Election of 2012....Who ya got?

[AE14]

Some do sure, but anyone can make it to the 100k a year level and live well.

this is just not true. not everyone has the same opportunities as others. Not all circumstances are the same.

Additionally, the value of degrees has changed. Currently, a bachelors degree is the equivalent to a HS degree of 20 years ago.

Your oversimplification does not address the realities that are being faced.

 

[EasyEJL]

this is just not true. not everyone has the same opportunities as others. Not all circumstances are the same.

Additionally, the value of degrees has changed. Currently, a bachelors degree is the equivalent to a HS degree of 20 years ago.

Your oversimplification does not address the realities that are being faced.

And attempting to hold the government and corporations responsible for a population that makes more effort to watch tv than improve skills its no different

 

[ax1]

And attempting to hold the government and corporations responsible for a population that makes more effort to watch tv than improve skills its no different

These are obvious issues I agree with you on completely, but its just a part of a complex equation that there are no single answers too. The answers are found on more of a individual bases than the country as a whole.

 

[AE14]

And attempting to hold the government and corporations responsible for a population that makes more effort to watch tv than improve skills its no different

again....an enormous generalization. Are there those who fall into your assumption? Of course, but by and large that does not seem to be an accurate depiction at all

I dont know what is going on today E, typically I am pretty much with you on these issues, but we are having a rough generalization day today

 

[EasyEJL]

I'm extra grumpy because I'm traveling for work. The things you have to do to make that $

 

[Jessep76]

Looks like the new hot candidate is putting himself in hot water. Herman Cain has come out and stated (paraphrasing here) "if you do not have a good job, or are not rich, dont blame the rich or the government, blame yourself."

Wonder how this will effect his numbers :lol:

Didn't he say that to the occupiers? Don't be made at wall street, be mad at yourself for not being rich (sounded like)

 

[Jessep76]

Is the government or corporations stopping people from educating themselves or spending more time on their children's education? No, and the value of unskilled uneducated labor drops each year by supply vs demand.

Again look at unemployment by education level.

Stopping them no, certainly not. I got all my college education from grants, but that was 10 years ago. Tuition keeps getting more expensive and last I checked they were talking about cutting grants if they haven't already. Community colleges were the way to go when I was in school to save on fee's for your first 2 years and then only have to go into half the debt for the State or University college. Community colleges are twice what they cost from 10 years ago. Unemployment on the other hand is higher also. So its safe to say its not easy to get an education for some.

 

[ax1]

Didn't he say that to the occupiers? Don't be made at wall street, be mad at yourself for not being rich (sounded like)

Cain was Chairman of the Federal Reserve branch in Kansas (but they market him a pizza guy.) He will say whatever propaganda it takes to cool off and invalidate any enemies of his corporate/banking interests.

 

[AE14]

Stopping them no, certainly not. I got all my college education from grants, but that was 10 years ago. Tuition keeps getting more expensive and last I checked they were talking about cutting grants if they haven't already. Community colleges were the way to go when I was in school to save on fee's for your first 2 years and then only have to go into half the debt for the State or University college. Community colleges are twice what they cost from 10 years ago. Unemployment on the other hand is higher also. So its safe to say its not easy to get an education for some.

exactly, its not easier now by any stretch. Add in the value of a bachelors in todays job world (which is minimal) and you realize how difficult it is.

 

[Grumpy]

Looks like the new hot candidate is putting himself in hot water. Herman Cain has come out and stated (paraphrasing here) "if you do not have a good job, or are not rich, dont blame the rich or the government, blame yourself."

Wonder how this will effect his numbers :lol:

With the folks he is trying to attract to nominate him, that might get more cheers than the execution of 200+ people.

 

[Jessep76]

exactly, its not easier now by any stretch. Add in the value of a bachelors in todays job world (which is minimal) and you realize how difficult it is.

Better off getting a 2 year certification or an associates degrees than paying for a bachelor's.

 

[Conagher]

At the same time, he's right

A year ago I would have agreed with you,but this is a different America than the one I grew up in.

 

[vinnythestick]

Yes...anyone may have a chance, and I also agree you can make far less than that and live well.

That chance though is only limited and there are only a small % of jobs available that even make 100k. According to the 2009 census 9.7% of Americans make 100k and up. I know there are far more than that that qualify for the same type's of jobs but are in a impossible situation of limited work.

