Okay, the various complaints of Mr.Bush have been pointed out and acknowledged..One that (hopefully will be dropped)...is ...he is derelict in his duties by not securing the borders and protecting us from invasion...UNLESS..you put the same blame on EVERY President before him as well.

This would also include enforcing the law of the land and prosecuting violators as well.. so let's get to the meat of the subject and fine,prosecute, and deny illegal invasions.

Just my thought..

Nice try, but no cigar!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/icon_albino.gif

er, i think, rather, a cigar. a cuban cigar, snuck over the border despite anti-cuba sanctions.

Nice try, but no cigar!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/icon_albino.gif


Like THEY just appeared out of nowhere?......How many illegals did we acquire over the years or did these 12 MILLION just arrive at once?

Something else in that cigar uther than tobackky?

Like THEY just appeared out of nowhere?......How many illegals did we acquire over the years or did these 12 MILLION just arrive at once?

Something else in that cigar uther than tobackky?

Actually, you're right. Corporations control the U.S. government. Clinton facilitated corporate sovereignty by signing on to NAFTA. If illegal immigration hurt corporate profits, it would be stopped yesterday! Since it only hurts human beings, why should the fatcats care?


And, uh, anyway, I've just got the one finger for Bush!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/03/countdown.gif

Actually, you're right. Corporations control the U.S. government. Clinton facilitated corporate sovereignty by signing on to NAFTA. If illegal immigration hurt corporate profits, it would be stopped yesterday! Since it only hurts human beings, why should the fatcats care?


And, uh, anyway, I've just got the one finger for Bush!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/03/countdown.gif



Can I still get Perot elected?

the thing that gets me is, why are we talking about immigration all the sudden? everybody's going on about it like it's some kinda crisis but it's not like illegal immigration patterns have changed recently and if the problem is terrorism they're worried about the wrong border (the 911 hijackers came in from canada and had paperwork, so it's not like building a bigass wall is gonna help) and anyway, 911 happened 4 1/2 years ago now so why are we going on about immigration now?

i rather think the repubs are looking for something to distract from the iraq fiasco, the katrina fiasco, the various and sundry indictments and investigations and general disaster of the bush administration by using the bully pulpit to prop up a big huge distraction issue.

only problem is, they're blowing it -- they're too light on immigration for their base, and too tough for the latino population that bush was actually, up to now, doing a passable job of courting. so... oops.

the thing that gets me is, why are we talking about immigration all the sudden?

As the lawyers say, never ask a question to which you don't already know the answer!
;)

the thing that gets me is, why are we talking about immigration all the sudden? everybody's going on about it like it's some kinda crisis but it's not like illegal immigration patterns have changed recently and if the problem is terrorism they're worried about the wrong border (the 911 hijackers came in from canada and had paperwork, so it's not like building a bigass wall is gonna help) and anyway, 911 happened 4 1/2 years ago now so why are we going on about immigration now?

i rather think the repubs are looking for something to distract from the iraq fiasco, the katrina fiasco, the various and sundry indictments and investigations and general disaster of the bush administration by using the bully pulpit to prop up a big huge distraction issue.

only problem is, they're blowing it -- they're too light on immigration for their base, and too tough for the latino population that bush was actually, up to now, doing a passable job of courting. so... oops.



As Max has already pointed out, you hit the nail right on the head with this one. The immigration issue is a distraction. (Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.)  It is also a way to divide the U.S. population. It seems that most of this nation is starting to get on the same page about Iraq, about what is going on (or not going on) in Washington and one means of statagy is divide and conquer. So they are dividing the U.S. on this issue. And the reason why they are pointing to the southern border as opposed to the northern border can be summed up in one word-racism.



Cat

As Max has already pointed out, you hit the nail right on the head with this one. The immigration issue is a distraction. (Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.)  It is also a way to divide the U.S. population. It seems that most of this nation is starting to get on the same page about Iraq, about what is going on (or not going on) in Washington and one means of statagy is divide and conquer. So they are dividing the U.S. on this issue. And the reason why they are pointing to the southern border as opposed to the northern border can be summed up in one word-racism.



Cat

The Repugs have nothing to lose. If Republican politicians pledge to do something about illegal immigration next term, and then they don't make good on it, the majority of white males, white Christians, and white suburbanites are still going to vote Republican. If Dubya could run for a third term this time against Hillary, all of the former supporters who now give Bush low poll numbers would run back to Bush in a big hurry! Hillary? Heaven forefend!

pfft. hilary. i'd probably vote for mccain or chuck hagel before i'd vote for hilary.

they better not!

pfft. hilary. i'd probably vote for mccain or chuck hagel before i'd vote for hilary.

they better not!

Money talks louder than good ideas. Hillary has way more money than any other Dem, so it's going to be Hillary. Hillary is never going to be elected President in a two-ticket race. We'll end up with a Republican president in 2008...unless there is a bigtime spoiler who can take a major voting bloc from the Repugs, as Ross Perot did in '92.

However, a lot can happen in eighteen months...

so let's get to the meat of the subject and fine,prosecute, and deny illegal invasions.


i.e. Iraq, the biggest illegal invasion today

i.e. Iraq, the biggest illegal invasion today

We did not invade Iraq. We liberated it!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/terminator.gif

It wasn't illegal either. Why? Because we say it wasn't and whate are you gonna do about it anyway!

As Max has already pointed out, you hit the nail right on the head with this one. The immigration issue is a distraction. (Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.)  It is also a way to divide the U.S. population. It seems that most of this nation is starting to get on the same page about Iraq, about what is going on (or not going on) in Washington and one means of statagy is divide and conquer. So they are dividing the U.S. on this issue. And the reason why they are pointing to the southern border as opposed to the northern border can be summed up in one word-racism.



Cat




Um...For Cat etal those who took the time to complain the US is racist against our SOUTHERN invaders...I didn't go to Harvard but still know enough that MEXICAN IS NOT A RACE!

You wonder how these protestors can understand the issue let alone they have no cause to rebuke when they call the border patrol, the politicians and people who know LEGAL FROM ILLEAGAL 'Racists' ..racist against WHAT?

