patrick.net

I'm willing to accept risk and loss of life. The loss of life to western nations, and the slight increased risk we take, for accepting refugees, and ensuring Muslims in the USofA are afforded the same rights as non-muslims IS worth it. That ensures we remain a free nation and upholds the core principals of America.

There is no point arguing with a troll, but I did want to preserve that comment. I hope we never get another 9/11, and the ensuing "Patriot Act" stuff, but if we do, I don't want Rew to go back and delete this comment. It deserves a place alongside YesYNot calling hundreds killed "nothing". Also, I note the Freudian slip, principals vs principles, as in my opinion the real beneficiaries of this policy combination (driving Syrian Muslims out of Syria and into Europe and America) are the politicians and their princpal financiers, at the expense of American principles.

turtledove 2015 Dec 4, 6:14pm

"Dad what was it like back when you could ..."

36 years from now using your plan... Allow me to finish your sentence for you... What was it like back when you could go outside without worrying that someone might kidnap you and cut your head off? Or, what was it like when you could go to popular public places without being shot at? Daddy, tell me about movie theaters.... Daddy, what's a "school?" Or, what was it like when you could use public transportation without risking your life? Or... Why isn't mommy allowed to drive? You two can have long discussions about when freedom of thought actually existed.

(Two thumbs up and a cheezy Joe Isuzu face)

zzyzzx 2015 Dec 4, 6:20pm

Obligatory:

Strategist 2015 Dec 4, 6:57pm

Oh no. I am not denying Islam has a radicalization problem outright. I'm not denying the existence of these attacks. Much like the gun regulation debate, I'm willing to accept risk and loss of life. The loss of life to western nations, and the slight increased risk we take, for accepting refugees, and ensuring Muslims in the USofA are afforded the same rights as non-muslims IS worth it. That ensures we remain a free nation and upholds the core principals of America.

So let me understand what you are saying....... It's worth the loss of life to Western Nations, in order to uphold our freedoms and core principals, which is to give equal rights to people who want to destroy our freedoms and core principals.
Do you want to rethink what you just said?

indigenous 2015 Dec 4, 7:03pm

Strategist says

core principals

Like who the Bushes or the Clintons or their bosses the NWO?

30 mell 2015 Dec 4, 7:06pm

Islamic terrorists found all sorts of ways to travel to other countries and perpetrate attacks, prior to having a large Syrian refugee issue.

There are practically no attacks in countries that severely curbed immigration/visas and locked their borders such as Poland, Hungary etc.

I could handle 1 or 2 mouths to feed at my door, and would accept them, given the right circumstances. I've got a spare room right now and can do it.

That's nice if you are serious, but you should think about your family if you have any and not put them in harms way. They should be first priority. But then again, why not house and feed one or two of your fellow American countrymen who have been homeless instead? There is enough poverty here and you need to have a working society with little poverty among its citizens first before you can even think about taking care of other nations.

turtledove 2015 Dec 4, 7:09pm

There are practically no attacks in countries that severely curbed immigration/visas and locked their borders such as Poland, Hungary etc.

It couldn't possibly be that simple. Oh wait! It is!

indigenous 2015 Dec 4, 7:13pm

Also countries that do not enable. Where as France and Spain and the US, not so much.

Strategist 2015 Dec 4, 7:14pm

Rew says

I could handle 1 or 2 mouths to feed at my door, and would accept them, given the right circumstances. I've got a spare room right now and can do it.

That's nice if you are serious, but you should think about your family if you have any and not put them in harms way. They should be first priority. But then again, why not house and feed one or two of your fellow American countrymen who have been homeless instead? There is enough poverty here and you need to have a working society with little poverty among its citizens first before you can even think about taking care of other nations.

I would not mind housing little orphan children, and the old from the refugees. All others including women, can forget it.

Strategist 2015 Dec 4, 7:19pm

Rew says

I'm willing to accept risk and loss of life. The loss of life to western nations, and the slight increased risk we take, for accepting refugees, and ensuring Muslims in the USofA are afforded the same rights as non-muslims IS worth it. That ensures we remain a free nation and upholds the core principals of America.

There is no point arguing with a troll, but I did want to preserve that comment.

I don't think Rew is being a troll. He is presenting an argument he really believes, which is..........our constitution and our freedoms can overcome all adversaries. I think it's silly, because we have already lost our freedom to publicly criticize Islam.

turtledove 2015 Dec 4, 7:30pm

I agree. Rew isn't a troll. He/she seems like a very nice person, actually. Too nice. Too ready to give the benefit of the doubt to a bunch of people who dedicate themselves to a religion that actively preaches killing infidels.

