HopefulFuture

Not necessarily. For example, civil unions, while not the same as out right marriage, offered identical benefits in some cases. These issues, while no less important in their own right with regards to the law of the land, were not as significant an impact on the current economic state as the job, employer, corporate corruption that has not only destabilized the nation, but led to massive deficits and debts at every level of government. They can address the social issues merely by following the Constitution, but, both parties for some reason appear hell bent on circumventing it instead of supporting it's "equality for all" core value. But, I will say this, if the Republicans continue down that far right path of attempting to usurp these issues, they will fail just as the Dems have in the past 6 years to truly help the nation. I will give credit where credit is due however, the Dems did at least try and affect change in the country, the only problem is, just like their Repub counterparts, they tried to run over the Constitution on some issues, and flat out lied on others. Sad actually they couldn't be honest, principled representatives of the people with integrity that hold themselves to the highest standards of responsibility and accountability, not that I expect that from the Repubs either as history has bared this out. But, It is their opportunity to show that they have learned those lessons. As I said, the American people are in no mood for shenanigans another cycle, they want results, let's see what the Repubs from this Congress bring to the table. And my independent self thinks they fubar it and we end up with more gridlock from 16 to 20, but, I'll be objective for now as I was in 08 to see what they actually do. Not that I care to admit it as a conservative, but, you may be correct on the moderate side of that statement. Far right got us Bush and his crap, Far left got us Obama and his crap, I'd like a closer review of the candidates actually installed, the new ones anyways.

While the left leaning media bashes the Republicans over the head with the social issues, they picked the wrong issues. It was always about the economy, never about who could marry who, and that war on women, what a joke. The Republicans have 2 years to offer up real solutions and put them on the Presidents desk, if they offer up common sense, pro economic bills, and the President refuses to sign them, Hillary is done for. The Republicans will get the White House in 16 and most likely retain control of both houses in congress. This last President the public craved change because of the illegal activities of Bush, Cheney and the Republicans, and Obama took advantage of the smitten public with it's first African American President. Hillary isn't going to have the luxury of assuming votes are going to come her way just because she's a woman in mass amounts, the American People have spoken, they are in no mood to choose a President based on sex, race or any other of the charactistical stats, they want a President that will march lock and step with Congress to have a real plan on how to right this ship. As I said, if the Republicans don't have that plan, or plan on attacking Obama from all quarters without a plan explained to the American people, they will have missed an opportunity that only comes along once in 3 or 4 generations, the chance to shape the future direction of the nation. Some of Obama's programs while hated by the American people, were liked in the ideology of them, not so much the planning and implementation. Be prepared for Obama care to stay, even if the Republicans win out everything in 16, quite frankly, the American people want some type of Health Care checks and balances in place, they just didn't want Obama care, which sucks, and based on lies. If the Republicans were anywhere near smart, they'd offer single payer. And that is one example of a portion of a plan that they should be putting together and touting, well before 16.

Oh, and I should give you all a little tid bit of information from a colleague of mine in the energy industry. An Oil war is coming, specifically on pricing. I was informed tonight I will be on the a project following my stint in Texas that is the largest refinery in the western hemisphere to be built. It will be utilizing no Middle East oil in it's operations. If the Saudi's attempt to go below 40 a barrel, the party that just won election will be sure to demand job protecting legislation for their industry. Just an FYI.

I wonder how this is going to play out at the local and state levels 2 years from now. Will the people actually up end Hillary's bid in an effort to give Republicans a chance to initiate these pro jobs promises they've made? Should be interesting.

We should start a new thread based on Cross Fire with you 2 as the hosts :P

No surprise really. He's actually attempting to shave costs at the state level.

Although it is amusing when one party offs another in a given cycle, bare in mind, it's only the mid terms and by no means is a stamp of approval to the Republicans, it's merely the lesser of 2 evils at this time, same as 08. I don't see President Obama rubber stamping the Republican Agenda, and without veto proof numbers, it's grid lock for another 2 years, which means, another 2 years of QE's minimum before we here any type of real plan on the economy, debt and jobs. And not just these hosed down low end jobs, but jobs across all spectrum's, including such industries as textile, which have dried up here. The real challenge for both parties will come in 16, when many battles will take place, including the White House. I half agree, fracking is coming, but home rule may impede economic growth. He'll work out an arrangement in his next term, after all, money is on the table from some real players. Ironic, I'm moving out of New York, but may come back here to work in the Marcellus fields they build here, only at that time, I'll get per diem :P I don't believe he will either. The nations mood is in poor conditions for the Dems, no reason to add pressure to Hillary she won't need. As for fracking, I would have been right there with you in that thought, only, there are players in the game on that end with real money on the table that would considerably help New York. LOL, always the glass half full kind of guy GCOE, good on you I say. I to believe it's going to be a real challenge, only, not for the Republicans, but for both parties. When Americans get 2 more years of stagnation at the Federal level on a multitude of issues that need to be addressed, I think both parties are going to pay a heavy price in 16. My guess is that is a great year to come in as an independent speaking common sense on all issues across the board. Lay out your reasons as a candidate and gather with a group of independent candidates on a national scale and offer a 3rd choice. The American people are reaching their breaking point on poor governing, I think 16 will be close to the peak on that.

