Administrative salaries and unnecessary technology.

This is not exactly what the post you replied to claims.

You just described the placebo effect.

I want a nuclear powered electric car.

What? George W. Bush's last budget wasn't reasonable?

Yes, it is. It is a continuation of the budget that was already passed. You should be happy about it too, since it has effectively cut spending when you take into account inflation. The federal budget has grown less under Obama that is has under any other president since the end of WWII.

What does that mean? Care to elaborate?

Between Ted Kennedy dying and the Coleman/Franken Senate race recount, the D's actually had a filibuster proof majority for ~24 working days during those two year. The rest of the time, they required Republican vote(s) to get anything through. With what little time they had, they chose to pursue health care reform instead of passing a new budget.

That aside, they *did* pass a budget. They passed a continuing resolution which extended Bush's last budget; so we've been operating on George W. Bush's last budget since FY2009.

You have been misinformed. Those here illegally do not qualify for medicaid and other social services as a result of having a child here. The children do qualify for various forms of assistance, but the parents are only entitled to emergency care, of which every human being on our soil does regardless of legal or financial status.

I hope don't think the meager assistance afforded to a child is enough for an entire family to live off of.

I live in Central California and grew up around families of mixed legality and based on my experience, your narrative of the lazy welfare sucking migrants is pure fantasy.

Leaving all of the disputed details aside, it is still true that low skilled immigrants place a lower burden on the welfare state than citizens of the same socioeconomic class.

There is absolutely no data to support the "anchor baby" narrative that scares nativists so much, while there is in fact data that disputes it.

I don't know what country you're from (judging by your use of the term "dole", I would guess Britain), but here in the U.S. "illegal immigrants" do not qualify most major social services, though studies have shown that 60% of them pay into them through payroll taxes. Studies have also shown that low skilled immigrants in the U.S. are less of a burden on the welfare state than citizens of the same socio-economic class.

In what context do you see the supreme court ruling on whether or not is acceptable to commit violence against our own government?

Don't forget shooting up old cars. That's what my gun nut coworker friend gave as an example when the topic of the purpose machine guns came up!

We should be able to have machine guns because shooting up old cars is fun.

This is what we are dealing with.

It makes me sad.

Setting aside any judgement of whether or not it can be ultimately viewed as morally right, committing violence against the government will never be ruled legal, period.

You are correct. I was being to narrow there.

Natural right? I have a natural right to bash someone's skull in with a rock if I want their coconut.

Doesn't mean that right should exist should exist in a civilized society.

No. It's about being able to own a handgun for the purpose of protecting your home. The supreme court in 2008 and again in 2010 proclaimed it so.

You can disagree with the supreme court's decision, like I do, but its opinion is the law of the land, while ours are just the opinion of a couple of assholes on the internet.