Good read
Up Next: Open Gays In The Military And Amnesty For Illegals
-Chuck Baldwin
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=1027
O.......M.........G!!!!!!!!!! What are they gonna allow next!?!?!?!? ( that's sarcasm in case you miss it)
;D ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: pamagain on March 26, 2010, 03:06:05 PM
O.......M.........G!!!!!!!!!! What are they gonna allow next!?!?!?!? ( that's sarcasm in case you miss it)
Yes I know... Holy Crap it's almost as if they were people..... /me shakes his head
Quote from: jerry wagner on March 26, 2010, 05:26:43 PM
Yes I know... Holy Crap it's almost as if they were people..... /me shakes his head
Might be people but their criminals. Why give amnesty to people who break the law.
In no way shape or form should homosexuals be allowed in the military, nor should there be co-ed submarines.
Grant Amnesty to illegals?...absolutely not, they're criminals, get rid of them.
Aren't there some high ranking military officers who are gay? How did they attain their rank? As far as the subs, I agree. Take 'em away from the men and turn them over to the women, no more problem. ( just poking, honest ;D) I wish people would stop making the sex aspects of everything so important and just go get the job done.
Diane, I agree to a point. There are certain situations where having a women serve along side men is not a good idea. If the Navy wanted to field all women subs, I'd have no problem with that.
As far as the gay issue...so long as they stay in the closet and no one knows about it, fine. However, when the vast majority of military personnel say that they don't want gays in the ranks then they shouldn't be allowed.
Billy,
We know that our military branches overwhelmingly DO NOT want the don't ask, don't tell policy changed but what do we know. We were only lowly NCO's. The armchair Generals know what's good for our military. Just a couple weeks ago the top brass from all services voiced their opinion at capitol hill. The Marines, Army and Air Force do not want the policy changed and I never did hear what the Navy had to say about it.
Quote from: jarhead on March 26, 2010, 07:16:43 PM
Billy,
We know that our military branches overwhelmingly DO NOT want the don't ask, don't tell policy changed but what do we know. We were only lowly NCO's. The armchair Generals know what's good for our military. Just a couple weeks ago the top brass from all services voiced their opinion at capitol hill. The Marines, Army and Air Force do not want the policy changed and I never did hear what the Navy had to say about it.
ROTFLMBO Leave it to a Marine to remind us that all the navys good for is a ride to the action! :)
Steve,
Didn't mean to imply that at all. I just never read on the news or seen it on the boob tube, what the navy had to say about it, but I seriously dobt they want it changed either. No sir, after watching Navy Corpsmen in action you will never hear me trash talk the Navy unless it's in fun. But the army is a differant story Larry---Billy . :)
Quote from: jarhead on March 26, 2010, 08:30:55 PM
Steve,
Didn't mean to imply that at all. I just never read on the news or seen it on the boob tube, what the navy had to say about it, but I seriously dobt they want it changed either. No sir, after watching Navy Corpsmen in action you will never hear me trash talk the Navy unless it's in fun. But the army is a differant story Larry---Billy . :)
LOL i know that, my sons trash talked them in fun. :)
Not all of the leadership supports don't ask, Adm. Mullen supports a repeal of Don't ask... just as a note...
As a Note----- Jerry, Adm Mullen was appointed CJCS by BHO. Would you really expect him to go against Barrack ?
Quote from: jarhead on March 26, 2010, 08:57:38 PM
As a Note----- Jerry, Adm Mullen was appointed CJCS by BHO. Would you really expect him to go against Barrack ?
Frankly irrelevant... you stated that the military and its leadership was firmly against repealing don't ask despite the fact that the Chief of the JCS was in favor and despite the fact that most polling of the military only shows tepid support for maintaining don't ask with 37% in favor of maintenance, 26% in favor of repeal and 37% with the opinion either way.
BREAKING NEWS JERRY !!!!
Marine General Says He'd Give Gays Separate Rooms
FOXNews.com
The comment, by Gen. James Conway, is the latest pushback by a small but vocal faction of senior military leaders opposed to a repeal of the 1993 law known as "don't ask, don't tell."
WASHINGTON -- The Marine Corps' commandant said he won't force his troops to bunk with gays on base and would give them separate rooms if Congress votes to allow openly gay service.
The comment, by Gen. James Conway, is the latest pushback by a small but vocal faction of senior military leaders opposed to a repeal of the 1993 law known as "don't ask, don't tell."
President Obama says the ban is unfair, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates has launched a lengthy study to determine how to allow gays to serve openly without hurting military effectiveness.
Among the questions to be answered is whether changes to housing policies would even be necessary.
Conway, a known opponent of repealing the law, suggested in an interview published Friday by Military.com that he already knows it would be a logistical hurdle. On base, Marines typically bunk two-to-a-room.
"I would not ask our Marines to live with someone who is homosexual if we can possibly avoid it," he said.
"And to me that means we have to build BEQs (bachelor enlisted quarters) and have single rooms," he said.
Conway's remarks foreshadow the rocky political debate ahead. Gates has asked lawmakers to keep troops "out of the political dimension" of the issue, but some uniformed officers are willingly jumping in.
Earlier this month, a three-star Army general called on troops and their families to "speak up" against allowing gays to serve openly.
Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, who heads Army forces for U.S. Pacific Command, was publicly admonished by Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen for using his rank to advocate a political position and challenge the president.
"There's an opportunity in this process for everyone from junior to senior" to have an opportunity to comment, Mullen said.
Mullen added that military personnel disagreeing with the nation's policies should "vote with your feet."
Then fire him
Brilliant idea Jerry !!!! Hell, let's just discharge everyone that does not want gays to serve openly in the military. Hell why we're at it, lets make the uniform of the day, be a jockey strap & sailor cap !!!! Then we can house all that's left in the Howard Fair Barn. It should hold what's left.
Quote from: jerry wagner on March 26, 2010, 09:16:13 PM
Then fire him
Why? First of all, why does the military have to make special concessions concerning this. Last i checked being gay wasn't on the list of duties preformed by military personnel. So it should have no bearing on the military whatsoever. You go to work shut up sit down do your job. Thats what you are paid for. Their not being paid for their weenie washing capabilities.
Quote from: srkruzich on March 26, 2010, 09:26:29 PM
Why? First of all, why does the military have to make special concessions concerning this. Last i checked being gay wasn't on the list of duties preformed by military personnel. So it should have no bearing on the military whatsoever. You go to work shut up sit down do your job. Thats what you are paid for. Their not being paid for their weenie washing capabilities.
Never said they were paid for their "weenie washing capabilities" but they should not be discriminated against.
