Open Thread

By NB Staff | May 22, 2007 - 11:30 ET

Discuss, debate, pontificate. Name and town not needed if you wish to opine.

Here's a topic to think about.

Why do the media pay little if any attention to the role that the OPEC oil cartel plays in high oil prices, largely laying the blame at the feet of publicly-traded corporations that the media deride as "Big Oil"?

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

And why do people pay NO at

And why do people pay NO attention to the fact that the Saudis stole US assets every bit as much as the Cubans did? Have the Saudis actually bought THAT many people off? And if any Saud family royals are watching, I can probably be shut-up about your brutal dictatorship for a price, so please, make me an offer!!
JMR

I know...the Saudi government

I know...the Saudi government is just like Saddam, Chavez, Castro, Kimjongil, etc with all of their constant anti-American rhetoric...!

You're trying to be sarcast

You're trying to be sarcastic, I know, but unless you can somehow deny their dictatorship's 100%-financing of literally 4 decades of Wahabbi anti-US hate, all you're doing is being unintentionally-funny instead... We need to come up with some foreign policy besides a binary "make war" or "give subsidies" 'choice' if we're to have a future, IMO.
JMR

How can I deny...? How about

How can I deny...? How about what is your evidence...?

...any idea what Osama thinks of the Saudi Gov (house of Saud)...?

http://www.thewahhabimyth.com/

Osama and I agree about the

Osama and I agree about the dictatorship -- it should be replaced, preferably with brutality and swiftly. We no-doubt disagree about what should follow. Do you actually deny that the Saudis have spent decades spreading Wahabbi hate planetwide?? What is your evidence that they didn't???
JMR

...are you saying it's time f

...are you saying it's time for "regime change?" Some shock and awe? Why do you want to rush us into war? Is it for oil or something?!!!

You think the state department doesn't know about this Wahabbi stuff? What about the "brutal dictatorship" of China which we also do massive business with? Should we brutally and swiftly invade them too?

I thought diplomacy and dialogue was supposed to be the solution here. SA is an ultra-conservative Islamic kingdom. Cultural change happens at a snail's pace there...

China is a different, but a

China is a different, but also brutal, dictatorship, but I hold out more hope for them because I've seen less hate from them. I like business as a way to change most countries -- Vietnam seems to be working better than Cuba. Apparently, diplomacy and dialog are the preferred solution except when they're not...Some of us would prefer to see Saudi culture change very rapidly for a few weeks, along with Chinese culture, but WITHOUT yet-another expensive war. BTW, I was not impressed with the Pro-Wahabbi link you provided above, it is rather dense reading, but the parts I skimmed sounded a lot like excuse-making for hate-spreading to me. Frankly, I like my "religionofpeace" link better.
JMR

...and I think our business l

...and I think our business links with SA have helped us push for reform there just like in China - but it's painfully S-L-O-W and we just have to accept it...

I'm not totally disregarding your assertion but it's effect is largely in an incidental and collateral sort of way. IMO my link is largely accurate regarding your attempt to link Wahabbi's to terror. Wahabbi's are anti-US because of our DEPRAVITY - it's not political - and they don't use terror - they support the conservative Islamic Saudi government and culture...who are overwhelmingly peaceful and decent people...

The less depraved we get (ie more Amish) the less they will despise us...that means infinitely more to them than the oil business we give them...

From what I've seen, money

From what I've seen, money from oil means more to the Saudis than anything else. And I think they can call us "depraved" all they want, but take a look at what they all seem to desire in their own personal lives, and it always comes back to what I call the 2 most powerful weapons against Islamofascism the USA has: Pamela Anderson's boobs (and by that, I mean hot blondes in general, not just Pam). I don't know of any Americans who plan to get less-depraved, I'd rather just see less dictators on this planet like the Saudi dictatorship expecting me to behave in ways that please them instead of me. (Again, anyone supporting the Saudis here should feel free to try to logically differentiate between "monarchy" & "dictatorship" as long as they can do it coherently -- ie in a way a guy like me can follow -- since my post below asking for the same enlightenment was once-again-cloaked!)
JMR

I guess it's only "fundi

I guess it's only "fundies" like me who are trying to get less depraved...

The more the libs legalize depravity here the more they are going to hate us...

Difference between a monarchy and a dictatorship:

Not much...some are better than others...

Some of us don't define dep

Some of us don't define depravity the same as either the Saudi dictatorship (sorry, your distinction contained 0.0 difference, and I think you know it...) or "fundies" define it. And I can only hope the Saudi dictatorship hates me as much as I hate them, but I doubt it. What I love about NB, or at least one of the things, is that unlike the regular media, I get to correct attempts at NewSpeak repeatedly, using bold. It's fun, and slowly but surely it changes minds.
JMR

Rock on - just remember that

Rock on - just remember that the Wahabbi's you complain about dislike us thanks to big-boob depravity-lovers like you...funny isn't it...

Forget the boobs, it actually started half a century ago with swing dancing and booze...

P.S I'm moving to a very nice dictatorship someday called the Kindgom of Heaven...

I do happen to like boobs

I do happen to like boobs, but I don't consider boobs "depravity," and what I was talking about was the Islamofascists' Ted Haggard style hypocrisy in (for example) frequenting FL's strip clubs pre-9/11. I find it somewhat ironic that people like you want to try to blame people like me for the Saudi-dictatorship-financed spread of Islamofascist hate. And the Saudis, from everything I've ever heard, are also Ted Haggard style hypocrites when it comes to alcohol use in the dictatorship. For me, depravity is defined differently than for you. For all I know, you may actually advocate things I find a hell of a lot more "depraved" than Pam's enhanced knockers, such as the state (any state, including the Saudi dictatorship) punishing peaceful people for victimless "crimes."
JMR

I'm not TRYING to blame you -

I'm not TRYING to blame you - the Wahabbi's are blaming you - I'm just repeating the message...

And how does this blame dif

And how does this blame differ in any way from "blame America first"?? I don't care what the Islamofascists (or the dictatorship that financially supports them) think about my lifestyle. In fact, that's a big part of what I love about America. Drinking booze & dancing are -- thank God -- here to stay.
JMR

Well then just get used to st

Well then just get used to strong Wahhabi disapproval - and yes thanks to oil they've got a whole lot of money to spend on schools to teach their little Muslims all about decadant American culture...and how we need Islam to save our souls...

I've been used to their hat

I've been used to their hate, not just disapproval, for the past 3-4 decades, man. What I asked was how does this differ in any way from "blame America first." I don't see any answer, which probably means, like the alleged "distinction" between the Saudi dictatorship and a "monarchy," there isn't one. I'm off for now.
JMR

...it blames America first if

...it blames America first if that's what you prefer...

I blame the sinful nature of humankind...

It's not what I prefer, but

It's not what I prefer, but it is what I believe. Saudis have no moral right whatsoever to tell me how to live or play or believe. I may call their dictatorship a dictatorship & want someone to overthrow it, but I do not tell them how to live or believe (I kinda doubt they play very much). Blaming some Americans' "decadent" lifestyles for Islamofascist attacks makes less sense to me than blaming US policy under various US Presidents, which has repeatedly been labelled "blame America first" around here, by those who at the same time (and in practically the same breath) argue that Clinton was largely responsible for 9/11. It's an amazing leap of 'logic,' to put it mildly...
JMR

Sarc, they're not telling us

Sarc, they're not telling us how to live - they just DON'T LIKE THE WAY WE LIVE!

If we adhered more closely to a devout Christian culture the Wahhabi's would not dislike us so vehemently...

Well, I don't like the way

Well, I don't like the way THEY live, either. IMO they should be tolerant of others and should immediately overthrow their corrupt, immoral dictatorship, despite US government support for that dictatorship historically. If they and we adhered more closely to the libertarian philosophy of America's founders, we'd all have richer lives in a number of ways, not just financially, and Islam would probably be a lot less dangerous to the world.

As they exist now, the corrupt Saudi dictatorship practically defines "entangling alliance." I think a person like Washington or Jefferson if magically revived today would be outraged, even once someone explained the importance of oil in modern times to them, that we'd support such a repressive regime. And the Saudi dictators spent a LOT of their oil money funding, it seems, whichever band of Afghan rebels hated America the most that day back during the Afghanistan-war, in keeping with the teachings of the hate-filled schools they still fund.

I've said it over and over, but it bears repeating because I'm right. ;) The "God Hates Fags" segment of Islam has, with the help of an oil dictatorship we support, practically taken-over an entire major world religion in one generation, and other factions within that religion have much to fear, and know it. My old friend Dean (who probably lives in very tight security these days, if my guess is right) is an exception. He's among a TINY, TINY, TINY minority within his religion (analogous in size to the "God Hates Fags" sect of Christianity, come to think of it) and part of the psychological reason for that IMO is explained in this 1998 press release, which bears reposting here.
JMR

Monarchy

No matter how many times you try and say it sarcasmo, the Saudi government is a monarchy... not a dictatorship.


"Stop global warming! Asphyxiate a liberal!" -
Show us how far you're willing to go to stop "global warming"

Dude... lighten up..

I can't seem to tell the di

I can't seem to tell the difference between the Saudi dictatorship and the various dictatorships everyone here actually admits are dictatorships, perhaps you can enlighten me??
JMR

Interesting premise, Sarc. Pl

Interesting premise, Sarc. Please post a link to your source.

?? I didn't think that the

?? I didn't think that the idea that the Saudi dictatorship "nationalized" (governmentese for "stole") oil resource concessions once they were developed by American companies was a controversial premise! Did you actually not-know that about this theft, Rog??
JMR

Nope. Thanks for the links. G

Nope. Thanks for the links. Good reading.

Meanwhile, palooney is making

Meanwhile, palooney is making googly eyes in Syria - so, can they be added to the bad guys? Iran too, maybe?

I'm confused, FastEd.

I'm confused, FastEd. I was under the impression that Syria & Iran were already on the list of badguys, and that I was trying to add the Saudi dictatorship (God, do I ever love bolding that word when there are people around who'll actually try to deny it!) to the same list the other 2 dictatorships are already-on -- although to me Iran, ironically, seems the least-like a dictatorship of the 3. At least in Iran, "The Leader" gets to have a different last name every once in a while, even as he's under the sway of the mysterious religious nutcases in control for all actual policy, from what I'm told. Anyway, I have no argument with the idea that Syria & Iran are led by bad people, my post above didn't mention them at all because my point was instead about the Saudi dictatorship we support for some reason, despite their behavioral history.
JMR

Oh, and here's one you won't see on TV

Oh, and here's one you won't see on TV news, from the "dictatorship gratitude" department. Courtesy of yet-another dictatorship "friend" the taxpayers support for mysterious reasons...And amusingly, this ties in to my repeated inflation-rants, folks. Guess what's coming (coughinflationcough) and guess who tends to know about that kind of thing first because it's their job? Might it be other countries' central bankers, by any chance?
JMR

Drat. Cloaked again...

Drat. Cloaked again...
JMR

Livestock being fed junk food

An eyebrow-raising column in the WSJ says that, due to ethanol causing the price of corn to rise, livestock of all types are being fed junk food.   Pretzels, trail mix, licorice, cheese curls candy bars, french fries, and frosted wheat cereal, are just a few of the food products producers are turning to.   ;^>

Damn those environmentalists.

Damn those environmentalists.  They've turned our livestock into junk food junkies.

