The image is false, the text is true.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/alinsky.asp

I think you could absolutely make the case that some of the things that make this country great are socialist type programs. Public education, emergency services, certain forms of welfare, etc. Not saying every program is good and not saying that more would be better but I certainly think that we would be worse off as a whole without certain socialist elements. Imagine if you will a private army instead of a government one.

What's wrong with paid contractors?

If you read the SNOPES explanation, the text is incorporated in the picture.  The only false part is the specifics assigned to the rules.  However, even though Alinsky didn't uses these examples, it doesn't make them inaccurate.

That's a ridiculous argument.  The over 18 illegal border jumpers are leaving <fill in the foreign county name here>, their family, friends, any jobs or businesses they have, and coming to a country that is likely completely different, where the majority doesn't speak their language, and living in a culture that is totally unknown to them.

If their parents can uproot themselves to come here, we can uproot their kids and send them back.

What's wrong with paid contractors?

Sorry, I should have clarified, the text you posted below the image is correctly attributed to him, what is written in the image is not. I would not say that the things mentioned in the graphic are universally true either. Take gun control for example, cannot one be socialist and pro gun rights at the same time?

Sorry, I should have clarified, the text you posted below the image is correctly attributed to him, what is written in the image is not. I would not say that the things mentioned in the graphic are universally true either. Take gun control for example, cannot one be socialist and pro gun rights at the same time?

Those you mentioned are leaving by choice and probably because of a worse situation. The ones I am talking about are ones who had no choice and don't want to go back. They did not knowingly break the law. Sending them back to a country where they may have no support system and may not even speak the language is not a punishment that fits the crime. Punishment should be proportional to the level of wrong they did.


During the Elian Gonzalez incident, do you think they were right to send the boy back to Cuba? I ask because this incident became political and a number of republicans wanted citizenship for the boy.

Those you mentioned are leaving by choice and probably because of a worse situation. The ones I am talking about are ones who had no choice and don't want to go back. They did not knowingly break the law. Sending them back to a country where they may have no support system and may not even speak the language is not a punishment that fits the crime. Punishment should be proportional to the level of wrong they did.


During the Elian Gonzalez incident, do you think they were right to send the boy back to Cuba? I ask because this incident became political and a number of republicans wanted citizenship for the boy.

Those you mentioned are leaving by choice and probably because of a worse situation. The ones I am talking about are ones who had no choice and don't want to go back. They did not knowingly break the law. Sending them back to a country where they may have no support system and may not even speak the language is not a punishment that fits the crime. Punishment should be proportional to the level of wrong they did.


During the Elian Gonzalez incident, do you think they were right to send the boy back to Cuba? I ask because this incident became political and a number of republicans wanted citizenship for the boy.

If you want to have a society where the state has the power to dictate what is good for the collective, there can be no means of resistance.  The first rule of Communism is there can be no resistance.  Either everyone plays, or it doesn't work.

It does not matter whether it's by choice or by force.  Either way, the illegals we deport will be able to assimilate and survive, especially if they still have relatives living in their country of citizenship.

Maybe their government will be nice enough to offer financial assistance for their settling in?  You know, the same way the US offers assistance for all necessities to the illegals living here.

Anything else is rewarding their or their parents' criminal act of jumping the border.

And if they cannot assimilate and survive? Ok, bottom line for me is that I will vote not to deport those types of people. The punishment doesn't fit the crime.

So you would punish a child for the sins of their parents?

Just read Armstrong's proposal.  Very intelligent man indeed, but after perusing his paper, he seems to be framing the potential economic fall of the US via "cycles."  Similar to Wall Street commentator Peter Schiff, he also places a lot of blame for the current dilemma at the doorstep of the government for its failure to take control of the situation due to its internal corruption.

All valid points.

However, Armstrong like Schiff fails to make the connection of the root of all of the nation's economic troubles originating from the financial banking elite.  Yes, the government has to take responsibility for the economic ills of their country, but in America's case, it is the financial banking elite, who are manipulating Wall Street as well as are the main financial backers of those who comprise the government.  Furthermore, Armstrong does not, at least from my view, mention the Federal Reserve Bank, a private corporation, taking any responsibility for America's wild economic swings.  He mentions many trivial historical events, but never mentions the actions of the Fed as a possible factor influencing these economic cyclical changes.

In summary, Armstrong relies too much on academic reasons to explain the current economic situation and very little common sense.  He goes on to reaffirm that Adam Smith was correct in that "greed is good for the economy", while ignoring the research of fellow Princeton mathematics faculty member and Nobel Prize winner in Economic Science, John Nash, Jr., who was able to prove mathematically that capitalism works against society.

Interesting read, but should not be taken too seriously.


Kuleana