Quote from: jerry wagner on March 26, 2010, 09:27:26 PM
Never said they were paid for their "weenie washing capabilities" but they should not be discriminated against.
Again wheres the discrimination? The last i checked, the military didn't need a few good sheims.
They are discriminating against a group of individuals, how is this confusing?
Tell you what Jerry. If and when they let gays serve openly, you join the service and when you get to bootcamp and have to shower with 75 other men and you drop your bar of soap---let us know how brave you are !!!
Just curious... why do you assume they would be attracted to you? I always wondered why it was assumed that a gay man would **** anything that moved.
Why hell Jerry, that's because I'm such a handsome cuss !!!
Why is it assumed a gay man would###### anything that moved?? Are you so old you can't remember what it was like to be 18-19 years old ?? Hell at that age you were ready if the wind changed directions !!!!
Quote from: jerry wagner on March 26, 2010, 09:30:11 PM
They are discriminating against a group of individuals, how is this confusing?
ok and the problem is?
Quote from: jarhead on March 26, 2010, 09:37:02 PM
Tell you what Jerry. If and when they let gays serve openly, you join the service and when you get to bootcamp and have to shower with 75 other men and you drop your bar of soap---let us know how brave you are !!!
Hey jarhead why not let them. That way the co's can send them in when their pmsy and let them toss pansies at the enemy screaming stop that you bad boys!
Quote from: jarhead on March 26, 2010, 09:50:02 PM
Why hell Jerry, that's because I'm such a handsome cuss !!!
Why is it assumed a gay man would###### anything that moved?? Are you so old you can't remember what it was like to be 18-19 years old ?? Hell at that age you were ready if the wind changed directions !!!!
Uhmm is that a hard number there jarhead, hell i'm that way now at 49 :P
Quote from: srkruzich on March 26, 2010, 09:51:27 PM
ok and the problem is?
That discrimination is wrong. Period.
Quote from: jerry wagner on March 26, 2010, 10:03:29 PM
That discrimination is wrong. Period.
so your saying no matter what you wouldn't discriminate.
OK, Jerry, I'm gonna be serious here---for once !! When I went to bootcamp in 1968 we had almost 20 recruits that got dropped (discharged ) from the platoon during the 8 weeks of recruit training. They joined so must of wanted to be Marines. Were they discriminated against because they washed out ? just because they couldn't physically run the obstacle coarse was that reason to kick them out? Should the non hackers be dropped to a lower level and formed a Battalion of their own so as not to be decriminated against ??
Quote from: jarhead on March 26, 2010, 10:09:47 PM
OK, Jerry, I'm gonna be serious here---for once !! When I went to bootcamp in 1968 we had almost 20 recruits that got dropped (discharged ) from the platoon during the 8 weeks of recruit training. They joined so must of wanted to be Marines. Were they discriminated against because they washed out ? just because they couldn't physically run the obstacle coarse was that reason to kick them out? Should the non hackers be dropped to a lower level and formed a Battalion of their own so as not to be decriminated against ??
Dang jarhead, that sounds just like our current educational system.
I think I saw some slam against the Army. Was that you, Jarhead?
We all know the Marines are sent in first to wipe out the enemy. They are trained killers and go in obliterating anything and everything in order to secure the objective. Kinda makes ya wonder what kind of idiot wants to do that.
Then you got the Army who has to go in and do the job right and then put things back together again. The Army rebuilds the infrastructure and gets things back to normal.
So, in reading this thread to R.A.M.B.O., he is somewhat insulted along with me. He is suggesting that we withdraw our application for membership in the bunker. He has decided to cut his tanning bed time in half in order to begin digging his own bunker in our back yard. I tried to dissuade him from this idea, but he is becoming determined to dig his own bunker. That might take some time what with his small paws, but he says he can do it.
Larryj
Larry, Tell R.A.M.B.O. to quit digging before he wears the polish off his toe nails and has to go get a pedicure. I DID NOT trash talk the army---I just left it so I could in the future if the need arises.
Great---that's just great !! Now R.A.M.B.O. decides not to live in my bunker !! After running a 220V wire to hook up his tanning bed he bails like a rat on a sinking ship. That's just peachy keen !!! Maybe it's better this way though because it aint really a tanning bed but just an old toaster oven I had laying around.
Our troops have said that they don't want homosexuals in the ranks. If we allow this to happen it will only serve to cause tension, and a breakdown of unit cohesion and essprit de corp. As it stands homosexuals are not being discriminated against, they can serve just not openly, so long as Command doesn't ask and the gays don't tell. It is no different than our troops not being allowed to have long hair or beards. Not only that, but if this is forced on our troops against their wishes isn't that discrimination against them?
I just can't imagine that many homosexuals would enlist in the military, but I guess there are those that do. When I first moved to California, I was working for a company in Lakewood that had a branch in Hollywood, the main store. All orders were called in to the Hollywood store. That was my job. I became friends with the guy on the other end of the line and later found out he was gay. I was somewhat shocked because he was "normal looking" and not what I pictured a gay guy would be like. I didn't have much to do with him after I found out, other than calling in orders on the phone. I also found out that he was born in Canada and had been in the Air Force there before coming to the states. He was a pilot (he said). I was pretty naive at the time coming from a small town existence where people trusted each other. What to believe? I don't know, but I just can't imagine that many homosexuals would enlist and I CAN imagine how they would be treated if the guys in the unit found out they were gay.
As far as the bunker, it is too late. On his daily walk yesterday, we passed by the local Home Depot hardware store and he hired several of the Mexican fellows who hang out in the parking lot looking for work. R.A.M.B.O. says they work cheap and he will give them cervezas and papas for lunch. I was mistaken in that I thought he was going to do the work himself. Silly me. What with the 20 or so guys he hired, the bunker should be done soon. In fact, R.A.M.B.O. has informed me that on our walk today, he wants to go into said Home Depot and pick out wallpaper.
Larryj
What is there about the idea of a gay male that makes you uncomfortable? Is it because you think they will come on to you? Just curious.
No diane , I don't worry about a gay coming on to me but statistics show more gays test postive for HIV and other STD's than "straights". In a combat zone, or at least back in my days, no one had rubber gloves including our beloved Corpsmen. I HAVE put battle dressings on gun shot & Schrapnel wounds because one "Doc " couldn't be every where at once And I HAVE put bloody KIA's in a body bag like I'd imaginge any other grunt has done. Did I know if the WIA / KIA had "bad blood " . No !!!! But in the same situation if i knew the guy was gay, would I be as willing to get his blood all over myself ?? guess I'd have to do some soul searching to answer that or be put in the situation to see how i would react. but i think I would have reservations on being so willing to help.