Here's an interesting comment

Here's an interesting commentary on OPEC by Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute:

OPEC Is the Problem

by Jerry Taylor

Is the OPEC cartel a good thing for consumers? Its raison d'etre, after all, is to radically restrain production in order to jack up oil prices. Given the political and economic angst sparked by the recent spike in gasoline prices, you'd think that the answer would be rather obvious. You would, however, be wrong. Rather than come up with a plan to bust up the cartel, most Washington politicos and policy mavens are content to leave the cartel alone and, in fact, defend OPEC against those who want to tear it down.

OPEC apologists contend that the cartel assists in stabilizing oil prices. The record, however, suggests otherwise.

In the period between World War II and the formation of OPEC, the inflation-adjusted price of oil fluctuated little. Oil prices indeed jumped during the Middle East crises of 1956 and 1967, but they fell back quickly. In fact, the inflation-adjusted price of oil -- indexed by GDP -- fell by about two-thirds from 1945 to 1970.

From 1970-1980, however, the real price of oil rose by about 1,300 percent. Between 1980 and 1986, it dropped by about two-thirds. It was fairly steady between 1986-1997, fell farther in 1997-1998, and then nearly quadrupled after February 1999. This is stability?

Cartel prices fluctuate more because they are less certain than normal market prices, inviting speculation. In short, market agents are forced not only to consider global supply and demand but also to factor in OPEC's behavior and its members' fidelity to their promises. Hence, the market is less predictable and prices are accordingly more volatile.

The price spike in late 1973 is instructive. There were only trivial changes in world oil supply yet prices rocketed, a phenomenon that can only be explained by buyers' panic.

Others believe that OPEC is doing us a favor by producing oil in dribs and drabs because underproduction now postpones the end of the oil age. The widely advertised, long predicted end of the oil age, however, is like the horizon -- forever receding as we move closer to it.

How would we know if oil was indeed becoming scarcer? The only certain metric would be finding costs. If oil stocks were indeed dwindling, it would be more expensive to find and develop each additional barrel of oil. Up until about 15 years ago, however, finding and developing costs were trending downwards, not upwards.

Since then, most of the data on the matter have simply disappeared. As an alternative, economists Morry Adelman and Campbell Watkins tabulated the sales value of proved reserves in the United States, information that serves as a window on the value of oil reserves anywhere in which oil finders can go freely and invest. From 1982-2002, however, the price of existing reserves did not increase, demonstrating that the market does not believe oil in the ground is an appreciating asset.

Someday, of course, oil stocks will indeed begin to dwindle. When that might be, however, is unknowable because new technologies continue to emerge that make finding and producing oil cheaper than ever before. Regardless, we don't need OPEC to manage the future. When depletion becomes a real problem, oil prices will rise of their own accord and economies will adjust because prices today reflect expectations about prices tomorrow.

OPEC's defenders also contend that high oil prices bring political stability to the Middle East and that low oil prices bring political instability. Perhaps. But why is a stable Saudi, Iranian, or Libyan regime in our interest? While we could perhaps imagine worse regimes, we could certainly imagine better. But more to the point, the argument that these undemocratic, oppressive, ideologically bizarre, and terrorist-friendly regimes are propped-up by high oil prices is scarcely a strong argument for applauding the cartel's machinations. In fact, President Bush's program to encourage human rights, democracy, and peace in the Middle East will not succeed as long as these regimes remain in power in their current incarnations.

Let's be clear about what's at stake. If OPEC disappeared tomorrow, oil prices would drop to somewhere around $8 a barrel and gasoline prices would almost certainly be south of $1 a gallon. A price collapse of that magnitude would do more for consumer welfare and the overall health of the American economy than almost anything that's been put on the table by President Bush or his Democratic Party rivals. Accordingly, the OPEC cartel should be resisted, not embraced, and policy should aim at undermining it, not propping it up.

# # #

Jerry Taylor is da man.At a B

Jerry Taylor is da man.

At a Business & Media Institute panel discussion last year, he really ripped into some dumb legislative ideas being forwarded at the time by an otherwise generally conservative Georgia Republican congressman.

He's a great advocate of free markets and an able detractor of Big Government.

And Jerry Taylor represents

And Jerry Taylor represents the libertarian/fiscal-conservative side of Republicanism that's been ignored (just like Democrats ignore blacks) by their party in favor of Ted Haggard's "Elmer Gantry lobby" for too damn long, IMO.
JMR

Why is Mr. Bush in bed with Ted?

In my humble estimation, this great country now faces a greater threat here at home from illegal immigration than from any radical follower of Islam, and this threat is being brought to us by the very people we elect to represent us: The President of the United States, George W. Bush, as well as our very own senators and congressmen,

Yesterday, The Heritage Foundation released the results of a study entitled: "The Fiscal Cost of Low-Skill Immigrants to the U.S. taxpayer." I don’t expect there will be much coverage of this in the MSM, but for those of you who are truly concerned about the issue of illegal immigration and what it will eventually end up costing us all, this is a must read.

You can read the entire report here.

If you’re in a hurry, you can read the executive summary here.

Friends, as things currently stand, a sizable number of our senators, including both from my home state of Georgia, appear to be preparing to vote for an immigration “reform” bill that, the more I learn about it, bodes ill not just for the long term future of this great nation, but the near and even short term as well.

This cannot be allowed to happen. If it does, then we have truly lost control of our own government.

What are you a racist? We sho

What are you a racist? We should gladly bankrupt the Social Security System, pay 40% more in taxes, etc. because these poor immiGRUNTS are only trying to better their life. It should not matter to us if our standard of living decreases because of it. <sarc off>

Actually, we don't need new immigration laws. We just need to ENFORCE the ones we have......AND BUILD THE FENCE!!!

No RINOs in '08 - Vote for a true conservative!

The solution is simple enough

The solution is simple enough, but elected officials won't do it: ENFORCE FINES AND JAIL TIME FOR THOSE THAT EMPLOY ILLEGALS!

Sarge,I think you just nail

Sarge,

I think you just nailed the whole problem. If we would not hire these people, not rent to them, not give them access to any public funds other than emergency services, not loan them money, not allow them access to our schools and threw a few employers in the slammer for hiring them, they would go back to Mexico on their own.

EXACTLY!

EXACTLY! I would also add the morons setting up these 'sanctuaries' in their cities or towns.

Sarge,If Mr. Gonzales were

Sarge,

If Mr. Gonzales were any kind of an AG, he would have gone after that idiot mayor out in San Fransicko and made an example of him for every one to see.

Unfortunately, the man is an empty suit.

You are correct. Hell, if the

You are correct. Hell, if they won't enforce immigration laws, why enforce drug laws?

You mean they're not wastin

You mean they're not wasting my taxes enforcing dimwitted drug laws, in direct violation of the 10th amendment, and to the deafening silence of the vast majority of (but not all) conservatives?? Wow... Coulda fooled me!!
JMR

Sarge and you Dave are right

Sarge and you Dave are right--enforcement of existing laws will resolve the problem. I will post another post just to bring up a forum post that addresses a lot of what you are saying.

why oh why ?

Dave R sucks up to Sarge;

Deny those people. Curse those people. Back it up with bullets and bombs; because after all; those people are different; not as good as Americans.

That's the current party line among fringe Right-wingers today. White supremacy masked as Americanism. --Thank God they haven't got the clout to endanger anybody. Talk is cheap. Being an American isn't about cursing poor people out and demonizing them. LOVE THY NEIGHBOR; the words of Our Holy Redeemer. Words to live by, every American should remember.

see here sarge,

see here sarge---don't you know enforcing the laws may cause some businessmen friends, (some of whom assisted in drawing the compromise), of our politicians to get fined or go to jail????

Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land?  And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?

Sir  Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard

I know.. I know.. we must put

I know.. I know.. we must put 'capitalism' above all else.

Incredible website.. btw.

Judging from what is leakin

Judging from what is leaking out about this hundreds-of-pages immigration "reform" bill, I think it could be boiled down to just a few words that T. Kennedy, J. McCain, and G.W. Bush really seem to agree on:

"All persons on Earth are hereby granted citizenship of the United States of America. Applications for government assistance will be approved as quickly as we can balloon up the size of the government agencies with more union workers. Courts are put on notice that the definition of "person" should be expanded at the earliest opportunity to include Chimpanzees, Apes, Dolphins, Dogs, Cats, Fish, Rats, Mice, Gerbils, Flies, Mosquitoes, Birds, Trees, Flowers, etc. Courts will be given the option of including Rocks in the definition of "person" if they see fit."

Lee T.

U.S. Navy (ret.) / Vancouver, Washington

The history of the race, and each individual's experience, are thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.-- Mark Twain

Let's stop calling illegal im

Let's stop calling illegal immigrans, immigrants - They don't want to immigrate - if that was their goal, they would do what is right. But, since we have no other term, I suggest we call these hard working folks (numbering around 12 million, according to the demolibs) who are not imigrating nor assimilating -

Ugly Immigrants. Like their earlier namesakes, americans, they are rude, arrogant, want rights that they don't have (legally or otherwise), refuse to assimilate and learn the culture of the country they visit.

This is TRUE! Of course, but

This is TRUE! Of course, the media refuses to acknowledge this FACT.

When did the goal of new arri

When did the goal of new arrivals to this county become "assimilation?"  For most of our history first generation Americans were homogeneous.  They brought the best of their former lives to this country and thrived in the proverbial "Melting Pot."  The flavor of the stew changed with each generation.

Sometimes, they also brought the worst, of course - slavery, smallpox, measles, etc.  But that's not my point.  When in our history did "America" become so well-established that the duty of new citizens solely became fitting in?

Seeing how you missed it, you

Seeing how you missed it, you make my point - why are there so many 2nd and even 3rd generation who don't speak english? If you were to speak with the generation that came here between 1890 and say 1945, they made it a point that their children learned the language of their newly adopted land - my old neighborhood had the lyrical strains of polish, german, italian, russian, spanish, greek, mixed with the lyrics of the irish and scotts. And they became citizens, didn't stay in the shadows and became friends and associates with their fellow immigrants.

&quot;...why are there so man

"...why are there so many 2nd and even 3rd generation [residents] who don't speak english [sic]?"  Where?  I see 2nd generation children translating for their parents.  I see first generation children learning English in schools every day.

But that's not the point.  When did the goal of new arrivals become assimilation?

I'll use your  method of ass

I'll use your  method of assuption - that as a teacher your view is skewed to the left - as to the goal of assimilation - where did I mentionthat it was a goal. Reading into someones' statements is assuming your own prejudices.

Remember that the refusal to assimilate is a choice, not a goal, and with that choice are the consequences of lower pay, less health care and a brighter future for the children and future generations.

And why do apologists always negate or forget about the lawlessness of being "illegal". Is it the term that is bothersome? or the concept? What makes anyone think that by breaking one law, people who are given a pass will NOT break another, sometime in the future.

You mean like all those folks

You mean like all those folks who always drive under the speed limit?

Where did you mention that assimilation was the goal?  In your two previous posts.

FYI - I'm not a teacher.  Wrong again.  Never said I was.

And where are all those 2nd and 3rd generation folks who don't bother to learn English?  Certainly not my wife (2nd G).  Or her parents (1st G).  Or our kids (3 G).

Apples and oranges - point ou

Apples and oranges - point out, please, where I say it was a goal to assimilate, and specifically the word goal.

" I see first generation children learning English in schools every day." The assumption is teacher - otherwise, you like hanging out at schools?

Can't help to think that you're not living in the inner city somewhere, but in Cul de Sac, I've Made It Ville.

"I see first generation children learning English -"

"I see first generation children learning English in schools every day."