I feel that if everybody gets a master education, and is equally as competitive, hard working and smart..still only 9.7% will make 100k.

This is what they told people in China that if they get an high education they will do good. With the increase and overabundance of college graduates in China many and more in the future are being left out with no real job opportunities because you can only supply a certain amount of jobs.

In any monetary system most have to be poor and there is no choice. The only solution to this is to ban the monetary system and to move on to a resource based economy.

haha SOCIALIST!! jk :lmao:

 

[vinnythestick]

Hey Everyone,

Just got my OWN internet connection so no more slow internet for me. Watched the Sept. 22 debates. My thoughts:

Bachman - She's crazy. She's tanking. She's a woman. Not happening. I don't know anybody that likes her. I'd even like to point out that her campaign slogan is "The unifying choice that will beat Obama" and shes pushing abortion bills in the house to try to gain votes... honestly? no interest in the problems of the nation Michelle?

Gary Johnson - First, he's either gay or a former junkie. Somethings wrong with that guy. I kinda like him, but the GOP doesn't. He's pro too much for the far right and religious to handle.

Rick Perry - NO...oh GOD no!

Herman Cain - Um he's black. Is 2012 the year when Americans will choose between two black guys as President? I doubt he will win the GOP. He does sound like a used car salesman. He's smart, and I believe Fox will support him for a while to come, but...

Ron Paul - Funny guy. He seems to have the best nature of the lot. He's too Libertarian though for any serious Republican consideration. And he kind of intimidates me, like he wants anarchy or something. I do believe and have faith in what he says, but it's still intimidating. And I don't support libertarian views.

Rick Santorum - He's a weasel. He used his child's death as a campaign tool, he has this intelligent design thing going on, he's discriminatory. He's very smart, and very capable, but I can't stand the guy.

Newt Gingrich - I don't think he wants to be Pres. Lol. I just think he's enjoying the attention.

I'm still getting to know Romney and Huntsman but they both seem pretty decent.

 

[AE14]

Your analysis is funny and pretty spot on. I think Newt really wants a shot at VP and would be a good choice for many.

I actually like Huntsman, he is my top choice of the bunch, but anything less than 2nd in NH for him and he is done.

It is Romney's to lose imo. He is very smooth, and never seems to get flustered by any attack. If he can get the religious right loons to jump on board, he will beat Obama, especially if unemployment remains an issue

 

[ax1]

It is Romney's to lose imo. He is very smooth, and never seems to get flustered by any attack. If he can get the religious right loons to jump on board, he will beat Obama, especially if unemployment remains an issue

Now there are internal warfare with the christian religion, 1 sect (evangelical?? dont remember) was calling out Romney as saying his sect of Mormonism is a cult.

 

[EasyEJL]

Ok, I'll recant to 100k for a couple I just figure if i, as the child of an illiterate blue collar worker who grew up on occasional food stamps, free school lunches and salvation army clothes could break 6 figures without a college degree others can too

 

[vinnythestick]

Your analysis is funny and pretty spot on. I think Newt really wants a shot at VP and would be a good choice for many.

I actually like Huntsman, he is my top choice of the bunch, but anything less than 2nd in NH for him and he is done.

It is Romney's to lose imo. He is very smooth, and never seems to get flustered by any attack. If he can get the religious right loons to jump on board, he will beat Obama, especially if unemployment remains an issue

I'll also throw my hat in with Huntsman. He seems to be sane, and that takes him a long way in this race! He makes the most sense and uses the facts to try and win his arguments. I'd be the least scared for this country's future with him in office.

As for Romney, he a politician. Watch his 2011 CPAC speech. When he could have approached the problems he instead attacked Obama for the entire speech.

YES WE GET IT OBAMA SUCKS! Can we please hear a plan, an idea, ANYTHING besides hate spewing?

Also watch his 2011 VFW Convention speech. As a vet I will say that his speech doesn't make any friggin sense. It's horrible, he uses fear to try and persuade his audiences, he talks of spending more on the military when he's talking to veterans! Umm.... hello? Vets aren't interested in military spending, they are interested in veteran's benefits, healthcare, pensions, etc. Thats exactly why there's a Department of Defense and a Department of Veteran's Affairs. Two separate entities.