Back in the day, Jarhead, there was no HIV, or at least, we didn't know about it. Must have not have been a problem as like you I handled enough blood.
Diane, do I worry about gay guys coming on to me? No, I don't. The above mentioned gentleman did invite me up to Hollywood for dinner one night and after a few drinks, made a "pass" and I made it clear that I was hetrosexual and I was out of there. He apologized and said he had got the wrong impression of me through our phone chats and invited me to go to a bar and have a few drinks. I went along with it and to my surprise discovered that the bar down the street from the Hollywood store where I had gone for lunch and drinks with many male and female co-workers turned into a gay bar after 6 PM. The only female present was the waitress. However, my "friend" set them straight (no pun intended, or maybe it was) on my preferences and we all had a good time. Oddly enough, one of the guys was a police department psychologist. He helped cops who were stressed on the job. A gay guy coming on to me is just plain disgusting, probably much like some nerdy, ugly, ill-mannered slob coming on to a woman.
Larryj
To you both, HIV in humans didn't exist back in the 60's. We didn't worry much about gloves back then either except for child birth. A number of times I reached into an open bleeder to pinch blood vessels closed. A nerdy slob I could handle, it's the girls that are sometimes a pain. I'm so old now I'm of no interest, but in a college town.... yes, there were a few tries. Being polite usually took care of it. One girl was hard to put off but she eventually settled down and we were able to be friends.
Sitting here reading this thread this morning made me think. (I know, you smell something burning.) I wonder how today's military medics handle things in a war zone. Back when, like as been mentioned, we didn't worry about HIV or anything like that. But, in a combat situation, medics don't wash their hands between wounded patients and I am pretty sure they don't carry a supply of gloves (or maybe they do). It would be interesting to know how today's medics handle that situation.
Larryj
Quote from: larryJ on March 28, 2010, 08:12:57 AM
Sitting here reading this thread this morning made me think. (I know, you smell something burning.) I wonder how today's military medics handle things in a war zone. Back when, like as been mentioned, we didn't worry about HIV or anything like that. But, in a combat situation, medics don't wash their hands between wounded patients and I am pretty sure they don't carry a supply of gloves (or maybe they do). It would be interesting to know how today's medics handle that situation.
Larryj
Whoops, I messed up on Larry's quote
Larry, I would say a medic /Corpsman would do the same thing they did back in our days. When the call came for "CORPSMAN UP " the Doc didn't even think about rubber gloves , even if they had of had them. He did what it took to keep the boy alive and with the HIV that's out there today is just one more reason to keep gays out of the military and before Jerry jumps in here and tells me straight guys can have HIV , I know that, but not at such a high rate. Crap Larry, we need to change the subject before the ol PTSD kicks in !!!
I would have responded earlier to some of these posts but of course I was busy mending my pink panties which are constantly being ripped off my body. I was also picking pansies in my garden to shake at our enemies. I'm amazed I could actually focus to do those things what with all the lustful, sexual thoughts that consume my every moment. With all those thoughts in my head 24/7 I can barely remember to breathe in and breathe out.
Seriously, some of you are so caught up in stereotypes and generalizations about gay men that you don't ever pause to consider that we might actually be human. We have hopes and dreams just like you. We bleed and die for our country just like you. The "special rights" we want are the same ones you take for granted - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; and the right to not lose our jobs or family because of our orientation. I do realize that if you took the time to actually get to know someone who is gay you might have to give up some of your preconceived notions. You are too comfortable in your hate and righteousness. For to admit that we are actually people who desperately love our country is too much for some of you.
I, of course, have no problem with gay people being in the military. At this stage of the game on the world scene can we really afford to turn anyone away who wants to serve? We need all the help we can get.
Many of your arguments sound the same as when blacks were admitted so long ago - loss of unit cohesion, separate barracks, etc. I don't understand people who shout on one hand, "Support our troops, they provide our freedom", and on the other hand have a problem with who provides that freedom.
This is a big issue with many sides to be considered. Jarhead is right about the risks of HIV - however, if I was a medic, I would treat all the men as potential risks. HIV is out there and it does not care what your orientation is.
It would be nice if this topic could be discussed with actual facts instead of what some of you think gay men are. Very few of the gay men I know fit your stereotype. I've met some very masculine gay men and some very prissy straight men. Wouldn't it be nice if we could coexist and actually get to know each other?
Kudos tdub.....you got guts :)
Thanks Pam - I have always appreciated your posts!
Thanks :)
tdub, nice to hear from you again. Some of our conversations do tend to make people feel uncomfortable. I hope I haven't said anything inappropriate. The one girl I had real problems with, the other finally got the message and looked elsewhere and we were able to become good friends.
Diane - you have nothing to worry about. I have also always appreciated your posts!
Well, thanks. ;) I'm not nearly as liberal as a few want to convince themselves I am, but I'm not super conservative either. I consider myself to be a moderate who considers issues and ideas and have been known to change my mind on things if new evidence or information appears. I have stated many times that I don't like ugly generalizations and I don't like it if I catch myself doing it either. People are people. Some are terrible and some are not, period. I think if people would take the time to learn about all kinds of people and countries and cultures, we be much richer for it.
I appreciate the input tdub, all these old military guys on here seem to forget that one of the greatest military minds in the history of the world kept male concubines. I am speaking of Alexander the great.
SDM,
I don't recall seeing anywhere where someone said Gays are not as smart as straights and dtub I don't see where anyone says a gay is not any less a man than a straight, where it comes to being masculine. I have relatives that are gay and I think just as highly as them as I do anyone else. Maybe because of my wise ass comment to Jerry about dropping a bar of soap in the shower should have had a smiley face after it.I wrote that just to rattle Jerry's cage.That is not the point. Point is, MOST of military personel want to keep the policy just like it is, including some gays so why cause problems by changing it. DTUB is right, with all the deployments we need all we can get into the military but you change the law and watch how many join or ship over !! I don't know if dtub was in the service but looks like the rest on this thread,who want the law changed were not in the Military. Interesting . The same ones on here that give lip service to supporting the troops then say things like what's been posted in the past. Now these not might be word for word quotes but went something like----"My husband was in the Army back in the 40's--now that was a real war " ----Really ?? Do I take that to mean Korea, Vietnam or anything since is not a real war ? I had a wise old great uncle that was a WW-I vet and told me once that when you're getting shot at, it's all the same no matter what the war's name is. I imagine Sarge heard the same words from him, Sarges grand-pa.