 It is logical to assume then that you are a teacher, a school administrator, bus driver or some functionary of the school. Otherwise, you are intruding upon the teachers and the students or are an exceptionally slow learner and are still a student.I addressed your question regarding assimilation below. Further, as a citiizen of any country. I would expect anyone who wanted to move to my country to learn our language and obey our rules. I absolutely would do so were I to emigrate to another country.

Assimilation: Sociology. the merging of cultural traits from previously distinct cultural groups, not involving biological amalgamation.

Please note the word "merging " in the text. In the process of assimilation , parts of the culture of the emigre' become part of the ethos of therir new land. To exaggerate for the point--if a cannibal came here, would you expect him to continue to kill and eat people?

I am done with you for today. I seek electrical shock treatments after reading your posts.

Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land?  And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?

Sir  Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard

&quot;Logical to assume.&quot

"Logical to assume."  If the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, their foundation is assumptions.

Why is it unreasonable for a parent to be at school?  Perhaps in your world that is an intrusion.  Not in mine.  What's wrong with being a student?  I would consider being a life-long student a very reasonable position.  Not full-time, perhaps, but that's another story.

I would hope that each generation of new arrivals make our country a better place.  We don't have all the answers.  We can learn from people from other nations - if we have the native wit to pay attention.

PS:  Please keep your promise and be gone...

Sir, you argue in an incredibly

Sir, you argue in an incredibly, juvenile and illogical manner.

Tata!

Doc Spock - you promised to b

Doc Spock - you promised to be gone...

PS:  No need for a comma between "incredibly" and "juvenile."

Ha! Spelling/Grammar Nazi!

Ha! Spelling/Grammar Nazi! You lose frank!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

Your use of &quot;Nazi&quot;

Your use of "Nazi" is in remarkably poor taste.  I prefer to reserve that name for the real thing.

I pointed out the unnecessary comma because I was being called "juvenile."  Guess such a subtle point was lost on you...no surprise there.

Not a Seinfeld fan huh? Oh

Not a Seinfeld fan huh? Oh well... No more jokes for YOU!!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

It was an accident---

It was an accident---it was a comma left over from the major error of addressing you as "sir". It will not happen again, Sparky.

Assimilation should be the go

Assimilation should be the goal of every immigrant. By ignoring our laws, these illegals, by their actions, are showing that they have no intent to ever assimilate. A nation is nothing without, as Michael Savage would say, "Borders, Language, and Culture". 

The "Melting Pot" only works if we combine our cultures into one. This can't be done by self segregation of different peoples. We must have some common ground if we are to survive as a notion. Learning English and assimilating is the only way to go about standing on this common ground

Assimilation into what?  The

Assimilation into what?  The concept of the Melting Pot is that each ingredient adds flavor and spice and variety.  Best practices, if you will.

Following the law isn't the same thing as assimilation.

But when you start quoting the Silly Savage the conversation is over.  Although I do believe America will survive as a notion - and a nation, at that.

PS: What did you think of Weiner's novel?  Enough man on man love for you?

There you go again--

"Assimilation into what?  The concept of the Melting Pot is that each ingredient adds flavor and spice and variety.  Best practices, if you will."

 I am not being nasty- I truly do not understand what you are saying. It (to me) is obvious that one would be assimilated in to the American way of life, the ethos, the spirit of the people they moved in with for life improvement, unification, support , giving back to those who give you a home. I understand and agree with the second sentence. Again, the third sentence, What???

I don't like most of what he

I don't like most of what he says either. The point is that as a NATION, we have to have some commonality. What most people are objecting to is the blatant disregard for our immigration laws, our culture (America DOES have a culture you know), and our language. I shouldn't be castigated in certain communities, or by "clever" comedians, because I don't speak Spanish. It is a duty, and I will call it a duty, to become a contributing member of the society in which you live. If I moved to another country, it would be expected of Me. Why should We not expect that of others coming here?

hay--

hay-- I'm whichoo restless.

 I certainly would make ever effort to be assimilated if I moved to another country. The first thing I would do is try to learn the language. The second--if I could get friendly advice--give me a list of NONOs. I would not want to offend my hosts. The third would be to read, find out any customs, rituals, etc. my new neighbors may indulge.

It is natural to gravitate to those of your country and customs , but if you continue on that path, you may never be assimilated.

OK - I'll bite - what precise

OK - I'll bite - what precisely is "American culture?"

By the way - it's fine with me if you don't speak Spanish.  While it would certainly be an advantage to do so here in Northern California, I don't...

I guess the easy answer would

I guess the easy answer would be "baseball, hotdogs, and apple pie", but it is more than that. Is is the things that make us unique in the world. It would begin with the founding of this great nation. The constitution, and the freedoms it gives us.

It is the hard working nature of our citizens. It is the spirit that anything can be done.

It is the American Dream, that our children should have a better life than we did.

It is no doubt contributed to by cultures brought here by immigrants past. It is the fact that chili is called Texas caviar. We are a nation of individuals bonded by a love for this nation, while still keeping our autonomy.

American culture is something that can be felt easily if you are willing to acknowlege it. If you do not feel this, then I feel sorry for You.

Right on, FastEd. I've heard

Right on, FastEd. I've heard the same thing over and over again throughout my life. People tell me differnent versions of how they immediately tried to "become American", and a big part of that was to learn the language. I heard several stories about coming to America and the father simply wouldn't let anyone talk unless it was in English -- as a way of forcing a rapid learning of the language.

That doesn't mean that families would abandon everthing about their "old country" culture. But the language was important from day one.

Why is it so different now? Well, I've actually walked out of stores when I was about to pay for my purchase with a credit card, and I couldn't unless I first chose: English or Spanish? I left all my products on the counter and simply walked out. And that is the reason so many of these new arrivals don't learn English -- they are pampered and too many of them think they have "special rights". Bullsh**T.

j. frank,Ever heard of La R

j. frank,

Ever heard of La Raza?

The difference here is that, in the past, immigration into this country was controlled enough so that new immigrants were able to assimilate into our culture without overwhelming it.

This "reform" bill will allow each illegal here to bring in five more in a very short period of time.

Do the math. 12 mil. x 5 = 60 mil. (If the government is telling the truth about the number already here. I believe the government is lying about the true numbers.

What if it is 20 mil. Then we are talking 100 mil. immigrants in a very short period introduced into a country of 300 mil. That's 1/3 of the present population, j. frank.

If we have 30 mil. illegals (and many believe this # is much closer to reality than the government numbers), we are talking a potential flood of 150 mil. people-most of which really aren't interested in becoming Americans.

Scared yet, j. frank?

What does La Raza have to do

What does La Raza have to do with anything?  Are they seeking to enforce the original constitution of the State of California - that all laws be published in English and Spanish?

When did immigration legislation begin?  For a significant part of our history there were no restrictions.  Then there were restrictions based on health.  And jobs.  Then to keep out the Chinese folks.  Then...?

j. frank,Read this.

j. frank,

Read this.

What does La Raza have to do with anything?

Dear Lord, please help us in this time of trial.

Good call, misterbill, as a

Good call, misterbill, as apparently our own government doesn't seem remotely interested in stemming the criminal invasion from our southern neighbors. In fact, they appear to be doing what they can to encourage it!

Damn, I can't wait to get inside a voting booth and start doing my small part to help our recalcitrant politicos find early retirement, hopefully before they manage to sell us all down the proverbial river.

Dave...That would be the Rio

Dave...

That would be the Rio Grande.

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

Ct,LOL-Yeah, that proverbial

Ct,

LOL-Yeah, that proverbial river.

Dave R.  Think about this. 

Dave R.  Think about this.  Prior to the establishment of the Farmworkers' Union, most California agricultural workers were legal immigrants.  As a matter of fact, Mr. Chavez actively resisted illegals coming here to work.

After the UFW Union was up and running, and workers were being paid a more reasonable wage, had a higher liklihood of actually collecting the wages due, conditions improved somewhat (toilets, living conditions, etc.), the short hoe banned - the floodgates were opened for illegal immigration.

I certainly realize mis-guided US policies in Central America had something to do with this.  But can it be pure coincidence that the UFW established itself and suddenly there was a huge wave of illegal immigration?

j. frank,I realize there is n

j. frank,

I realize there is now (and always has been) a great deal of political pressure that is being brought to bear by companies that are seeking to improve productivity while lowering labor costs, and this pressure is being felt by the republicrats (demopublicans?) as a whole.

The political class, who apparently deem themselves answerable to no one, is naturally looking to solidify its future power base by attracting a whole new constituency while at the same time pleasing their benefactors in the business community. The problem is, in this particular case, the politicians have have elected to do so at the expense of the rule of law.

If the politicos are willing to ignore established immigration laws in order to strentghen their own power, then we are headed for serious calamity in the near future as a nation. If it is deemed okay to ignore one particular law that some do not like, then what of other laws?

This republic is a nation of laws, without which we would be nothing more than a losely organized rabble, which historically has been the signal that a dictatorship is looming just over the horizon.

Herr Hitlary, anyone?

All of this is exactly correc

All of this is exactly correct.

j candid wilson

The immigration rules and laws established years ago were intended to help the "melting pot" assimilation of Americans. It also is intended to keep us from having an extra large minority that will, rather than adjusting to the American way of life, continue to live as they did in their country of origin. This is known as "multiculturism". It soiled and spoils our forefathers intent. It has been the intent --not the "duty" as you describe it above for people to become part of the American ethos and principles. (See multiculturism.) A minority group (I laugh) that becomes too large then has major control over the government of the US. Laws will be enacted that reflect the home country of the minoroties. Definitely contrary to the decisions and intents of our forefathers. Your definition of a "melting pot" is totally incorrect-- I don't know why I am addressing ot it is so wrong. Hey-- it's just like someone --probably you--who said the First Amendment was to keep religion from inetrfering with government. Now that I think of it--if it was you--that explains a lot.

Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land?  And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?

Sir  Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard

Of course I believe religion

Of course I believe religion should not interfer with government - but I believe the First Amendment was written to keep the government from interferring with religion.

You got my point--I think???

You got my point--I think??? That is exactly what I was trying to get across--I will tell you sslloowwllyy so you can get it---there is no law or amendment that says, "religion will not affect this government in any way".

People keep misquoting the First Amendment and the Constitution.

Protect religion from state not state from religion.

Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land?  And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?

Sir  Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard

Mr. Bill...This says it all..

Mr. Bill...

This says it all....

Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate for any other."- John Adams

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

CT right on---

I mentioned before that I am reading John Diamond's book. "The Rise Of America". It goes into some very specific details of the motivations and intents of our Founding Fathers.

Mr. Bill...Everyone that took

Mr. Bill...

Everyone that took part in the creation of our constitution felt the same way as John Adams. Our liberal historians would have you think otherwise.

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

Bless you, CT

Bless you, CT. I know I get emotional about our country. Ever since I was a young man in the Navy and went to so many other countries, I saw frist hand the differences and I became aware of my blessings. I still am.

That would be the same John A

That would be the same John Adams who recommended the US Senate ratify the treaty of peace between the US and the Barbary states?  The treaty that confimed the USA is not a Christian nation?  That's been the law for what - the past 200+ years?

j. frank...So you beleive tha

j. frank...

So you beleive that religion means only christianity?

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

CT what J frunk believes is that--

CT what J frunk believes is that-- he must challenge almost every post he sees that deals with patriotism and love of country. That tells me a lot about him.

Mr. Bill...Same here. Help a

Mr. Bill...

Same here.

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

Of course not.  And I think

Of course not.  And I think John Adams said "moral" and "religious" for a reason.

