Latest info re immigration from Trump

[ML]

I know several FSU folk who's first port of call was Florida and some stayed .... I don't believe getting pregnant by a US citizen  - to be able to stay - was on the agenda ..

No, you misinterpreted.

Already pregnant women come to USA to give birth to a USA citizen.

[ML]

http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/02/four-hidden-policy-changes-trump-immigration-memos-000323

[ML]

Can someone explain to me:

1) Why people are referred to as 'undocumented immigrants' rather than the actual situation of 'illegal immigrants?'

Is it simply another of the PC constructs?

2) Why are so many people in the USA so intent on protecting and helping those who illegally come into USA ?

Just as an example, Legal Aid groups in several cities provide guidance to illegal immigrants how to skirt the law, etc.

Another example, several cities are sanctuary cities wherein officials including law enforcement refuse to help immigration authorities locate illegals.

Are there examples of where individuals and groups help people who are perpetrating other types of illegal activities, other than this illegal immigration?

For instance, would Legal Aid Societies give advice to robbers as to how to avoid apprehension, etc.

[msmob]

No, you misinterpreted.

Already pregnant women come to USA to give birth to a USA citizen.

Thank you.. 

I always wondered at this as it is hard to fly when clearly 'due to drop'.  We have a series on TV about controlling immigration to the UK and one episode dealt with a Nigerian lady at Laos attempting to board to the UK - when her final destination was the USA... She was refused boarding as he Brits liaised with Stateside and suspected she was simply flying there - hoping to give birth.

[krimster2]

Many people realize that their own ancestors likely came here as refugees and were subsequently viewed with disdain by the general population.  As a result they feel some sympathy, I do...  To equate them with being thieves is ridiculous.  The ones I personally know are very hard working and dedicated to their families welfare, more so then many white families that I know.  I suspect that if you were in their shoes you would do exactly the same, I would without hesitation.  If you look at the history of America’s immigration laws, and in particular the immigration act of 1924*, you can see that they were overtly racist and were designed to restrict the flow of immigration from Eastern Europe and other “less white" places.  In that case breaking the law would be a virtue and not a vice.  Mexicans of course have a different status, they didn’t cross the border, the border crossed them!  How can you say that a Mexican who crosses the border without documents to live in Santa Fe or Los Angeles has no moral right to be there, even if they were not granted the legal right to do so?

*if you are unfamiliar with this law, here’s a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924

[LiveFromUkraine]

Can someone explain to me:

1) Why people are referred to as 'undocumented immigrants' rather than the actual situation of 'illegal immigrants?'

Is it simply another of the PC constructs?

2) Why are so many people in the USA so intent on protecting and helping those who illegally come into USA ?

Just as an example, Legal Aid groups in several cities provide guidance to illegal immigrants how to skirt the law, etc.

Another example, several cities are sanctuary cities wherein officials including law enforcement refuse to help immigration authorities locate illegals.

Are there examples of where individuals and groups help people who are perpetrating other types of illegal activities, other than this illegal immigration?

For instance, would Legal Aid Societies give advice to robbers as to how to avoid apprehension, etc.

ML, I would say it is more about compassion than anything else. 


I would prefer the illegals that are here and haven't done anything illegal (besides coming here illegally) to stay.  I agree with the criminals being deported.  I do believe we need to control our borders.

We have families that have generations born here and only know the US.  After spending time in 3rd world countries, I can understand why people would come here illegally and at great risk.

[fathertime]

Not too long ago, I read a report that in such places like China, they actually had 'travel agencies' specifically set up for expecting mothers. A lot of Chinese came to the US for the sole purpose of making sure their child earns US citizenship.

Well known abuse, and right in the backyard.


http://ktla.com/2013/03/13/exclusive-local-motel-converted-into-makeshift-maternity-hospital/


ARCADIA, Calif. (KTLA) — A motel in Arcadia is allegedly being used as a baby factory of sorts — housing expectant mothers from overseas to have their children here in the United States.

Sources and some motel guests say the Santa Anita Inn is being used as a maternity hotel.

They tell KTLA that a new wave of pregnant women, sometimes with their families in tow, arrives every three to four months from China.

Our sources say the women stay in the two back....

Fathertime! 

