Agreed. Unfortunately, the GOP has been a gang of statist looters since the founding of the party, but worse since Goldwater lost in 1964.
They won't rock the boat in fear the truth might slosh on them.

In my mind the people here illegally are NOT immigrants. They are INVADERS. The harm they intend is taking money they are not entitled to.

Loved his post today quoting both Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi from only a few short years ago!

If you have any doubts on our familiarity with Objectivism, all you have to do is look at the point totals next to our profiles... Especially look for the little Galt symbols (the $) signifying Producers!

We take these conversations seriously. If you have a question you want to raise do so, but please keep in mind this isn't Twitter. Feel free to expound and make your case clearly and articulately. What you'll find is that the people on this forum are incredibly intelligent and not your common forum trolls.

I am surprised Pelousy has not attached a bill to reopen the government to some other bill that Trump wants. That is the kind of game that has been played in the past. Unfortunately the line item veto does not yet exist.

Trump knows branding. Branding did a lot to get him elected. If Republicans were smart, every public statement, every answer to a media question by any Republican would beat the drum, branding the Democrats as the party of:
1) Illegal immigration for welfare and votes,
2) Cross-border child sex trafficking, and
3) Cross-border smuggling of drugs that kill more Americans every year than died in the entire Vietnam War.
If Republicans were smart....

Smith, have you been thinking of the NYT forum to join? It would probably be a better environment for you to set up your tent.

"Democrats have ALWAYS been for immigration regulation in one form or another."

Would you care to elaborate what that "regulation" entailed? I must have missed it b/c all I see is the left clambering for open borders.

Whose rights are you referring to? Objectivism is not anarchy, and I think you're confusing the two. Our government, as defined in the Constitution, has an obligation to protect the rights of its citizens, and an Objectivist should have no problem with that. Extending those rights to foreign invaders is destructive of a freemarket republic, and threatens individual freedom of its citizens

There are 35 million people in South and Central America who would relocate to the US if there were no immigration restrictions. Trying to absorb a 12% instant surge in a large nation's population strains its resources to the breaking point, particularly when the surge consists of people who don't share the language or culture.

Keep it shut down!!!

BTW...Note to Natasha Chen....the TV reporter. You would look a lot nicer if you would occasionally run a brush through your hair...OMG....what is it with people looking like they just got out of bed these days.

You're off-topic. Perhaps you could start a discussion as to why immigration laws should be repealed. I'm sure it would be riveting.

How can something that doesn't violate any rights be illegal?
The term "illegal immigrant" is pure, political illiteracy.
I expect this nonsense from conservatives, but Objectivists should know better.

I just assume you don't know anything about politics or Objectivism.

Pelosi is just sitting at the table to conceal the knife she's going to shove in his back. She is in it for Pelosi! She is so transparent! I wouldn't waste my time by talking with her. Her mind is made up! She doesn't need 'the little people'.

Uh...what?

"a rights protecting government" While we're at it, how about "a carnivorous vegan"...and maybe "a patriot act"?

Who will serve in the Nightswatch to defend America?

it’s going to be different than a lot of people are thinking,” he said.

Hitlery, Obama, and Pelosi convicted for treason works for me.

Galt’s Gulch was hidden and seeming inaccessible behind walls of mountains built by the minds of men.
They also had a looter problem.

I have no idea what your post is trying to covey, but I certainly support the effort to build a wall to keep illegal immigration in check.

Except Objectivism support a rights protecting government in politics and so would never support a border wall.

IMO both.

IMO, it is an attempt to win the PR battle with the American people.

Trump keeps up the positive language with Pelosi.

I know it is a diplomatic move by him but I shudder every time I hear it.

Pelosi's new Speaker arrangement only means the left has no strategy or any programs to make the lives of Americans any better.

It is nauseating to see a communist leading the House again, thanks to the laziness and subversion of Ryan.