Yet we still see someone pop up with a sign saying it AND can you believe showing up to a protest WITH A  MEXICAN FLAG..Sure does defeat the idea and purpose that one wants the benefits of America BUT continues to wave the MEXICAN FLAG...(oh, that number went down after the first major march when that became part of the commentary of how the march hurt more than helped).   

Um...For Cat etal those who took the time to complain the US is racist against our SOUTHERN invaders...I didn't go to Harvard but still know enough that MEXICAN IS NOT A RACE!

You wonder how these protestors can understand the issue let alone they have no cause to rebuke when they call the border patrol, the politicians and people who know LEGAL FROM ILLEAGAL 'Racists' ..racist against WHAT?

Yet we still see someone pop up with a sign saying it AND can you believe showing up to a protest WITH A  MEXICAN FLAG..Sure does defeat the idea and purpose that one wants the benefits of America BUT continues to wave the MEXICAN FLAG...(oh, that number went down after the first major march when that became part of the commentary of how the march hurt more than helped).   


Mexican isn't a race but Hispanic is. There is a lot of racism against Hispanics.


To show that there is a double standard here, look at the people coming from Cuba. If they reach the U.S. shores, they are free to stay. Yet, they still wave their Cuban flags and I don't see anyone saying anything about that. So why is it ok for Cubans to come here but not Mexicans?

I just think that there is so much more to this issue then just a bunch of people coming across the border. Many people have looked the other way for many years because "they were doing jobs that Americans didn't want to do." But there is more to that statement, "they are willing to do the job at a fraction of the cost than Americans are expected to be paid." There have been many people who profited from the practice of hiring the so-called "illegals". But then people complain that these people are taking over "our" jobs when the good paying jobs are being sent overseas or even to Mexico (how ironic) for cheap labor. So instead of putting the blame where it should be-the employers who want cheap labor and they don't care where they find it, the blame is being put on the families who just want to better their lives.


Cat

Mexican isn't a race but Hispanic is. There is a lot of racism against Hispanics.


To show that there is a double standard here, look at the people coming from Cuba. If they reach the U.S. shores, they are free to stay. Yet, they still wave their Cuban flags and I don't see anyone saying anything about that. So why is it ok for Cubans to come here but not Mexicans?
That's because Cubans live under the yoke of an undemocratic Communist dicatorship.
::)

Mexican isn't a race but Hispanic is. There is a lot of racism against Hispanics.


To show that there is a double standard here, look at the people coming from Cuba. If they reach the U.S. shores, they are free to stay. Yet, they still wave their Cuban flags and I don't see anyone saying anything about that. So why is it ok for Cubans to come here but not Mexicans?

I just think that there is so much more to this issue then just a bunch of people coming across the border. Many people have looked the other way for many years because "they were doing jobs that Americans didn't want to do." But there is more to that statement, "they are willing to do the job at a fraction of the cost than Americans are expected to be paid." There have been many people who profited from the practice of hiring the so-called "illegals". But then people complain that these people are taking over "our" jobs when the good paying jobs are being sent overseas or even to Mexico (how ironic) for cheap labor. So instead of putting the blame where it should be-the employers who want cheap labor and they don't care where they find it, the blame is being put on the families who just want to better their lives.


Cat


I haven't heard anyone at the protests saying 'We must keep HISPANICS OUT!' then ..yes, that would be racists.they ARE saying to keep illegals out..Big Business of course is to blame and I maintain, we must enforce the laws we already have rather than create new ones...

We have that allowance for Cubans as long as they reach land, otherwise they are sent back....

One method that would be a win-win is dig a trech across the mexico borderline,let the water from New Orleans fill it and throw in all the alligators from Florida...but will we see it?  naw!

One method that would be a win-win is dig a trech across the mexico borderline,let the water from New Orleans fill it and throw in all the alligators from Florida...but will we see it?  naw!

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/15/tool.gif

the thing that gets me is, why are we talking about immigration all the sudden? everybody's going on about it like it's some kinda crisis but it's not like illegal immigration patterns have changed recently and if the problem is terrorism they're worried about the wrong border (the 911 hijackers came in from canada and had paperwork, so it's not like building a bigass wall is gonna help) and anyway, 911 happened 4 1/2 years ago now so why are we going on about immigration now?

i rather think the repubs are looking for something to distract from the iraq fiasco, the katrina fiasco, the various and sundry indictments and investigations and general disaster of the bush administration by using the bully pulpit to prop up a big huge distraction issue.

only problem is, they're blowing it -- they're too light on immigration for their base, and too tough for the latino population that bush was actually, up to now, doing a passable job of courting. so... oops.


I just had to dip in again on this topic...NO HIJACKERS CAME FROM CANADA, SEE 9/11 Commission report.
But yes you are right, bogus papers and a big wall never stopped anyone.
If conditions are better in the US or Canada for that matter since there is a fair sized population that has made it this far north, people will try to improve their life.

I just had to dip in again on this topic...NO HIJACKERS CAME FROM CANADA, SEE 9/11 Commission report.
But yes you are right, bogus papers and a big wall never stopped anyone.
If conditions are better in the US or Canada for that matter since there is a fair sized population that has made it this far north, people will try to improve their life.

I couldn't emmigrate to Canada. I don't own enough assets.
::)

Okay, the various complaints of Mr.Bush have been pointed out and acknowledged..One that (hopefully will be dropped)...is ...he is derelict in his duties by not securing the borders and protecting us from invasion...UNLESS..you put the same blame on EVERY President before him as well.

This would also include enforcing the law of the land and prosecuting violators as well.. so let's get to the meat of the subject and fine,prosecute, and deny illegal invasions.

Just my thought..


My problem is the insane split-personality attacks that the Democrats are taking on this very topic.

On one hand, they attack because not enough is being done to protect the border, and that nothing is being done to remove those who enter illegally.

Then on the other hand, they attack because The Republicans (and President Bush by association) are to hard on the poor illegal immigrants who enter the country.  They want a wide-range amnesty to all, no matter when they entered or how they came into the country.