N.T's polling place where I go was nice. Mostly elderly and they engaged in post voting conversation with myself. I would have so fit in with the 1920's/30's/40's era. To bad I was born decades later, missed the Golden Year's of America.

6 to 1 final. Wow, they must not like the morning games

Agreed GCOE on the fact that the government ignores them, but, they do not need to be changed to be protected. It is the responsibility of the people to do that, with whom they put in office to represent them or administer the laws. And it keeps coming back to that, what I speak of, personal accountability and responsibility. Freedom isn't free, and you just made my point on that. Until the people speak up, this will be the case. Only the people have the ability to protect them. I say to you both, a government for the people, by the people, will only succeed if the people are involved. It is the single most important aspect of American life, and yet, so few understand just how important it is, not only to understand the law of the land for which you live under, but also your sacred duty to defend it via the electorate. Great men that helped write this document warned us, as a nation, both their present and future (us) about this.

I don't believe I've ever stated the Constitution is or is not a "living document". That is not for me to say, it is for the people to decide, of which, I am merely one voice in a choir. In the end, it is neither here nor there in so far as whether or not the document can be changed, clearly the articles and 1st 10 amendments may not. That is a given under the circumstances of which they were brought in to existence and whoa on to any political individual, group or party who attempts to do so, for it will be their undoing. The articles are written in stone, deriving the layout of the governing body and subsequently, their individual responsibilities and duties. You can add to those, or subtract, via Amendments or, as in most cases, laws that are written and passed, but you can never change the articles themselves, for to do so is to change the very foundation of the nation. Is it a perfect form of governing then? Well no, of course not, it's merely the great experiment. Will history bare out a change of governance to a form that is actually improved for the people it governs? I don't know, by no means would I pretend to know, I only know that the current form is fitted or suited for the current populace under it's governance, if imperfect. Because quite frankly, we as humans, are imperfect beings to begin with. Hence the hunt for Utopia is as elusive as BigFoot. The Amendments now, the first 10, good luck changing them. By doing so you change the very culture and essence of what it is to be American. 8 of those first 10 pertain directly to the citizens, the other 2 to the states. This is known as the Bill of Rights, and I submit, it would be a fools errand to attempt to alter them. When you kick a sleeping bear, don't be surprised when the bear awakes and you find it's claws stuck in your mid-section.

LOL, well Numark, as sincere as I am on this subject, I sometimes go back and read what I've posted, because most of my posts are on the fly, just answering to the best of my ability. I do hope that I create enough thought in individuals to kind of put their finger to their chin and just say, hmmmmmm, maybe, just maybe, he has a valid point :) I enjoy the multiple interactions with everyone, and I think I've done ok responding when it comes to my views on these issues B-)

Actually Eleven, your incorrect. But, close. As an executive, you do not have the authority to curve the will of the people. Obama does have the ability to influence deportation policy by saying who to deport, such as illegal's who commit a crime, as this article points out. But then, this is where it gets truly in depth, why in the hell would no executive, Obama or other wise, uphold their sacred duty to defend citizens? That is where it's going to come back to haunt him and any other executive that attempts amnesty. When you take the oath as President of the United States of America, it is to the Constitution and the Citizens of this nation and no other. I've always found this article to be very insightful when attempting to put pardon's in an amnesty situation. The article is correct by the way. http://www.washingto...S53ZO_blog.html Well, you have a point. I am half native American, so yea, I say any European Immigrant, or, any immigrant that came to the New World, be it slave or master, are in effect here illegally. But that's not really common sense, is it now. Since no law was in place at the time of the exodus to the New World. Laws do change, and, contrary to your belief, the precedence set by the early Supreme Courts are not re-interpreted, they are however used in various cases as interpretation for future cases that may need them. John Marshall's courts had the most profound impact on this, John Jay had a few, but John Marshall and the rulings that presided under his tenure as Supreme Court Chief Justice was instrumental in creating the foundations for case studies for all time on many subjects. He was a phenomenal man, principled with integrity. I highly suggest to anyone remotely interested in US history to read on this gentleman. It is not in the power of one man to alter the course of history at the behest of his own personal whims, that is reserved for the Congress who were elected by the people to represent them. Contrary to popular belief, the President is not elected to represent you, he is elected as the administrative, or executive branch of government. He cannot write a law, then vote it himself in to existence, he can sign a law that was passed through the Congress. Understand, while each of the 3 branches of our Republic are equally important in governing, none is more important than the Congress since that is the branch where the people elect their representatives on a more localized scenario. Your Congressional District Representative and your 2 State Senators represent you at the Federal level. You want the laws changed? Then do it through the legislative process. Through the very electoral process I am speaking about protecting.

