is doomed now (good luck with that legalized pot, though) so I moved up here in the Lakeville, North Nowhere, and the migrants are STILL pissing me off (yeah, I know, I am one, now; but I’ve made my best effort to assimilate into the culture. Chicago cunts come up here and bring their faggotry with them; I left my faggotry in Colorado)

    But you know this can’t happen until the states secede. I say: forget a new confederacy, or anything like it. Let’s turn this continent into a massive patchwork of different nations. I think people are scared of the competition. Minnesota wouldn’t be able to handle having Wisconsin next door, because Wisconsin is a better competitor. That scenario applies all over the continent: weakling, overintellectual liberal states next to harder-working red states. The blue states would shit their collective pants if that kind of competition was unleashed.

    P.S. The map on Jayman’s blog post linked at the top puts Cajun Country in the same nation as… Quebec. wtf?

    Like


    • OK, on further reflection, WI-MN is a bad comparison, though I think it still stands. A better example would be Vermont v. New Hampshire. NH would blow VT out of the fucking water in no time flat.

      Also on further reflection, I’m starting to see the similarities between the Cajuns and Quebeckers… they’re both classless, unhygienic xenophobes who speak incomprehensible gibberish. And they’re both strangely charming. I could get behind that ‘New France’ idea.

      Like


      • Also on further reflection, I’m starting to see the similarities between the Cajuns and Quebeckers… they’re both classless, unhygienic xenophobes who speak incomprehensible gibberish. And they’re both strangely charming. I could get behind that ‘New France’ idea.

        No, they’re actually quite different politically. Louisiana Cajuns are probably the few ethnic Catholics in the USA who (at least now) vote hard-right. Quebeckers are so leftoid that other Canadians can’t stand them, and are Catholic-in-name-only.

        Like


      • Left? Well if you squint the right way. They are just this side of nationalists. I have relatives from Ontario, and more than a few would happily tell the Quebecois to fucking leave already.

        Like


    • Minnesota and Wisconsin are far more alike in temperament than you understand. Large portions of their populations are from the same geographic areas. They have similar cultures and if you think Wisconsin is a right-wing paradise, it’s where the progressive experimentation has it’s heyday. Look up Fighting Bob LaFollette. Yes, it’s the ‘birthplace of Republican party’ but it’s also the birthplace of the Wisconsin ideal.

      Wisconsinites actually believe in government, they just don’t trust the people running it and that goes along with the ideals.

      Like


      • >Minnesota and Wisconsin are far more alike in temperament than you understand.

        No, I definitely do understand, and I don’t think it’s some right-wing paradise here. I do know, however, that it’s still a fairly reasonable process starting up a business here, and a couple hours away in MN, well, it’s not. And the taxes are much higher there, too.

        You’re right in a way; I did admit that it was a bad comparison. Still, I think you’re underestimating the differences. There’s not nearly so much faith in the ‘Good Government’ ideal here; MN is all about it.

        Besides, we gave the world based Joe McCarthy. At least give us credit for that.

        Like


      • I’m from Wisconsin mate, and I think he turned into a power hungry attention whore. Wrong hero.

        Feingold, as an example, was an idiot a lot. However he was the ONLY senator with the stones to vote against the Un-PATRIOT Act. Still doesn’t mean I would vote for him.

        Of course his replacement is a whore as well that bought the seat in a good year to run against incumbents. His only real purpose is to help himself. The guy voted against a balanced budget amendment.

        Oh, and I’ve done business in both states. The differences are stylistic at best. Taxes are the only real difference, but WI seemed to always do a little better in primary education. Minnesota seems to favor wild experimentation more than Wisconsin.

        Like


      • Yeah, I made a bad comparison. NH-VT is a better one.

        Don’t like McCarthy? Here’s another based Wisconsinite:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Grothman

        Like


      • Hmm, I’ll have to look at him. I, admittedly, do not know him well enough (a Wikipedia entry is not the qualities of a person) to be able to say whether he is a good choice. I will say: if he’s like most politicians since 1976, he’d be similar to a petulant child. The truth is in his ideas on paper, and his actions in them.

        We, in America, have fallen for the love of the apocryphal. The fawning of the superficial. The attractiveness of the sound bite.

        America has suffered from that limitation.

        Like


      • Any politician who is merely a drunk, as opposed to a sodomite or Unitarian, is OK in my book.

        Like


      • A power-hungry attention whore is no better than a feminist. He damaged conservatism, and bloody well distracted America.

        Like


      • No, Buckley ruined conservatism. On purpose.

        Like


  17. These left-wing civil rights ramblings are what happens when these so-called “black power” bloggers fail with complex modern economies in real life. So they resort to blaming the GOP, discrimination, racism, the popo, conservatives, CEOs, and whites. The other option would be traveling to these poverty-stricken African countries to try out their “civil rights” on machete wielding blacks who don’t know the basics of home construction and are desperate for a gimmedat.

    [CH: ftfy.]

    Like


    • first teebagger and then the quotes around pick up artist and game itself– we have run afoul a formiddable foe in this one gentlemen. en garde!

      Like


      • Well, truth be told, the ignorant ass Teahaddists damaged the Republican brand far more effectively than the Democratic Party. I wish Bonehead and McClueless would’ve thrown those idiots under the bus in the beginning and competed on an actual idea. The intellectual laziness of those idiots would have made Teddy R. fly into a rage.

        Like


      • The average Tea Partier has a higher IQ than the average Obama voter.

        Truth.

        Like


      • The average TEAhaddist is not any smarter. Please, whar bird certificate, descent is, and so on. Most are people that are incapable of forming their own ideas. I hate (read: despise) the ACA. However, as someone that has watched private care morph into HMO’s and seen costs (which HMO’s were supposed to control) skyrocket year after year, I knew it was going to change again soon. Only an idiot thought America had a good system. Then again, we seem to have picked some of the worst pieces from around the world to put into the ACA.

        So I do not believe the average TEAhaddist is intelligent. Then again, I think et average Democrat is an idiot as well. Part of the Wisconsin ideal is judging ideas on merits, not party affiliation.

        Like


      • So, I guess your solution is to vote for the Dims, amirite?

        The “teabaggers” caught hell for the so-called “shutdown”, and now lo and behold, 0bamacare is blowing up and completely vindicating them.

        Who’s the idiot now?

        Like


      • @Corvinus

        Voting varies. Quite often my economic interests are better served by the Republicans. In some cases, for example Bush II second term, I voted against Republicans. In all fairness, I was perturbed that Bush II created Medicare Part D. That program is horrifically expensive. Also, he started a pointless war in Iraq that has cost the country. Add up the costs and he put America Tens of Trillions in debt.

        That is against my economic interests and therein I voted against him. I’m an extremely consistent voter in that regard.

        Like


      • Somehow the folks in Madison tend to think the Dems have the most compassionate, best ideas. The folks in inner city Milwaukee vote Dem out of affiliation and obvious self interest. And the folks in the rest of the state are just like other midwesterners, they’ve had enough of being taken to the cleaners.

        Like


      • @David

        Somehow many Republicans seem to think that no ideas are ideas. Somehow I think you believe that Scott actually balanced the budget and isn’t just playing a shell game with the debt.

        FFS man, he did the same shit Doyle did: hide the debt by restructuring the payments. What a great thinker! We get to pay even more interest now to pay for a tax cut that would’ve been better used paying off the credit card. Even the latest 15 dollars, why not pay the debt instead of leaving it I service longer?

        Answer: Republicans today lack moral conviction. They lack character. They are as bad as Democrats.

        Like


      • you’re just assuming mainstream republicans have a single idea to compete on, but that doesn’t make it so. they love their lives in dc and that’s the limit of their principles. i’ll take cruz, lee, paul, etc anyday. relating a filibuster in any way to terrorism is a quick clue to the barren landscape of your argument.

        Like


      • No, for one thing he leftoids (as you like to call them) were right about the filibuster being abused. Now they abused it as well, but hey, it’s not in the constitution and it will bite them in the ass later.

        Next, Paul, Cruz et al, are the problem. We need guys like Ike. Stamping your feet at everything (politics is compromise, even AuH2O said it) is counterproductive.