However, Thomas Jefferson's advocacy of tolerance for all religions in Virginia was a radical position for his time.

You think J. Adams said &quot

You think J. Adams said "moral" and "religious" for a reason. Well...Duh!

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

Precisely.  There are people

Precisely.  There are people who are moral.  There are people who are religious.  It's quite easy to be one without the other.  Then there are the rare folks who are both.

&quot;Then there are the ra

"Then there are the rare folks who are both."

What?!?!?

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

Somehow I'm not surprised you

Somehow I'm not surprised you don't know any.

No, I am suprised you think

No, I am suprised you think they are "rare."

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

You confuse what Adams said.

You confuse what Adams said.   He makes no statement whatever about whether there are men who are moral but not also religious. His observation is confined only to the viability of our form of government.

"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other

And of course, you've also made unattributed reference to this sloppy piece of scholarship.  I think I could destroy the credibility of this piece were I to spend the time on it.  it isn't worth the time.  Paragraph two is ample proof of its erroneous nature. 

"The Founding Fathers, also, rarely practiced Christian orthodoxy. Although they supported the free exercise of any religion, they understood the dangers of religion. Most of them believed in deism and attended Freemasonry lodges. According to John J. Robinson, "Freemasonry had been a powerful force for religious freedom." Freemasons took seriously the principle that men should worship according to their own conscious. Masonry welcomed anyone from any religion or non-religion, as long as they believed in a Supreme Being. Washington, Franklin, Hancock, Hamilton, Lafayette, and many others accepted Freemasonry."

This author demonstrates a remarkable ignorance of Freemasonry.  It is not a religion.  No one "accepts" Freemasonry.  It is not a creed.   Indeed, Freemasonry accepts individuals!  It preaches nothing.  It is not in the business of saving souls.  Its business is strictly the encouragement of good fellowship amongst men here on Earth.  It is a fraternal order and nothing more.  Moreover, Freemasons demand that their members believe in two things, only one of which the author identifies.  All Freemasons must believe in a Supreme being as the author indicates.  They must also believe in the immortality of the soul.  The reason this is demanded has to do with the taking and swearing of obligations.   Freemasons believe that Godless men are by nature ammoral and will not honor their contracts with other men.  This is entirely temporal reasoning.

Huh??? How did the treaty state --??

Huh??? How did the treaty state we were not a christian nation??

Please see the famous Article

False information again-----

You are posting a false statement. I am tempted to forgive the error because I assume you are working alone and it is easy to err. However, your response, as all your other reponses is fraught with hatred for this country. (Please note I did not say OUR country, as I suspect you are not an American.)

Why are you so anxious to define America as a fascist country? Why do you leap out and attack almost every NB poster?  You are usually in error or spouting half-truths or anti American lines of hate. There is no doubt in my mind, from reading your posts that you hold an intense hatred for America. At any rate, I decided to seek assistance from a learned colleaguere: your recent allegation the JohnAdams had declared us a non-Christian country. My  friend told me that the Yale libraries include all translations of the treaty and that there are some unofficial translations that have been exposed as containing false data. I will not tell you where to find this, because you are really beginning to rile me. You can look for it yourself.

"As even a casual examination of the annotated translation of 1930  shows, the Barlow translation is at best a poor attempt at a paraphrase or summary of the sense of the Arabic; and even as such its defects throughout are obvious and glaring. Most extraordinary (and wholly unexplained) is the fact that Article 11 of the Barlow translation, with its famous phrase, "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion," does not exist at all. There is no Article 11. The Arabic text which is between Articles 10 and 12 is in form a letter, crude and flamboyant and withal quite unimportant, from the Dey of Algiers to the Pasha of Tripoli. How that script came to be written and to be regarded, as in the Barlow translation, as Article 11 of the treaty as there written, is a mystery and seemingly must remain so. Nothing in the diplomatic correspondence of the time throws any light whatever on the point."

PS Put your "famous Article 11" in your pipe and smoke it.

Regarding Article 11 - Appare

Regarding Article 11 - Apparently this is a new topic to you.  The US Senate wasn't as concerned with the Arabic treaty signed by the Dey of Algiers as it was with the English translation presented to it.  Your own post states you are referring to an English translation from 1930 - a bit late, wouldn't you say?

Go back and read the Yale website - only please have the decency to read the whole thing.  Your arrogant attitude is showing - you aren't going to tell me where you found your reference?  I gave you the website!

As for half-truths, apparently that is your stock in trade.  For example:

NOTE REGARDING THE Barlow TRANSLATION

The translation first printed is that of Barlow as written in the original treaty book, including not only the twelve articles of the treaty proper, but also the receipt and the note mentioned, according to the Barlow translation, in Article 10. The signature of Barlow is copied as it occurs, but not his initials, which are on every page of the fourteen which is not signed. The Humphreys approval or confirmation follows the translation; but the other writings, in English and Spanish, in the original treaty book, are not printed with the translation but only in these notes.

It is to be remembered that the Barlow translation is that which was submitted to the Senate (American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II, 18-19) and which is printed in the Statutes at Large and in treaty collections generally; it is that English text which in the United States has always been deemed the text of the treaty.  [emphasis added]

That is what John Adams signed - and that is the law of the land.  Perhaps your "learned colleague" should have gone to Harvard...

As for your other remarks, you fall back upon the spurious claims that I am not an American (I am) that I am anti-American (I am not) that I favor a fascist country (that's not an economic system I favor).  Those are insults, and NB frowns on personal insults.  Do you honestly think I hate American because I'm not afraid to state opinions backed by fact and experience?

Next you're going to sound like Mel-UH-nie Morgan.

more

My initial challenge was from the "Avalon Project". You are correct in assuming I di not know about this. That is why I researched it. So the very same project that yoyu use as your base refutes the authenticity of the Article. Well , being fairminded I am attaching another site's explanation. They believe that it was in the original. They hint the possibility of accidental loss of the page with Article 11 on it. So they have the same objective as you. I repeat, the excerpt above is from the Avalon Project" So you can see there are some who  belive Article 11 was ther, some who believe it was not in the Arabic version and some who believe that Barlow added it for his own purposes. That puts us at a junture where we must make our own decision. Mine is that Bartlow added it and that it was rectified in an following treaty, eight years later.

"In point of fact, we have no idea if Barlow is connected to the page of gibberish in the Arabic version. The "substitute" page was not discovered until 1930; what happened to the treaty before that time is unknown. The Article, if it was originally in the Arabic version, could have been lost at any time between 1797 and 1930. And there is certainly no reason to assume that Article 11 wasn't in the original Arabic version: A Muslim nation would surely have welcomed Article 11 as an assurance of American intentions with respect to religion.

More generally, we can't imagine how the absence of Article 11 in the Arabic version effects the separationist argument. It was the English version of the treaty that was approved by President Adams and Secretary Pickering, and this version unquestionably contained Article 11. Similarly, when the Senate ratified the treaty, they did so knowing full well that the English version declared that the United States was not a Christian nation. The separationist implications of the treaty can't be escaped by arguing that the Arabic version may not have contained Article 11; the President, Secretary of State, and Senate thought it did, but approved the treaty anyway.

The treaty of Tripoli remained on the books for eight years, at which time the treaty was renegotiated, and Article 11 was dropped. "

Once again I have dealt fairly and honestly. Let us see your reaction.

Mr. Bill...Well done!J. Frank

Mr. Bill...

Well done!

J. Frank will unfortunately try to come up with some tiny grain of substance to claim you got it all wrong. If he does, ignore the SOB, he ain't worth it IMHO.

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

@MuddledThought:  If your on

@MuddledThought:  If your only purpose is to make insulting personal attacks (frowned upon by NB) why don't you stay out of it and let the adults have an intelligent conversation.

I too enjoy intelligent adult

I too enjoy intelligent adult conversation.

That's why I gave Mr. Bill two thumbs up! And I absolutely love my comments.

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

silly as ever

"And I absolutely love my comments."

I figured as much. You might be an adult, but intelligent ? Can you prove you're intelligent without falling off the roof ? Without breaking your neck ? Ha !

I'm not the least bit surpris

I'm not the least bit surprised you are practiced at amusing yourself. As to why you gave Mr. Bill two thumbs up for agreeing with me...?

It is good news that you've s

It is good news that you've seen the light.  Where precisely was my "false statement?"  Between them John Adams and the US Senate passed a treaty - the law of the land - that we are not a Christian nation.  You can muse all you want about the Arabic original - and what difference a 1930 translation makes on an original well over 100 years old by then - but it doesn't change the point.

You've managed to skip the pointless and personal attacks, as well.

The quote you posted re-states what I said.  Of course I'm going to agree with that.

Here is some more interesting reading:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.html

JFrank--excuse me I am a little annoyed now--

JFrank--excuse me I am a little annoyed now--I had typed a response with a timeline of each event. I got blown off when I tried to post.

I did say that I see that your main intention seems to be to prove that America is not a Christian nation. Well, tomorrow when the old man is rested I will rebuild the timeline and post it. I am not refuting what you charged--I am showing that it was an aberration--but , indeed accepted by Adams and rectified with a new treaty eight years later. Meantime I have a quote:

"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: that it connected in one indissoluble bond civl government with the principles of Christianity."

Guess who?? No, not Madelyn Murray O'Hare--it was--

John Quincy Adams.

Also in the following, who do you think the writers were addressing in the emphasized names? (emphasis mine)

"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Are you man enough to admit t

Are you man enough to admit that you were wrong - that your post that I offered a "false statement" was a lie?  That you didn't fully understand what you were writing about - and when you bothered to complete your research you discovered that , indeed, I am correct?

That John Adams had the native wit to read what he signed - particularly when he wrote above his signature that that he had, in fact, read it and that he recommended that it be approved?  Which, of course, it was without serious debate or other objection.

As to your other statements about me - without foundation or evidence of any kind - let alone proof - I suppose it would be too much to expect for you to admit those are figments of your overworked imagination.

Save us your "timeline."  If you can not step up and admit when you are so seriously mistaken, your time is up.

Ooops --you misspelled interfere--

Ooops --you misspelled interfere-- also interferring!!

That is so hard to believe!

misterbill,You are correct.

misterbill,

You are correct. This is NOT a multi-cultural country, nor was it ever designed to be. If it should ever become one, it will perish soon thereafter.

amen and very soon--

amen and very soon--Dave --a little soap box on my part. As I wandered through the years of my life, I many times would be puzzled by violent action and uprising in this country or that country. I would think "why can't they come to some form of agreement - a compromise"? Now that I see current happenings in my country-I understand some of the unrest and violence of those other countries.One of the key reasons, is of course, patriotism, the love of one's country and the willingness to sacrifice for it. We have a very special freedom in this country that few other countries have. We have an elected government that is not in perpetuity and owes no allegiance to an Emperor, King or Dictator. We have mandated that no President shall preside for more than eight years. All these things are in place to preserve the most unique republic in known history. To be here and enjoy our benefits is a special gift. We have bestowed this gift on many people over the years. It is called our immigration policy. We have attempted to maintain a balance of those who enter here and limited the numbers of them so as to give them time to be assimilated in the American way. It has worked wondefully for many years. I ask anyone who reads this to look around and see who his friends and workmates are. Why, even look at your spouse and your children! It works! As any precious gift in life, the stealing of it is heart-rending to the victims of the crime. We are now faced with the most severe threat to our country's standards, policies and customs than has ever faced us before. We are being invaded --it is a breaking of the law--and we are finding out that our precious gift is being stolen with the aiding and abetting of those we trusted and elected to public office.

End part I.

Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land?  And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?