Now, is that not insane?  How can you have both at the same time?  This very topic shows me that they are nothing buy bitchy partaisan attacks, and are of no merit at all.

Kick out all the illegals and tighten the borders, and then you are a racist nazi.

Allow those who enter illegally to find a place to legally join society, and then you are not doing anything to make the nation more secure.

Damned if you do, damned if you dont.  Just damned no matter what.

i rather think the repubs are looking for something to distract from the iraq fiasco, the katrina fiasco, the various and sundry indictments and investigations and general disaster of the bush administration by using the bully pulpit to prop up a big huge distraction issue.

only problem is, they're blowing it -- they're too light on immigration for their base, and too tough for the latino population that bush was actually, up to now, doing a passable job of courting. so... oops.


Uhhh, this is exactly what I mean.

The topic seems to have started as "Why is not enough being done to protec the borders".  ANd here you are, going on about how the Republicans are to hard on illegal immigrants.

Well guess what, you can't have it both freaking ways!  So which do you want, tighter border security, or more open immigration policies?  Cause you can't have both.

And whichever one you want, you had better shut up about the other.  Since immigration seems so important, you should actually be backing the President, since he is the one on your side, fighting Congress.  Because if you keep cutting his feet out from under him on immigration, you will not get anywhere.

And you had also better shut up on border security, because you already seem to think liberal immigration is more important then security.

But I know that all you really want is something to bitch about.  SO no matter what, you will still bitch.  (and that is not aimed at Tia, but at the chronic bitchers in general).

Uhhh, this is exactly what I mean.

The topic seems to have started as "Why is not enough being done to protec the borders".  ANd here you are, going on about how the Republicans are to hard on illegal immigrants.

Well guess what, you can't have it both freaking ways!  So which do you want, tighter border security, or more open immigration policies?  Cause you can't have both.

And whichever one you want, you had better shut up about the other.  Since immigration seems so important, you should actually be backing the President, since he is the one on your side, fighting Congress.  Because if you keep cutting his feet out from under him on immigration, you will not get anywhere.

And you had also better shut up on border security, because you already seem to think liberal immigration is more important then security.

But I know that all you really want is something to bitch about.  SO no matter what, you will still bitch.  (and that is not aimed at Tia, but at the chronic bitchers in general).
wow, who pissed in your rice krispies, dude? Or are you just sad because yours is the party not only responsible for flagrantly racist immigration policies at home, but you're also now gunning down women and children in cold blood in iraq?

I guess I'd be pissy too if my political party was such an unmitigated clusterfk.

wow, who pissed in your rice krispies, dude? Or are you just sad because yours is the party not only responsible for flagrantly racist immigration policies at home, but you're also now gunning down women and children in cold blood in iraq?


No, I am just frustrated because of people who talk out of both sides of their face.  I am frustrated at people who are so blatently partaisan in their thinking that they are unable to make consistant and logical policy statements.

I am frustrated at people who put slogans and cute little attack statements, and who live in Potempkin Villages, wondering why the world is so messed up.

I am tired pf people who distort the truth, and who will be all in favor of something during one administration, and dead set against it in the next.

And I am tired of all BS and no reality.  Oh it is so cute to throw around statements like "racism" and crap like that, but all it does is water down real racism.  I am sure that the next thing you know, people will be attacking Viking movies, because there are no black people in them.

And excuse me, but "racist immigration policies".  Uhhh, I hate to tell you this but more immigrants ceom from Latin America then any other area of the world.  And by it's definition, "immigration" is all about "minorities" entering the country.  Therefore, any restriction on immigration at all is racist by nature.  Once again, an arguement that is based in false information, therefore is unwinable.

So back to the topic, what should be done about tightening border security?  Or should they be thrown wide open, and anybody who wants to enter them just allowed to walk on in?

Yeah, I think the racism thing applies. Why so much concern about Mexicans and no concern about people coming down from canada? Why whenever a far rightwinger wants to invade a country, it's full of people with dark skin?

Anyway, I'll just reiterate what I said before. This immigration stuff is a distraction from bush's failed policies. I'm on record on this board saying I'd vote for chuck hagel or john mccain before I vote for hillary Clinton, so it's not that I'm a partisan hack. It's that I firmly and truthfully believe bush is the worst disaster to have befallen this country probably since the civil war. And we have WAY bigger fish to fry at the moment than immigration. I honestly don't care about it, I don't think it's a very serious issue.

Yeah, I think the racism thing applies. Why so much concern about Mexicans and no concern about people coming down from canada? Why whenever a far rightwinger wants to invade a country, it's full of people with dark skin?


Uhh, the last time I checked, the people of Iraq are Caucasians.

And oh yes, those evil Lybians.  Oh wait, they are Caucasians also.  So were those evil Serbs.  In fact, were we not protecting the Muslim Croatians from the evil Christian Serbians?  Wait, I am so confused.

In fact, part of the entire mess in Iraq was the genocidal slaughter of minorities.  So, in other words you think we should ignore the slaughter of minorities, and support caucasian regemes?

Please get back to me when the arguements start to make logical sense.

Uhh, the last time I checked, the people of Iraq are Caucasians.

And oh yes, those evil Lybians.  Oh wait, they are Caucasians also.  So were those evil Serbs.  In fact, were we not protecting the Muslim Croatians from the evil Christian Serbians?  Wait, I am so confused.

In fact, part of the entire mess in Iraq was the genocidal slaughter of minorities.  So, in other words you think we should ignore the slaughter of minorities, and support caucasian regemes?

Please get back to me when the arguements start to make logical sense.

semantic games. if you're trying to pretend there's no such thing as anti-arab racism in the world, again, this is simply prespammersite. or are you trying to claim that iraqis are commonly perceived in america as being "white"? ridiculous on its face.

and the serb war was, of course, under clinton. so that's a nonstarter.

we typically DO ignore the slaughter of minorities, but if there's money to be made or power to be acquired -- for instance in the oil-rich nation of iraq -- the right isn't above invading them and then pretending to care about liberating them, only to turn around and massacre them. i rather suspect that if the victims of the latest marine slaughterfest were white, the right wing would be much more interested in getting to the bottom of who did it.

let me know when you MAKE an argument. all you ever do is dance around the maypole, play wordgames, and indulge frothing vituperations about how everyone but you is a "chronic bitcher." dude, you bitch and moan more than anyone ON this board.

and please amuse me by finding the word "caucasian" on this page. guess you haven't checked in a while.

http://www.geoplace.com/hottopics/CIAwfb/factbook/geos/iz.html#People

unless you think the source is unreliable? lol.