        The Republicans are just as morally, and intellectually, bankrupt as the ‘leftoids’ you oppose! Even on a state level, take Scott Walker. He hasn’t really balanced the budget (anymore than the Democratic guv Doyle). Oh, he’s shifted money, restructured debt into higher terms (which will cost more interest) but he hasn’t balanced the budget. He’s put stuff off, shoved it down to the counties (and / or cities) but be hasn’t balanced the budget. He’s as bankrupt of ideas as the last three guys before him! Heck, only McCallum was honest: he looked at what decades of Tommy Thompson had wrought and must’ve said ‘fuck me’ before raising taxes to pay the bill.

        We need ideas, ON PAPER. Not vague shiat, that’s what you guys accuse leftoids of doing, but the rightoids appear no better. Where is the Republican replacement for the ACA? Replacement for the Un-PATRIOT Act that halts US spying they are now (12 years after a leftoid warned about it) concerned about? Where is Cruz’s immigration bill? Where?

        Like


      • Hey dimbulb, it’s kinda hard to put forth better solutions when Dingy Harry and the Dims block absolutely everything. Get it through your head.

        Like


      • @Corvinus

        So, and this is meant to sting, WHERE ARE THE IDEAS ON PAPER!?!?

        Does ‘Dingy Harry’ control the nations printing presses? The auditoriums? The radio? The TV?

        You can blame the leftoids (DemonRats) all you want. The truth is that they haven’t provided an actual alternative for review. ‘Dingy Harry’ can’t stop that. I don’t see Republicans advancing anything other than: tax cuts and, oh, repeal ACA 40 odd times.

        Bankrupt my friend. They offer nothing substantive. That’s worse than offering something and having it mocked.

        Like


      • Anondumbass:

        You’re a typical problem-reaction-solution idiot. You just can’t accept that 0bamacare is blowing up the country, but it’s good because it was a solution to a problem. Having a solution (even one that causes armageddon) is better than having no solution?

        Maybe you should let it sink into your pea-sized brain that just perhaps having no solution may be better than having a solution that wrecks the country’s economy. Especially because virtually nothing that comes out of Fedgov does anything other than make the situation worse.

        Try again.

        Like


      • @Corvinus. (Again!)

        Where are this ideas? Seriously? Have you no ideas to put forth? I already said the ACA was bad. I don’t like it, but sticking your head in the sand and pretending the status quo ante was acceptable is ridiculous.

        So seriously now, where is the Republican replacement. Repeal & Replace, remember?

        Are you admitting you have zero ideas? Then come up with one that isn’t status quo ante. That was already proven to not work.

        Like


      • Where are this ideas? Seriously? Have you no ideas to put forth? I already said the ACA was bad. I don’t like it, but sticking your head in the sand and pretending the status quo ante was acceptable is ridiculous.

        Yet again, you miss the point.

        I never said the status quo ante was acceptable. My point is that any solution that makes it through Fedgov — especially if it’s put forth by the Dims — will make the situation worse, as 0bamacare has well shown.

        But even a GOP plan would be loaded with pork, perks and kickbacks to the health care industry, and so forth that would ensure that health care would still cost an arm and a leg.

        The only thing that would work is to do something about the rampant price gouging occurring all throughout the health care industry, from the hospitals, to the insurers, to the pharmaceutical companies, to the legal profession. Not making up a bunch of stupid mandates which only serve to spread the pain around and load it onto the backs of those who can least pay for it — young people aren’t getting snapped up in this crappy economy, let me remind you.

        Like


      • @Corvinus

        Ironically, or maybe not, you’re reflexively anti-Democratic party. This goes against my grain (the Wisconsin Ideal) of judging ideas on their merits. Heck man, it’s why Wisconsin is a purple state!

        Being reflexively for ANY party (not judging ideas) is what leads to totalitarianism. You accuse the ‘leftoids’ of following the ‘Cathedral’ but you’ve erected your own Cathedral around ‘Conservative Republicans’. You’ve ceased assessing them, and their ideas, critically. You make the noises of a ‘concerned’ (or ‘compassionate’) ‘conservative’ but Corvinus, I’ve known real conservatives. Those men were not Steve King or Ted Cruz. Heck, those two assclowns don’t measure up to William F. Buckley Jr., and fail Goldwater (AuH2O) horribly.

        Anything FedGov is bad? Well I’m sure Texas will love the US of A stripping out all the hardware and moving the military bases elsewhere. I’m sure that Newport News will give up those Shipbuilding contracts (government doesn’t create jobs), and I’m triple sure that Texas and Florida will reflexively agree that Mission Control and Kennedy Space center can be moved. After all, if it’s FedGov, it’s bad. Alaska is about the only state that can really get away with that, as long as the price of oil holds. Due to the Socialist nature of how the state sold the contracts, they get a percentage of all oil sold. Of course the citizens in Alaska might lose their free check to balance the budget.

        The ACA (watch it, you’re going to hate calling it Obamacare in 30 years) will be modified and those modifications will correct some of the flaws outright. Some things it will eliminate, but not the mandate. I know that sucks, but its called a risk pool and you claim to know statistics. I’m calling on Republicans to stop being children and come up with ideas how to fix it at least. Heck, come up with a real replacement, put it forward for EVERYONE to see. They ‘own’ the House right now. That gives them a huge bully pulpit. They’ve had this bully pulpit since 2010, and I don’t just watch cable news (Fox, CNN, MSNBC) I read (FR, WSJ, DK, DD) a LOT.

        They’ve whined about it repeatedly and voted to repeal it 40 odd times. That’s some real leadership there from the Republicans. You wonder why I rank them with the other children? Why I call the bankrupt? Why I say that even the TEA party bereft of ideas?

        As far as your ideas: the ACA does much of what you ask: How would you make them better? Please, I’m not trying to be mean, or spiteful, or anything else right now. I honestly want to know how you would handle the ‘gouging’ as you put it. Especially since you’ve ruled out federal intervention. Please don’t think tort reform either. Even states that went for that failed horribly on increasing prices.

        Like


      • Yeah, Corvinus said that Obamacare is worse than what it replaces. You didn’t even attempt to argue the point, instead said he missed the point, then went on to some other stuff to distract our attention. Corvinus was right on point.

        This CH post is attracting shills=a=plenty.

        We need to revive the Bracero program!

        Like


      • To fight the wacko Dems in Madison, one needs police, not ideas on paper. The days of moderation are gone. Yes Thompson is corrupt, he’s in the pay of big money. But at this point cynical people would rather that than support more leftism.

        You’ve really got to just stop the leftism. We will not have it. We know that if there’s any way it’s allowed to survive, it will be abused and we’ll be cheated. So now we will even pay more to be rid of it.

        If it’s not self interest, it’s a morality that you may find twisted, but we don’t ask you to like it.

        Like


      • @David

        Worse how? I see it as a slight modification of the status quo. The ACA will, at best, slow the rate of premium growth in the longer term. The fact that people will have to buy insurance. Well, I’ve got a way out of that. My friends and I have worked out an exacting system to replace the ACA if you’ve for the stones.

        No premium, no insurance if you don’t want it. Now mind you, we’re people of means. I have a much larger insurance bill than most people. My friends, much the same. Now after bandying this around tonight, it was a laughing conversation, one of my friends recalled a conversation with a classmate. He proposed a simple fix.

        You want to repeal the ACA? We’ll support it. Now, there are a couple of caveats. We want the law requiring hospitals to treat anyone (in emergent situations) regardless of the ability to pay repealed at the same time. We wouldn’t make it illegal, just not required. We would eliminate all tax deductibility of said losses.

        Why? To limit our costs. ‘I don’t personally care,’ my friend said, ‘if a loser’s brat dies.’ No more free immunizations, SCHIP, Medicare, Medicaid, or anything similar either. You can’t pay, go off and die. Not my problem, and I won’t have to lay for it. Now, if the hospital wants to help – that’s their bailiwick. I won’t stop them, but they’re on the hook for the bill by themselves.

        No more money for planned parenthood, pregnancy counseling centers, no more leeches. Pay or die. Or if you’re really lucky I guess, find a benefactor.

        That’s one option, and one I would support. What is the CH plan? Come on great thinkers. The status quo ante was costing me far too much money for too little return. I’ll contain costs by kicking people out, completely. How would you do it?

        Like


      • OK, so an anonymous guy on the internet reeeally hates Scott Walker. Are you really so desperate for attention that you need to come here for that? Take a hint from the rest of the astroturf and at least choose a funny name. “Subway masturbator” is already taken.