Sir  Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard

Amen and very soon Part II

The "compromise" is amnesty-there is no two ways about it. I discussed this with a friend who is very pro-immigration. He said as long as they pay a fine , it's a good thing and as the kids say "olly olly oxen free'. I chose to drop the matter, but I recalled a post that I had seen which drew an analogy to someone breaking into your house. Yes, all of us would be glad if the person was fined, but after paying his fine, does that mean he now has the right to live in your house???

It is not necessary to be a veteran of the military to be a patriot, politician or good citizen. It does help in one's experiences in life. We have a path to enter this country legally. We have very few public officials who will enforce the rules  and make people use that path. Proximity to our border is no ameliorating reason for the crime of illegal entry. I have asked for and gotten some answers from fellow bloggers as to why some percentage of our population not only condones illegal entry, but welcomes it. In previous posts I mentioned the people I knew who were in this category were the beneficiaries of the low wages. They were hiring illegal entrants. I will not list all the trite excuse--but one of them is--"Oh they work so hard"--hey--so would I if I were here illegally.

I have , in very recent days, gone from a person of tolerance about illegal entrants (e.g. Well they have been here for  5 years, let's just pretend we don't see them ) to a strong  advocate of removing all illegals from our country.

You cannot tell me that there is not rampant illegal voting. I shudder when I think of the ACLU and elected Latino officials who form alliances to promote breaking the law. I challenge you to go to Mexico and try to bring some drugs into America. See how many blind eyes you encounter.You will be locked up as quick as if you were a Border Guard shooting at a drug smuggler.

There is a peaceful way to resolve a lot of this. I have posted it. I do not pretend to be so intelligent that I don't make mistakes . It is the "Attrition by Enforcement" document at the Center for Immigration Studies. I would love it if some of the NBers would read it and share their opinions with me.

Here.

In closing--when I started this posting -I mentioned the violent methods used in other countries. Well when someone is giving away your country, sometimes fighting is the only way to save it. If it comes to that, this old man stands for America not for giving it away.

Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land?  And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?

Sir  Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard

You are right about the votin

You are right about the voting of illegals. Here in Bexar County (San Antonio), the new told of hundreds of illegals trying to  register to vote, and about 33 or so who had actually managed to cast ballots. Sorry, I can't remember the station so I can't link to story.

On stations

If the station was KSAT, I will faint.

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

Actually, it was on the radio

Actually, it was on the radio. It was either WOAI or KLUP. I can't remember which station I was listening to at the time.

Exactly how far is this non-m

Exactly how far is this non-multi-culturism supposed to extend? And if it's not supposed to be multi-cultural, who were all those immigrants that came to Ellis Island all those decades ago?

bal -- you disappoint me--

bal -- you disappoint me--you are usually a very agreeable sort. Please read the difference between multiculurism and the "melting pot" concept.

I welcome LEGAL immigrants. I would also (haven't been around any for a while) encourage them to ASS -imilate AssAP to make their lives easer in the transition  to the USA (or France or Italy--how far do you want me to go?? or Portugal). Never mind --I think you know how I feel.

bal,A multi-cultural nation i

bal,

A multi-cultural nation is not the same thing as a nation that is derived from many cultures.

Certainly those who have come here in the past represented many different cultures, but they became members of the American culture.

Many, if not most of our current criminal illegal invaders have-as they themselves have stated- no interest in joining our culture.

The immigration rules and law

The immigration rules and laws established years ago were intended to keep Chinese people from coming to the United States.  Over the years the laws and rules were amended, updated, altered, and other wise changed.  The Chinese laborers first came to build the railroad east - work Americans would not due.  They wouldn't have been imported if local labor was available.

I don't think our forefathers were overly concerned with Chinese immigration, by the way...

Would you then say that imm

Would you then say that immigration laws are inherently racist just by their existence? Perhaps we should just declare everyone a Citizen of the United States of America, and leave it at that.

Lee T.

U.S. Navy (ret.) / Vancouver, Washington

The history of the race, and each individual's experience, are thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.-- Mark Twain

The Chinese Exclusion Act was

The Chinese Exclusion Act was racist.  Obviously.  I think the name of the act is a hint...

You sir, like an balloon are once again full of hot air

The Chinese Exclusion Act was an amendment to out immigration laws, you are correct that it was meant to exclude the hundreds of thousands of Chinese who were coming here to escape a bad situation at home. Quite like the current immigration fiasco--they signed five year contracts with the rairoads and worked under conditions that most Americans would not tolerate. They were NOT imported. Please do better research.

I am so happy that you were alive back then to interview our forefathers who could not get railroad jobs.

This act:  Immigration and Nationality Act amendments of 1965 put our immigration policies back in balance.

The Chinese railroad laborers

The Chinese railroad laborers weren't imported?  Were they home-grown?

Import:To bring or carry in f

Import:

To bring or carry in from an outside source, especially to bring in (goods or materials) from a foreign country for trade or sale.

emigrate:  to leave one country or region to settle in another; migrate: to emigrate from Ireland to Australia. They emigrated .  They came of their own volition. Were you watching some old reruns of "Have Gun Will Travel" or did you buy an English translation of an old Chinese dime novel?

Up to today, I have usually ignored you other than to read your discourses with other NBers. Now that I have engaged you, it is obvious why you vex them. Nonetheless, I have chosen you as a member of my club. Those Whom I Trust. As a matter of fact you have impressed me so much that I nominate you for the leader of TWITs. You are the best.

The Chinese laborers were rec

The Chinese laborers were recruited and imported.  First they needed the consent of their local rulers - that is why most workers came from a very small geographic area.  They needed the established infrastructure here in California once they arrived - temporary shelter, a job waiting for them, etc.  They wanted agreements their bodies would be shipped back to China in the event of their demise while under contract here.

Of course a few Chinese came here on their own.  The railroad workers were, however, imported.

Please save your oh so clever insults for the very few folks who are easily amused.  They have no place here.

Yawn, sigh!

Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land?  And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?

Sir  Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard

You are partially correct--"Oh the humanities"

The railroad's agents scoured the towns of California for Chinese laborers. By fall of that year there were 3,000 on the payroll.[7] "The number rapidly increased to ten or eleven thousand and from then till the golden spike was placed, at Promontory, four men in every five hired by the Central Pacific were Chinese.[8] After the supply of local Chinese labor was exhausted, the railroad began recruiting in the Far East.[9]
 Hmmm, after they exhausted the emigrants, then they recruited.. Hmmmm? Ten Thousand , eh??? Hmmmm.

I'm oh so happy you've finall

I'm oh so happy you've finally figured it out.  The wise teacher takes the most pride in the slowest student.

I never said you were the slowest--

I never said you were the slowest--also I nominated you for leader of the TWITs.

You are very ungracious--you were only partly correct. Most of your posts are filled with half truths and misstatements. I deal with you honorably and get a wise remark in reponse. Your fellow TWITs may not elect you if you keep that up.

I could have said--"once again Jfranc you have told a half-lie.".

Didn't you promise to leave s

Didn't you promise to leave some time ago?  Typical.

I can not say your posts are vast - guess we'll have to settle for half-vast.

Do try to keep your story straight. Talk about lies and half-lies. First you claim Chinese laborers weren't imported. Then you stated a total of 10,000 or 11,000 were used to build the railroad and some 3,000 were recruited locally. That would leave the preponderence - 7,000 to 8,000 - imported. It's a sad day when you don't even read your own post...

darn it will you read before you challenge

darn it will you read before you challenge--and recheck the posts I said they emigrated and I stand by it. I chose to be conciliatory because the fact that the railroad moguls went to China to get more workers could be called "importing" by someone who views humans as cargo.The way the Chinese got here was by emigrating. The article I excerpted said 10-11000 were recruited before they had to go overseas.

Now as to leaving--I was about to leave and then the US senate gave me a Z-Visa. Do you have a problem with that??

PS Your wit was only half there in your joke(?).

From Stan Steiner's Fusang (1

From Stan Steiner's Fusang (1979):

The muscular young men from China were given the jobs that the whites had abandoned. "Wherever we put them, we found them good," said the delighted Crocker. "And they worked themselves into our favor to such an extent, we found if we were in a hurry for a job of work, it was better to put Chinese on it at once." Even the stubborn Strobridge barked, "Send up more coolies."

And they came as the gold miners had come before them, from the same regions of Kwangtung province on the Canton delta, mostly from the sea-swept maritime districts of Sunwui and Toishan, in the area known as Sze Yup. They came by the thousands and tens of thousands. So many young men wished to come that the ships of the Pacific Mail Line, which brought most of them, were often overloaded by their captains with a third too many passengers. At the inevitable congressional investigation of this lawlessness, the captains were redundantly accused of greed, though no one asked the young men of Kwangtung to testify as to why they were so eager to come to America that they crowded onto the obviously overloaded ships.

Since most of the Chinese workers who were already here planned on returning to China, I don't think immigrant is the proper term.  Nonetheless, the Central Pacific recruited and imported.

By the way - what did you think of the Article 11?

On immigrants

Your deep, overwhelming hatred of your country is showing again. (Or perhaps your impaling yourself on a cross of self-inflicted guilt.)  If life for those immigrants was so great where they came from, then why did they bother leaving home, or even thinking of leaving home?

I don't know about you, but I was raised by an immigrant from Germany who was horrified at my idea of learning German.  Now, if my grandmother would have heard about my idea, she would have gone ballistic, insisting that I stay away from it, because, as she would no doubt say, I am an American, and Americans speak English. 

Many immigrants to this country indeed have insisted that their children speak English exculsively at the expense of the native tongue, reason being, they are in America now.  Like it or not, this "assimilation" idea you are so horrified at (probably because it also includes pride at being American; you despise being American, especially since we aren't a guilt-ridden Socialist Nanny State) happened all on its own.  My experience and that of many others I have either read about or simply interacted with contradict your self-loathing view of the world.

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

So our nation is perfect has

So our nation is perfect and has nothing to learn from anyone else?

A few years ago Newsweek ran a detailed study of White, Black, and Hispanic folks in the United States.  In every category - families with two parents, heads of households who worked, parents who married, parents who sent to church, on and on, the Hispanic families rated the most favorably.

However, over time those households deteriorate.  We don't learn from them and improve.  Rather the influence of society tears them down.  Run the same study 10 or 20 years from now.  Nationally we don't improve - locally those families will not be as well off as they are today.

I don't hate this country - that's crap you make up.  I love this nation.  And I trust it.  Apparently you don't.

You claim you don't hate this

You claim you don't hate this country, but your own posts contradict you.  You began your rantings here by blasting our early immigrants by importing smallpox and slavery (among other evils; I apologize for the first settlers not having the decency to invent smallpox vaccines before crossing the Atlantic, sorry they couldn't figure that out sooner...but they wound up starting up the country that would help eradicate it!  As for slavery...oh, that has been around for thousands of years before America), and on other threads you hatred for the United States is as ill-concealed.  I don't make that up...you provide ample evidence in spades of what you believe.  Stop crying to me for merely pointing out the obvious.  Don't like it?  No one is leveling a gun at your head, forcing you to post here.

Your second and third paragraphs are quite bewildering.  Race has nothing to do with how good/bad family life is.  I am as pasty as they come, being German/Italian/English/Irish, and I come from a stable home anchored by two parents who have been married for 40+ years, which is something that many families from many backgrounds, ethnicities and cultures cannot claim.  So what? 

But then, you did get such silly notions from Newsweek, perhaps one of the worst news magazines printed in the English language.  Not surprising. 