"Ethnic groups: 
Arab 75%-80%, Kurdish 15%-20%, Turkoman, Assyrian or other 5%  "

semantic games. if you're trying to pretend there's no such thing as anti-arab racism in the world, again, this is simply prespammersite. or are you trying to claim that iraqis are commonly perceived in america as being "white"? ridiculous on its face.

and the serb war was, of course, under clinton. so that's a nonstarter.

we typically DO ignore the slaughter of minorities, but if there's money to be made or power to be acquired -- for instance in the oil-rich nation of iraq -- the right isn't above invading them and then pretending to care about liberating them, only to turn around and massacre them. i rather suspect that if the victims of the latest marine slaughterfest were white, the right wing would be much more interested in getting to the bottom of who did it.




http://users.pandora.be/eforum/emoticons4u/happy/1074.gif



Cat

and please amuse me by finding the word "caucasian" on this page. guess you haven't checked in a while.

http://www.geoplace.com/hottopics/CIAwfb/factbook/geos/iz.html#People

unless you think the source is unreliable? lol.

"Ethnic groups:   
Arab 75%-80%, Kurdish 15%-20%, Turkoman, Assyrian or other 5%  "


*hmmmm*

The last time I checked, "Arabs" were "Caucasians".

I am frustrated at people who put slogans and cute little attack statements, and who live in Potempkin Villages, wondering why the world is so messed up.

I am tired pf people who distort the truth, and who will be all in favor of something during one administration, and dead set against it in the next.


Then you must be absolutely fed up with the American Right. Talk about Potempkin Villages. Men who never served in the military, let alone led troops in combat, designed and forced the Iraq war and ignored the warnings of the top military brass.  Now the Right is calling Jack Murtha, USMC x37 years, a traitor and propping up that idiot Rumsfeld as some kind of brilliant strategist!

What I and other "liberals" have tried to say about the immigration issue is that there is a complicated history of corporate exploitation of migrant labor and an even more complicated history of American imperialism in Latin America.  

The right-wing rejoinder is those immigrants should be fighting for reforms in their own countries. I said before when "the people" in Latin-American countries force populist reforms, the first group to scream blue murder is the American Right. The right-wing was alll gung-ho for the Contras, but not the EZLN in Chiapas. The EZLN wants the kind of Mexico in which Mexicans would not need to cross the Rio Grande, yet the EZLN only holds sway in the southernmost (and poorest) state in Mexico. If the American Right is really against illegal immigration, they should demand America support the Zapatistas.  
Can you honestly say either Bush and the Republicans or Fox and the National Action Party want any REAL reforms to benefit the Mexican people? Fox is as big a nutcase as Dubya, he called oral contraceptives "weapons of mass destruction."  I mean, for Pete's sake! They're both christo-fascist zealots!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/10/vampa.gif

*hmmmm*

The last time I checked, "Arabs" were "Caucasians".
i rest my case. You're playing a semantic game, by your rule there's no such thing as anti-arab white racism because they're the same race. It's silly.

IF FREE BORDERS IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR CORPORATIONS, WHY NOT FOR PEOPLE,
TOO?

JONATHAN ROWE - There is an egregious disconnect in the case for the
global economy, corporate version. We are told that the world should
be without borders, for corporations and stuff. Borders are clogs in
the celestial mechanism of the market. They are protectionism, which
is darkness to the market's light.

But when the discussion turns to people, somehow the argument flips.
Then it's troops, fences, regulations up the kazoo. Corporations get
magic visas; cars and video games get them too. But when an actual
human being tries to cross the border  well, call out the National
Guard.

To which one has to say, "Wait a minute." If the world should be
borderless for artificial persons called corporations, then why not
for real people? If Ford can go to Mexico to find cheaper labor, then
why should not Mexican workers be able to come to the U.S. to find
higher-paying jobs  or jobs period? The proponents of global
corporatism think that real people should be content with second-class
status. I don't think so.

http://onthecommons.org/node/904

*hmmmm*

The last time I checked, "Arabs" were "Caucasians".



Not according to Ronald Reagan who referred to them as "sand n****ers"




Cat

IF FREE BORDERS IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR CORPORATIONS, WHY NOT FOR PEOPLE,
TOO?


By the law corporations are people. I guess the lesson for Mexicans is don't cross the border as Juan Sanchez, cross the border as Juan Sanchez, Inc.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/09/smokin.gif



Not according to Ronald Reagan who referred to them as "sand n****ers"


Eh, no surprise, the man was flaming azzh()le.
::)

Then you must be absolutely fed up with the American Right. Talk about Potempkin Villages. Men who never served in the military, let alone led troops in combat, designed and forced the Iraq war and ignored the warnings of the top military brass.


Hmmmm, am I the only one that remembers "Somalia" and "Yugoslavia"?  Oh wait, those were lead by that wonderful war hero, William Clinton.

THis is the type of coprolite I just tune out.  It is meaningless and pointless, simply more partaisan bitching.

At least this administration has not put out a gag order, threatening to court-martial any serviceman who speaks out against the war.  I remember that little trick of William Clinton very well.

Hmmmm, am I the only one that remembers "Somalia" and "Yugoslavia"?  Oh wait, those were lead by that wonderful war hero, William Clinton.

THis is the type of coprolite I just tune out.  It is meaningless and pointless, simply more partaisan bitching.

At least this administration has not put out a gag order, threatening to court-martial any serviceman who speaks out against the war.  I remember that little trick of William Clinton very well.