Seriously, Rew... If they succeed... I am so DEAD. Your convictions could result in MY death. They aren't going to put up with me for one minute. I'm everything they hate. Female, educated, outspoken, attractive, in good shape, and too vain to wear a burka!

Though shalt not put me in a fuXXing burka! (the lesser known eleventh commandment)

curious2 2015 Dec 4, 7:35pm

This quote is what persuaded me it was trolling.

Strategist 2015 Dec 4, 7:38pm

turtledove says

I agree. Rew isn't a troll. He/she seems like a very nice person, actually. Too nice. Too ready to give the benefit of the doubt to a bunch of people who dedicate themselves to a religion that actively preaches killing infidels.

And Rew, you should realize we are the ones who respect your opinions. Those extremists would cut your throat in a second for expressing the same opinions.

indigenous 2015 Dec 4, 7:38pm

turtledove says

I am so DEAD. Your convictions could result in MY death.

They may just sell you as a sex slave.

With all that at stake perhaps it would make sense to look at how much the US warmongers? and what the affects of that would be?

This is a blind spot with most Americans and conservatives on Pat.net. I'm conservative just against the elephant in the room...

indigenous 2015 Dec 4, 7:41pm

Shaman 2015 Dec 4, 8:07pm

When you invite a stranger into your home you run the risk that they will steal all your stuff and/or axe murder you in the night. If it is just you in your home, okay maybe you take that risk, because you're only risking your own life. But when you have a wife and kids, you're risking their lives too.
I felt sorry for the bum I talked to at the beach, and felt sorrier that he was planning to sleep in the beach restroom that night, but I didn't know the guy and I wasn't going to risk my family's safety to do him a solid. I gave him a ten-spot and wished him well. Then I took my wife and kids home.
That's what Obama and Rew don't get. They aren't risking themselves only by inviting America-hating Muslims into our homeland. They're risking our wives and our children as well. It's completely irresponsible, no matter how altruistic the motives, you have no right to put others at risk to accomplish your altruism.

41 mell 2015 Dec 4, 8:32pm

Quigley says

When you invite a stranger into your home you run the risk that they will steal all your stuff and/or axe murder you in the night. If it is just you in your home, okay maybe you take that risk, because you're only risking your own life. But when you have a wife and kids, you're risking their lives too.

I felt sorry for the bum I talked to at the beach, and felt sorrier that he was planning to sleep in the beach restroom that night, but I didn't know the guy and I wasn't going to risk my family's safety to do him a solid. I gave him a ten-spot and wished him well. Then I took my wife and kids home.

That's what Obama and Rew don't get. They aren't risking themselves only by inviting America-hating Muslims into our homeland. They're risking our wives and our children as well. It's completely irresponsible, no matter how altruistic the motives, you have no right to put others at risk to accomplish your altruism.

And that's by design, feminism and modern leftist propaganda is directly responsible for declining birth rates. If you don't have any immediate loved ones, you may think your job is to save the rest of the world, even if it means that you are putting your fellow countrymen at risk. In fact many of the white leftist 'altruists' are childless and seem to hate their own race and culture with a fervor.

indigenous 2015 Dec 4, 8:38pm

feminism and modern leftist propaganda is directly responsible for declining birth rates.

Actually the number one factor is child mortality. When it is higher people instinctively have more children.

43 mell 2015 Dec 4, 8:41pm

mell says

feminism and modern leftist propaganda is directly responsible for declining birth rates.

Actually the number one factor is child mortality. When it is higher people instinctively have more children.

Yes, where it is a factor. But child mortality has been low in most western nations for quite a while, yet birth-rates have been plummeting to new lows each year.

indigenous 2015 Dec 4, 8:53pm

Fair enough. Do you have a chart on this?

curious2 2015 Dec 4, 8:59pm

birth-rates

result largely from economics. Federal policies propping up the price of housing have discouraged household formation, and thus childbearing. Also, federal policies trying to drive up and prop up the CPI have increased the cost of living relative to wages, which have not always kept up with inflation. Also, the guaranteed student loan program has probably had a negative effect on birthrates, for two reasons: (1) people struggling to make loan payments are less likely to have children, and (2) for women, a university degree is a negative predictor of having children. Also, the millenials being an echo boom generation, women in peak child bearing years are having difficulty finding husbands in the age range they tend to look for (a few years older than themselves), because there are fewer. Blaming feminism and leftist propaganda seems a partisan explanation for a mostly non-partisan (or bi-partisan) set of facts.