        Like


      • I’m not reflexively GOP. But I am reflexively anti-Dim because they have proven themselves time and time again to be unfit for running a country. Plus there’s the little abortion thing, the sucking up to nonwhites and women (everybody but white men), and so forth. 0bamacare pretty much ensured that I will never, ever vote Dim again.

        You also seem to assume that because I’m pro-GOP that I’m in favor of having a huge “defense” budget. Wrong again.

        What angers me about 0bamacare is not just the mandate, but the fact that catastrophic policies are now banned and people are pretty much forced to buy Cadillac plans that cover abortion and contraception, maternity care, mental health treatment, and so forth. The whole point of health insurance is catastrophic plans. The only reason the more expensive ones came online was because the health care industry started price-gouging everybody. Why exactly does health care cost more than 10x as much here as it does in Russia or India for the same treatment? You can’t answer that, and the idiots who put together the ACA didn’t even attempt to address that little problem. Instead, the health care industry has every incentive to worsen their price-gouging under ACA because now people are forced to buy insurance. It’s like the student-loan racket and the ridiculously high cost of education: if you increase the demand, costs will spiral upward. The mandate is probably the dumbest possible thing when it comes to containing health care costs. Also, making insurance companies pay 90% of their income on covering care will just ensure they make the 10% larger by — guess how — increasing premiums to keep their profits at their former level.

        Dims seem to be complete failures at understanding how costs work, and how they get passed on to consumers. Maggie Thatcher’s quip about the stupidity of socialists is right on.

        In addition, your snark regarding cutting off emergency room care just goes to show further that you don’t get it about costs. Why does a two-hour emergency room stay cost $1,000? It doesn’t use $1,000 worth of supplies. It doesn’t cost $1,000 of a nurse’s time. Again, the price-gouging.

        I’ll hammer it home until people eventually get it: the ACA does absolutely nothing to address price-gouging, and if anything, will make it worse.

        Like


      • ” Come on great thinkers. The status quo ante was costing me far too much money for too little return. ”
        The simple answer is to kill the insurance industry. There’s 30+% saved off the top. The Republicans should have stolen the issue by supporting Single Payer as a pro business option. Take the burden of healthcare off employers and watch how much better they can compete in the global market. Take the middle men (insurance companies) out of saving lives and everyone benefits.

        As for the other guy who carped about a lack of conservative ideas, that’s because there are scant few conservative Republicans in power. They all love federal power and the big budget that brings. That is antithetical to real conservatism. So here is an idea/platform for you:
        Adopt sane immigration policy (the Australian model) and establish a Mexican border Ellis Island to implement it.
        Expel illegals and refugees (the Israeli model).
        Reimpose time limits on welfare benefits and means test for all of them. No benefits for citizens of less than 5 years or their children.
        Able bodied poor/unemployed are required to work on infrastructure development projects like the TVA to qualify for assistance.
        Legalize marijuana/hemp and give farmers a cash crop equivalent to tobacco of the old days.
        End corporate welfare/subsidies.
        Tax incentives for companies that don’t outsource or start manufacturing sites here.
        Tax penalties and tariffs for outsourcing and third world labor goods.
        A national sales tax (so people realize what they’re paying) and abolish the IRS.
        Prioritize NASA and R&D to jump start a new era of innovation (which will lead to renewed manufacturing).
        Abolish the Fed and a constitutional amendment abolishing debt spending other than in time of crisis (global war, domestic attack, or natural disasters only).
        Demobilize from WWII and close foreign bases. Consolidate US bases. Kill redundant and obsolete weapons program pork projects (like 3,000 tanks the Army didn’t want).
        A comprehensive right to privacy amendment and an end to domestic spying programs.
        A federal/national concealed weapons permit for non-felons that trumps state and local law (looking at you NYC).
        Dump all social issues (gays, abortion, etc) and lump them under life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Don’t harm or bill me for it and it’s none of my business.

        That would be a mostly conservative platform that would draw many independents and Dems and fix almost all of our problems.

        Like


      • Really? I’ll leave the assignation of whether they are wealthier than I to my heirs.

        Smarter, no. Most everyone (and I know this will grate people here) are roughly average iq. I know, it sucks. We are a nation of specialists. Quick fix your car, grind out the part if metal, build it if it’s a circuit board, weld it, et al. I’ll find a series of skills you are incapable of performing without a large amount of training. More than you think, in all likelihood.

        There are outliers. They are the Hawkings, Nietzsche’s, Whitman’s.

        Also, having been to several teahaddist meetings, no. Those people were (in many cases) my intellectual inferiors with zero grasp of history or scale. They liked boilerplate rhetoric, enjoyed being spoon fed idiocy, reveled in ignorance. I went thinking ‘Ok, the media just finds the dumb ones to mock.’ Having been to meetings in various places, no, it’s like a bunch of kids that failed civics class and history. The joke ‘Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be’ from the Onion was eerily accurate in one case.

        So pretend. Use a cutesy (and useless) survey that says people that support the Republicans still support the Republicans. The Republican demographic has always skewed to the wealthier because of tax policy. I’m not an idiot either, I vote for my economic interests, and most of the time that’s Republican. (A few notable exceptions: I actually voted against a Bush II second term (after Medicare Part D, and the Iraq waste of money, massive budget holes, talk about trillions pissed away) because he was ruining America.

        TEAhaddists smart? When pigs grow wings and fly alongside my Mooney Acclaim Type S the average TEAhaddist will be intelligent. That’ll be right about the time the average American voter starts replacing the children with adults on a state and national level.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 5:05 pm Jochen Peiper

        fly alongside myMooney Acclaim Type S

        Oh yeah? I have a squadron of Ju 88s on call and my very own Kampfgruppe with 45+ Panther Gs, a full artillery battalion for fire support, and over 4,000 highly trained and motivated Waffen SS men at my disposal. Plus I’m a legend in my own time. So I’m still cooler than you! Neeeener neeener!

        Not sure what you wanted here coming around and insulting all of us.

        We need to reclaim our nation or suffer becoming a despised and exploited minority in our own country. Due to the results of long term and successful ideological subversion by our Bolshevik friends in NYC and California we have nothing but bloated, corrupt, and wasteful government. We have reached the point where we are prohibited from making the common sense course of action by laws created for the sake of vested interests. How many government jobs are there for female empowerment? How many women would be working if all that was available was private sector work?

        I can tell you with confidence, that bloated and wasteful as DoD is, it is miles ahead of most civilian agencies in terms of how consciensciously it spends its money. Much of the bloat is due to mandates from Congress and permanent staff created where none is needed to support social engineering schemes. The point of the Tea Party as I see it, is to point out that one can have lavish and excellent government for what we garner in revenue but it is simply wasted. The next time you’re in DC, do a tally of the police agencies Federal and local that operate there. Did you know the Department of Education has a SWAT team? WTF? Did it ever occur to you that maybe the Tea Party takes the position they do because it’s a bargaining position? How much do Democrats compromise? Zero.

        Like


      • “I can tell you with confidence, that bloated and wasteful as DoD is, it is miles ahead of most civilian agencies in terms of how consciensciously it spends its money.”

        On that, you are woefully misinformed. Remember that Trillion dollars that the Pentagon lost the day before 911, yeah no one else does either unfortunately. Name me a business, or entire sector, that has …misplaced, a trillion bucks. I hope we got a secret moon or Mars base with that… maybe a Bond villain blackmailed us.
        As a former military contractor, I can speak firsthand about how stupidly I’ve seen our tax money spent. Especially in regards to contractors that have replaced most military and civil service personnel. If you knew the half of it you’d be ten times angrier than you already are.

        Like


      • Maybe people who have un-brainwashed themselves from what they had to recite back in Civics class to an A.

        Yes I betcha they got an A in civics, all the while suspecting or knowing at least parts of it were bullshit.

        That’s typical for bright students. Being able to perform and give the teacher what she wants while not believing it. Don’t you just hate that?

        Like


      • I love it: the Constitution in basic civics is brainwashing. Thank you for expressing the mentality they demonstrate perfectly.