Somalia and Yugoslavia were entirely different beasts from the neo-con plan to get our country in intractable war to destabilize the entire Middle East. I do not recall the Clinton court-martial threat, I'm not denying it, I just have to look it up. Anyway, there's no need for enlisted men to criticize this war when all the generals are quitting and doing it for them!
This war is like Vietnam without the draft. It is founded on insane foreign policy. It is getting thousands of American youth killed, and innumerable Iraqis, and atrocities are mounting. Atrocities are what you get when you put soldiers into this kind occupation. If I was stuck over there in 120 F heat with an IED around every corner, I don't know what I might become capable of either. This war is unwinnable and the stated goals are unattainable. This is what happens when psychotics start running your country.
Partisan bitching nothing. I'm ashamed of the Dems for voting for this war resolution which gives the President unconstitutional power.
You might as well quit trying to defend this administration, Mush, the job is just going to get harder and harder over the next 18 months. You don't need the stress!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/06/krach.gif

since mushroom is so adament in saying any criticism of the administration is unfounded partisan bickering -- as though there were nothign to complain about -- i'd be curious to know, mushroom, do YOU honestly think the country's headed in the right direction? how do you see the iraq war turning out? and when?

"what part of illegal don't you understand?"
http://la.indymedia.org/uploads/2006/06/slavery.jpg

since mushroom is so adament in saying any criticism of the administration is unfounded partisan bickering -- as though there were nothign to complain about -- i'd be curious to know, mushroom, do YOU honestly think the country's headed in the right direction? how do you see the iraq war turning out? and when?
i guess we'll never know.

since mushroom is so adament in saying any criticism of the administration is unfounded partisan bickering -- as though there were nothign to complain about -- i'd be curious to know, mushroom, do YOU honestly think the country's headed in the right direction? how do you see the iraq war turning out? and when?

I'll answer for him. At the heart of it all, it's not about policy, it's about being on the "right" side.  It feels good to side with the fascists. It makes you feel like you're on the winning team, like you're a patriot, like you're on the side of God and truth and right. You feel safe at night knowing Big Brother is looking out for you...until the night the secret police kick in your door and nobody hears of you again. As the jack-booted thugs haul you away, no habeas corpus, you're at a loss to explain what it is you did. "Why me? I was such a model citizen." It's like the prisoners used to say in the dungeons of the Kremlin, "This is all such a terrible mistake, if only Comrade Stalin knew..."
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/help.gif

i've been thinking a lot the last few days about the comparative narratives of the left and right, and how much more pleasant and enjoyable the story on the right is. think about it! they say that america is totally selfless, incorruptible, and always and forever wonderful, you can be as selfish as you like and it just helps everybody, and war is the ultimate thrilling reality t.v. show. meanwhile the left keeps saying the government is corrupt, the society is unfair, and war is an unholy horror.

i've been thinking a lot the last few days about the comparative narratives of the left and right, and how much more pleasant and enjoyable the story on the right is. think about it! they say that america is totally selfless, incorruptible, and always and forever wonderful, you can be as selfish as you like and it just helps everybody, and war is the ultimate thrilling reality t.v. show. meanwhile the left keeps saying the government is corrupt, the society is unfair, and war is an unholy horror.

Sean Hannity is fond of referring to America as "The greatest country God ever gave man." Ann Coulter says liberals are "godless." Therefore He couldn't have given America to liberals, therefore liberals aren't Americans. The right-wingers would not argue with this!

Fitzgerald isn't going to indict Karl Rove after all, so God smiles upon the GOP, and the march to nazi-town goes on unhindered! Aren't you glad you're on Jesus' team instead of those sniveling Democrats?

it's like being intoxicated. drunk on this fantasy of manifest destiny and that every war we fight is world war ii all over again.

it's like being intoxicated. drunk on this fantasy of manifest destiny and that every war we fight is world war ii all over again.

And there was no such thing as an unhappy veteran until the liberals started poisoning the well during Vietnam!

And there was no such thing as an unhappy veteran until the liberals started poisoning the well during Vietnam!
jah. "all quiet on the western front," "the thin red line" and "whistle" have never been high on the right-wing reading list.

since mushroom is so adament in saying any criticism of the administration is unfounded partisan bickering -- as though there were nothign to complain about -- i'd be curious to know, mushroom, do YOU honestly think the country's headed in the right direction? how do you see the iraq war turning out? and when?


I did not say that questioning or criticism is "Partaisan bickering".  However, most of the discussion in this forum is exactly that.

I look through this, and see the most outrageous things.  Most of it is absolutely meaningless, mean spirited, and unfounded.  It is pure nonsense, and is so far off the point it is astounding.

In another topic here, somebody used as an example the "fact" that if the President's daughters got "knocked up" (his own words), then of course they would get abortions.  That is complete nonsense!  It is an offensive and rude kind of ramark to make, no matter who it is about.  I would be just as offended if the ramerk was made about Chelsea Clinton or anybody else.  Nobody has the right to make a remark like that about another person, especially when they are in the puiblic eye because of their parents, and not for something they themselves have done.  Besides, nobody has any idea what another person would do, and has no right to make a statement like that.

Most of the conversation in here is simply nothing but attacks, accusations and opinions disguised as "truth".  And I call it partaisan because that is what it is.  And in fact, for most people in here it can be easily proven.

It has been asked in here before "What do you think the President has doen right?"  And what were the responses?  Largely nothing but attacks.  Even when the President does something like propose an immigration amnesty he is attacked.  There is simply no way that people can be 100% against everything the President does, unless they are so blinded by partaisan politics and their own opinion that they refuse to look at things with open eyes.

There were a lot of things I did not like about President Clinton, but there were also a lot of things I liked that he did.  I no more agreed with the Republicans that attacked everything he did then I agree with the Democrats who attack everything that President Bush does.

Politics (and human nature) does not work by absolutes.  And whenever somebody starts with statements that the other side is totally wrong about everything, then I know I have found an individual with a closed mind.  There is no negotiation with them, there is not much use even having a conversation with them.  They are so pompus in their belief that anybody who disagrees is an idiot.

well, to pick one thing at random: why not wonder what a pro-life politician would do if one of his daughters got pregnant? he'd be forcing lots of other people's daughters to carry unwanted pregnancies to term so it seems fair to speculate whether he'd hold his own family to the same standard. i really don't see the problem there.