[jone]

Many people realize that their own ancestors likely came here as refugees and were subsequently viewed with disdain by the general population.  As a result they feel some sympathy, I do...  To equate them with being thieves is ridiculous.  The ones I personally know are very hard working and dedicated to their families welfare, more so then many white families that I know.  I suspect that if you were in their shoes you would do exactly the same, I would without hesitation.  If you look at the history of America’s immigration laws, and in particular the immigration act of 1924*, you can see that they were overtly racist and were designed to restrict the flow of immigration from Eastern Europe and other “less white" places.  In that case breaking the law would be a virtue and not a vice.  Mexicans of course have a different status, they didn’t cross the border, the border crossed them!  How can you say that a Mexican who crosses the border without documents to live in Santa Fe or Los Angeles has no moral right to be there, even if they were not granted the legal right to do so?

*if you are unfamiliar with this law, here’s a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924

Krimster, you have quite a vivid set of ideas about open borders.  But let me take a small pin to your big bubble.  The original owners of land were given grants from the Spanish monarchy - Eurpoeans.  That monarchy had about as much in common with present Mexico as the Arabs do in the present Spain (You, of course, know that the Caliphate, from 700 - 1100 ruled Spain).  You create your own history for your liberal views. But, before you go giving away the United States, I suggest you refine your ideas a little more. The current Mexican is a Mestizo and not of the original native North Americans as your post implies.    Mexico claimed California for ownly 27 years.  (1821-1848)

Ultimately, the Spanish forts that line the coast of California used local populations, not AmerIndians from Mexico.  And the fall of the Spanish empire did not give rise to mass migrations from Mexico to the US.  So your argument that Mexicans have rights to California is false.  They were not here prior to the current push for illegal immigration to the United States. 

I have stated before that I do not support removing illegal aliens that live productive lives in the US.  But to imply that because they are Mexicans and deserve to live (or have rights to live) in the US is just a liberal puff of smoke.

[fathertime]

Can someone explain to me:

1) Why people are referred to as 'undocumented immigrants' rather than the actual situation of 'illegal immigrants?'

Is it simply another of the PC constructs?

I refer to them as both, personally it doesn't matter much.  I was talking to a 'illegal' earlier this week, and referred to him as a 'ilegal'...he didn't seem to care...he really doesn't deserve such status,but for the moment that is the way things are

Can someone explain to me:


2) Why are so many people in the USA so intent on protecting and helping those who illegally come into USA ?

Probably for many reasons, one being that it is 'our' fault that these individuals are here.  We allowed them to come in and live here, for many, it has been decades.  As far as I'm concerned they are as American as anybody else, and often more of a credit to our society than many of the native born  whiny leaches


I'd say an even better question is why are some so intent on doing the more inhumane thing which is to throw out people who have worked hard, lived clean, and created a family?  They are often a net credit to our society.  Genuinely stopping/slowing the new arrivals can probably be done, and I would support this if we actually got serious, but I don't think the small individuals that have been caught up in the government's/business wink/nod should be the ones that have to now suddenly pay. 


Fathertime! 

[krimster2]

Jone,

“The original owners of land were given grants from the Spanish monarchy”

So what, much of the original owners of North America were also given land grants, what does that have to do with the people who ended up making their future homes there? - nothing...

“They were not here prior to the current push for illegal immigration to the United States."

If “they” Mexicans were not here “before” then why are so many place names in the South Western US in Spanish?  Los Angeles, San Antonio, etc. The Mexican people had lived for centuries in the South Western US when the land was “acquired” by force after the Mexican-American war.  So in your opinion as stated here, Mexicans have no right to go there now, but someone with lighter skin with no historical ties to the land does because their people have issued them documents that say that they have this right and Mexicans do not have these documents.  Please note as I have pointed out in the above post, that US immigration laws are VERY discriminatory. So why should the very people who are discriminated against by these laws respect and obey them, would you?

“You create your own history for your liberal views.”

No, and no!  The historical facts I presented in my post above are true and verifiable, this is not a liberal view or a conservative view but a factual one. 

I suppose I have sympathy for these people because my father’s family came as refugees to the US from Ukraine before the introduction of the 1924 immigration laws which would have prevented them from doing so. As a result, it’s not hard for me to put myself “in their shoes”, because just change a date and I would have been...