        You’re as bad as a the Democrats that want to ban guns. You’re equal to the people that believe in ‘free speech zones’. Textbook social group normalized behavior. Just like ignoring (for years) the spying that a ‘crazy terrist loving leftoid’ warned you about before having the biggest stones a politician has demonstrated in years by voting against it when that was considered political suicide. Voting against it AFTER getting up in the chamber and decrying it as an abomination in the making and being called Unamerican by the very people you now support.

        The very people that now (since it’s politically expedient) decry it.

        That leftoid knew the constitution. That leftoid stood up and decried the attack upon it. Where was the TEA party? When he stood up again, and repeated his warning, and voted against it again. Where was the TEA party? They were licking the boots of the people that voted for it, and replaced him with a guy that votes for the abomination AND against a balanced budget amendment.

        You can call yourselves whatever you want, but constitutional scholars, or even knowledgable? You. Are. Not.

        You commit an even greater crime: you lack consistency in argument.

        Like


      • You’re really stretching hard here, Anon. Saying I’m like some strawman, then going on about how bad that strawman is …

        And I am not even sure what you are talking about, which “leftoid”?

        The civics class of the Constitution isn’t the real thing, any more than the civics class discussion of the Supreme Court mentioning 2 cases: Brown v. Board, and Roe v. Wade, is not a useful description of what the SC has done and does.

        I mean, they don’t even mention that Brown v. Board was largely overturned 20 years later in Milliken.

        Like


      • The evidence it in. Tea-party supporters are more intelligent than everyone else. The study was done by a leftist of all things.

        http://capitalismsaves.com/2013/10/17/tea-party-supporters-are-smarter-than-everyone-else.aspx

        Like


      • The evidence is in. Tea-Party supporters are smarter than everyone else. The study was even conducted by a leftist.

        http://capitalismsaves.com/2013/10/17/tea-party-supporters-are-smarter-than-everyone-else.aspx

        Like


      • “Smarter, no. Most everyone (and I know this will grate people here) are roughly average iq.”

        The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores: East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.

        time for you to shut the fuck up apparently

        Like


      • Great test takers, workers, and such sure, innovative and creative, no.
        You know, the hallmarks of intelligence and higher thinking.
        Asians copy western products and imitate, enslaving their own to manufacture cheaply. Asians can replicate or refine a great car, but only just now send an unmanned mission to the moon after the west did the leg work.
        Chinese invented fireworks thousands of years ago, the west made cannon, guns, rockets, and spaceships within a few hundred years.
        Japan had to send out emissaries to Europe to adopt/steal their way out of medieval times.
        I hate getting sucked into race conversations and forced to point out the obvious, especially on a HBD site.
        Just for punctuation, we’re Still (just heard a radio ad today) having to go to Africa to build wells. How primitive do you have to be to not develop well and aqueduct technology.

        Like


    • on December 3, 2013 at 12:19 pm Mr.magNIFicent1

      ya stick to teh p0on

      Like


    • evan83, Taxonomy:

      ****

      Kingdom: Cathedral

      Phylum: Anti-Naturalist

      Class: Ethnomasochist

      Order: Donkey

      Family: Winged Servant

      Genus: Leftoid

      Species: SWPL

      Like


    • LMAO! I think that is the first time I’ve seen an entire post re-written. Not sure if anyone even caught that.

      “I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.”

      Like


  18. Continuing: We’d be better off breaking into multiple countries at that point.

    East coast (upper) – South / Florida – Texas, Kansas, Montana, et al Midwest – Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana? – west coast states – minus a couple of small sections that might jump with a small section of Colorado. Some states would melt away independently, I expect NM would end up as part of Mexico, a big chunk of Texas as well. AZ? Hmm, variable could go or stay.

    Like


    • yes please. and i don’t really care how it breaks up.

      all we need is a stricter limit on gov’t in a constitution, and a way to keep libs from bleeding in after they destroy their home (see also massachusetts vs new hampshire, dc vs virginia, california vs arizona). oh and some access to the ocean for shipping.

      Like


      • Not disagreeing completely, but the DC / Virginia thing is about space more than everything else. Cost of housing, suburbanization.

        Like


      • Why do we have to give Lebensraum to DC?

        Like


      • Dumb luck of proximity. I’d say I’m sorry, but really, I’m not. You get the headaches and the benefits. Look at it this way, you get my money into your local economy :/ not much solace but it’s what is.

        Like


      • Don’t get discouraged by the difficulty of fencing off Mexico. DC is much easier, just let what happens inside the beltway stay inside the beltway — permantly!

        Like


    • This is going to happen sooner or later on our current trajectory so you will get your wish. It is, quite likely, the goal of the Marxists as well since a balkanized US has now been taken off the world stage. Obama has great animosity for the military hegemony and colonialist past of the US so his plan is actually coming along quite nicely. Particularly when you add in the radical defenstration / sacking of the upper military brass.

      Like


      • Actually, and this is not without irony or precedent.

        The military needs a thorough cleaning. The ‘professional’ military has started to become bloated like any (corporate or government) organization.

        Part of this is the fault that has existed since the beginning of the military: they are always fighting the last war. We have a huge military designed to take on nation states. Our true enemies (that have nothing to really lose) are not that anymore. We need to clean out the ‘dead wood’ to allow the younger, mentally agile, leaders to take us into the future.

        What of China? (Et al) We don’t need a huge military to defeat them. Ok, you did when you couldn’t pinpoint bomb, use high-tech / low-tech mixes like ‘Glittering Pebbles’, or (if really backed into a corner) go nuclear. Today we can, and China sees that there is no way to really win the game. They’ll try little things (this sea air defense cordon joke being one of them) but they won’t push too far. First off, if we can hold out for a few months, trust me, we’ve got more shiat in mothballs than they’ll build in the next decade. As far as India, don’t make me laugh. They can’t even get the Russians to give them a functional carrier without it being a clusterfuck. Iran / NK? Please bitch. Nuclear weapons seem like a great idea, as long as your the only person with them. Otherwise you (and everyone else, granted, but these people are dictators that like the trappings of power) can almost NEVER use them. Nuclear weapons are only useful to prevent outright invasion nowadays.

        Ironically, I think they’ll run it far cheaper than their predecessors did.

        Oh, and you can ditch the Marxist shit. The biggest problem with the US military is the brass (upper), not ‘Marxists’.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 7:19 pm Carlos Danger

        It will happen on its own as robots become more common. Manpower is 60% and more of the DoD budget. Drones will dominate the skies in the next ten years. I advocate the draft as a nation building tool. It is also cheaper than a volunteer army because you don’t have to treat the soldiers as well or pay them as well as we do now. You could keep the best for permanent cadre and pay them well, but you would have perhaps 15% of the costs you do now.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 7:29 pm Carlos Danger

        Russia has developed a dispersed gas bomb that can level about ten square kilometers or better. We have a Daisy Cutter bomb that is pretty heavy duty too, but not that big. One nuke exchange would cause massive catastrophe. Such conventional munitions are better for obvious reasons, they’re cleaner and more controllable.

        Like


      • Ever hear of the Monroe Doctrine? It used to be the American thing to Not get involved in the affairs of other nations. Other than nukes and biological weapons, we’d be far better off it were still that way. Screw the “upper military brass”.

        Like


  19. on December 3, 2013 at 11:28 am Life at Calhoun's Lake

    Nice thoughts but the totality of constitutional law leans against any such proposition. SCOTUS has repeatedly upheld the right to free travel between States citing the Privileges and Immunities Clause (article iv). United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966) is the most applicable precedent here.

    Like


  20. There will then be heard, if all goes as planned, a tremendously loud snapping sound as the cognitive dissonances of millions of open borders cheerleaders finally and fatally tears free from tethering to bloated, self-righteous egos.

    To see this happening under laboratory conditions, look at Sweden. Especially the hue and cry when the Sweden Democrats got into the Riksdag. Or in the USA, Minnesota, which used to be the land of HHH but is now the land of Michele Bachmann.

    But even so, most Western European-descended countries are now only about 80-85% of their historic ethnic groups (the Netherlands is about 80% Dutch, Germany about 85% German, Canada about 80% white, etc.) and while pressure to clamp down on muzzies ‘n groids immigrating is increasing, it doesn’t seem to me as if it’s as strong in countries where muzzies ‘n groids aren’t a major burden, like Canada or Australia, as much as it is in Europe, where the formerly laissez-faire Brits are starting to get seriously confused about all their Pakis and Nigerians.