I did not say that questioning or criticism is "Partaisan bickering".  However, most of the discussion in this forum is exactly that.
(In the right-wing lingua franca) Partisan bickering: when somebody says something Republicans don't like.

I look through this, and see the most outrageous things.  Most of it is absolutely meaningless, mean spirited, and unfounded.  It is pure nonsense, and is so far off the point it is astounding.
Wot's that then? Coulter, Hannity...a Bush press conference?

In another topic here, somebody used as an example the "fact" that if the President's daughters got "knocked up" (his own words), then of course they would get abortions.  That is complete nonsense!
I said so. Impolite phraseology aside, I do believe it is true. If I thought Bush family members were scanning our message board, I would use more temperate language (so as not to get hauled off in the middle of the night to a Rove Arbeitslager). It is not comparable to Rush Limbaugh holding up a picture of 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton on national television and scoffing, "...did you also know there is a White House dog?" And foidamore, it is not as if Jenna and Barbara have shown themselves to be paragons of temperance, virtue, and good judgment.

It is an offensive and rude kind of ramark to make, no matter who it is about.
The insinuation does not extol the image of the First Daughters, but the example is set in hypothesis and speculation. I did not say they have and they did, I said they would, and who's to say they have not already.

  I would be just as offended if the ramerk was made about Chelsea Clinton or anybody else.  Nobody has the right to make a remark like that about another person, especially when they are in the puiblic eye because of their parents, and not for something they themselves have done.  Besides, nobody has any idea what another person would do, and has no right to make a statement like that.
The right? Ever hear of the First Amendment, bub? I am sure you are familiar with the affirming of First Amendment privileges in discussion of public figures in the case of New York Times Co. V. Sullivan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_v._Sullivan
I'll bet Limbaugh's father went on a tirade against this ruling, but it is what protected Rush from getting sued by the Clinton family, and thank the lord for that!

Most of the conversation in here is simply nothing but attacks, accusations and opinions disguised as "truth".  And I call it partaisan because that is what it is.  And in fact, for most people in here it can be easily proven.
"Truth" gets harder to define in a country in which we tolerated the theft of two consecutive Presidential elections, bot proven stolen beyond the shadow of a doubt.* But don't get me started on all the lies of this Administration! As for "partisan," you won't catch me giving an uncritical pass to any Dem, whether it's Hillary Clinton or Joe Lieberman, or Nancy Pelosi or Howard Dean. The Democratic party has lashed itself to the same corporate paymasters as the Republican. The real partisan pathology in this country goes to stupid white people with their canine loyalty to Ronald Reagan.

It has been asked in here before "What do you think the President has doen right?"  And what were the responses?  Largely nothing but attacks.  Even when the President does something like propose an immigration amnesty he is attacked.  There is simply no way that people can be 100% against everything the President does, unless they are so blinded by partaisan politics and their own opinion that they refuse to look at things with open eyes.
Unfortunatley, Dubya has proven himself entralled to the nationless billionaires who are loyal to nothing but their own greed and their own corporate fiefdoms. True conservatives rigorously oppose Bush's "guest worker" program because it does nothing for reform and only serves Bush's big business cronies. Bush is not a conservative. He is a corporatist with no moral principles at all. It is like asking in Germany in 1936, "what has Hitler done right?"

There were a lot of things I did not like about President Clinton, but there were also a lot of things I liked that he did.  I no more agreed with the Republicans that attacked everything he did then I agree with the Democrats who attack everything that President Bush does.
I don't doubt your sincerity here. However, I will doubt your sincerity if you try to argue that Bush is not a far worse president and a far more dangerous person than Clinton.

Politics (and human nature) does not work by absolutes.  And whenever somebody starts with statements that the other side is totally wrong about everything, then I know I have found an individual with a closed mind.  There is no negotiation with them, there is not much use even having a conversation with them.  They are so pompus in their belief that anybody who disagrees is an idiot.

Again, I am not arguing for absolutes. I have found so many faults with my party, the Democrats (and I am a registered Dem), it breaks my heart. In fact, I was so distressed with Bill Clinton that I could not vote for him in 1996. If the Dems nominate Hillary, I might not be able to vote for her either. On the other side, I believe the Republican party is NOT the party it was in 1864 with Lincoln or in 1964 with Goldwater. Heck, even Richard Nixon, as paranoid and obnoxious as he was, seems mature and reasonable compared with what the GOP has become since Reagan. I do not say the Republican party is fascist-occupied sarcastically. I believe the Republican party today is the most dangerous political party in the Western world since the Nazis. Fair and balanced? Would you like to take the shark's point of view in a shark attack?

* The truth is out there for you to read if you so choose to seek it. You could challenge me on the statement and I could argue about it for a week. You will never accept the truth from me. It's as if you did not want to believe the Earth is a sphere. I could hold forth with vigorous arguments as to why the Earth is not flat, but there is no need. The round Earth is an established scientific fact. So is the fact that the Republican operatives stole the last two Presidential elections. Now, it would not surprise me if you kept coming back with Flat Earth Society talking points. The conservative establishment in this country, after all, is demanding public schools give equal time to faith-based intelligent design (in other words, Biblical creationism) and hold the principles of Darwin suspect!

DEAR STUDENT: The theory of evolutions is a only a theory, that is why it is called the theory of evolution.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/nixweiss.gif

Yeah, I think the racism thing applies. Why so much concern about Mexicans and no concern about people coming down from canada? Why whenever a far rightwinger wants to invade a country, it's full of people with dark skin?

Anyway, I'll just reiterate what I said before. This immigration stuff is a distraction from bush's failed policies. I'm on record on this board saying I'd vote for chuck hagel or john mccain before I vote for hillary Clinton, so it's not that I'm a partisan hack. It's that I firmly and truthfully believe bush is the worst disaster to have befallen this country probably since the civil war. And we have WAY bigger fish to fry at the moment than immigration. I honestly don't care about it, I don't think it's a very serious issue.