In the end, it's not the years in your life that matter, it's the life in your years. My word is my bond, I say what I mean and mean what I say. I am a loyal citizen of the United States of America. I wore a uniform to defend her, the Constitution and all of it's citizens from enemies both foreign and domestic. What kind of character would I have if my oath of allegiance is worthless? To myself, I would not be an individual of trustworthy status. I would not be an individual worthy of the title citizen. That is who I am, my word is my bond.

Interestingly enough, it was both, and if the internet had been around then on a scale as it is today, you'd of seen me on there railing against what Reagan did. Trickle down economics my ass, who in the hell thought it was a good idea to put the bad actor in office to begin with? It's a good time to point out to those Republicans that read this to wake the ###### up as well. I can't believe some of the people both parties have put in office, they've both put the giant vibrator in all the way then hooked up the car battery for good measure, the only problem is, the citizens never feel orgasmic about it after wards, they only feel the pain of the gaping hole left in their beliefs in the system. There is an existing law in place for immigration, any executive order to grant amnesty would be over riding that law that was passed by the representatives of the people. Should the president attempt to do so, even I, who many consider even keeled on common sense, would be calling for impeachment.

And I don't think we'd have to round up all 30 million + and deport them. This is where it gets sticky for myself, because of my belief in the law of the land. Is there a way to create a temporary fast track program to those individuals that meet certain criteria? Interestingly enough, if you serve in the United States Military as an immigrant, I want you as a citizen. You've shown loyalty, and taken an oath to the law of the land. Yes, I can support that without question. But then, you'd have to be a legal immigrant to join the service to begin with. I know it isn't as easy as rounding them up, and, I'm open to suggestions as a citizen, I'm not closed minded to compromise by the way. The only thing I ask is for is that any solution be one that is Constitutional.

Drunkard, there is a reason these laws were put in place beyond politics. I believe we are all fully aware of the European immigrants, and even then, Spanish immigrants, although a minor player, were also in there. I don't believe ethnicity had much to do with it. Race is a different matter all together however and could be an interesting discussion on the historical aspects of immigration policies both past and present. But, back to the subject at hand. I completely understand why they are migrating, a majority of them, for a better life, that's always been a given. If the law does not suit what the larger portion of Americans believe in or value, they can change it through the electorate. If that isn't happening at this time, that merely points to the fact that a majority of voting Americans believe the current policies and laws in place suffice. As of now, multiple polls across the board show only 35% of Americans roughly, support amnesty. In contrast, a majority want illegals returned to their home country, 52%. The Gallup Poll historical data on it's survey's are neutral and interesting. http://www.gallup.com/poll/1660/Immigration.aspx As you can see from the multiple questions asked, it's more than apparent the current majority of Americans do not want amnesty. And furthermore, a majority want the illegals here dealt with. There are several factors in to how to deal with them without amnesty whereby they can stay, and this is the middle ground I speak on. Of course, I don't recommend one survey or poll firm to be utilized as a basis for over all data to be collected, but I could just post poll after poll from multiple sources and they all clearly indicate that a majority of Americans do not support amnesty and, over 40% in each case support sending them back to their country of origin. Less than 40% say it should be a case by case study with the remaining % undecided. While the reasons may vary from person to person, group to group in as far as Citizens go, there is clear indication the American people are overwhelmingly in favor of dealing with the situation. And rightfully so.

Yes, I am Eleven. I worked in Ft. Lauderdale back in 05, on the Port Everglades power plant there. The firm I worked for uncovered 16 illegal Cubans attempting to work on the project with stolen identities. Mostly the elderly. In any case, all 16 were detained and eventually gained asylum. I followed the incident closely and not 1 news report on it down there, interesting, don't ya think, considering some have called Miami a Democratic Bastion, in particular Broward County. But, the circumstances are such that the current form of Cuban government allows for asylum cases, not that I completely agree mind you, but that policies that were instilled in the 60's are still in force. But yes, over all, I would like to see that mess cleaned up as well. The reason the Mexican/southern US border is front and center is because of it's overwhelming superiority in numbers on the issue, but fraudulent voting should be stamped out every where, not just on that situation. Edit: And it should be noted Eleven, I've said this before, the amnesty policy would have a negligible effect on this years election process, it would most certainly effect future one's however, and on a large scale, given the influx of individuals we are speaking on. It's not so much to save the process short term as it is to address the long term negative impact amnesty would surely have. After all, who do you think those immigrants would vote for if given amnesty? The Republicans? I know you know better than that. It's no more than buying votes, and in this case, it's a great deal of votes that would be getting bought.