    And even in the USA, we don’t have pressure even from red-state whites to clamp down on immigration per se. Our groids are for the most part natives, and while I do foresee groid immigration becoming a serious problem as Africans hog more and more of the family-sponsored visas, it’s not yet at the tipping point where red-state whites start saying “we don’t want any immigrants” rather than just railing at Latino illegals because they’re illegal and not because they’re screwing up our demographic balance.

    I agree that defederalization would be a good idea. If California had had its own immigration policy, I’m not sure that they’d let it get to the tower-of-babel demographics it has today.

    Like


    • This, though, is why I readily decry the current system.

      I’m not a fan of wanton immigration. I am more than willing to ‘steal’ any ‘best and brightest’ regardless of race. I want the makers, the thinkers, the builders here. Asian, middle eastern, African, whatever. They can keep the lazy, unmotivated, et al. Britain can keep the white chavs. No. I want the people that will contribute, and the current system doesn’t reward that.

      Claiming that race is a sole arbiter of usefulness is childish and unproductive.

      My humanitarian impulse is only to prevent ethnic or religious genocide. OTOH, if the idiots are just going to starve because of stupidity (not because someone is killing them) that’s not my problem.

      Like


      • My humanitarian impulse is only to prevent ethnic or religious genocide.

        Does this include the current and egregious soft genocide occurring the US and UK most overtly, and other Western nations a bit more covertly?

        Discuss.

        Like


      • That’s a result of piss poor policy ( see my statement on ‘useless’ people – Britain has chavs (and others), we have white trash, ghetto losers, et al) that encourages non-useful behaviors. That’s useless policies from Republicans and Democrats.

        Like


      • My humanitarian impulse is only to prevent ethnic or religious genocide. OTOH, if the idiots are just going to starve because of stupidity (not because someone is killing them) that’s not my problem.

        No. No “humanitarian” immigration at all. If Somali Clan A gets in a fight with Somali Clan B and starts winning, it’s not our obligation to take in Somali Clan B under any circumstances either.

        Like


      • Now this is arguable. I admit a bit of religious imperative to help someone that may have done no wrong. That is my burden and could be (readily) argued against. One could easily say that, in evolutionary terms, that the losing side in an ethnic or religious genocide is simply falling prey to natural forces.

        Like


    • I, for one, am a red state native that says no more immigrants. Most I know think likewise.

      Like


  21. I’m a latino who approves of this idea.

    Like


    • I am surprised more latinos don’t approve and take the conservative view generally. Do they like being lumped in with loser lawbreakers sneaking across the border?

      Like


      • You’d be surprised. They don’t like it, but the heavy handed nature of HOW the enforcement happens drives a LOT of the anger. People don’t like it when you go after their friends just because of how they look. How would you like it if, because of Tim McVeigh, every white guy with a box truck was stopped? Another example, after the Unabomber, every post office making white guys open boxed packages before mailing them? We wouldn’t like that either. Here is the only workable solution I’ve come up with so far.

        You want to stop illegal immigration, and they come for work so:

        Go after the work and start seizing businesses, not just fine them. I mean seize them, sell off the assets to whoever wants to bid, no minimum.

        To do that you will need a national database of legal persons that businesses can check against reliably. Without that, and e-verify won’t cut the mustard, businesses are just swinging in the wind.

        To do institute a national ID card? Fuck man, that would piss off nearly every conservative in the country.

        The bonus is that everyone would have a national ID to use for voting and any sort of benefits.

        I guess it’s a pick your poison thing.

        Like


      • I don’t like illegal permanent immigration gumming up our demographics with the losers from south of the border. (Those who could not make it in their countries of origin.). I am fortunate not to be competing in the job market with them, so I benefit from the labor supply of illegals.

        I don’t hire illegals, but when I have something fixed around my house, a crew of a bunch of brown skinned people show up speaking Spanish. I think we’d be lucky if more than one (say, the foreman) is legally present and working here.

        Hope that doesn’t mean my house would be at risk if I hired people to do work at my house. This is a serious issue, getting the definitions right would be tricky. Or maybe to some people, the right definition is that my house WOULD be at risk.

        What do you think of going back to the Bracero program?

        Like


  22. Centralized government is a cornerstone of tyranny, which is why libs heart heart heart it forever. The only thing better than enforcing “tolerance” at gunpoint in, say, California, is ramming it down the throats of all Americans.

    Like


    • How local is small enough? Apparently states still do it. Towns? Streets?

      I’m just aiming to get to the size you consider small enough to not be a ‘central government’

      Like


      • The smaller the better. The idea is that when one place enacts unjust laws, you can simply leave for a nearby, better one. Unfortunately it takes more resources to escape from America than, say, Elm Street in Dayton, OH.

        Like


      • You do realize the patchwork of legal issues that would create? I mean, even the roads would become an issue. You’d be creating at least dozens, if not hundreds of tiny nation states that probably won’t really be self sufficient. What of currency? That small and you’d run into issues I think. I certainly wouldn’t trust a bank. Gold is too heavy. Digital coinage could be either hacked (some of them) or network access blocked in protest.

        What about the movement of people? Suburbanization, as an example, has people that live an hour away form work.

        I don’t see it being workable smaller than state sized, of course some states (Texas, Alaska, California) are bigger than others.

        Like


      • There are some issues (roads, water/sewer, military defense, etc) that are harder to fit into this scheme. Anarchists like Rothbard claim to have solutions for those but honestly I’ve never looked into them, because I’m more interested in the monetary aspects and because we’re so far from this situation occurring anyway.

        As to the legal issues, yes it simplifies things when you move them from the city level up to the state and then the federal level. The problem is that when you inevitably get unjust laws, (1) the whole country suffers under them and (2) there are fewer market forces to offset them. I’d prefer the legal patchwork. As to self-sufficiency, what does a city need that the state or federal government provides? It has a tax base, whatever resources are in the area, police, etc. I can’t think of anything other than defense.

        As to currency, I’d rather have wildcat banking where anyone can issue his own money, than what we have now. Gold is too heavy to move around constantly but you could issue paper or electronic entries against it with 100% backing. The system we have now still uses this basic form, except (1) instead of gold we have “reserves” that can be created from nothing, and (2) banks are allowed to lend out multiples of these reserves. Those are the two things (at least) that I’d get rid of.

        Banks that engage in fractional (aka fraudulent or fictional) reserve lending would be bankrupted by runs from their competitors. Customers would be required to monitor the solvency of their banks, and no doubt businesses would arise to fulfill this need. That might sound onerous, but hell you have to become educated in order to protect yourself from legalized predation by banks as it is.

        State-sized, I’d take that readily.

        Like


  23. on December 3, 2013 at 12:12 pm Chris from Dublin

    If, during the 1980’s, anyone had supposed that the USSR would collapse, they would have been ridiculed. At the end of 1991, the USSR collapsed and the Russian Empire returned to a much older shape – Russia and its western backyard being Ukraine and Belarus (in ancient Russian “Ukraine” means “hinterland”).

    The USA will collapse. When this happens it is likely that the new shape of the entity will focus on the states becoming, at least in effect, independent countries. The collapse of the USA is unlikely to be as relatively profound as that of the USSR (or of Yugoslavia, which was horrific). White Americans are of the same stock and all Americans tend to use the same language so the ethnic definition of the components of the USSR and Yugoslavia is missing, thankfully.

    News from Ireland: over the weekend just gone I was at a wedding at Adare Manor in County Limerick. It was a great hooley altogether, and everyone had a terrific time. I met a few Americans, very wealthy and successful individuals who had made money through the IT industry. Everyone was very nice and civil but what struck me about the Americans was their reluctance to say anything “offensive” or that might cause an “issue” whatsoever – this is pure SWPL guilt at its most stark. What a pity the hotel couldn’t make a decent cup of Irish-style tea. Do north Americans need everything to be sweetened???

    The M7 is a straight motorway connecting Limerick with Dublin. In true Irish fashion there are no service stations so on the way back to Dublin I pulled into Nenagh, County Tipperary, to get a cup of coffee. It took me half an hour to find anywhere open. The main street of the town, the county town of Tipperary, was littered with “FOR SALE” and “TO LET” signs. Most shops and pubs were closed.

