[quote]Varqanir wrote:
rainjack wrote:
lixy wrote:
There is a huge difference between “can’t” and “won’t”.
Can you elaborate on this? Do you mean that there is some sort of conspiracy in Washington? Because last I checked, money and the overseas (over)deployment of US military personnel was the only limiting factor here. And it goes without saying that most Americans want secure borders.
Once again, you prove your ignorance of how it works over here.
Hispanics are votes. The fastest growing voting block in the country.
Neither side wants to do shit to piss off the hispanic vote - votes they both think they can get if they are nice enough.
It has nothing to do with the war in the middle east. It is all about courting the hispanic vote, and turning a blind eye to any problem that may exist.
This is especially true in the border states, with candidates for mayoral and gubernatorial elections increasingly addressing their prospective constituents in Spanish.
We’ve had the British-Canuck view, RJ, what about the Texan view? Have we lost the war already, or is there still time to turn things around?
[/quote]
Dunno. I think if they quit offering illegals free health care, social security, and allow the border patrol to deport the illegals, we can at least get back to the way it was in the 80’s.
Who knows? The way the dollar is falling, jobs may get pretty scarce for the lazy white man, and he might be forced to actually do some fucking work - taking the jobs away from the illegals.
What’s odd is that, back in the day, border ranchers used to have “wet shacks”. The illegals would cross on the ranch, make it to the wet shack, and work for the rancher for a week or two - then head on out. It was quite a symbiotic relationship: we scratch your back, and you scratch ours.
But then the government had to get involved. Throw on top of that the “war on drugs”, and now the rancher pulls out is .30-.06 instead of offering to help. And the illegal would rather steal you blind than offer to help with anything.