Oh yea, we had a member say they had a friend "die a needless death in a needless war" refering to Vietnam. That's nice--real nice. I bet the dead "friend" really appreciates that little statement from their "friend" telling them they died in a needless war.
Or when someone said"well we didn't do too good in Vietnam " Meaning what ?? We kicked ass and took names. It wasn't the soldiers fault our Govt. pulled us out and let the country fall to the North. We were long gone so don't blame us.
Sorry for the rant but one last thing---SDM, to say Alex the Great was the greatest miltary mind in the history of the world ?? Alex couldn't have carried Chesty Puller's jock strap !!!!
Jarhead - I apppreciate your comments. I have never served in the military so I lack a perspective that you have. I wish I knew what the attitudes were. ( for the argument and against )
I do have a lot of wishful thinking and hope.
Well, according to one who shall remained unnamed, we didn't lose Vietnam, which never was a declared war (a technicality, I know) and I agree Congress should never have had the influence it did. I don't know a soul on here that isn't eternally grateful to our military whether they were ever in harms way or not. I don't like to see people being asked to "prove it" too often, that can get tiresome, and can lead to hurt and misunderstandings. Jar, keep in mind we still had the draft for Viet Nam and for some that will always make their attitude different. We are still in Korea after all these years and there are serious concerns about that heating up too. Do we still have the luxury of being picky about who is accepted into our armed forces? I sure don't know.
Jar, please reread my post. I said that Alexander the great was one of the greatest military minds in the history of the world, not THE greatest. Sheesh.
SDM,
Again I guess I should have added a smiley face. It was meant as a joke that I guess only OLD Marines (and Larry---and Sarge ) would understand.
Diane, Not sure what you're talking about having to prove anything. You aint gotta prove nothing to me. Would like to know what the draft had to do with anything being talked about here. Should I add a smiley face to show my qestion aint being snotty ? :) :)
Quote from: jarhead on March 28, 2010, 08:03:47 PM
SDM,
Again I guess I should have added a smiley face. It was meant as a joke that I guess only OLD Marines (and Larry---and Sarge ) would understand.
Diane, Not sure what you're talking about having to prove anything. You aint gotta prove nothing to me. Would like to know what the draft had to do with anything being talked about here. Should I add a smiley face to show my qestion aint being snotty ? :) :)
Well everyone knows that ole chesty was the greatest. Though i do consider lee, jackson, and all those good ole southern gents his equal. Took on the north and dang near took washington back then against the odds. Grant only won by attrition. Superior numbers do not equal superior leadership.
Jar, I promise you, you are not a problem.There is another though who enjoys baiting and setting up traps. I'm going to leave it at that. As far as the draft went, since a lot of people didn't really understand why we were in 'Nam there was resentment, especially in families whose lives were disrupted by the draft and whose sons didn't come home. If this country was directly in harms way or we had been directly attacked, it might have been different. But for many the idea of death to prevent the spread of a political idea...communism... in a country so far away, seemed to be a price too high to pay, with no return in the investment, except to the politicians .
It is true that Korea and Vietnam were political wars. The government had to stop the spread of communism in Asia. Many of those drafted, including me, were not really interested in doing that. It was thought by many draft age people that 'where are the communists going to go from there'. Certainly there was no threat to the United States physically. Why should I give up my education plans and separation from my family to fight somewhere that some called meaningless wars. Like Jarhead said, if someone is shooting at you, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference where you are at, it is still a war. When I was drafted, I gave up my college plans, came home to a less than grateful nation and wound up getting divorced from a woman who also didn't understand what I had gone through and wasn't willing to understand and wasn't willing to allow me to readjust to a civilian lifestyle again. As it turns out, it was for the better. God had better plans for me. Also, like Jarhead said, in Vietnam, our troops did the job AS MUCH AS THEY WERE ALLOWED TO BY OUR GOVERNMENT.
As posted on the SLICE OF WRY thread, today is the anniversary of the day the last combat troops pulled out of Vietnam in 1973. I came home from Korea in March 1968 on the same plane carrying flag-draped caskets from Vietnam and when deplaning heard people standing by the fences and gates hollering "baby killers", etc. Absolutely no respect for those guys who lost their life. So what did I accomplish? Something I hope, at least, I have the knowledge that I served my country in a time when it was needed.
I have the utmost respect for all those who served and my never ending sympathy for the families of those who didn't come home.
Sorry for the rant.
Larryj
Well stated dtub.
Larry you got it exactly! :-* Thank you so much by saying much better than I could, what's been in my heart.
I had a couple more thoughts about this topic today. If DADT is overturned I really don't think anything drastic will occur. The gay men and women already serving won't suddenly jump up and run through the streets shouting, " I'm gay, I'm gay! " If anything I think there will be a big sigh of relief and they will simply go back to doing their jobs - without a big cloud of fear over their heads. Now they can really serve without the fear of losing their jobs. And if you're concerned that gay men and women are not brave, think about it. How much bravery does it take to join a military force that is hostile to your presence so you can serve your country? They have a lot more courage than I do.
QuoteHow much bravery does it take to join a military force that is hostile to your presence so you can serve your country?
Good point :)
DTUB,
You are probably right. If DADT is lifted things won't change much. I just know what I read and see on the news and alot of military people say they will get out instead of staying in if the policy changes. I guess we will just have to wait & see. Being gay or straight has nothing to do with how brave a person is.
Diane,
I fully understand how being drafted could make a person feel differant than someone who joined but if we didn't have these un declared wars how is a Marine supposed to get that coveted Combat Action Ribbon and Purple Heart's and all them other nice medals ? Without Vietnam I couldn't get into the VFW and drink them fine Margaritas they make !!!! :)
You know tdub its like who cares. The problem isn't the average gay guy who goes about living life as he/she wants. The problem is the ones who are militant about it and try to force everyone to cater to their whims.
Like i have said before when your at work your at work to do work, not socialize. That goes for straights too. I have been in management unfortunately having to deal with all the drama trauma and I have absolutely no patience for it. You might call it discrimination but i never allowed lifestyle into the business. I nailed not only gay but straights too. As a manager of a department the only thing i was concerned with was doing the job for the boss. My job was to make my boss look good to his boss and my employees job was to make me look good to my boss. The way we did that was to be profitable. There is no place for office romances/affairs/whatever you want.
I worked for MCI for a while in Atlanta and i thought it was the funniest thing i ever saw. They had a blue zone, a pink zone and a area for straights. I never figured out that scenario. Apparantly the gay guys wanted a section of their own, same thing gay women, and the rest of the areas were for straights. IF they wanted equality why the segregation??? I could never figure that out at all.