    Bring the flames …

    Like


    • Actually, other than ensuring our ability to defend ourselves, we had the CIA talking about it since the Nixon Kitchen Debates. You know, in the 50’s when Nixon had an impromptu ‘debate’ vs Khrushchev? We were more worried they would go Red Dawn toward the 1970’s – domino theory be damned – than nuke us. Different scenario than the movie though, Hollywood loved the Cubans for some reason while the USSR wouldn’t have invited them. Khrushchev was (to say the least) unimpressed with Castro despite the public face. That’s why there were USSR missile crews on the island. Even in Europe, they distrusted their vassal states in the Bloc. There was no way in hell he was going to give Castro missiles under his control. The guy was considered a nut.

      We knew if we could hold them off, they couldn’t possibly sustain their system. They were building too many guns and not making enough butter. Now you guys don’t get the reference ‘guns or butter’ read up on it.

      A lot of people wrongly assign the fall of the USSR to Reagan. Reagan didn’t cause them to fall, he held them off. That was laudable, and required. The USSR, however was undone by 50 years of wanting Coca Cola, Denim Jeans, et al. We simply had more in view. Of course that was all deficit financed as well. We just did it differently.

      As far as the US collapsing due to insurmountable debt, I’ll wait and see. A lot of the debt effect is the economy itself. Example: under Clinton economists were actually worried the US was on track to pay it’s debt off completely in a couple of decades. Illogical right? Paying off the debt might be bad for the US? US Debt was (and is) considered a ‘safe instrument’ in the world. Not only that, but US Debt helps ensure that it remains the ‘default’ currency. In true form, inflation has to be monitored for that to remain true. (Many factors in economics)

      Mind you, a few years earlier (under Reagan with ballooning deficits, and then G. H.W. Bush had economic stagnation) people were worried about default and Japan owning America. See: Prayer of the Rollerboys for a laugh brought onscreen by Hollywood. Also: See the sheer terror when people saw ‘they’ bought Rockefeller Center. Oh did you ever hear: ‘AMERICA IS DOOMED!!! DOOM!!! DOOMED WE SAY! DEBT WILL KILL AMERICA IN 5 YEARS! AMERICA WILL BE OWNED BY JAPAN!!’ Nowadays suggesting that Japan will own America would get you laughed at by people. We’ve replaced Japan with China (DOOM! DOOM I SAY!! HEED ME OR THE DEBT WILL HAVE CHINA OWNING AMERICA!!! DOOM!!!!!!!) but I take all such pronouncements with a grain of salt.

      This is also similar to the stagflation that Carter endured. Even then unemployment stayed constant over the term. Dumb luck about the Arab Oil Embargo. He got nailed for Nixon supporting the Israelis in the Yom Kippur war. Even that wasn’t fully Nixon’s fault, he was screwed over by decisions made by Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin after WWII.

      Amazing long chain arguments. History is rife with bad decisions coming to fruition decades later. The deposing of the Iranian government by the CIA, the government Britain installed in Iraq, the support of the Saud family in Arabia, Domino theory, supporting Mao and Chiang Kai-Shek against Japan, the support of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Nothing is ever as simple as it seems, well except for feminist duplicity.

      A hundred years of questionable decisions coming home to bite the anglo world in the ass. We can’t ignore them completely, but whenever we get involved we seem to create shit for ourselves decades later. No way to win thus far: even nuking them would just piss off the Russians and have them nuke us over the fallout effects.

      Oh well, flame on.

      Like


      • Great post, and I remember that stuff too. In fact, I remember the speech by Bill Clinton during his first term where he went on TV and said that to save the 30 year bond market, he was going to start increasing the debt rather than paying it off. Literally, that’s what he said.

        My jaw dropped. It was in among some other stuff I guess so I don’t remember anyone else noticing.

        An explanation I’ve seen for the Arab Oil Embargo was Nixon’s going off gold convertibility for foreigners holding dollars. The story goes that eventually they had to simply accept the dollars, unbacked by gold, for our oil. Perhaps the US Navy helped cure them of too many ideas of developing markets, but anyway that seems like a plausible explanation for the embargo. And it makes Nixon into a huge hero, so that the Fed can just print and we can buy oil with what they print — the birth of the Petrodollar.

        Like


      • I don’t remember Clinton saying that, but I was talking about economists not him.

        I just wish that we could tell a big chunk of the world to piss off. We can’t really become isolationist, but it seems everything we (and most of Western Europe for that matter) does comes back to bite us in the ass 10-50 years later. ESPECIALLY in the Middle East and Central Asia.

        Like


      • on December 4, 2013 at 5:07 pm Carlos Danger

        Because we don’t control our foreign policy, we react to what AIPAC says.

        Like


  24. Anyone in this thread or in any other forum who advocates for immigration of non-white or otherwise intractably incompatible populations into white countries for any reason, is an advocate of genocide.

    This is not a hyperbole. It is a calm, reasoned statement of fact, supported by the 1948 UN charter on the prevention of genocide.

    Go, look in the mirror. If you are for immigration, just tell yourself “I advocate the genocide of European people or their diaspora in whole or in part.”

    Say this to yourself, and live in truth with your deepest motivations, and then come back here and argue away.

    Like


  25. My opinion: the moment someone starts throwing around epithets like teabagger and such, they have zero credibility.

    Like


    • Tell that to the people called leftoids for disagreeing.

      I’m maker. I could probably buy pretty much anything I want. I own a Mooney Acclaim Type S for fuck’s sake (well one of my corporations does)

      But I’m the lazy ‘leftoid’ for pointing out stupidity. I’m a leftoid for calling out lack of ideas. I’m a leftoid for actually offering ideas.

      Bitch, please. That makes me a leftoid? You sound like a ‘good party member’. You didn’t get that in two seconds: get your lazy, uneducated, useless ass to the Googles and look it up.

      That’s what you become when you sign up for one party but stop holding t accountable. Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин welcomes you to your true home. Welcome to the party, comrade. Thought is not necessary, we will think for you. Ideas are not necessary, we will come up with your ideas.

      Like


      • At least Stalin offed a whacking bunch of leftoids himself in the purges. He wasn’t entirely bad.

        Perhaps you aren’t necessarily a leftoid in the economic Marxist sense. Rather, you seem to be more like the business-uber-alles Establishment wing of the GOP. But that’s leftoid in a different sense — in the sense of considering all humans interchangeable. It’s like George W. Bush, who helped 0bama get elected because he assumed that Mexicans could become Americans, and that Middle Easterners could take up democracy.

        But as the new black ‘n muzzie blight in Western Europe shows, assuming a human is a human is a human is an extremely dangerous assumption, and one that’s quickly shown to be bankrupt. The problems with bringing in hordes of Chinese and Indians into Western countries are more subtle, but there nonetheless. The business class sees Chinese and Indians as better because they’re cheaper, plus you can gain brownie points with the leftoids by eschewing young white American talent for them — but they’ve been shown to be flops at developing anything.

        And now they’re here.

        The bottom line is, the rationale for any immigration, aside from marriage, is over.

        Like


      • Actually the Republican Saint (Reagan) is the guy that led the amnesty call.

        Yes, Stalin technically was a hard core right winger. Not in the Republican sense, no the man was a power mad dictator.

        Personally, and this comes from experience, you have to see what the person is like for immigration. I’ve known enough Indians to know how useless some of their (IT degrees in particular) professionals are at working. Again, you have to take the best and brightest. I want the ones able to earn a place at CMU, Harvard, MIT, MTU, et al., to stay AFTER they complete their degree. When anyone, I don’t care if they’re orange with pink polka dots at that point, earns a technical degree (IT, Medical, et al) from any of those schools (even state schools like UW-Madison, Texas, et al) they’ve proven they’re thinkers and makers.

        They can keep the ditch diggers and refuse from their own inadequate schools.

        Like


      • You gotta love how lefties equate conservatism with totalitarianism. See Starlin was really a conservative, so communism is saved. It was the evil conservatives who screwed that up too. The sad part is that America is now so stupid that it works.

        Like


      • Fuck no communism isn’t saved. Communism, just like Laissez-Faire Capitalism is functionally unworkable because of human behavior. They both (Marx and Rand) failed in a way that’s all too common: they believed that humans would be ‘better’ under their system.

        All dictators are functionally right wing, anarchists are functionally left wing. I know it’s not pretty (nor does it fit the narrative) but just because you call yourself a ‘man of the people’ doesn’t mean shit.