[Fashionista]

In Canada right now btw. Very different feeling than where I live in the US. Abnormally friendly people, nobody even locks their front doors. Our ski instructor is a Chinese immigrant. Was very interesting to hear his views on US politics and view son local and US immigration.

Abnormally friendly? Feels like the US where I am now. In Canada that typically means that they don't trust you. Once they are your friends, you'll get an earful. My neighbor - nice person, with a good sense of humor - in an attack of friendliness once told me that after getting to know me she tells people that not all immigrants are horrible people. I was flattered


I do recommend locking those doors though. Preferably with expensive locks that cannot be open with a hairpin.

[jone]

Jone,

“The original owners of land were given grants from the Spanish monarchy”

So what, much of the original owners of North America were also given land grants, what does that have to do with the people who ended up making their future homes there? - nothing...

“They were not here prior to the current push for illegal immigration to the United States."

If “they” Mexicans were not here “before” then why are so many place names in the South Western US in Spanish?  Los Angeles, San Antonio, etc. The Mexican people had lived for centuries in the South Western US when the land was “acquired” by force after the Mexican-American war.  So in your opinion as stated here, Mexicans have no right to go there now, but someone with lighter skin with no historical ties to the land does because their people have issued them documents that say that they have this right and Mexicans do not have these documents.  Please note as I have pointed out in the above post, that US immigration laws are VERY discriminatory. So why should the very people who are discriminated against by these laws respect and obey them, would you?

“You create your own history for your liberal views.”

No, and no!  The historical facts I presented in my post above are true and verifiable, this is not a liberal view or a conservative view but a factual one. 

I suppose I have sympathy for these people because my father’s family came as refugees to the US from Ukraine before the introduction of the 1924 immigration laws which would have prevented them from doing so. As a result, it’s not hard for me to put myself “in their shoes”, because just change a date and I would have been...

You make up history as you go along.  The names of cities have Spanish names because they were named by the Spanish priests.  Not the Mexicans.  Get your facts stratight.  Do you think Mexico speaks Spanish because that was the native language of Mexico.   

Simply because California has common heritage with Mexico in that they were both part of the Spanish Empire does not give Mexicans citizen rights in the US. 

Sorry Krimster, but you look like a moron for making such statements.

[krimster2]

Residents of Mexico were Spanish subjects before they declared their independence in 1821, and this detail is completely irrelevant to this “conversation”. It would be like saying, “oh by the way Americans were once British”  Yeah, so?

“You make up history as you go along”

I haven’t “made up” anything, every assertion I’ve made is verifiable

“The names of cities have Spanish names because they were named by the Spanish priests"

Not all, Father Serra didn’t get naming rights to everything, for instance Los Angeles was originally named, “El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles de Porciúncula” and was so named by its original settlers who were of mixed race from Sonora

Your irrelevant details obfuscate the fact that the South Western US was originally settled and inhabited for many generations by people who came from Mexico and who subsequently had their land taken from them as a result of the Mexican war.

“Simply because California has common heritage with Mexico in that they were both part of the Spanish Empire does not give Mexicans citizen rights in the US.”

Alta California was actually a part of the territory of the nation of Mexico when it was seized by the US.  I have duly noted that Mexicans have no legal residency rights in the US, but this is based on immigration law which is overtly discriminatory against them.   I am merely questioning whether their condition is just when considering the historical details.  I have no idea why you would consider such questioning to be a sign of my stupidity, I suspect it’s just meant to be an insult because my opinion is different from yours, too bad you can’t participate in a mature intelligent conversation without name calling.

[Bee Farmer]

Can someone explain to me:

1) Why people are referred to as 'undocumented immigrants' rather than the actual situation of 'illegal immigrants?'

Is it simply another of the PC constructs?

2) Why are so many people in the USA so intent on protecting and helping those who illegally come into USA ?

Just as an example, Legal Aid groups in several cities provide guidance to illegal immigrants how to skirt the law, etc.

Another example, several cities are sanctuary cities wherein officials including law enforcement refuse to help immigration authorities locate illegals.

Are there examples of where individuals and groups help people who are perpetrating other types of illegal activities, other than this illegal immigration?

For instance, would Legal Aid Societies give advice to robbers as to how to avoid apprehension, etc.