Now i admit i rattle cages but the truth is i don't care what one does as long as they don't affect my life or try to modify my behaviour or beliefs.
In my opinion, this isn't about the loyalty or bravery of homosexuals. It is about the majority of opinion in our armed forces. The troops don't want gays in the ranks, peroid. If we allow gays to serve openly then we should allow women to serve in combat units without gender segeration. They should also have to share the same barracks, latrines, and showers. If that makes them uncomfortable, oh well. Afterall, isn't that the message being sent? What does it matter if they don't want to shower with a bunch of straight guys that may or may not be eyeballing them?
I've got news for all of you...If this country's borders were being attacked...If there were bombs flying everywhere here, like there are in some parts of the world...You wouldn't give a good you-know-what what anyone's persuasion was...The only thing you'd be interested in would be whether or not they had the ability to shoot straight consistently. We've gotten spoiled in this country...We've forgotten what is really important. You're arguing semantics. I guarantee you...If we were being invaded, no person, gender aside, that I know would give a damn about any of the aforementioned...It would be, rather, a case of them stepping forward, shouldering their gun and asking where they were going to serve...Because...They wouldn't be there to compare statistics...They'd be there to protect this country. Period.
Catwoman, so well said.
Ladies, unfortunately we may find that out sooner than we want or expect it.
Frank, I so agree with you. We may not know what hard times are yet.
Thats all well and good Cat, however, we are NOT being attacked, bombs are NOT flying everywhere, and if that were the case then I would expect everyone to pick up a rifle, not just our military. Our borders are kept safe because of our military and their ability to function as a cohesive unit. That ability is hindered when certain members of their ranks, that they don't want there, are forced upon them. This is not about diversity or equality, which by the way doesn't work in certain situations, its about the troops. You want to support our troops, then support their wishes. And that is that as far as Don't ask Don't tell, things remain the same.
Isn't this really kind of a stupid argument to start with? THERE ARE GAY PEOPLE IN THE ARMED FORCES....do you seriously think the straight people don't actually know who they are?
Personally I don't see the point in the big push to stand on the corner and holler hey I'm gay instead of just keepin on keepin on but then I don't get MOST peoples need to force what they are on other people. I mean good god I got eyes :P I just don't CARE what you are when you go home....I don't worry about sex when I'm at work...it really ain't the time or the place so why should they?
Can anybody explain the need to make a huge point out of what your sexual preference is? Somebody elses orientation doesn't really make me uncomfortable because I am comfortable with MINE. May not underSTAND it but it doesn't bother me. If a gay person was to make a pass at me or somthin I'd expect THEM to be uncomfortable because I just ain't interested Lol
I understand what yall are sayin about HIV but they are already IN the forces, the potential threat of the HIV is already there too so it ain't like comin out in the open with it is gonna make it anyMORE there.
Hell I can answer my own question I guess...they make such a big deal out of it because they want somebody ELSE to tell them they are ok that way cause deep down THEY don't feel they are. The ones who are comfortable with who and what they are don't make a big production out of everybody havin to KNOW.
Long story short I don't think sexual preference or male or female has anything to do with whether or not you can be a good warrior and do what needs doin when the fur is flyin.
So Varmit, what you are saying is that having gays is a weak spot for the military? All we have to do to rattle them is infiltrate a bunch of gay men into their units and they are less effective? Sorry, don't believe that.The troops aren't always able to have things as they want either. Just gotta suck it up and do the job. IMHO!
Diane, you have never served in the military so you wouldn't understand. And this is exactly the type of argument that arises when civilians try to dicate military policies.
So for the sake of argument lets say that homosexuals are allowed to serve openly. Would you be against allowing seperate shower and latrine facilities for straight soldiers that wanted them? For the military command to do away with gender classification altogether and to tell every solider, salior, marine, and airman that in the interest of fairness seperate facilities will no longer be provided? Hence, it does not matter wether or not females do not want males using the same showers at the same time as they do; or if a female does not want to share the same barracks room with a male.
The two situations are not comparable are they? Neither the men nor the women would be comfortable sharing showers at the same time. As far as barracks ,how different is that from female firefighters sharing the same bunk space as the men? The men, so I'm told, snore worse than the women...most of the time. ;D
Really, I am not trying to dictate policies, but the nurses from Viet Nam managed well and were thrown into odd situations with the men on a regular basis. Big deal, they were all there to do their jobs! Are gay women separated from straight women in the military? Why would straight soldiers be insecure with gay male soldiers sharing showers? Isn't their plumbing all the same? What is the big deal.? (They could already be in committed relationships and be not available, just as straight men could be and therefore not available.) What did they do during high school gym?
Quote from: Diane Amberg on March 31, 2010, 12:12:00 PM
The two situations are not comparable are they? Neither the men nor the women would be comfortable sharing showers at the same time. As far as barracks ,how different is that from female firefighters sharing the same bunk space as the men? The men, so I'm told, snore worse than the women...most of the time. ;D
Really, I am not trying to dictate policies, but the nurses from Viet Nam managed well and were thrown into odd situations with the men on a regular basis. Big deal, they were all there to do their jobs! Are gay women separated from straight women in the military? Why would straight soldiers be insecure with gay male soldiers sharing showers? Isn't their plumping all the same? What is the big deal.? (They could already be in committed relationships and be not available, just as straight men could be and therefore not available.) What did they do during high school gym?
Oh come on diane, they are comparable. Sheesh. Same thing. Why would any normal red blooded American male 100% straight want some gay looking at them when the fact their gay means they like sex with the same gender. Women don't want men looking at them cause they don't like to be a object of sexual lust. It same freaking thing.
Every so often, I read something written by other people that I wish I had written. For instance, Thomas Paine observed over two centuries ago:
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead."
In 21 words, Paine perfectly summed up the frustration faced by a conservative every time he attempts to debate an issue with a liberal airhead. Speaking of airheads, it seems our commander-in-chief, who's such a blithering idiot when it comes to our military and national security that he almost makes Bill Clinton look adequate, wants to allow women to serve on submarines and allow gays to serve openly in the military. The Pentagon doesn't think these are particularly good ideas, but I understand that he's gotten two big thumbs-up from Iran and China.
Recently, someone sent me a message that was posted on the Internet by a retiring soldier that sums up the prevailing insanity:
"When I joined the military, it was illegal to be homosexual. Then it became optional. I'm getting out before it becomes mandatory."
That took all of 22 words, but Tom Paine couldn't have said it any better!