How about saying thanks to the vets huh? How about asking how their benefits are working?

Honestly Election of 2012, who do I have?

OBAMA FA YA MAMA!

If it so happens to be Obama v Huntsman or Obama v Paul then I'll vote Republican and watch the show. But that will never happen.

 

[EasyEJL]

On al awlaki, this answered most of my concerns. I'd say it probably was legitimate now after the justifications presented

Invalid Link Removed

 

[ax1]

On al awlaki, this answered most of my concerns. I'd say it probably was legitimate now after the justifications presented

Invalid Link Removed

Ive been waiting for them to come up with a story like this, lol

 

[Jessep76]

On al awlaki, this answered most of my concerns. I'd say it probably was legitimate now after the justifications presented

Invalid Link Removed

Interesting video none the less. My Airforce buddy was trying to play it down last weekend saying the attack wasn't soley toward Awlaki, but they got him in the process.

 

[ax1]

Interesting video none the less. My Airforce buddy was trying to play it down last weekend saying the attack wasn't soley toward Awlaki, but they got him in the process.

Did you know the Awalki was the Pentagon's guest of honor at a dinner just months after 9-11, at the same time a Homeland Security commission was ivestigating him for his involvement in 9/11? Awalki was known as the spiritual leader of 3 of the 9/11 hijackers as well, nice guest of honor for a Pentagon dinner isnt it?

 

[nonidentity]

Hey Everyone,

Just got my OWN internet connection so no more slow internet for me. Watched the Sept. 22 debates. My thoughts:

Bachman - She's crazy. She's tanking. She's a woman. Not happening. I don't know anybody that likes her. I'd even like to point out that her campaign slogan is "The unifying choice that will beat Obama" and shes pushing abortion bills in the house to try to gain votes... honestly? no interest in the problems of the nation Michelle?

Gary Johnson - First, he's either gay or a former junkie. Somethings wrong with that guy. I kinda like him, but the GOP doesn't. He's pro too much for the far right and religious to handle.

Rick Perry - NO...oh GOD no!

Herman Cain - Um he's black. Is 2012 the year when Americans will choose between two black guys as President? I doubt he will win the GOP. He does sound like a used car salesman. He's smart, and I believe Fox will support him for a while to come, but...

Ron Paul - Funny guy. He seems to have the best nature of the lot. He's too Libertarian though for any serious Republican consideration. And he kind of intimidates me, like he wants anarchy or something. I do believe and have faith in what he says, but it's still intimidating. And I don't support libertarian views.

Rick Santorum - He's a weasel. He used his child's death as a campaign tool, he has this intelligent design thing going on, he's discriminatory. He's very smart, and very capable, but I can't stand the guy.

Newt Gingrich - I don't think he wants to be Pres. Lol. I just think he's enjoying the attention.

I'm still getting to know Romney and Huntsman but they both seem pretty decent.

which libertarian views do you not support? "not trying to be a dick, genuinely curious"

 

[vinnythestick]

which libertarian views do you not support? "not trying to be a dick, genuinely curious"

I think the Libertarian party is too anarchistic for my tastes. They believe in too small a government role in economics, foreign-policy, drugs, prostitution, etc.

This would be awesome if the world was a better place, but if you dont place controls on people then they go crazy.

Muslim extremists and Imperialist nations are getting ready to launch one hell of a war on the US in the next 30 years if we don't intervene IMHO.
We'd experience huge jumps in human trafficking, sex slavery, etc.

I think we'd need an insane police force to keep this type of government from failing to protect it's citizens from the dissidents of society.

I think Libertarian views are about freedom and self-expression, but they fail to account for the views of the religious population of the world which are usually about reverence ,restraint, and order. Also the plain crazies.

You give religious nuts and the crazies freedom and they kill you with it.

 

[vinnythestick]

The more I think about it the more I cant believe that Perry can withstand the scrutiny for another few months. I think its looking:

Cain vs Paul vs Romney

Maybe Ron Paul 2012 isn't a bad chant after all...

 

[ax1]

Cain vs Paul vs Romney

^^^ Federal Reserve Dictator vs Thomas Jefferson vs Death to late night television

 

[AE14]

Perry continues to fall. Now in 4th with Romney, Cain and Gingrich ahead. Poor Ron Paul

 

[nonidentity]

I think the Libertarian party is too anarchistic for my tastes. They believe in too small a government role in economics, foreign-policy, drugs, prostitution, etc.