We used to call them illegal aliens.  An illegal alien is someone who is here legally, and is not supposed to be here.
Illegal immigrants are people who have moved here, but bent the rules to get here. (They are comparable to a legal immigrant who told a white lie.)
Undocumented immigrants are just like a legal immigrant, except their papers are messed up.

The Underground Railroad would probably be the closest example I can think of where groups of people actively worked to protect and give assistance to illegal persons.

The Ku Klux Klan would be an example of an organization which protected illegal activities.

Many people realize that their own ancestors likely came here as refugees and were subsequently viewed with disdain by the general population. 

 If you look at the history of America’s immigration laws, and in particular the immigration act of 1924*, you can see that they were overtly racist and were designed to restrict the flow of immigration from Eastern Europe and other “less white" places. 

*if you are unfamiliar with this law, here’s a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924

My ancestors came to New Amsterdam in the early 1600's.  The Native Americans here welcomed them, and even sold them land. (Manhattan)

Have you considered the possibility that the immigration policies back then were a good thing?  It lead to great prosperity in America.

When America started allowing tons of immigrants with cultures that don't align with American Judeo-Christian values, everything started going to Hell in a handbasket.

I welcome LEGAL immigrants.
I believe we should deport ALL illegal immigrants.
I believe we should rescind citizenship of children and descendants of illegal immigrants, and deport them to their parent's country.

[fathertime]

Sorry Krimster, but you look like a moron for making such statements.

You are not sorry, so lets not pretend you are. Face facts, Krimster makes good points, and you hate that your 'facts' are disputed/minimized...so you angrily lash out.


Fathertime! 

[jone]

Residents of Mexico were Spanish subjects before they declared their independence in 1821, and this detail is completely irrelevant to this “conversation”. It would be like saying, “oh by the way Americans were once British”  Yeah, so?

“You make up history as you go along”

I haven’t “made up” anything, every assertion I’ve made is verifiable

“The names of cities have Spanish names because they were named by the Spanish priests"

Not all, Father Serra didn’t get naming rights to everything, for instance Los Angeles was originally named, “El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles de Porciúncula” and was so named by its original settlers who were of mixed race from Sonora

Your irrelevant details obfuscate the fact that the South Western US was originally settled and inhabited for many generations by people who came from Mexico and who subsequently had their land taken from them as a result of the Mexican war.

“Simply because California has common heritage with Mexico in that they were both part of the Spanish Empire does not give Mexicans citizen rights in the US.”

Alta California was actually a part of the territory of the nation of Mexico when it was seized by the US.  I have duly noted that Mexicans have no legal residency rights in the US, but this is based on immigration law which is overtly discriminatory against them.   I am merely questioning whether their condition is just when considering the historical details.  I have no idea why you would consider such questioning to be a sign of my stupidity, I suspect it’s just meant to be an insult because my opinion is different from yours, too bad you can’t participate in a mature intelligent conversation without name calling.

Congratulations.  You know how to use Wikipedia.  But the idea that California was occupied by Mexicans is a fallacy.  My neighborhood, and the surrounding areas was occupied by the Tongva (native American) peoples.  They made canoes and lived by trading among the Channel Islands.  These were the people adopted by the Spanish priests. 

You don't need to give me the naming of Los Angeles.  Most of us Angelenos know where it came from, but mostly, California was not populated (aside from the Native Americans) until the turn of the last century, unless you count those Spanish priests and their wards.  I have been to the Spanish missions, up and down the coast.  They were the sole provenance, not the Mexicans, as you state.  The accepted name of Los Angeles came from the local residents.  Today, I am writing from my brother-in-law's home, he, of Sonoran descent.  I chatted with his mother, who is in her 90s.  Her family came here through the diaspora.  She would be one of the first to claim that Mexicans were not the predominant peoples prior to the 1920s.

The argument that you purport is a general fallacy.  The Mexicans claimed California for 27 years.  Get a grip.   Mexico Territory:  27 years.  United States of America:  169 Years. The Mexican diaspora to the United States did not begin until about a century ago.  If you type in Mexican Diaspora, on the internet, that is verifyable. 

So, your idea that Mexicans should have rights to citizenship in the US is no more correct than any other Central American country, or for that matter, any country not the United States.   You are an apologist for the United States, and yes, I reject you outright.