Not a serious issue? BULLSH*T.  We're talking about the welfare of the American people.  Wages have stagnated, dude.  My father is working as a painter for ten bucks an hour.  You know what he would have made 20 years ago?  The same goddamned thing, 10 bucks an hour.  Now do you think the cost of living has stayed the same?  Its not a racial issue its a NATIONAL issue.  We have to take care of our own first.  You can't  disregard millions of working Americans because its your bleeding heart instinct to let these people enter our country and take jobs.  Apologists on the Left and the Right can squawk on all they want about "its jobs Americans don't want to do", no, correction, its jobs UPPER MIDDLE CLASS Americans with college educations don't want to do. 

What about the American working man?  Oh, wait, I remember, hes just a honky- he and his family deserve to be screwed anyway. ::)

[quote author=

[quote author=

Well, obviously, your dad's a nitwit because he didn't manage his stock portfolio correctly. You liberals always blame somebody else, never take no personal responsibility!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/icon_biggrin.gif


;D

They also would say he should go to college.  Now of course they don't explain how a middle aged person with a family to worry about gets the money for college, who takes care of his family while hes going etc. :D

A LOT of Liberals excuse illegal immigration because they are so damned hell bent on being the "Tolerant liberal" they don't want to take a position that might upset any minorities.  I feel for the plight of the Mexican migrant workers and their families, but it makes no sense to screw American families over just so we can help them.  They have to solve their own problems in Mexico.  I realise its not all their fault and a lot of the problems in Latin America are because of our government, but that doesn't make it right to screw over American families.  I keep thinking deep down theres a racist component to this.  Some extreme liberals in their heart of hearts think because our government has screwed over Latin America that when Mexicans come up here and bring hardship to the American families it doesn't matter because its somehow justice for what we've done to Latin America.  How does a blue collar worker whos never set foot in the Congress deserve to be disadvantaged because of the follies of our government? >:(



calm down dude.

refer to what i said on the other thread. it's not that i think it's intrinsically frivolous, i think the republicans have ulterior motives for bringing it up and have no intention of doing anything real about it. if you want to do something about stagnant wages, do something about CEOs pulling in 400 million dollar retirement packages for driving their companies into bankruptcy, and a national debt so large that a criminally large fraction of our national resources are being sent overseas as interest for creditor nations like china. lack of accountability in government is the problem, not mexicans coming across the border to work at wal*mart.




Not Mexicans coming across the border to work at Wal mart?  Um you do of course REALISE there ARE Native-born Americans who need these jobs?  Do you think all Americans are college educated? Hell no they aren't.  YOU have to understand something, illegal labor is what the bosses use to control Americans' wages.  Its as simple as that.  CEOs pull down way too much, but thats not the whole problem.  Mexicans crossing the border to work at Wal Mart IS a problem dude, and its a big one. 

well, to pick one thing at random: why not wonder what a pro-life politician would do if one of his daughters got pregnant? he'd be forcing lots of other people's daughters to carry unwanted pregnancies to term so it seems fair to speculate whether he'd hold his own family to the same standard. i really don't see the problem there.


The problem here is that you are totally unable to step out of your own mind-set, and view things as other people do.  You are so obsessed with your worldview that nothing else matters.

And I can answer that first hand.

I am pro-life.  My late fiancee was pro-life.  Her father is pro-life (and an even more radical Republican then I am).  When she got pregnant, neither of us were really considering starting a family so soon.  We had only been dating for a little over a year, and she was a full-time student.  In addition, we had no health care, and my job barely paid enough to support us 2, let alone 3 of us.

What did we do?  We had the baby, of course.  We briefly talked about abortion, but it was something that neither of us wanted to do.  And her family fully supported our decision.

Some people are so consumed with the idea that babies are disposible, that they can't understand that not everybody shares that belief.  And since of course they would have an abortion, that automatically means that everybody else would make the same decision.

But the most important point is that nobody has the right to say what they think somebody would do, especially if they do not know the people.  By saying that "of course they would get an abortion" is really stupid.

And even more important, you are forgetting that his daughters are legal adults.  They have their own beliefs about this subject, which may or may not be the same as that of their father.

And in any event, that is a personal decision of the people involved.

[quote author=

Then what we need to do is fine the HELL out of businesses who use illegal labor.  If you take away their work, they won't come.  The the bosses will be forced to use American labor for these jobs, and wages will finally start to go up again.

[quote author=

well, yes, but taking on the mexicans is treating the symptom, not the problem. the problem is the bosses who exploit the immigrants as wel as the rest of us to maximioze the bottom line. you can build all the fences you want but until you take on the lack of accountability in washington you'll be chasing your tail.


If that is the case, then why are so many constantly breaking the law to come up here?

"Oh, I am so tired of being exploited by American business here in Mexico.  I think I will go up to Unidos Estados so I can be directly exploited."

Hmmm, does not seem to make much sense to me.  Of course, then we have the problem where the Government is both accused of not keeping the border secure, then complaining when a proposal comes out to build a fence and station the National Guard on the border.  Then we are forming a police state.

Of course, then you have the problem of both complaining on the insecure border, then turning right around and complaining when there is a crackdown on illegal immigrants.

Myself, I agree with MOR.  Penalize the hell out of any business that knowingly hires illegal immigrants.  In fact, put in a "3 Strikes" system, where further violations result in to prison time for owners/hiring managers.  And put in a system to verify that a prospective employee is legal.  Currently, it is rather stupid to hire anybody who is not born in the USA because of the inability to verify their status.

[quote author=

If that is the case, then why are so many constantly breaking the law to come up here?

"Oh, I am so tired of being exploited by American business here in Mexico.  I think I will go up to Unidos Estados so I can be directly exploited."


the point i'm trying to make is a little more precise than that. if illegals come into this country (sorry to use that vaguely perjorative term i'm in a hurry) and then are hired off the books they have entered into a contract with their bosses to circumvent labor laws -- having to do with minimum wage, hours you can make an employee work per day, child labor, etc. -- that have been established to prevent historically exploitative labor/hiring practices. if you think that, for instance, child labor laws as they exist in america AREN'T exploitative (i imagine a lot of conservatives would like to see them changed) then you should write your representative but as it is, conspiring to violate labor laws is exploitative virtually by definition.

that a great deal of wealth exists in the US and that therefore a lot of people want to come here is a different question entirely. conservatives want to think that this has to do with america's manifest uber-greatness in the world but i think it has to do more with, for instance, why the us has something like 5 percent of the world's population and consumes 25 percent of its resources. (i dunno if those statistics are right but i know they're in the ballpark.) of course people would want to come here, particularly when the nature of foreign investment in countries like mexico focuses on raw materials development and tends to lead to capital and resource flight from the country in question rather than the development of any indigenous infrastructure.