This would be awesome if the world was a better place, but if you dont place controls on people then they go crazy.

Muslim extremists and Imperialist nations are getting ready to launch one hell of a war on the US in the next 30 years if we don't intervene IMHO.
We'd experience huge jumps in human trafficking, sex slavery, etc.

I think we'd need an insane police force to keep this type of government from failing to protect it's citizens from the dissidents of society.

I think Libertarian views are about freedom and self-expression, but they fail to account for the views of the religious population of the world which are usually about reverence ,restraint, and order. Also the plain crazies.

You give religious nuts and the crazies freedom and they kill you with it.

I don't think it's going to turn into a free for all. I think everything that the libertarians want to legalize will still have to face tight restrictions. I don't think there would be anymore 'sex slaves' than there is now. My big issue is the drug war. I can't stand to think that '30,000?' people have died under unnecessary prohibition :/ even the cold-blooded cartel members wouldn't have been enlisted if all the gangs were bankrupted by legalization. but I'm leaving the US in january for a few years anyways, so while I hope things get better here, it's not in my backyard so to speak

 

[ax1]

I hope things get better here, it's not in my backyard so to speak

Nope...its full steam all out turning to a police state here and there is nothing stopping it.

 

[carpee]

Nope...its full steam all out turning to a police state here and there is nothing stopping it.

All according to plan..

 

[AE14]

ahhhh.....its good to see the tinfoil is out in full force

 

[ax1]

Herman Cain Sings "imagine" All the pizza

 

[AE14]

But AX, dont you know that 9,9,9, is the new catch phrase for the masses?

 

[ax1]

But AX, dont you know that 9,9,9, is the new catch phrase for the masses?

This is troublesome...I was just doing a headstand while finishing up some computer work when I read your post and I realized there is a hidden message there.

 

[Jessep76]

But AX, dont you know that 9,9,9, is the new catch phrase for the masses?

The Christians really need to jump on this one.

 

[AE14]

Nice heated debate last night. Cain's plain was shown to an extent as a fraud, and it is. Paul had his best debate thus far IMO, but I still think Romney comes out ahead again

 

[EasyEJL]

But AX, dont you know that 9,9,9, is the new catch phrase for the masses?

[video=youtube;xoMgnJDXd3k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoMgnJDXd3k[/video]

 

[EasyEJL]

and although i'll join in making fun of it, the plan when you think about it has some merits. Yes, viewed directly middle class sees an increase. But when their employer is paying 7% less in payroll taxes, that means more capability for raises. And similarly with some of the other areas, there would be an effect over time that would fix some of the issues as businesses worked out the new cost structure. But it would take a few years.

I don't have a problem with middle + down being taxed more anyhow. We are nearing the point where close to half of america are tax consumers rather than tax payers and long term that just can't work.

 

[ax1]

Nice heated debate last night. Cain's plain was shown to an extent as a fraud, and it is. Paul had his best debate thus far IMO, but I still think Romney comes out ahead again

I normally try not to pay attention to the way they act on these debate's, but Perry is just a plain prick, lol.

You never know though....Perry could be staging that to help elevate Romney's status. Id doubt it, but you never know and it would work.

 

[ax1]

and although i'll join in making fun of it, the plan when you think about it has some merits. Yes, viewed directly middle class sees an increase. But when their employer is paying 7% less in payroll taxes, that means more capability for raises. And similarly with some of the other areas, there would be an effect over time that would fix some of the issues as businesses worked out the new cost structure. But it would take a few years.

I don't have a problem with middle + down being taxed more anyhow. We are nearing the point where close to half of america are tax consumers rather than tax payers and long term that just can't work.

I only support no income tax. The term "fair income tax" isnt something that can exist in practice unless people enjoy slavery.

Man's freedom = man owns his own labor, not the government.

 

[AE14]

and although i'll join in making fun of it, the plan when you think about it has some merits. Yes, viewed directly middle class sees an increase. But when their employer is paying 7% less in payroll taxes, that means more capability for raises. And similarly with some of the other areas, there would be an effect over time that would fix some of the issues as businesses worked out the new cost structure. But it would take a few years.

