The fence should be built. It's about god damn time.

The fence should be built. It's about god damn time.

The fence should be built. It's about god damn time.

they're actually building the fence? never thought it would happen.
especially in an election year.

As if bypassing construction of the fence through the land Bush's country club friends while confiscating the land of the poor and middle class citizens of Texas wasn't bad enough, now Chertoff, in an utterly unsurprising move, has declared that the fence will be exempt from more than 30 laws and regulations.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... 1067.story

What's funny is that Chertoff argued, at the same, that it was vital that these immigrants FOLLOW THE LAW.
That's the typical Bush administration MO. Rules are for everyone else.

I'd say they're ONLY building it because it's an election year. Republicans have to pander to their xenophobic Mexican-hating base.

Singapore is a big plastic bubble of shit. A neo-con's wet dream.

What, turning your citizens into obedient soul-dead workers for a garish glass town parroting "Asian values" that were in fact at least as much ripped off from a bunch of long-dead imperialist limey dinks? Don't even get me started on the fact that it's basically a reasonably benevolent dictatorship run by a single party.

What was it that Ben Franklin once said? "Anyone that values security over freedom deserves neither"? It's not even about security, it's about control. How else do you explain Singapore on homobuttsex and porn and media? That's what I hate about this kind of mentality. It hides the desire of control with a thin veneer of bullshit and "security".

Rights do not exist anyway, but that's another philosophical discussion.

Oh, and the two-party thing is a straw man. I never mentioned any support for the American system, did I? I don't think you'll find a more vocal opponent of it on the site, save for some Ron Paul basement-dwellers.

Ben Franklin's somewhat cynical quote reflects the historical reality of power grabs. Here we have a regime whose propagation of security and positive values is not a smokescreen for ulterior motives, itself a freak of nature among one-party control states.

You have the right to stay alive. To work a job of your choice. To eat what you want. Travel where you want. You do not, however, have the right to have anal sex with your congressman. See how there is a threshold in every value spectrum?

What would be your preferred system of government? I will agree to respect your preference. My personal experience has reflected well upon Singapore's system of governance.

It doesn't? Then why is questioning authority met with such scorn in Singapore? Yes, it's cultural, but it's precisely because the people in power want to keep it, and they do. The PAP has the country by the balls, and not because security is so great, but because it's the one thing that keeps them in power. With a cultural ethic of shutting up and listening to what you're told to do (which is everywhere, really, but incredibly pervasive in Singapore and it's ilk), and hypnotizing the populace with their safe little plastic bubble society, it works. I guess there's inherently nothing wrong with the plastic bubble, but, it's bullshit in this case. It's a tranquilizer, a distraction.

Oh, and Chye Thye Poh might have a few opinions on this.

What kind of rights are we talking about? Moral? Sure, I'll agree, but that doesn't mean anything except our outrage as humans. Legal? That only means anything if they are enacted, which they are loosely, really, they are more "temporary privileges". Things that if violated will result in repercussions? Far from guaranteed. Things that are universal? Ha. Godly? Ha. Things that if violated will rupture space-time and destroy all? No.

I don't have any.

Since that plastic bubble society is a masterpiece of modern statecraft, I don't begrudge people wanting to maintain the status quo. Not only is security a factor; the state has been able to actualize progressive urban and environmental planning that would have been impossible here. This indeed is a cultural factor. Collective versus individual freedom is a major cultural gulf between western and eastern civilizations. That you were taught only individual freedom is true freedom is a philosophical inconvenience... the kind that causes diplomatic friction.

Precisely why should I care about those opinions?

More philosophy. I can assert that the individual freedoms of others have damaged the collective freedoms I could otherwise have enjoyed. Again, not a moral absolute.

In summary, every possible permutation of the world is a hole and you have no suggestions otherwise. Way to go.

Now you just need a few quality conspiracy theories to back that up.