By the way, can you quote me anywhere as claiming that the United States was perfect?  It surely isn't, but I, at the same time, don't spend every waking hour of my life trying to find out how horrible and evil the United States is in order to be in an evil, spiteful mood, 24/7 (life is too damn short for that), or to construct a cross of guilt upon which to crucify myself (again, life is too damn short for that).

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

Unsane,Well said, as always

Unsane,

Well said, as always.

I wonder what our resident America-disparaging trolls think is so desirable about suddenly adding such a potentially large segment of people who are unable to communicate with the rest of the country, or vice-versa.

If history is any guide, two separate cultures with such differing characteristics rarely gel peacefully. In fact, often they wind up in open armed conflict with one another.

I wonder if the NB troll community has considered that?

On PQ and Belgium

j. frank wilson, et. al, have never heard of Quebec or Belgium, apparently. 

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

ENFORCMENT FIRST !!!!Why is t

ENFORCMENT FIRST !!!!

Why is this such a difficult concept for these dunderheads to understand?  There is evidence that things like the Swift company crackdown, the bust in Mass., etc. are having some effect.

They want to spend billions to create more fence.  How many ICE and border agents could you hire for that billions and actually start enforcing the rules on the books today and you do not even need to deport all 12 million (yet).  Just make them painfully aware that they can and will be deported if they are unwillinging to play by the rules. 

Think of it like a speed trap.  A speed trap doesn't work because every single person going over the speed limit is stopped, instead it works because by increasing the number of people stopped in these areas other drivers think twice before racing on through.   The same could be done with ILLEGAL immigration.

Mass,You are correct. This

Mass,

You are correct. This issue has more to do with the rule of law than anything else. For whatever reason, Messrs. Bush and Gonzales cannot bring themselves to enforce our existing immigration laws. If they do not like the current laws, then they should work to change them. In the meantime, they should still work to uphold the laws already in place.

Both of these men took oaths that, more or less, require them to enforce our federal laws. Both have chosen not to do so. In my judgment, this makes them both derelict in their duties.

The problem goes all the way

The problem goes all the way to the top of the GOP:

Republican National Committee Chairman Sen. Mel Martinez rejected the claim that the new immigration bill will anger conservatives and destroy the GOP's chances to win in the 2008 election. <link>

He is unbelievably out-of-touch with the conservatives (and most Americans, for that matter)

No RINOs in '08 - Vote for a true conservative!

Mel Martinez is part of the

Mel Martinez is an idiot. 

Dave R,I totally agree...I li

Dave R,

I totally agree...I live in Florida and he could care less what I think. Too bad there isn't anyone who can run against him in a couple of years. He is a RINO!

unbelievably out-of-touchHe c

unbelievably out-of-touch

He certainly is.  Didn't he hear about the McCain/Brownback event a couple of months ago when they were deluged with questions about illegal immigration?

Which is why Bush &amp; Compa

Which is why Bush & Company are cahoots with the democRATS on this immigration bill that circumvents or otherwise relieves them of enforcing existing law.

Morning Dave...Here is Fred T

Morning Dave...

Here is Fred Thompson's opinion about this subject....thought you may be interested.

http://www.jacksonsun.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070521/NEWS01/705210314/1002

Thompson/Hunter '08

Thanks, bt.If I seem a litt

Thanks, bt.

If I seem a little blue, below is the response I received from Sen. Chambliss' office. Haven't heard from Isakson's yet, but I bet it will be similar.

Dear Mr. R****** :

Thank you for contacting me to share your thoughts about immigration reform. I appreciate knowing your thoughts on this important and emotional issue.

Our current immigration system is broken and needs reform. Any reform Congress enacts must meet our national security needs and our economic interests; it must also manage the number of people we admit into the U.S. to ensure American workers and families are not negatively impacted by our immigration system.

The recently announced bipartisan agreement on immigration reform is a step in the right direction toward reaching a final and comprehensive immigration bill. This legislation is a significant improvement over last year's bill, which I opposed, but this is not a perfect bill. For me to support any final bill, it must contain the following principles that are important to Georgians:

Strong border security before any new immigration programs go into effect in order to prevent future illegal immigration

An employer verification system that can provide employers certainty with respect to the status of potential employees

A meaningful temporary worker program that is truly temporary and does not provide a pathway to citizenship while allowing employers to fill jobs for which insufficient numbers of American can be found, such as agricultural jobs

No amnesty

Our nation's immigration problem has been in the making for many years and there is no easy fix. I have chosen to be proactive and engaged during the negotiations because my involvement is the right thing for Georgia and the right thing for America 's future. As the debate progresses, I will continue the fight to ensure that our nation is secure and our economy continues to thrive.

If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at: www.chambliss.senate... . Please do not hesitate to be in touch if I may ever be of assistance to you.

Dear Senator Chambliss:You an

Dear Senator Chambliss:

You and your collegues are working much too hard at this.  Give yourselves a break.  All you need to do is enforce the laws currently on the books.

One phone call and you could start your summer break early.  Extra time to campaign ...?  Think about it.

Sincerely,

Dahlia Travers

Dave R,I am waiting for a res

Dave R,

I am waiting for a response from Mel Martinez (yes he is my Senator). I have gotten reponses from him before but it is nothing more than a form letter. Since Martinez is now a buddy with Kennedy, I am not expecting a chance of heart.

msh,Bet you get the same lo

msh,

Bet you get the same load of canned BS I got from Sen. Chambliss. I'm not sure he is reading from the same bill the rest of us are.

Perhaps there is different version floating around the halls of congress.

Thanks, Dave R.  I'm a Georg

Thanks, Dave R.  I'm a Georgia resident as well and took his response to you and re-crafted a letter to him using his flawed statements.  Funny (sad) if I get the same response.

walk,Misterbill got exactly

walk,

Misterbill got exactly the same response I got, multiple times.

Perhaps it is time Sen. Chambliss had his hearing and vision checked. Apparently the man is deaf as a post and blind as a bat.

Dave R.,You sound so sad. I w

Dave R.,

You sound so sad.

I was thinking yesterday why would our government not understand (or deny) the truth about illegal immigration and the impact it is having on America. One thing I came up with is...these politicans live in a protected bubble. They don't really live amoung us, they don't do their own shopping, they are driven around, they don't wait in the doctors office, they all live in privilege. As a result they don't see what the big deal is all about. Just a few thoughts from a very frustrated American.

msh1973,You're right. I jus

msh1973,

You're right. I just finished Edward L. Gibbon's The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Perhaps I am somewhat jaded, but I am beginning to see ill times ahead for us, as we seem hell-bent on repeating the same mistakes they made.

This country cannot absorb an influx of illegals as large as I am fearing (5 persons per illegal alien) we are really in for. No country could assimilate that many without damaging itself, possibly beyond the point of repair.

And now, today's Shrub Report

And now, today's Shrub Report®:

Today's Alberto Gonzalez Update.

I believe everybody and their mother is, once again, calling for a very active hurricane season. I fully expect wall-to-wall coverage, just like last season's "accurate" predictions!

Riddle me this: should I be pissed that Edwards charged $55,000 to make a campaign speech (on poverty, no less), or should I be pissed that UCDavis were dumb enough to pay Edwards $55,000 to come make a campaign speech (on poverty, no less)?

What? Was Bill Clinton in Japan recently?

I didn't know there was a Spago in Greenland

Happy 48th birthday to my all-time favorite tortured homosexual British singer, Morrissey.

Is Pakistan really helping us, or is this just a bone being thrown our way?

Kenyan Cattle Pirates?

The Democrat(ic) "mandate" loses even more steam.

Philly Traffic Court nominee owes $11,412. In traffic fines. In true Democrat(ic) fashion, the excuses, er, reasons came gushing out: "he comes from a troubled family whose members used his name while committing traffic infractions" and "he was the son of a drug-addicted mother and a father in prison". Awww.

For Carl: here is a nice and fluffy Zimbabwe update!

Florida doctor convicted of helping Al-Qaeda.

Say bye-bye, Colossus of Rhodes!

Speaking of colossal (tools, that is), Joe Biden wants us to pay hundreds of millions to the UN because the UN has decided that what they want us to pay is more important than what the US Congress has allowed.

And now, today's Dumbass Marxist Professor Update.

And, finally, happy World Biodiversity Day, Tree-Huggers!

And now, today's Dumbass Marx

And now, today's Dumbass Marxist Professor Update. TOO FUNNY!!

"Asante said the exhibit doesn't tell visitors Egypt is in Africa, and he believes that many people leave thinking Egypt is in Europe." so, because this guy thinks people don't know geography, he assumes that King Tut is portrayed as a white and not a black......give me a break!!!!!!!

SJ1953:Haven't you seen some

SJ1953:

Haven't you seen some of the people they have on "Are you Smarter than a 5th Grader"?  They had a lady on there that said, and I can't make this up, that the country we share the most border with is Mexico.

That worries me.

Yes, I wonder where they get

Yes, I wonder where they get those people for "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" My daughters (4th and 6th grade) tell me "Dad, you should go on that show!" because I get all the questions right. I am surprised that most don't! America really has been dumbed down......and 'most' have some sort of a college degree!!!!!

No RINOs in '08 - Vote for a true conservative!

And now, today's Dumbass Marx

<<duplicate entry>>

Dumbass Professor - kinda say

Dumbass Professor - kinda says something about our educational system when people DON'T know where Egypt is located. He should be protesting the local Board of Ed., and maybe review his own classwork. He should question who made the liknesses of TUT - where they african or european? Maybe he should be protesting the diversity agenda of schools and colleges.

Zimbabwe

For Carl: here is a nice and fluffy Zimbabwe update!

Here is quote from the above article.

"The GMB is also carrying out inspections on farms and awareness campaigns to ensure farmers comply with the law, the report said.

Maize and wheat are controlled products, which means they have to be sold to the official grain company at a set price."

This sounds exactly like what was happening with the kulaks in the Soviet Union with their grain.  For those who are in the agriculture business you should really check this out and realize you do not want collectivization.  Collectivization sounds good to those in the agriculture business, but you only need to look at Soviet Union's collectivization, China's collectivization, East Germany's collectivization, Romania's collectivization, Cambodia's collectivization under Pol Pot, etc. to see that it doesn't work.

"I've always been crazy, but it's kept me from going insane"  Waylon Jennings

 

Carl, are you telling us that

Carl, are you telling us that Communism does NOT work?

Work!?! - Maynard G. Crebbs

Work!?! - Maynard G. Crebbs

Dobie Gillis references are n

Dobie Gillis references are not welcome under any Shrub Report posting, Ed. :p

Roger, don't question authority

Roger, Communism works and you better not question us.

Sincerely

Lavrenty Beria

"Oh we make the standards and we make the rules
And if you don't abide by them you must be a fool
We have the power to control the whole land
You never must question our motives or plans -

'Cause we'll outlaw your voices, do anything we want
We've nothing to fear from the nation
We'll throw you out of your houses if you get too much
If we have to we'll destroy your generation"  'Standards'

Last week I posted about the

Last week I posted about the murder of a Kenosha, Wisconsin sheriff deputy and made the supposition that the person charged with the murder was an illegal alien.  Fellow poster Mr. Bishop cautioned that the killer's legal status had not been established for certain.  I now attach the following. . . . . . http://journaltimes.com/articles/2007/05/22/local/22029461.txt

I thank Mr. Bishop for his cautionary note and I'm not trying to pick a fight with him, but my hunch on this one has now been substantiated. 

John Kerry Jr???

Oh I don't know Matt.  I don

Oh I don't know Matt.  I don't see any reference in the linked story to Genghis Khan.  We'll just have to accept this Macbeth as another historically tragic figure.