[Bounder]

Abnormally friendly? Feels like the US where I am now. In Canada that typically means that they don't trust you. Once they are your friends, you'll get an earful. My neighbor - nice person, with a good sense of humor - in an attack of friendliness once told me that after getting to know me she tells people that not all immigrants are horrible people. I was flattered


I do recommend locking those doors though. Preferably with expensive locks that cannot be open with a hairpin.

My parents have lived in their house in Canada for about fifteen years now. They don't know where the keys are. They can't remember the last time they saw the house keys and probably don't know what they look like. 😂

[ML]

My parents have lived in their house in Canada for about fifteen years now. They don't know where the keys are. They can't remember the last time they saw the house keys and probably don't know what they look like. 😂

Please send me their address . . . so I will know where to go when I need a free place to stay.  Also the combination to their safe would be a nice gesture.

[krimster2]

“But the idea that California was occupied by Mexicans is a fallacy.”.....My neighborhood, and the surrounding areas was occupied by the Tongva (native American) peoples.”

“Mexicans (Spanish: Mexicanos) are the people of the United Mexican States “Estatodos Unitos Mexicanos”, a multi-ethnic country in North America”.   In Spanish, it is typical to have the suffix “ano” to indicate an origin, so you, for instance are an “Americano”.  So who is a Mexican?  A Mexicano is a person from Mexico.

This is how I define Mexicans, and it seems to be the accepted definition (according to Wikipedia .  So regardless of their ethnicity; European or Native American, they are Mexican if they originate from Mexico.  Besides the Tongva your neighborhood was also home to a mixed race, Spanish speaking settlement that dates back to the 18th century as previously mentioned.

“ California was not populated (aside from the Native Americans) until the turn of the last century,” 

Since we are now in the 21st century, saying that California didn’t have a non-native population until the early 20th century is false.  Now it didn’t have a very large population, especially when compared to the vast numbers that are present today, but they did exist.  Haven’t you ever watched Zorro?  Who do you think these people were?

“ I have been to the Spanish missions, up and down the coast, they were the sole provenance, not the Mexicans, as you state.”

The sole provenance?  Definitely not true, there were soldiers stationed in forts like Monterey, numerous ranchos, and small settlements including the one not far from your home, and this is just California, how about Texas, New Mexico, Arizona? 

“The argument that you purport is a general fallacy.  The Mexicans claimed California for 27 years....

Yes, but they were there for centuries before that under a different government, same people, just a different administration, I don’t think you can erase their history just for the convenience of your argument , so in reality Mexicanos were present in the American South West for centuries, and that’s what separates them from everyone else even Anglos!

I never claimed that Mexicans should be provided something like automatic citizenship.  I just wanted to point out the inherent historic racism in our immigration laws (and that’s undeniable), and these laws do not acknowledge the centuries old connection between Mexicanos and the American South West.   










 

[krimster2]

Bee Farmer

“My ancestors came to New Amsterdam in the early 1600's.  The Native Americans here welcomed them, and even sold them land. (Manhattan)”

I grew up in the Hudson River Valley of New York surrounded by Dutch colonial towns with names like Fishkill and Peekskill, so I am very familiar with the history of the Dutch colonial period of New York.   The welcome the Dutch received was not consistent.  There were numerous skirmishes that escalated into actual wars, “The Peach Tree War” and “Kieft’s War”, to name but two.  Hostilities with the natives required the Dutch to build a series of forts around New Amsterdam.  You’ve heard the expression, “I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you”.  Well, that’s actually what happened to the Dutch with their original Manhattan purchase.  The Dutch bought the land from the Canarsee tribe, unfortunately the territory belonged to another tribe the Wappinger, so they were scammed, somehow that little detail has gotten lost!

“The Underground Railroad would probably be the closest example I can think of where groups of people actively worked to protect and give assistance to illegal persons.”

An excellent and very astute point on many levels!  Too bad you didn’t carry that a little further.  What is it that makes someone an “illegal person”?  What does the run-away slave and the illegal immigrant have in common?

I’m really not sure what to make of your definitions of immigrants however., seems a bit odd..

“An illegal alien is someone who is here legally, and is not supposed to be here.”
“Illegal immigrants are people who have moved here, but bent the rules to get here.”
“comparable to a legal immigrant who told a white lie”
“Undocumented immigrants are just like a legal immigrant, except their papers are messed up.”