Quote from: Diane Amberg on March 31, 2010, 12:12:00 PM
The two situations are not comparable are they? Neither the men nor the women would be comfortable sharing showers at the same time. As far as barracks ,how different is that from female firefighters sharing the same bunk space as the men? The men, so I'm told, snore worse than the women...most of the time. ;D
Really, I am not trying to dictate policies, but the nurses from Viet Nam managed well and were thrown into odd situations with the men on a regular basis. Big deal, they were all there to do their jobs! Are gay women separated from straight women in the military? Why would straight soldiers be insecure with gay male soldiers sharing showers? Isn't their plumbing all the same? What is the big deal.? (They could already be in committed relationships and be not available, just as straight men could be and therefore not available.) What did they do during high school gym?
Great post WARPH
Quote from: Diane Amberg on March 31, 2010, 12:12:00 PM
The two situations are not comparable are they? Neither the men nor the women would be comfortable sharing showers at the same time. As far as barracks ,how different is that from female firefighters sharing the same bunk space as the men? The men, so I'm told, snore worse than the women...most of the time. ;D
Really, I am not trying to dictate policies, but the nurses from Viet Nam managed well and were thrown into odd situations with the men on a regular basis. Big deal, they were all there to do their jobs! Are gay women separated from straight women in the military? Why would straight soldiers be insecure with gay male soldiers sharing showers? Isn't their plumbing all the same? What is the big deal.? (They could already be in committed relationships and be not available, just as straight men could be and therefore not available.) What did they do during high school gym?
Oh my God...Seriously? Not Comparable? Both are having to shower with someone that may view them in a sexual manner. Having to share a barracks room with somone is not the same as firefighters sharing bunk space. When was the last time that firefighters viewed that bunkspace as "home"? Or had to stay in that bunkspace for an extended period of time? As far as men being uncomfortable sharing showers with women...if she is "hot" most soldiers wouldn't mind.
As far as high school gym...if a guy caught another guy checking him out the offending party would have recieved one hell'va beating.
I'm not sure that the length of time people use their bunk space has to thing to do with anything, but I know you are trying to defend your position. But then again, back when "real" men were in the military, ya didn't have cushy 2 person rooms.They had 60 or so people in open barracks, period. (Get the towel ready, Varmit's about to have a nose bleed!) ;D
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 01, 2010, 09:33:03 AM
I'm not sure that the length of time people use their bunk space has to thing to do with anything, but I know you are trying to defend your position. But then again, back when "real" men were in the military, ya didn't have cushy 2 person rooms.They had 60 or so people in open barracks, period. (Get the towel ready, Varmit's about to have a nose bleed!) ;D
And back then if there was a gay in there, they usually got fragged.
Au Contraire, Miz Diane!!!! It depends on how high on the totem pole you are. It is true that in 1966, when I entered basic training, all recruits lived in "bunkhouses" designed to hold several men on single spring beds, bunk bed style, and the buildings at Ft. Campbell, KY, were two story. Stationed in Korea as an E-2 and E=3, I lived in a Quonset hut, again with single spring beds, bunk bed style. Upon promotion to E-4, I lived in another Quonset hut designed to hold about 20 men and with double beds. When I came home and was reassigned to Ft. Carson, CO, I was an E-5 and shared a room with another E-5 with double beds in a motel style building with elevators and everything. A dining hall similar to a hotel dining room and a TV lounge and game room.
So, the higher you go the better it gets. Officers usually have their own quarters both on or off base and on-base quarters are generally single family housing or apartment style living.
Larryj
Larry, I knew all that! You know I was just poking Varmit. I know there were /are lots of different arrangements depending on who you were/are and where. Al spent most of this time at FT. Sill as a Company clerk. He's the one who had to get up early so the morning report would be ready by 7:00. They would have people coming in at all hours, fresh out of the jungles, who were there to figure out how to be human again before they went home. I remember hearing some really sad stories. Some would wake up at night back in the barracks and not know where they were.
Larry,
Thinking of how the living arangements could have been. When my hero, Chesty Puller was a Lt General he made the statement that if the Corps made him commandant he would put a beer machine and whore in every barracks for HIS Marines. He never made commandant !!! If he had I bet ol Sarge would have joined my beloved Corps instead of the Air Force. :)
Diane, Why were they sending troops fresh out of the jungles to Ft Sill , then sending them home ?? Ft Sill is the artillery school where all branches of the services send their cannon cockers to learn their trade.
Jarhead, if I remember correctly, returning troops were reassigned to a base close to home. When I went in my selective service agent was in Colorado. I had moved to California and had not changed my draft registration to my new location. So, when I was drafted I had to return to Denver for orientation and enlistment. When I came back from Korea, I was reassigned to Ft. Carson because it was the closest base to Denver that had an opening for my MOS. I was discharged in Colorado. Big mistake on my part because had I changed my registration, I would have probably been sent somewhere closer to home before discharge. On the other hand, I would have never experienced all those fun nights at Club A Go Go in Colorado Springs. They even had go-go dancers high up in cages! For the life of me, I just don't know how I was able to find the bus back to Ft. Carson on some nights.
LOL
Larryj
Larry, Probably because the MP's carried your arse back to base !! :)
Club A Go Go?.... go-go dancers high up in cages?.... Larry, I sure hope Mrs. LarryJ and R.A.M.B.O. aren't reading this thread or youse in big trouble good buddy. It might be wise to head for Jarhead's Bunker while you can you can still run. LOL.... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 01, 2010, 09:33:03 AM
I'm not sure that the length of time people use their bunk space has to thing to do with anything, but I know you are trying to defend your position. But then again, back when "real" men were in the military, ya didn't have cushy 2 person rooms.They had 60 or so people in open barracks, period. (Get the towel ready, Varmit's about to have a nose bleed!) ;D
Was just pointing out the difference between the time firefighters use their bunk space and the time soldiers use theirs. Whats with the "real" men comment?
Jarhead, I got a great story about an MP which I'll tell you someday.
Warph, Mrs. Larryj is not into reading this forum or anything else on the computer. While she can use a computer, it is not something she does much and only then to read her e-mails. Besides, the go-go club was way before I ever met her. As far as R.A.M.B.O., he has his own crush on the German Shepard next door. Of course, being the size that he is and the humongous size of the German Shepard, his chances of hooking up (pardon the phrase) are about as good as mine were with the go-go dancers.
As my memory fades back in a little, I do remember that the Assistant Surgeon at Ft. Carson, a major, was my boss at the clinic and he designated me to be his driver. He was single and he had me drive him into CSprings almost nightly. He didn't want to get caught driving drunk, so he left it to me to drive drunk. That is how I usually got back. Whoops----memory is fading back out.