Two tidbits from the Washingt

Two tidbits from the Washington Post today:

In a front page article about the proposed immigration deal it referred to Sen Bernie Sanders (Socialist-VT) as an "independent liberal".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/21/AR2007052100105.html?hpid=topnews

In the Sports section we are to sympathize with the trevails of a Cuban defector/pitcher of the Baltimore Orioles who, when he first came to America, was "surrounded by people who didn't speak his language".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/21/AR2007052101724.html

Oh the humanity!

That's next on the lib's agen

That's next on the lib's agenda.....mandatory Spanish language lessons for everyone.

No RINOs in '08 - Vote for a true conservative!

LOL! Quit giving ideas to the

LOL! Quit giving ideas to the enemy!

Not funny - people are using

Not funny - people are using pesos for pizza, how many SUV's can we get using only pesos (in the USA that is)?

I just have to laugh at Taco

I just have to laugh at Taco Bell's recent "El Presidente" sweepstakes contest where the grand prize is ONE MILLION pesos (or about $91,000).  In this age of million-dollar game shows and hundred million dollar lotteries, doesn't $91,000 for the grand prize of a national contest seem, well, just a bit cheap, even if you dress it up as ONE MILLION pesos?

Without recognizing the ordinances of Heaven, it is impossible to be a superior man. - Confucious

PBS/Soros/Media Matters/Melanie Morgan banned

Our tax payer dollars at work once again for PBS and Soros and Media Matters strike again with Melanie Morgan being banned from Jim Lehrer's News Hour....

I am outraged over this, I am going to contact congress and Senate members about this as if that is going to do any good but I am sick and tired of the tax-payers funding this one station little iota.

Melanie was on against a member of the Soros funded group Vets.org...http://www.votevets.org/ she was accused of interrupting and being rude....oh really....surely you jest! Judy Woodruff was the host during this segment I guess.

I am going to put some different links in for those who may be interested...Randi Rhodes is one of them, one also has the video, I did not have time yet to see if it plays, as I am in a hurry to get some work done to make up for yesterday...anyway this whole thing is horrendous to me...what disgusts me is that Soros/Media Mattershttp://mediamatters.org/items/200705100002?src=rss-alert  strike again...they are chipping away slowly but surely which is their agenda to rid any conservatives from television or the airwaves.(the link I inserted has the Melanie Morgan ban from the Media Matters take from their leftist view.

http://penpressclub.org/labels/KSFO

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=809&comments=1

http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index.php?showtopic=112346

Mel-UH-nie Morgan won't be in

Mel-UH-nie Morgan won't be invited back because she was rude and shrill.  Personally, I don't know why she would be invited in the first place.  But once she is on the show she can reasonably be expected to have the manners of an adult.  This isn't the Sheer Insanity Show where guests are encouraged to yell and interrupt each other - and be interrupted by the "host."  Or cut off.

She's already spinning this into some sort of bias.  It's not.  She didn't know how to act and now she won't be back.

PS:  What does Mr. Soros have to do with Media Matters for America?

Wow. You almost appear since

Wow. You almost appear sincerely ignorant.

Almost.

Oh, wait. Let me remove the need for your inevitable response. You know, something along the line of "well, George Soros never gave money directly to Media Matters". It was only through his holdings did Media Matters get funding, but that doesn't count, right?

Now, your next response might be something along the line of "well, Soros-backed money was so small and tiny compared to the Tides Foundation."

The Tides Foundation has received over $7 million from Soros over the years.

So, please, spare us the drivel that Media Matters is NOT in the pocket of the radical socialist left.

shrubbster - I wan't going

shrubbster - I wan't going to waste time on that waste of space, but seeing you did I'll also add that the PBS producer specifically told Ms. Morgan they wanted her to be confrontational and that Judy Woodruff would have no problems with this approach.

The debate is over: so-called "manmade global warming" is a crock.

Can someone please explain to

Can someone please explain to me what is the end game for Soros?

Does he have visions of becoming King of a large Socialist country? What is he up to?

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

Share with us - what George S

Share with us - what George Soros "holdings" gave Media Matters any money?  Personally, I don't care if Mr. Soros gave them any money or not.  What I don't understand about is why people feel compelled to lie and claim he did when it is obvious he did not.

Next thing you'll be telling me is that President Bush's "Pioneers" shouldn't have bundled campaign contributions to evade the Federal limit.

Living in SoCal I have come t

Living in SoCal I have come to dread my every trip to The Home Depot, where you pull into the parkling lot and it's like a scene out of "Star Wars" where Obi-Wan and Luke pull into the cantina city and their landspeeder gets engulfed by Jawas, only in my case it's not Jawas that engulf my landspeeder it's those pesky illegals who want to do that home improvement job that I, as an American, won't do (except that I WILL do it myself!)

Anyway, with the recent 350 page bill in the news I was wondering if anyone can help me out with a question:

IF amnesty is granted and suddenly 12, 20, 40-million illegals are deemed legal and encouraged to work here, will these new workers fall under the minimum wage laws our country has on the books?

Or will we start hearing about children in the work force illegally doing those jobs that Mexicans won't do?

I'll bet that their sand cra

I'll bet that their sand crawlers take up most of the parking.

Yes and no

Yes, most jobs will be forced to pay them minimum wage. However, as most are contract workers, and work for a specific wage, non-taxed, and no minimum... that won't have an effect.

Here is the problem that will occur. This is not an opinion, this is what will occur as a result of human nature, as well as liberal pushing...

Illegals are made legal. Suddenly, these former illegals realize, they don't have to be forced to take the "horrible jobs that Americans won't do anymore" because they don't have to hide themselves anymore. As such, they will begin to demand better pay, and take different jobs. Whether they receive these jobs or someone else does, the unemployment numbers will go up. In addition, the former employers that farmed these guys from Mexico, will notice they don't have their "cheap labor" any longer. Rather then pay an actual wage, they will just transport more illegals into the country. And so the cycle will continue. The bottom line on this whole issue is -- legalizing these people, will not solve the problem. You have to solve the problem, by stopping the influx of illegals into the country. You cannot stop a sinking ship, in the middle of the ocean, by simply bailing water out... you have to patch the hole first. Until we stop the massive invasion of the illegals into the US, we cannot fix the entirety of the problem.


"Stop global warming! Asphyxiate a liberal!" -
Show us how far you're willing to go to stop "global warming"

Dude... lighten up..

Exactly!!!! So why can't the

Exactly!!!! So why can't the politicians "get it?"

No RINOs in '08 - Vote for a true conservative!

Here's what you do. Find out

Here's what you do. Find out the address of a local INS officer, and the next time you are approached at The Home Depot, tell the illegal workers that you have a major project they could all help you with, and tell them to show up at that particular address to start working.

Hilarity ensues.

*****

"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine no possessions?'" - Elvis Costello

Hero,You mean kinda like thi

Hero,

You mean kinda like this?

Newsbusters hits Deadspin

Don't know if anyone here reads Deadspin, but they discovered the "excellent" article about Kenny Mayne's "Obama" homerun call that was here a while ago. LINK

Sweet Sassy Molassy, instead

Sweet Sassy Molassy, instead of trynig to be clever (something the fellas at Deadspin try too hard to do at times), perhaps they coule have explained themselves  better, telling us WHY Obama is such a good catchphrase?

That being said, the users' comments more than made up for the poor writing. Case in piont:

Could we say that horse was ridden harder than Donna Rice on the Monkey Business?

Can we refer to the 2007 Cardinals as "pulling a Mondale"?

"Neifi Perez showed Adlai Stevenson power on that warning track shot."

"Sosa looks a bit like Admiral Stockdale as he shakes off that pitch to the head."

Good stuff. Thanks for the link, Bal. Are you, by chance, Chamomiles Davis?

Haha. I'm not a commenter.

Haha. I'm not a commenter. You have to actually be invited to gain that access.

And in general, the commenters on that site are hilarious and come up with great stuff, especially when ragging on ESPN and Colin Herd.

And I like this one most of

And I like this one most of all:

"Actually a Ch-Ch-Ch Cheney accidentally hits his friend in the face with his shot and not his intended target."

Today's top news: Guns don

Today's top news: Guns don’t kill people, SUVs with guns kill people

Headline of the day:

SUV crashes into store, perhaps in attempt to steal guns

Lee T.

U.S. Navy (ret.) / Vancouver, Washington

The history of the race, and each individual's experience, are thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.-- Mark Twain

Doesn't this sound like the t

Doesn't this sound like the the AmericanLeft/Demosocialists?  
Quico says:
Chávez has politicized everything. But chavismo is scared of politics. Chavismo dramatically expands the political domain, injecting politics into every nook and crevice of daily life. From the country's official name to black bean packaging, no sphere seems off limits. At the same time, chavismo fears politics. It goes to great lengths to avoid genuine political exchange, the back-and-forth of genuinely opposed ideas. Chavismo shares the old left's suspicion of bourgeois politics, its antipathy towards the unpredictable cut and thrust of political debate - it likes political ideas safely directed from the center, not running wild beyond their control. For chavismo, politics must be everywhere, but must everywhere be controlled

Well, that whole &quot;adjust

Well, that whole "adjusted for inflation" argument no longer has any merit, like it had any in the first place...

http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/stories/2007/05/21/0521bizgas.html

Uzumaki/Ayanami '08. Because a ninja and an Eva pilot can govern the nation better that what we have now...

Huh? Without adjusting for

Huh? Without adjusting for inflation, we'd never know what gas prices really are compared to prices in the past. Why is knowing that information so bad?? And what's the 'argument' you're referencing? Isn't inflation a fact??
JMR

Miatagirl, twice now, in a sp

Miatagirl, twice now, in a span of two short days, you have managed to dispel any doubt of your stupidity.

Twice now, you have shown yourself to be unworthy of our time.

Good day.

I said GOOD DAY.

Hell, even I have to admit de

Hell, even I have to admit defeat there. I'll hang my head in shame for now. But still, you can't hide behind this excuse forever, ya know.

Here's something else to think about. Apparently, Rupert Murdoch's bid for the Wall Street Journal is going down in flames. The two families that control the majority of voting shares in the Journal's parent company is resisting any attempts at a sale.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003586626

Uzumaki/Ayanami '08. Because a ninja and an Eva pilot can govern the nation better that what we have now...

Yawn. Save the idle, pitiful

Yawn. Save the idle, pitiful threats for another website, chica.

Come back when you grow a pair.

Let it be known, not all Demo

Let it be known, not all Democrats are close minded about Iraq.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010107

The critics who bother me the

The critics who bother me the most are those who ordinarily would not be on the side of supporting dictatorships, who are arguing today that only military intervention can prevent the genocide of Darfur, or who argued yesterday for military intervention in Bosnia, Somalia and Rwanda to ease the sectarian violence that was tearing those places apart.

Color me surprised...

Great article - thanks for sh

Great article - thanks for sharing it with us.

HS hearts Open Thread.

*****

"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine no possessions?'" - Elvis Costello

Some politicians are a mixed

Some politicians are a mixed bag.

(And some are very much not.)

http://members.aol.com/davetalan/cartoonC.html

PLEASE, ISN'T THERE ANYONE OU

PLEASE, ISN'T THERE ANYONE OUT THERE WHO CAN RESCUE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!

This is your guy.*****&quot;W

This is your guy.

*****

"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine no possessions?'" - Elvis Costello

pretty funny...and as we al

pretty funny...and as we all know, it isn't funny unless there is an element of truth in it :)

I think Fred Thompson is the

I think Fred Thompson is the only one that can.