Meanwhile, back to the thread, the issue reminds me of a debate from Spain. A Catholic bishop, whom I would disagree with about nearly everything else, made the same argument that if people followed the path prescribed by the church, Spain would have a higher birthrate. A Spanish observer acknowledged that they had essentially decided to prioritize their own lives, and have immigrants instead of having children. I suppose the Saudis might perhaps see it as an opportunity to build a wahhabi caliphate and a new Muslim conquest of Spain. I don't see it that way, because I think longer lifespans and greater automation will enable countries to prosper with birth rates below traditional replacement rates. The real estate interests do want more demand for housing, though, and that requires adding more people somehow. Bottom line, I think a lower birthrate would be fine if not accompanied by terrorist immigration.

indigenous 2015 Dec 4, 9:11pm

This graph from the Census Bureau says that there is and will be a whole lot of babies in the US for the foreseeable future.

FortWayne 2015 Dec 4, 9:23pm

These fucking ISIS bastards want us all dead, and I don't understand Obama's pretenses. Stupid.

lostand confused 2015 Dec 4, 9:35pm

I could handle 1 or 2 mouths to feed at my door, and would accept them, given the right circumstances. I've got a spare room right now and can do it. Yep (sorry jsut actually mentally figuring out how I would do that ...)

Wouldn't you want to know who they are-if they are murderers, thieves, rapists, wacky nuts who believe if they blow themselves up and take you with them-they go to heaven and spend eternity with 72 virgins?

Unless you verify that-will you still let them in???

49 mell 2015 Dec 5, 8:19am

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=25&c=us&l=en

Fair enough. Do you have a chart on this?

You can put in any country and also aggregates.

result largely from economics. Federal policies propping up the price of housing have discouraged household formation, and thus childbearing. Also, federal policies trying to drive up and prop up the CPI have increased the cost of living relative to wages, which have not always kept up with inflation.

The interesting part about this is that it works both ways. In extreme poor countries it drives up birth rates while for the US economic poorer times are used to explain lower birth rates. If this were the main factor, then one had to admit that despite all the luxury and technological progress we haven't made economic progress in a while. I think it is a factor but not the largest one. Plus, demographics who don't mind using government assistance are still breeding quite a bit. If you take the sharp decline in the US starting in the 1960s from which it never recovered, it coincides pretty much with the start of 2nd wave feminism.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/melanie-notkin/the-truth-about-the-childless-life_b_3691069.html

Blaming feminism and leftist propaganda seems a partisan explanation for a mostly non-partisan (or bi-partisan) set of facts.

Well, a lot of women postpone until it's too late because they are being told that their careers matter more and some companies even go that far to offer them to freeze their eggs. This of course being anecdotal evidence, quite a few of my acquaintances now regret having chosen this path. This huffPo article suggests that only 14% if childless women are so voluntarily

Bottom line, I think a lower birthrate would be fine if not accompanied by terrorist immigration.

Agreed. However in some countries it has gotten so low that they depend on imported youth for their economical models to work and that's a risky bet.

indigenous 2015 Dec 5, 8:26am

You can put in any country and also aggregates.

How do you reconcile the index mundi graph to the Census Bureau chart?

turtledove 2015 Dec 5, 8:39am

lostand confused says

Unless you verify that-will you still let them in???

It's more likely we'd just have them sign the following:

"I, potentially crazy fuck-nut who believes if I kill people I get to go to heaven with my 72 equally crazy virgins, do solemnly swear to uphold the laws of the United States of America."

-------------------------------------------------------- Date: ------------------------------
Signature

-------------------------------------------------------
Printed Name

52 mell 2015 Dec 5, 8:40am

mell says

You can put in any country and also aggregates.

How do you reconcile the index mundi graph to the Census Bureau chart?

The US birth rate has never fallen below the critical threshold where it would not result in a net population increase, it has always been higher than most European countries. Probably largely due to conservative and minority (e.g. mexican immigrant) populations. If it were only caucasian educated left-leaning folks, it would be on the decline.

indigenous 2015 Dec 5, 8:43am

So you believe the Census chart to be erroneous?

54 mell 2015 Dec 5, 8:52am

So you believe the Census chart to be erroneous?

It's a projection, so hard to say. It looks a bit overly "optimistic", but maybe it expects continued heavy immigration from breeding populaces ;) Note that it doesn't say anything about the quality of the new youth wrt being good taxpayers and successful citizens.

indigenous 2015 Dec 5, 8:58am

That has always been my concern.

turtledove 2015 Dec 5, 8:59am