I can only tell you what I've experienced first hand K-9, on top of those reports and not just by the right wing media, but, the left leaning main stream media down plays or omits them completely, even though they are factual. But, back to my point, I know of field hands in my industry that hold or can easily obtain illegal, fraudulent documents to vote. A place in south Texas, widely known as "The Valley" has a vast array of tools at it's disposal to do so, the ones that pay get the product. While I don't doubt that Republicans use this to deflect from their own misdeeds, any misdeeds in the electorate should be addressed immediately via existing laws. Do you not agree with this? Because if you do, then deportation combined with immediately securing the border is the common sense way of doing so. As a human being, I am born in to a society whereby I have freedoms from birth. By no means does this happen globally. There are area's of the world where children are enslaved from birth and have the facade of some freedoms, but are never truly free. Take women in many cultures in Asia, Africa and Asia Minor as an example. In some societies, they are merely a bartering chip in a larger scenario being played out at a social level. And they are groomed for such in most situations to fulfill that role. And once again, the document, by which the laws of the land are laid out, are what obtain my freedoms, not just being born, that's a fallacy and history his proven this out across 1000's of years as entire cultures were born in to slavery across man's history.

While I completely agree the slime ball party known as the "Republican Party" is one that uses loopholes within the system to unbalance the electorate, and I'll even state that there is solid evidence of voter tampering and down right tyranny type tactics in getting opponents supporters not to vote, they to should be held accountable, through the legal system. But that doesn't take away from what the Democrats are doing, attempting to use outside means to unbalance the electorate in their own right. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

I was born with those rights because of that document. If I were born in other parts of the world without that document, I doubt those rights would be granted to me, as a matter of fact, I know they are not. As for your comment on sarcasm, there was none, I was being serious. As for your 11 million figure, try 30+ million and growing. Your correct, secure the border. Simply put, we are not going to legalize 30+ million illegal immigrants currently here. And you know why, because of the situations I've already posted. Let me ask you a serious question, and this goes to all who want amnesty. This is a mature question, not given to the responses like "get over it" or other nonsense answers, a sincere question. What do all you amnesty supporters say to those American citizens that have had substantial damage done to their lives by the illegal immigration situation? So, where is the support for your fellow citizens that you so proudly stand up and beat your chest about when it comes to the illegal immigrants? How do you tell them that the law should not be followed? What do you say, oh, my bad, I didn't realize this was going to happen?

I am fully aware the Constitution is a man made document. And unless you have another document that secures the rights I was born with under this document, that actually increases individual freedoms all the while presenting accountability and responsibility to the citizens it serves, I'm all ears. I have to see such a document come forth. So, when you state I speak on it as though it were holy scripture, understand this, I took an oath to defend that document that grants me the rights I currently have under a Republic form of government. As an individual, it's within my character to honor my oath, something I was taught by both my immediate surroundings, I.E. family, friends, upbringing, as well as in my education of just what it means to be accountable and responsible as a citizen. Are you implying I shouldn't have those character traits of honor, integrity and principle? I've never once stated that these illegal immigrants (and not just from Mexico, but yes, primarily Central American Nations) are coming here to destroy the country. What I have repeatedly stated is that there is more than enough evidence to state emphatically that the Democratic Party is utilizing these illegal immigrants in an effort to change the balance of the electorate here in America, which of course, since they are illegal immigrants, is illegal. It's breaking the law. And speaking of that, I've pointed out time and again, there is a process in place to legally enter the nation, there is actually a law on it. One that has been accepted by both of the 2 corrupt political parties for years. It's only now that one of those parties has decided to break the law and utilize it on a mass scale. As to the bolded, there is a middle ground. It's called the law. All illegal immigrant cases should be reviewed, and in those cases where it is found they are illegal, sign the guest book and get in line for your turn via the process we have in place that is, oh look, a law. My hats off to you. I too do not vote in any scenario where the only choices are either of these 2 evils.

Nice stop on Dats by Zads, not allowing him to go around him and taking the puck away. Also some nice hits. Still hangs on to the puck to long, but I did notice he corrected that mid way through the 2nd period. A couple of small mistakes, but all in all, for the ice time he was given, I liked what I saw. Keep playing the kid please Ted.

Awwww, but I don't want Mez on the ice any more :(

Me to. Mez is horrible, as usual, may as well bring up McCabe to fill his spot as well. Let's get the kids some experience.