        Anyone with an iota of common-sense knows that anyone claiming to have a perfect system is a liar. Doesn’t matter if they claim to have perfected a form of government or the stock market. No system is perfect, it’s impossible with humans involved. Why do you think that the market has the ‘thundering herd’?

        My only problem with the arguments put forth here is that they ignore basic humanity similar to Marx or Rand. They ignore human nature.

        Like


      • Perhaps our problem is a matter of definitions. Why don’t you define what you consider “right wing”, and while your at it go ahead and explain how that relates to totalitarianism.

        Like


      • “At least Stalin offed a whacking bunch of leftoids himself in the purges. He wasn’t entirely bad”

        Dizzy with Success.

        Like


  26. The amount of undesirable immigration can be tied to welfare levels. A State can simply defer welfare entitlement for two years for all new arrivals and, voila! immigration ends.

    Like


    • Excellent idea! I think they’re looking at using this idea in Britain. I’ve advocated for something similar (minimum employment time to receive benefits except for political or religious refuges)

      Like


    • Fine idea. I am sure Obama and the leftists would call you a racist. But they can call me that too, I agree with you.

      Like


  27. I say, let the fucking heat build up.

    Like


  28. It’s too late for all that. This like so many other issues will now only be solved by the oldest form of negotiation.

    Like


    • Agree.
      If you believe the Constitution or political party or blah blah blah can fix the U. $.A, you’re shit out of luck.
      This place is a Goyim Slave Plantation.

      Like


  29. I spent some serious time considering the question of an American separation, doing research for a novel I was thinking about writing. I ended up dropping the whole idea, because I can’t make the story credible. The different factions in America have become too codependent on each other to survive independently, and we’re thoroughly stuck with each other.

    Like


    • I think one possible scenario is to have Fedgov blow up due to horrendous levels of unfundable debt. (If Japan blows up within the next few years for that reason, it could provide a good template.) The states could then form a customs union without a Fedgov, sort of like the CIS in the former Soviet Union, with free movement of goods and people, but each state being independent.

      Like


    • Oh you could make it believeable, but you’ll need to take into account the ragnarok level of violence and destruction coupled wifh mass starvation before you are able to create believable ethnopolitical states.
      Good luck selling that little bit of blasphemy to your average
      Family guy fan.

      Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 5:14 pm Carlos Danger

        I estimate it would take 30-40 million deaths.

        Like


      • But Carlos, the question is who and how.
        Those who manage to survive the initial onslaught of the rampaging inner city yard apes will most certainly starve to death within the first month. Couple starvation with the violence and the death doll could easily rise to a third or more of the current population within the first year. I’m doubtful the U.N. would even show up within that first year. Better to attempt to mop up than contain the detonation.

        Like


      • on December 3, 2013 at 7:09 pm Carlos Danger

        Country people will generally prevail and those who have the sense to ally themselves with such people. They will need manpower to keep what they have and the survivors who ally with them will need food. Cities and suburbs will be a wasteland. Pussy will plummet in price however. Any man who’s handy with an Armalite should have his pick of women for a harem. They’ll be a burden though.

        Like


      • Those females will be more mouths to feed and potential death for any man foolish enough to fall asleep around her. Pump and dump will take on a whole new level before stability returns.

        Like


      • I think not. I see locusts, and realize that one angry guy getting into the NG depots (which are located near cities, more appropriately cities grew around them) and arming your rampaging group and bang! They now have tanks (more realistically LAVs – range is about double) and your AR-10’s and 15’s (and similar) are useless. I’ve seen what an LAV can do to a house in <15 seconds – the country folk without a completely self-sufficient (and hidden) underground bunker storing EVERYTHING would not survive. Unless your farmers / country folks are packing anti-vehicle missiles it's very iffy. The anti-IED armor upgrade will truly limit the use of homemade explosive munitions, even stickies.

        Now the only question is: would the in the smaller states be able to hold out against the onslaught of larger states. You're talking waves of people with little training in comparison to a military, but the sheer amount of hardware and numerical superiority (bigger states) would probably be unpleasant to say the least.

        Texas would be the best situated at the time, but water could become a problem quickly. Fracking would probably stop out of necessity, it uses a LOT of water. I don't live in: flood areas, wildfire zones, drought areas, et al. I live in the Midwest near freshwater for a reason. Yeah, it might get cold. I can bundle up, but they can't drink sand or saltwater.

        Supply lines will become an issue. However, think locusts. Larry Niven had a great book about a comet strike, Lucifer's Hammer. There was a group of cannibals that moved from place to place like locusts. Now in the book they lacked hardware (most of the hardware was destroyed by mass flooding from weeks of torrential rain) and in fact only a couple of military bases survived the calamity with hardware intact enough to be useful.

        The 'survivors' would likely have to deal with a roaming bands of heavily armed thugs stealing everything as they move across the country. The best thing would be for the thugs to run into each other, and hopefully fight. The bad would be if one had a semi-charismatic leader with a penchant for violence. Think Africa, Central America, Central Asia, other unpleasant places that have had dictators or governments with a love of violence.

        We might also get lucky and have charismatic guys (that isn't a total ass) organize the troops at the bases. Cross fingers.

        Like


      • As much as I’d like to see a “hard reset” because I feel quite certain I would prosper in such a nightmare, I am less and less beleiving anything this drastic will ever come to pass. Our fully incorporated police state and military are mighty indeed.

        And growing every day. If the wheels come off, these entities will go into full on martial law mode and it won’t be pretty. It is more likely cities will become pirson camps as biggov attempts to recover.

        Like


      • Plausible scenario.
        There’s always the option of another world war with China and friends, but it’s timing isn’t right for the next few decades more than likely.

        Like


    • I agree with you, but your imaging a schism along geographical lines that forms separate but functional states. I don’t believe that will be the case. I imagine a decent of the present order slowly into totalitarianism and then finally chaos.

      Like


  30. They tried this in Arizona, cracking down on illegal immigrants, and Barack Obama’s federal government sued them! Madness.

    I personally look forward to the left eating its own. It will be a beautiful thing when Somalis start showing up at “I care so much for the poor I only vote Progressive” white suburban chick’s doorstep.

    What is best in life? To hear the lamentation of the leftist women.

    Like


  31. “You start putting plans under a microscope, nothing’s gonna make sense alright?”

    –Charlie, It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia

    You nitpicking Negative Nanciess are missing the big picture. Dissect CH’s immigration proposal all you want, he touches on the right theme: Devolution of political power is the most practical, hopeful strategy for making the world a better place. Mass deportation, amending the Constitution, violent revolution, starting a Third Party, backing Tea Party Republicans—these ideas suck compared to the time-tested strategies of nullification and secession. The 20th-century model of the large, democratic nation-state is dying. Bring on local governance! I quote Hans-Hermann Hoppe:

    “I think that a world consisting of tens of thousands of distinct countries, regions and cantons, and hundreds of thousands of independent free cities such as the present-day ‘oddities’ of Monaco, Andorra, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Hong Kong, and Singapore, would be a world of unprecedented prosperity, economic growth, and cultural advancement.”

    http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/6

    Like


  32. CH’s idea is going back toward the Articles of Confederation. While I would strongly approve, the Federalists managed to sneak in the Constitution, and they enforced it successfully in the Civil War, so it’s a tough row to hoe now.

    CH proposes something close to the European schengen system. Each country there grants citizenship by its own rules, but once you’re in any of the countries, you have freedom to travel to and live in any of the others.

    How does CH’s idea deal with someone who finds a state that will accept them as an immigrant, say Massachusetts, then once safely there moves to Texas via the interstate freedom to travel? This game would be played. Oklahoma would be unable to reject the refuse from Mexico coming via California.

    I think a better idea, and easier to imagine working, is to go back to the Bracero program. Canada is currently running a similar program. We have guest laborers as requested by businesses, they are admitted for a fixed period of time to do that work, then they leave. They are not given a pathway to citizenship. After all there is already a pathway to citizenship, it’s called the normal process where you apply in the standard way, and they are all able to use that process.

    Like


    • Migrant workers
      It isn’t legalized slavery
      If we don’t call it slavery…
      It’s just legalized.

      Like


      • It’s voluntary. Nobody is kidnapping them from their home countries to come here. Do you have a comprehension problem?