No RINOs in '08 - Vote for a true conservative!

SouthJersey...I have to agree

SouthJersey...

I have to agree 110% with you. All my efforts will be to help get him elected once he announces.

My first slogan..."I'm in bed with Fred". Yeah, I know it's terrible, but it might go over with the gay crowd (no I'm not).

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

Republican Party: DOA after t

Republican Party: DOA after this amnesty bill goes through.  The rest of us will be overwhelmed with new voters who have benefitted from those government subsidies and get to then vote for liberal Democrats: never mind the devastating monetary cost and the loss of our culture.   Bye, bye social security, sooner than we even thought before.

 

I am leaving the Pubs and--

 I am leaving the Repubs and--starting a new party- "Draconians for America".

There will be no BS delay in court cases. If there are witnesses to a crime--they will be in court within one week and the defendant will be sent to jail.

 Every driver's license in every state will be checked for validity of citizenship. (Not as hard as you may think if the government entities shared data). Of course all holders false ids will be jailed or deported.

"Hate" crime laws will be removed from the books--they just take up more pages and the victims suffer every bit as much.

The draft will be reinstated--no college deferments-you go when your number says you go.

The Kansas city airport will install a holy water font in the same room with the Islamic foot baths. One for all and all for one. (PS Any other religion that has a rquest e.g. A statue of Buddha will be honored post haste.)

Cab drivers will have their decal removed if they refuse to take passengers for any reason exept personal safety.

All current elected officials will have a votr of confidence in their state. If they get less than ifty percent--the state will hold another election.

No congrees man will serve more than six terms

No Senator will serve more that 2 terms

Ted Kennedy will get a free colon wash and be sent back to Cape Cod to install windmills iffshore of his compound.

Rooms in our schools will be designated areas of worship for every religion in the schools. This worship service is voluntary. No attendance will be taken.

The words "under God" in every printed document of the Pledge will be gold-scripted.

OK ==I started it--anybody want to add any other rules  for the Draconians ?

Mr. Bill....I have one reques

Mr. Bill....

I have one request... Whenever the holy water needs to be changed the old water goes into the bath water the Muslims use. Just my juvenile side coming out.

Hmmmm, would it burn them?

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

Pray for their soles!

Pray for their soles! It would cleanse them of the desire to behead people. (My juvenile side) LOL

Sigh. FL's clueless governo

Sigh. FL's clueless governor wants to investigate the oil industry for "gouging," and people here wonder why I am a Libertarian (ok, soon to change parties to vote for Paul in the primary, but still...) He's also promoting ethanol and hybrid vehicles. Good thing there's such a difference between the 2 "major" parties. The best thing is when he says "I'm a free market guy" but "I detest profiteering." And of course the CNBC anchorbimbo didn't question him on this contradiction.
JMR

Here's what I don't get abo

Here's what I don't get about politicians in Washington regarding immigration, and the disconnect between the American, I just read a poll at www.numbersusa.com I am no Larry Sabato,polling expert from The University of Virginia I think that's his name, but come on this is a no brainer.

Pulse Opinion Research* Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters May 15, 2007 (* Part of Rasmussen Polling)

1. First…there are currently 26 million legal immigrants in the country. That’s one out of every 11 people in the country. An additional one million new legal immigrants are allowed in each year. Is the number of legal immigrants allowed into the country too high, too low, or about right?

8% - Too Low
55% - Too High
32% - About Right
5% - Not sure

2. Okay…The total immigrant population in the United States, including both legal and illegal immigrants, is currently 38 million. That’s one of every eight people in the country. An additional 1.5 million new legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year. Putting aside the question of legal status for a moment, and focusing only on the totals, is the number of immigrants allowed into the country each year too high, too low, or about right?

5% - Too Low
70% - Too High
19% - About Right
6% - Not sure

3. Have the government's efforts to enforce immigration law been completely inadequate or has the government made a real effort to enforce our immigration laws?

76% - Inadequate
11% - Government has made a real effort
12% - Not sure

4. Should we continue the current level of immigration or has the time come to reduce immigration so we can assimilate the immigrants already here?

23% - Continue current level
64% - Reduce immigration
14% - Not sure

5. Do we need to allow more immigrants into the country to fill the jobs that require relatively little education? Or, are there plenty of Americans already here to do those jobs, but employers just need to pay higher wages and treat workers better?

14% - We need immigrants to fill jobs
77% - There are plenty of Americans here to fill jobs, employers just need to pay higher wages and treat workers better
9% - Not sure

6. Some have suggested granting legal status to the 12 million illegals already in the country. How confident are you in the government’s ability to weed out criminals and terrorists and others who should not get legal status:

7% - Very confident
19% - Somewhat confident
43% - Not very confident
28% - Not at all confident

3% - Not sure

7. As part of the effort to reduce illegal immigration, would you prefer a 700 mile long fence covering one-third of the US-Mexico border, a 2,000 mile fence covering the entire US-Mexican border, or not building a fence along the US-Mexico border?

7% - 700 Mile fence
51% - 2,000 Mile fence

35% - Do not build a fence
7% - Not sure

8. With regard to the 12 million illegal immigrants in the country, ideally would you prefer they go home or be allow to stay legally?

58% - Go home
30% - Be allowed to stay legally
13% - Not sure

9. A proposal has been made for a large-scale effort to round up and deport the 12 million illegal immigrants in this country. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose this proposal?

40% - Strongly support
24% - Somewhat support

17% - Somewhat oppose
14% - Strongly oppose
5% - Not sure

10. Another proposal has been made that would allows the 12 million illegal aliens here to be legalized and offered citizenship after they pay a fine, learn English and undergo a background check. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose this proposal?

27% - Strongly support
33% - Somewhat support

14% - Somewhat oppose
24% - Strongly oppose
2% - Not sure

11. A third proposal has been made to reduce the illegal immigrant population over time by enforcing existing immigration laws. This would include increased border enforcement, penalizing employers who hire illegals, and more cooperation with local law enforcement. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose this proposal?

54% - Strongly support
25% - Somewhat support

9% - Somewhat oppose
6% - Strongly oppose
6% - Not sure

12. Which approach do you prefer -- enforcing the law and cause illegal immigrants to go home over time or granting legal status and citizenship to those who meet certain requirements.

56% - Enforce the law
35% - Grant legal status
9% - Not sure

13. Would you be more or less likely to vote for a presidential candidate who favors allowing the 12 million illegal immigrants to stay in the United States and eventual get citizenship?

12% - Much more likely
24% - Somewhat more likely
19% - Somewhat less likely
33% - Much less likely

11% - Not sure

So now Senator Kennedy since you seem to what you are talking about on Immigration, what are the American people missing you spinless cur....I mean Sir?

I meant to post this on the &

I meant to post this on the "Juan" story, but what the hell its on the open thread, but as far as the oil & the high price of gasoline, build more refineries, and drill within our own borders more.

"I'm just a big fat hairy American Winning Machine!" - Ricky Bobby

This will infuriate some of you, but....

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 22, 2007

ARLINGTON, VA – The United Republicans of California (UROC) have
unanimously endorsed Congressman Ron Paul for president of the United
States. UROC, formed in 1963 to support Barry Goldwater, represents the
traditional conservative wing of the California Republican Party.

"The unanimous endorsement from the United Republicans of California
proves what the campaign has been saying all along," said campaign
chairman Kent Snyder. "Ron Paul is the only true conservative and real
Republican in the race."

In their official statement endorsing Dr. Paul, UROC called him "the
leading advocate for freedom in our nation’s capital" and recognized
that:

Ron Paul's voting record demonstrates that he has voted against:

· raising taxes;
· unbalanced budgets;
· a federal restriction on gun ownership;
· raising congressional pay; or
· increasing the power of the executive branch.

His voting record demonstrates further that he voted against:

· the USA Patriot Act;
· regulating the Internet; and
· the war in Iraq.

Dr. Paul is the only candidate with a record that matches the UROC’s platform.

"Whether the issue is life, the Second Amendment, foreign policy,
spending or taxes, Ron Paul is the only traditional conservative
candidate," continued Snyder. "Traditional conservatives across the
country should support Ron Paul for president."

-30-

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

DAMN!! I am Infuriated!!

DAMN!! I am Infuriated!!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

Want to get really mad? Ima

Want to get really mad? Imagine a Goldwater Presidency instead of Lyin' B. Johnson's. Imagine just what kind of prosperity & peace might have resulted today from the USA following Barry's principled brand of freedom -- which inspired Ronald Reagan, but IMO he was too-late -- instead of the statism we chose with Johnson. I was a toddler at the time so I could not vote, but IMO it was the most important US election of my lifetime. I just imagine what would have happened if cellphones had come along a decade sooner, as they very well might have if we'd had a Goldwater Presidency (see CATO Institute studies of the FCC cellphone delays for why)...
JMR

Ok sarc, just suppose we vo

Ok sarc, just suppose we vote for Ron Paul and he indeed does become President. Who is going to be Commander in Chief of the Military?? Because I have to be honest with you, he sounded pretty "whiney" answering that debate question about our policy's being the cause of 9/11. Whiney I say... Not likey to scare the bejesus out of anyone, let alone terrorists!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

The President would be Comm

The President would be Commander in Chief, as usual, no matter which one of 'em is elected. I disagree about how he sounded, but I think he should have been rude (like Carter) instead of Presidential, and mentioned Bill Clinton, since much of the genesis for 9/11 is found in his policies IMO. He didn't, though, but that's not the same as whining, and those California Republicans figgered it out, so I have hope for you. Now go back and read the very first post in this open thread. Keep reading what we say, all the way down, to find your dose of Ron Paul cognitive-dissonance for the day.
JMR

&quot;The President would b

"The President would be Commander in Chief, as usual..."

Ok I can't blame you for not wanting to play my little game but there is one thing you cannot deny: Paul got squased by Gulliani, and it was Gulliani who got the applause and not Paul... Right or wrong he was marginalized (even more) in the minds of many by that one response. And I do agree that Ron acted with class but it's going to take more than class and the California republicans to get Ron Paul the nomination. Can't wait for the Dems vs Repubs debates. I really do hope Ron is there, if nothing else he is an interesting guy to listen to.

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

&quot;squased&quot;? Sorry,

"squased"? Sorry, but I don't count audience reaction the same as you do, especially when that particular audience seems to have forgotten almost a decade of Clinton continually provoking 'em as I've repeatedly covered today earlier in this thread. On top of that, I have no idea what your "little game" even is, and no idea of your rules, if any, but I'm glad someone here has finally agreed (it feels like "admitted," at this point, to be perfectly-frank!) that Dr. Paul, as usual, acted with class. IMO class is a quality that's desperately needed in a President, and it's sorely lacking in Rudy, and I think this campaign will eventually show the truth.
JMR

My little &quot;game was th

My little "game was the" "The President would be Commander in Chief" gag, which you completly missed. Don't worry sarc. I won't bother you anymore.

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

Those crazy California republ

Those crazy California republicans. They got fooled by Arnold, so I guess this makes sense.

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877

LOL -- funny clear! Only in

LOL -- funny clear! Only in California.

The debate is over: so-called "manmade global warming" is a crock.

CT --from Jihn Diamond's book---

The highest glory of the American Revolution was this:that it connected in one indissoluble bond civil government with the principles of Christianity.

John Quincy Adams

God bless America. 

Misterbill 2007

Amen!Help a wounded soldier h

Amen!

Help a wounded soldier here...

http://newsbusters.org/node/12877