Larryj
First Varmit, lighten up I was just poking you in fun. You remember fun? Jar, Al said if he has to he will get on here and explain the ways of the Army....if that's possible. When I asked him he told me so much so fast I hope I can get this right. Ft. Sill was indeed the Artillery school, but more than that. They also the signal corp people and wire guys who supported the Sgt. Missiles going to Korea. They also had burial detail for parts of several states. He used to talk about the men practicing carrying coffins. They also had many other things going on. He was in a 3 storey barracks with two wings, part of which housed short timers. They showed up day and night around the clock. They flew into the west coast and were put onto commercial airplanes still in their jungle gear. He retold me told the story of the one guy whose time was up, he was pulled off his assignment, his gear had been packed up for him and he spent his time on the commercial plane hiding in the bathroom because he still smelled like the jungle and hadn't been given any time to clean up. He said some were at Ft.Sill for a few days, some a few weeks, but when the in country tour time was up, you were yanked out immediately. He also told me again about the Impact Zone in Lawton. They all went there when they could get leave. Girls and dancing and all. It's not there any more. The city fathers has it taken down after Viet Nam was over to clean up the image of the town.
Thanks Diane. I didn't know that and that's why I asked. Tell Al to slow down on talking or you will send him to auctioneer school. This is totally unrelated to the thread but talking about Ft Sill reminds me on my great uncle Bob Smith ( grand mother's brother ) . when WW-I started uncle Bob and my great uncle Dewey Troutman ( grand fathers brother )ran off to join the Army. Bob was 15 years old and he celebrated his 16 th birthday in a trench somewhere in France. I think Dewey was around the same age and they were taking their infantry training in Ft Sill. Bob got up one morning and Dewey's tent was gone and was common people died of disease and they hooked a team of mules to the tent and pulled it all away with the body inside. Well Dewey didn't die but had deserted which was punishable by death in front of a fireing squad. No one knew where Dewey went until WW-II broke out and he showed up in a boot camp in California. His past caught up with him but all they did was tell the "old man " to go back home to northern Ca. where he had been living like a modern day mountain man. Oh yea, Uncle Bob was Sarges grand dad so maybe that where ol Sarge got his patrotism from.
Thanks, great story. Al spent quite awhile telling more stories of Ft.Sill and Ft.Bragg, some of which I had never heard before. He had already toldd me the stories about crawling under all the wire with the live machine gun fire overhead and all that. There was one sassy dude who refused to keep his head down. He didn't make it out of Viet Nam alive.
Don't know how the Army did it but in my ITR training when we had to crawl under the razor wire with a machine gun firing over your head is almost a joke. You actuallly were only under the fire like 3 times and it's so high you would have to stand up to get hit. My middle brother had just went thru bootcamp a few months before i went and had told me all about it so did it scare me ??? hell no-----but I did come home with scratches on my cheeks and chin where they dug a groove in the ground when i belly crawled under that fire !!! :)
Oh yea, forgot to add---in the Air Force I heard that when Ol Sarge went thru the" crawling under the wire with a machine gun shooting over you", that they shot marshmellows with a sling shot !!!
My basic at Ft. Campbell, KY, was handled by the 101st Airborne (Screaming Eagles) just before the Army decided to make it a basic training camp. We were kind of a test group to see if the post could handle it. We were transported to the firing field and shown the machine guns mounted on concrete bunkers and you could see that the barrels were encased in a steel rectangle so that they could only fire at one level. We crawled about 50 yards after dark under the razor wire on our bellies and then on our backs for a few yards. When I was on my back, I could see the tracers just above the wire, so I am pretty sure they were serious about not standing up.
Then there was the gas chamber. We went in wearing gas masks and when it was your turn, you had to remove the mask and recite your name, rank, serial number, home address and telephone number. Then they hustled you out the door. That was in the days before your serial number was the same as your social security number. To this day, I can recite that serial number from memory.
Getting back to the title of the thread, all the comments have been about the military and little or nothing said about amnesty for illegal aliens. Any thoughts there?
Larryj
I don't think there should be a blanket amnesty for illegals...There should be a guest worker program insituted and every one of them automatically enrolled. That way, we can tax their earnings and get back some of the millions that are sent south of the border.
I wonder how we could ever get them registered. I suspect they would think it was a trick to round them up and I'm afraid the people who employ them wouldn't cooperate either. I'd love to know the actual costs in trying to catch illegals and deport them. It must be huge. The one thing that could be done very quickly is change the law affording children of illegals who are born here automatic citizenship. I understand why they do it, but that's a loophole that could be closed very easily. It should be that at least one parent should be a citizen born or naturalized here. That rule went back to slave days and has never been changed.
I think it is illegal to hire someone who is not here legally in most states, if not all. Maybe increasing the fines for employers who do hire them would help and as Diane says, don't allow those children born to illegal immigrant parents automatic citizenship. That way the whole family has to become citizens in order for the children to receive services or go to school. However, such a move was tried here in California that would prohibit children who were not legal to go to school. It was voted down because the people of this state would prefer that the children are in a safe and learning environment rather than out on the streets. Increasing border patrols is expensive and probably not really very effective, anymore than it is now. Having a national ID card such as a social security card could help, but would have to be made like our currency --- hard to counterfeit.
I used to think the guy who mows my lawn and does some yard work was maybe not legal until I found out one day while surfing the net, that he was incorporated and he had to be legal to get corporation papers. He owns a landscape/gardening company, not just another gardener. Heck of a nice guy too.
Still, it is fun to watch the news when the INS makes a raid somewhere and all the Latinos are running out the door shouting, "Migre, migre!"
I think there is no real clear answer unless and until our economy sinks so low that it is not worthwhile to cross our border in search of a better life. LOL?
Larryj
Quote from: larryJ on April 03, 2010, 11:24:54 AM
I think it is illegal to hire someone who is not here legally in most states, if not all. Maybe increasing the fines for employers who do hire them would help and as Diane says, don't allow those children born to illegal immigrant parents automatic citizenship. That way the whole family has to become citizens in order for the children to receive services or go to school. However, such a move was tried here in California that would prohibit children who were not legal to go to school. It was voted down because the people of this state would prefer that the children are in a safe and learning environment rather than out on the streets. Increasing border patrols is expensive and probably not really very effective, anymore than it is now. Having a national ID card such as a social security card could help, but would have to be made like our currency --- hard to counterfeit.