        Like


      • So you’re OK with indentured servitude? I’ve even heard that slavery was never meant to be a permanent condition, and I think that is probably true, since there is a financial burden in taking care of an elderly slave. That it was only made permanent so that white indentured servants could feel superior to black slaves.

        Like


      • For the strawberry season, yes I am OK with temporary work for a term.

        Notice the shilling that the Bracero idea brings out, maybe it’s a really good idea!

        Like


      • Slavery really is a natural phenomenon,
        Present at all times in all places throughout human history. The degree and institutionalization vary, but up until very recently it was accepted by main stream society.
        Now we just don’t call it slavery, and the slaves have a few more privileges, but it’s all the same to the elites.
        Humanity is gonna humanity.

        Like


      • Nah you misunderstood me.
        I’m talking about how the U.S. has a new caste of “voluntary” slaves. We don’t call them slaves, but they aren’t exactly free either.
        It’s more like slavery 2.0.
        I prefer slavery 1.0 personally.

        Like


      • The “illegals” are more free than the college-loan debt-slaves.

        Like


      • “slavery 1.0” was basically privatized welfare. A system where old and busted Negros were cared for as members of the villa.

        Like


      • Animal husbandry is expensive business.
        Caring for old busted beasts of burden is something you factor into the budget.

        Like


      • “Time on the Cross” is a good book about this.

        Like


  33. Regardless of how many or what type of laws you pass, it is virtually impossible to shut down a land border, especially not one that is thousands of miles long.
    Sea coasts are much more easily patrolled and closed, especially if the nearest (foreign) land is several hundreds or thousands of miles away.
    Reason No.1 why Britain hasn’t been invaded for nigh on 1,000 years: Water.
    Airfields are the easiest ports of entry to control.
    I don’t think we have to be too worried about mass immigration form Canada – unless it gets even colder – and most coastal areas and major international airports happen to be in ‘blue’ states.

    Like


  34. Funny because it’s always liberals from states far from the border attacking people from states like Texas or Arizona for “racist” immigration laws.

    Like


  35. Quite unrealistic, so let’s not do the mental masturbation thing.

    I’ve seen white hippy types in Detroit who are proud of “toughing it out” and living like a third worlder. You gotta understand, some of these people care more about their ideology and “being loving” than they do personal interest, let alone national interest. It’s like a mental illness.

    More importantly, the root of all this is not the law, it is plain emotions and tribal self interest. Minorities support things that hurt or diminish their white rivals, and white liberals support them out of compassion/stupidity. So its attitudes that must change before anything else can.

    You could start by emphasizing national identity to boost nationalism. Always make a distinction between American, and Other (the left hates this). At the moment, many Latinos simply sympathize with illegals just because they’re also Latino. Understandable, but not good for national cohesion. That needs to stop. One needs to create an atmosphere where national identity is more important for a minority than ethnic or cultural heritage, which will have an assimilating effect.

    Second is pushback, something your conservatives have no idea how to do. An argument with a liberal usually puts them on the defensive, explaining why they’re not racist, or how they’re also a victim, or how their idea actually helps everyone, etc. That’s not pushback. You need to straightup proclaim your ideas in the name of self-interest. That even if someone is anti-illegal because of racism, that person would still be right, bigotry irrelevant. That nobody, especially not illegals, are entitled to love or rights, and that they benefit from an extraordinary privilege simply by being allowed to exist in the country. Remember, every time the charge of hatefulness is used on an opponent, it dulls slightly as a political weapon.

    And finally, the reduction of empathy, the overabundance of which plagues every prosperous country. Most Americans, even non-liberals, search for moral justifications in politics. For them, being “equal” or “tolerant” is the bottom line. This is why a lot of you will call each other a bigot, then wait for the other guy to respond, genuinely believing that calling someone mean constitutes an argument. That anyone who isn’t thinking with such emotions is an outlier, a Hitler, a sociopath incapable of feelings, etc. The answer to this, is exposure. You must make it very clear in debate, that pragmatics and interests usually trumps love, empathy, “humanity” or any other synonymous feel-goodism. Let them know that virtually everyone acts on this priority, whether or not they admit it, or are even aware of it. Do NOT try to bolster your position with victimhood, even if you are a victim. This plays into their hands, where they will usually claim even greater victimhood. This has to be done on a scale large enough so that the general public, even those who disagree, is at least aware that empathy is not the ultimate reason to do anything.

    The hardest part of all this? Courage. Which a lot of you don’t have. I’ve stood up in a classfull of young, idealistic students and called everybody a fucking idiot for believing we should drain our country’s lakes and ship the freshwater to some African shithole in oil tankers, because love! The prof hated me because he was a lefty, the other kids hated me because they were naive SWPL ‘tards, even the other Chinese kids hated me because I was making Chinese people look bad. But I was right. 99% of their protests was some variation of calling me mean, not actual reasons. That’s what you need to do, not circlejerk with people who already agree with you.

    The left cannot win on the basis of pure, emotionless logic, which is why they resort constantly to shaming and sarcasm. You need to have the guts to to say something like this in person (using racism as an example):

    “So I can be racist to you, but you can’t be racist to me? And you want to be equals? And you want me to sympathize with you? Be your social justice ally? How about you go fuck yourself?”

    Actual hate not necessary. Understandably harder for white guys. But if you don’t want your country turning into some sort of impotent commune, where abortion/gay rights/trivial social bullshit is somehow more important than money/geopolitics/national interest, then it’s time to stand up.

    Like


    • on December 3, 2013 at 8:51 pm Carlos Danger

      Good post. Bravo. You have to undo the ideological subversion we’ve learned since birth. But that is what you’re talking about here.

      Like


    • it is absolutely fair to be racist you have to be equally critical of all races including your own.

      Like


    • You are counseling what Lawrence Auster called “right-liberalism.” It’s false counsel.

      Are you familiar with blogger/commenter Obsidian? You are just like him, with your womanish passive-aggression, seething resentment of Whites, and your fake concern.

      And you don’t know shit about Detroit hippies.

      Like


    • To some extent, I kind of enjoy ‘living like a 3rd worlder’, rather than in the plastic mall fakery of Starbucks filled with Ipads and googling cyber-nerds who aren’t sure if they’re bi or just trannies with spare parts.
      But I wouldn’t want to do it in a polluted, rusting hellhole that freezes half the year and where everyone hates my guts simply because I’m the wrong culah.
      Tent on the beach would be more like it.
      This area is heavily Hispanic – about 50% – and they are FIERCELY tribal, meaning they will support other Hispanics to the last drop, no matter what.
      That will never stop.
      So if a Republican/Tea/Conservative party wants the Latino vote, they MUST give them a Latino candidate or a candidate with STRONG Latino ties.
      NOTHING else will work.

      Like


    • You Chinese? You play joke?

      Like


  36. My are the trolls thick this time of year.

    Like


  37. Instead of a national immigration policy, why not devolve border control to the individual states?

    Hans-Hermann Hoppe: Why not devolve border control to the individual property owners?

    Like


    • Ultimately, yes.

      It’s a long way from here to there.

      Like


      • Truly Scrumptious: [referring to helping the children] It’s a beautiful dream Caractacus but, I don’t see how it’s gonna help them.

        Like


      • Hey, Matt, have you read any of Gene Wolfe’s novels? He started conservative (RCC style), and he’s getting more and more reactionary. The last two (Home Fires and The Land Across) are really interesting from a dark enlightenment POV.

        Like


      • No, but I saw your reference to Wolfe in some post (I think it was about your gravatar picture), checked him out on Amazon, and saved him to my list for browsing.

        I have to say, I’m not big into the SciFi/Fantasy genre.

        Like


  38. Instead of a national immigration policy, why not devolve border control to the individual states?

    You know what this mean? The break-up of the United States in probably more pieces than the Soviet Union. I say good riddance. The Solid South would become the most powerful country on Earth, an yet none of the new countries would be strong enough to have the malicious impact that American currently has in the World

    Like


  39. […] If it’s open borders the smug coastal leftoids really want, then give it to them, good and hard.… […]

    Like


  40. Tremendously prescient. I’ve been thinking along the same lines for some time now. A separation is in order, it would provide a much-needed societal pressure release valve,possibly save a lot of lives in the long run.

    Like


  41. […] The US needs state-level border laws. […]

    Like