I don't have a problem with middle + down being taxed more anyhow. We are nearing the point where close to half of america are tax consumers rather than tax payers and long term that just can't work.

look at your wording.....capability. That does not mean there will be, so in essence more for the middle class to carry, without a definite bump in pay.

Once the logic of the plan is truly understood, Cain is toast imo

 

[EasyEJL]

look at your wording.....capability. That does not mean there will be, so in essence more for the middle class to carry, without a definite bump in pay.

Once the logic of the plan is truly understood, Cain is toast imo

Yeah, and it would minimally take a year or two for wages and product pricing to catch up.

But at this point, almost half of americans are tax consumers rather than payers, not paying even enough to cover what they will collect in social security. This needs to change

 

[AE14]

Yeah, and it would minimally take a year or two for wages and product pricing to catch up.

But at this point, almost half of americans are tax consumers rather than payers, not paying even enough to cover what they will collect in social security. This needs to change

it most certainly does....however, 999 is not the way to get it done. The federal sales tax can never pass. People will stop putting $ into the system if they get hit with 9% extra.

As an aside....the apples to oranges thing was funny and stupid all at the same time

 

[fueledpassion]

Or, you could just as easily see which plan or approach is constitutional. Cain's plan, however "flawed" it might be, runs parallel to what the founding fathers said would work. This can be seen in Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Consitution. Plan as day really, the very first federal allowance. Uniform taxation. This was effective and the federal government never saw a deficit (with the exception of the Civil War era) until the constitutional revolution in 1912 by socialist Wilson when he had congress ratify Amendments 16 & 17 into the consititution. By doing this, Wilson effectively transferred all the power of the states to the federal government by giving the states no representation and giving the people double representation and with the 16th amendment allowing the feds to tax those people however they wish - without uniformity. So in essence, this was the very first socialist movement and has since gotten terribly worse. If Cain's deal on uniform taxation were to happen, the 16th amendment would have to be repealed...something I am in full support of getting rid of. I encourage you guys to read the Constitution asap before siding with one party/candidate over another. Its a quick 20 minute read for an educated individual, maybe 30-40 min for the lower than average IQ's. Either way, its stupid to even choose a side without first knowing the foundation and success of our country. If ur an "anti-natural rights" person, then u should just move somewhere else instead. There r plenty of socialist/communist/corporatist countries to choose from elsewhere. We dont need to change what is nearly perfect in our country to suit those who want to live in total government dependency.

While Cain may have some additional things that he might need to adjust to make a strong run, I certainly like two things that he stands for:

1) abolishing the 16th amendment by tax reform
2) abolishing the 17th amendment by deligating power back to the states, which should be treated like mini countries since they were originally independent in every aspect OTHER THAN INTERSTATE COMMERCE, which the ISC clause defines clearly enough. This reduces the feds and central powers and gives it all back to the peeps and giving us essentially 50 different countries to choose from to live and prosper in.

 

[ax1]

Or, you could just as easily see which plan or approach is constitutional.

Paul's plan = no income tax.

Paul's plan is the only constitutional plan.

Ron Paul supports the elimination of the income tax and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). He asserts that Congress had no power to impose a direct income tax and has called for the repeal of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified on February 3, 1913.An income tax is the most degrading and totalitarian of all possible taxes. Its implementation wrongly suggests that the government owns the lives and labor of the citizens it is supposed to represent. Tellingly, “a heavy progressive or graduated income tax” is Plank #2 of the Invalid Link Removed, which was written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels and first published in 1848.
To provide funding for the federal government, Ron Paul supports excise taxes, non-protectionist tariffs, massive cuts in spending.
Ron Paul discusses the income tax and the “FAIR Tax” in May 2007: (link for video)


Invalid Link Removed

 

[fueledpassion]

W

Paul's plan = no income tax.

Paul's plan is the only constitutional plan.

