[John Kilduff]

I don't mind people just trying to better themseves, yet sympathy is dfifferent than pragmatics sometimes.

It is really the responsibility of the USA to take care of the whole world? Why can't Mexico and other countries fix their own countries and make them reasonable and prosperous places to live????? Are we to fix their countries for them? If their government is corrupt and ineffective who needs to fix it: we or they? What about their responsibility to better their own countries? Does that not exist at all?

It is a similar mindset to policing the whole world, to think that the USA must extend welfare to the world and also admit anyone who sneaks in. I'm not saying that you think this. But those two mindsets are just different sides of the same paternalistic nanny-state coin.

IMO we shouldn't be in Iraq, or Korea, or be policing the world. IMO we shouldn't feel that we are somehow responsible for taking up the slack for every corrupt government in the world that cannot get its act together enough to allow its citizens to develop relatively free and prosperous lives of their own initiatives.

We've got plenty of problems right here at home (if you don't think so, just wait 5 more years).

As Ron Paul pointed out, this country is intended to be a Republic: not an empire, not a welfare state, and not the nanny of the wide world.

You personally can't feed every homeless person that you see on the street. The USA can't admit everyone in the world (billions of people, if they could, probably) who would prefer to live here.

Of course that homeless guy you see on the corner several times a month is a human being too. So why don't you at least let him sleep in your garage for a few months, and mow and rake your lawn for food? I'm asking this of everyone, not just you, Moseley. Now apply the answer to why the USA can't be expected to open its doors to unlimited numbers of desperate unskilled uneducated people.

At most you might let one person sleep in your garage, right? Why have limits on the number of homeless people you can accomodate?

What about the responsibility of the homeless to better their own lives? Does that exist at all?

If I were formerPresidente Vicente Fox, I'd have been DAMN EMBARRASSED to have touted more illegal immigration to the USA from Mexico as a solution BECAUSE MEXICO CAN'T GET ITS ACT TOGETHER.

What is Mexico supposed to be, like a totally dysfunctional person or something?

Mexico has oil, Mexico has a tourism industry, Mexico has natural resources. Mexico has plenty of people who obviously can work. WTF? Why is Mexico's solution to send as many as possible here? And why do Mexican Presidents see that as their solution instead of getting their country's act together???

Yes, we hear how corrupt the Mexican government is and that that is why it can't get its act together. So is corruption in the Mexican genes or something (obviously not, lol)? The problem can be fixed if it is not inherent, right? So...when the government of the USA becomes too corrupt (and it's well on it's way [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ), the solution will be for most of us to move to Canada, instead of fixing the U.S. system???

If prospective immigrants have job skills, or a solid job offer, and are non-criminal and not carriers of TB or something: fine, let them immigrate through the established process. But why does 20% of the entire country of Mexico need to emigrate to another country??? And why isn't the focus on fixing that underlying flaw, rather than on a surrogate solution?

/baffled

/questions off

/rant off

Thanks for reading.