I believe several states sent illegals running to other states, by enacting laws for landlords to verify legal status. Most illegals won't go through it. Those that do, verify with ins and they will leave.
Sheriff's Deputies Have a Difficult Job Enforcing Immigration Laws
Thursday, 01 April 2010 11:25 Maricopa County sheriff
MARICOPA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPUTIES OPERATE UNDER DANGEROUS CONDITIONS ENFORCING IMMIGRATION LAWS
Sheriff Arpaio Continues Crackdown on Immigration Enforcement
24 Illegal Aliens Arrested on Felony Smuggling Charges
Maricopa County, AZ. - Maricopa County sheriff's deputies arrested 24 more illegal aliens for felony state human smuggling charges last night during two separate traffic stops. The arrests are a result of the unique policy of Sheriff Joe Arpaio who requires his deputies to arrest and process both smugglers and those being smuggled into the country illegally on felony charges.
The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is the only law enforcement agency in the state of Arizona enforcing the co-conspirator aspect of the sate human smuggling laws. To date, the sheriff's office has arrested almost 2,000 illegal aliens under the human smuggling law.
Sheriff Arpaio stated that human smuggling operations have proven to be very dangerous, especially to deputies who are charged with confronting smugglers in desolate remote locations outside of city limits often with little backup. The escalation of violence at the U.S.-Mexico border has also become a cause of concern for sheriff's deputies.
"My deputies have a very difficult job to do in dealing with these smugglers and I will continue as their Sheriff to arm them with the ability and training to take action when necessary. Unfortunately their safety is at risk and they do not have the luxury to wait around for Washington to initiate policy changes. The threat is here and now" stated Sheriff Arpaio.
Many human smuggling traffic stops have resulted in multiple subjects fleeing vehicles into the desert putting deputies and motorists at risk.
The Sheriff has initiated a special program aimed at training nearly all 900 sworn deputies in his office to detect and arrest illegal aliens when they encounter them. The program was launched after the federal government made the decision to remove 100 deputies' ability to act as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.
Maricopa County sheriff's Office Press Release
FAIR Legislative Updates on Illegal Immigration 2010:
http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=22567&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1721#1
DHS Claims of Border Security "Accomplishments" Belied by the Facts,
Charges FAIR
(Washington, D.C. March 26, 2010) In their latest effort to set the stage for a massive illegal alien amnesty, the Obama administration claims that it has made "significant progress in securing the U.S.-Mexico border." This declaration of significant progress by the Department of Homeland Security marks the one year anniversary of the administration's Border Security Initiative, a program that they have targeted for a nearly 30 percent funding cut in the proposed FY 2011 budget.
To support their assertion of progress along the southern border, DHS cites increases in drug seizures and other contraband over the past year. But what the press release neglects to mention is that by DHS's own estimation it maintains "effective control" over just 894 miles out of a total of 8,607 miles of land and sea borders. Moreover, the department's stated goal for the current fiscal year is the same 894 miles of "effective control."
DHS's claim follows closely on the heels of the department's decision to scrap plans for a "virtual fence" that was supposed to augment 700 miles of physical barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border. And while taking credit for expansion of Border Patrol manpower — nearly all of which occurred before the current administration took office — the DHS release makes no mention of the fact that 180 Border Patrol positions are slated to be eliminated in the 2011 budget.
"Unfortunately, what the American people are getting is a lot of posturing and empty rhetoric, not meaningful security along our borders," said Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). "The Obama administration has a dismal record of dismantling this nation's immigration enforcement capability at the border and in the interior of the country.
In one of the most ironic claims ever made by any U.S. government agency, DHS says that is has "begun screening 100 percent of...rail shipments for illegal weapons, drugs and cash." Unfortunately, that 100 percent screening record applies to rail shipments leaving the United States and entering Mexico, not the other way around.
"The Obama administration's record of securing our borders has been feeble, at best, and not nearly commensurate with the real security threats posed by current situation in Mexico," charged Stein. "Even as it is becoming more difficult to determine who is actually in control in Mexico — the government or the warring drug cartels — the Obama administration continues to weaken our defenses, promote amnesty and open borders, all the while telling the American people that they are making progress.
"In reality, the situation along our borders is more dangerous than ever and the unilateral policies of this administration as it pursues its political goal of amnesty for illegal aliens are increasing the risks to this country," Stein concluded.
A few eye-opening sites to checkout if you have a year or two of nothing to do:
Immigration in Your Backyard:
State impact pages describe factors such as poverty, housing, smog, water, schools, land density, labor, traffic, farmland, and health care and other services. State extended data pages describe aspects such as immigration's share of population growth, sources of immigrants, incarceration, etc. - State, County, Cities:
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/facts/national_data/
Suggested Reading:
Historical Perspective On Immigration:
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/site/PageNavigator/facts/suggested_read/
Immigration Facts:
Immigration-related data are available for the country, for each of the states and the District of Columbia, for large metropolitan statistical areas, for large counties and for large cities. Data include:
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/facts/
Immigration Issues:
This section provides links to Immigration Briefs -- short descriptions of issues -- as well as to our publications that describe issues in depth. The Immigration Briefs provide links to related publications.
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/issues/
CAN WE IMPEACH HIM YET?
Obama endorses immigration blueprint
President Obama on Thursday gave a thumbs-up to the framework of a plan to legalize illegal immigrants and create a flow of low-skilled foreign workers for the future, saying the bill being worked on by a Republican lawmaker and his Democrat counterpart is "promising."
For which jobs exactly? Clinton and Bush 43 made sure that all the jobs went overseas.
The long-awaited framework, written by Sens. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, and Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, calls for illegal immigrants to be put on a path to citizenship and would create a temporary program for future foreign workers. Maybe most contentious of all, it would turn all Social Security cards into tamper-proof IDs to be checked by employers when they are about to hire a new worker. The cards would include biometric information designed to prevent counterfeiting — but the senators said the information would not be stored in a government database.
Welcome to the Fascist States Of America. If you believe that information won't be stored in a database, you must have just fallen off the turnip truck.
"I congratulate Senators Schumer and Graham for their leadership, and pledge to do everything in my power to forge a bipartisan consensus this year on this important issue so we can continue to move forward on comprehensive immigration reform," Mr. Obama said in a statement soon after the two senators published their framework on The Washington Post's Web site.
The senators said their legalization approach would be a "tough but fair" program that would require illegal immigrants to admit they broke the law and make them perform community service and pay a fine.
'Tough but fair' would be to throw them out of our country without shooting them first. THEY BROKE THE LAW WHEN THEY STEPPED ACROSS THE BORDER!!!!!