Ron Paul supports the elimination of the income tax and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). He asserts that Congress had no power to impose a direct income tax and has called for the repeal of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified on February 3, 1913.An income tax is the most degrading and totalitarian of all possible taxes. Its implementation wrongly suggests that the government owns the lives and labor of the citizens it is supposed to represent. Tellingly, “a heavy progressive or graduated income tax” is Plank #2 of the Invalid Link Removed, which was written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels and first published in 1848.
To provide funding for the federal government, Ron Paul supports excise taxes, non-protectionist tariffs, massive cuts in spending.
Ron Paul discusses the income tax and the “FAIR Tax” in May 2007: (link for video)


Invalid Link Removed

I'm down with Ron Paul. Only problem is he doesnt have much of a shot right now..or does he? I'd vote for him before Cain, but between Cain, Romney and Perry - I'm for Cain.

Hopefully Ron can makes something happen. He'd totally upset alot of congressman tho which is why I dont think he has a huge chance. Honestly tho, the tea party ought to be behind him. He is indeed the most inline with the constitution...

 

[ax1]

W

I'm down with Ron Paul. Only problem is he doesnt have much of a shot right now..or does he? I'd vote for him before Cain, but between Cain, Romney and Perry - I'm for Cain.

Hopefully Ron can makes something happen. He'd totally upset alot of congressman tho which is why I dont think he has a huge chance. Honestly tho, the tea party ought to be behind him. He is indeed the most inline with the constitution...

The problem is whenever a movement starts, mainstream media Hijacks it and will appoint Sarah Palin as the leader of it or something.

If Paul doesnt run as an independent I wont vote for him...then I wont vote for anybody unless Nader runs. Yes dramatic difference but I like both of them. My politics are quite abstract.

I completely have boycotted the single party american system of Republicrats, but I do understand how Paul needed to be a repub to get any attention.

 

[AE14]

Or, you could just as easily see which plan or approach is constitutional. Cain's plan, however "flawed" it might be, runs parallel to what the founding fathers said would work. This can be seen in Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Consitution. Plan as day really, the very first federal allowance. Uniform taxation. This was effective and the federal government never saw a deficit (with the exception of the Civil War era) until the constitutional revolution in 1912 by socialist Wilson when he had congress ratify Amendments 16 & 17 into the consititution. By doing this, Wilson effectively transferred all the power of the states to the federal government by giving the states no representation and giving the people double representation and with the 16th amendment allowing the feds to tax those people however they wish - without uniformity. So in essence, this was the very first socialist movement and has since gotten terribly worse. If Cain's deal on uniform taxation were to happen, the 16th amendment would have to be repealed...something I am in full support of getting rid of. I encourage you guys to read the Constitution asap before siding with one party/candidate over another. Its a quick 20 minute read for an educated individual, maybe 30-40 min for the lower than average IQ's. Either way, its stupid to even choose a side without first knowing the foundation and success of our country. If ur an "anti-natural rights" person, then u should just move somewhere else instead. There r plenty of socialist/communist/corporatist countries to choose from elsewhere. We dont need to change what is nearly perfect in our country to suit those who want to live in total government dependency.

While Cain may have some additional things that he might need to adjust to make a strong run, I certainly like two things that he stands for:

1) abolishing the 16th amendment by tax reform
2) abolishing the 17th amendment by deligating power back to the states, which should be treated like mini countries since they were originally independent in every aspect OTHER THAN INTERSTATE COMMERCE, which the ISC clause defines clearly enough. This reduces the feds and central powers and gives it all back to the peeps and giving us essentially 50 different countries to choose from to live and prosper in.

No offense, there was enormous defects early in the countries history. Hence the enormous ordeal of Jackson balancing the budget.

With that said, this is not a constitutional issue IMO. Cain's plan won't pass, simple as that. It puts too much of a hit on the middle class, and worse for him right now, his campaign is running out of money.

 

[AE14]

No offense, there was enormous defects early in the countries history. Hence the enormous ordeal of Jackson balancing the budget.

With that said, this is not a constitutional issue IMO. Cain's plan won't pass, simple as that. It puts too much of a hit on the middle class, and worse for him right now, his campaign is running out of money.

Sorry on my phone answering this.... You said to move elsewhere, but we are a coporatist nation, so we all need to move.

 

[ax1]

Sorry on my phone answering this.... You said to move elsewhere, but we are a coporatist nation, so we all need to move.

Whats beautiful about this country is that you can choose whatever side you want, even if its completely unconstitutional or anti-natural rights.

To tell someone to move because someone has "anti-natural rights" can only come from someone who doesnt know the foundation and success of our country.