[tfcrew]

You are mistaken, which is n't  uncommon incredibly seldom.  I've never been for immigrating the elderly here wholesale.  We need people that are going to be productive to our society, hard workers...the elderly were productive in their home countries presumably, so now in their later years their countries can take care of them.    I don't know if I have any political heroes, and certainly don't tailor my opinion to any individuals in particular.

You disown your heroes now that they've gone down in defeat?
The legal elderly immigrants that I know brought their retirements along with them.
 Re: Latest info re immigration from Trump  « Reply #334 on: February 05, 2017, 12:37:42 PM »

I blame this whole mess on not only the previous 4 presidents but even more on the spineless congresses who accompanied them.

MIAMI — For the past few weeks, we've watched Republican presidential candidates argue about the 147-year-old practice of granting U.S. citizenship to people born in this country.
GOP front-runner Donald Trump, who has made opposition to undocumented immigration a hallmark of his campaign, got the birthright citizenship debate started when he called for its elimination, splitting the GOP field in half.
Some support Trump, arguing that immigrants are taking advantage of the custom by giving birth to “anchor babies” — children who could eventually help their parents get citizenship. Others argue that it's a time-honored American practice that should endure.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/08/29/birthright-citizenship-voices-gomez/71313864/

Illustrates my points exactly.
Your congress has no backbone.
I am seldom mistaken and hardly ever wrong


 
 

[tfcrew]

“My ancestors came to New Amsterdam in the early 1600's.  The Native Americans here welcomed them, and even sold them land. (Manhattan)”
So then... you should own property next door to Trump Towers?


 
“Undocumented immigrants are just like a legal immigrant, except their papers are messed up.”
Somethings messed up alright.
 

[Bounder]

Congratulations.  You know how to use Wikipedia.  But the idea that California was occupied by Mexicans is a fallacy.  My neighborhood, and the surrounding areas was occupied by the Tongva (native American) peoples.  They made canoes and lived by trading among the Channel Islands.  These were the people adopted by the Spanish priests. 

You don't need to give me the naming of Los Angeles.  Most of us Angelenos know where it came from, but mostly, California was not populated (aside from the Native Americans) until the turn of the last century, unless you count those Spanish priests and their wards.  I have been to the Spanish missions, up and down the coast.  They were the sole provenance, not the Mexicans, as you state.  The accepted name of Los Angeles came from the local residents.  Today, I am writing from my brother-in-law's home, he, of Sonoran descent.  I chatted with his mother, who is in her 90s.  Her family came here through the diaspora.  She would be one of the first to claim that Mexicans were not the predominant peoples prior to the 1920s.

The argument that you purport is a general fallacy.  The Mexicans claimed California for 27 years.  Get a grip.   Mexico Territory:  27 years.  United States of America:  169 Years. The Mexican diaspora to the United States did not begin until about a century ago.  If you type in Mexican Diaspora, on the internet, that is verifyable. 

So, your idea that Mexicans should have rights to citizenship in the US is no more correct than any other Central American country, or for that matter, any country not the United States.   You are an apologist for the United States, and yes, I reject you outright.

Seems like a timely point to add one of my favourite pieces of trivia. Where have the Spanish and the Russians been directly at war with one another? California. :tiphat:

[Bounder]

Please send me their address . . . so I will know where to go when I need a free place to stay.  Also the combination to their safe would be a nice gesture.

They live in a good community. But they aren't fools

[fathertime]

You disown your heroes now that they've gone down in defeat?
The legal elderly immigrants that I know brought their retirements along with them.
 Re: Latest info re immigration from Trump  « Reply #334 on: February 05, 2017, 12:37:42 PM » http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/08/29/birthright-citizenship-voices-gomez/71313864/

Illustrates my points exactly.
Your congress has no backbone.
I am seldom mistaken and hardly ever wrong

I guess you like to make up positions for opposing viewpoints.  I've certainly never been for large scale immigration of elderly people that have aged out of contributing very much to our society while potentially running up large medical expenses.  It doesn't make much financial sense for our country as a whole.
 I have no idea what politicians you find to be 'your heroes', but I personally don't do the hero worship thing. 


Fathertime!