Has anyone stopped to think that bushes attitude toward Mexicans has a lot to do with Jebs wife, Columba Garnica Gallo of Leon, and the little brown ones?

Has anyone stopped to think that bushes attitude toward Mexicans has a lot to do with Jebs wife, Columba Garnica Gallo of Leon, and the little brown ones?


Uhhh, how about the fact that he was born and raised in Texas?

You know, for those of us who live in Border States (California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico), we all live with Hispanics on a day to day basis.  In fact, in most of those areas, Hispanics are actually the Majority, and Caucasians are the Minority!  I know that as a Californian, it is rare to see much discrimination against Hispanics, because their culture is so dominant in that area.  And from my travels in Texas, it is very much the same.

And that is also obvious by his friendship with President Fox.  And while not bilingual, he is semi-fluent in Spanish (as are most of us who live in such areas - Yo se habala muy poquito Espa

And forgive me, but I am going to try and not take offense at your use of "little brown ones".  Not only is it racist, it is grossly offensive to those of us with children of Hispanic descent (not to mention those of Hispanic descent themselves).  It is no more acceptible then the words pickaniny or any other perjorative racial term.


"I love all my grandchildren...even the little brown ones!"

--George HW Bush, c. 1990

Does anyone else find it ironic that the SAME person who started THIS thread (and titled it "before you POINT FINGERS") is doing just that in the Al Gore thread (which was also started by said person)? ???

Does anyone else find it ironic that the SAME person who started THIS thread (and titled it "before you POINT FINGERS") is doing just that in the Al Gore thread (which was also started by said person)? ???

He's not the most introspective fella, in case you haven't noticed!

And forgive me, but I am going to try and not take offense at your use of "little brown ones".  Not only is it racist, it is grossly offensive to those of us with children of Hispanic descent (not to mention those of Hispanic descent themselves).  It is no more acceptible then the words pickaniny or any other perjorative racial term.



As Max pointed out it was gb the first who coined the term "little brown ones" when speaking of his grandchildren with Jeb and Columba.  "even the little brown ones"  that should be enough to make you cringe ten times over.

As to gb2 take note that he was born in New Haven Connecticut, spent the school term at Phillips Andover(Massachusetts), vacations at Walkers Point(Kennebunk Maine) College at Yale(New Haven, Connecticut) and Harvard(Cambridge, Massachusetts) and the summers during college at Walkers Point, so from the age of about 14 until about 24 he was all New England Yankee. He did return to Texas to secure a National Guard berth since it was easier for daddybush to wangle that for him there.  Born and bred, dicey....very dicey.

So fine, George Bush Sr. himself said it, does that make it any more right?

Guess what, I can run off a list of people a mile long who have used "The N Word", and nobody has said anything about it.  Therefore, it is right for me to say it.  In fact, I would say it right now, but thankfully the censor blocks it out.

I have stated my views on this often enough in here, that I really do not feel I need to say it again.  Just because somebody says it, that does not mean it is right.  And I still will (and always will) speak up whenever I see it used.  And I do not care who says it. 

i think the point danoota is trying to make is that it's NOT okay, the term, and she's quoting bushie saying it in order to make that point. ::)

i think the point danoota is trying to make is that it's NOT okay, the term, and she's quoting bushie saying it in order to make that point. ::)


Thank you.  You have stated, Mushroom, what you think of my editorial license without commenting on the error you made in gb2s being "born and bred" in Texas,  and his father using a pejorative to state that he is able to overlook his grandchildrens maternal heritage and love them anyway.

Thank you.  You have stated, Mushroom, what you think of my editorial license without commenting on the error you made in gb2s being "born and bred" in Texas,  and his father using a pejorative to state that he is able to overlook his grandchildrens maternal heritage and love them anyway.
I think he meant Jeb was born in Texas, but I could be wrong.  I agree that he jumped the gun on the "little brown ones" comment, though.....

I think he meant Jeb was born in Texas, but I could be wrong.  I agree that he jumped the gun on the "little brown ones" comment, though.....



Jeb is a bit more Texas than gb2, they all spent their formative years in at Phillips Andover and all summers were spent in Kennebunk, Maine, but he did go to University of Texas in Austin.  gb2 was going to go there, but he couldn't get accepted so daddy got him into Yale and Harvard on a legacy.  There is usually a bit of laughter around here when the bushes are referred to as Texans.  They are considered to typify what would be considered the worst of the Yankee moneyed culture.

Dubya is what they call a "hat." He's a rich poseur from the Northeast playing native. I'm surprised Mushroom thought "Dubya" was "born-and-bred" in Texas. I don't blame him. It's easy to forget. As easy to forget as the Bush Family bourgeoisie tracing its lineage back to George III and the House of Hanover, as easy to forget as Dubya's grandfather being Prescott Bush, senator from Connecticut, as easy to forget as the Bush and the Walker families funding Hitler's rise to power and continuing to fun Hitler after the the U.S. declared war on Germany and the U.S. government dissolving their bank because it was funding the enemy....
:D

Jeb is a bit more Texas than gb2, they all spent their formative years in at Phillips Andover and all summers were spent in Kennebunk, Maine, but he did go to University of Texas in Austin.  gb2 was going to go there, but he couldn't get accepted so daddy got him into Yale and Harvard on a legacy.  There is usually a bit of laughter around here when the bushes are referred to as Texans.  They are considered to typify what would be considered the worst of the Yankee moneyed culture.


Bush Klan=Carpetbaggers

Bush Klan=Carpetbaggers


Ku Klux Karl Rove