As I suspected, nothing. No first hand proof of anything. I have no blinders and I'm not marching to any party line. Show me the money trail or audio clips. Can't be done.

It boils down to a couple very simple things. What people want versus what they are willing to pay for. Nothing is free and requires tax dollars and the willingness of the people to pay those tax dollars to get the programs funded.

It isn't possible to insure no kid is left behind or insurance for all without bankrupting everyone in the process. Sorry but most people want to keep most of their paycheck. This isn't a socialist country. Even the ones that were showed it doesn't work. We're still here, they aren't. So which is the better model? I think if we look at our border problem it clearly indicates the vote of the rest of the world. Since many of you believe immigrants are so much smarter than idiot Americans are you willing to recognize their vote as valid?

I will continue to defend my country and I am a proud USC. Not ashamed of anything. If anyone doesn't like it, leave. Go back where you came from and try to enact your utopia there. If you don't end up in a body bag you'll probably spend your waining years in prison.

quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:

The problem is the media will report whatever its viewers want to hear whether it is CNN, Fox, MSNBC, Altmedia, Backpage, etc. [/QUOTE]

Just to be clear. I am not talking about something I picked up in the Media. I am talking about sitting in a room with other members of the GOP who have no clue about how offensive their racial remarks have become. I am talking about incidents I have witnessed firsthand, not a soundbite I heard on the six o'clock news.

I have watched the GOP morph from the party of small government, a balanced budget, limited foreign intervention and Constitutional rights (remember Barry Goldwater?) to the party of big government, massive deficits, global dominance and a lockstep dictatorship. As a person of reason and good conscience, I cannot accept the hi******* of my core values.

There is not outcry of Harm or Foul by party leadership when Republican employers break the law by hiring undocumented workers. Withing the GOP there is a collective outcry that is harsh and inhumane against mainly Mexicans. We are quick to deny them the benefits of any worker including a driver's license to drive to their place of employment, all the while supporting laws that make these undocumented workers, felonious criminals. Its politics but it is also self-serving, mean-spirited, with strong racial undertones. No one should reward Republicans for breaking the law by hiring undocumented workers.

It is a fact, not my opinion that judicial review has been tampered with, and that the Detention Centers are being run by Haliburton Subsidiaries. It's a fact that prosecution and Enforcement have been selective in Immigration cases. If its a dicey unpopular case that will bring some heat to DHS/ICE they just back off.

The Attorney General and Department of Homeland Security are being given marching orders from the Bush administration. They could go after business and could have done so all along. Keep a couple of Swift Meat Packing executives in a Detention Center in a remote undisclosed location and deny them access to their attorneys, families and restrict phone access. House them in an open bay room with 30-50 other detainees for a couple of years while they decide what to do with them. (BTW this is not Gitmo this is Lumpkin GA) That would send a message, and you would not have to clean a whole house just one room. Haliburton would not be happy though would it?

The choice in Immigration Enforcement has been calculated and profitable. It's much easier to harass those least able to defend themselves. Its time the Republicans learn we are a nation of laws, and those laws apply to them, and there is a penalty for breaking laws. Until that becomes the case, we will continue on this road mimicking the third world dictatorships who we incredulously criticize for the same Human Rights violations.

The Party that supported Bush for two terms is not the party that supports the rule of law.

BTW.. who the hell calls America "the homeland"? Is this Nazi Germany and we have co-opted the "motherland"?

Someone accused me of falling off a ladder here. Well maybe I bounced off a "Reality Rung".

Many say it's hopeless for the GOP and Hillary will be the next president. If so will she correct this whole Haliburton connection? Or will she have it's chief executive officers over on a sleep over in the Lincoln bedroom? I remember this practise from the first Clinton years.

quote:

It's a fact that prosecution and Enforcement have been selective in Immigration cases. If its a dicey unpopular case that will bring some heat to DHS/ICE they just back off.

Yes, claim you were abused and get the opportunity to be put on a fast track on getting a green card.

Dang shame on what is happening to this country

If I've repeated what someone else said then apparently there is some truth to it. You iperson have not added anything aside personal insults. What does that say about your abilities and probable age, perhaps 10 or 11.

Instead of quoting dead poets come up with something of substance. So far, third hand biased reporting at best.

What would any one who is against the current Gov do differently? Open the borders to all. Give a free pass to the 12 million.? Turn this country into another Mexico? What? Besides taking the low road and tearing down this countries leadership offer some alternatives. Won't happen though. None are capable of providing more than lip service for an ideal that died with the former Soviet Union.

A bigger shame then is what is happening in the rest of the world.

quote:

Originally posted by davdah:
If I've repeated what someone else said then apparently there is some truth to it. ....

When a poor man wears a ring made out of gold, people will say it's made out of bronze. When a rich man wears a ring made out of bronze, people will say it's made out of gold!

On planet earth, credibility has a very high price tag!

Its the object not the scenery that dictates its authenticity. A wise man will see the diamond in the mud. Its just as credible in the mud or on your wifes finger

quote:

Originally posted by iperson:
* You think Lennon was a brilliant social commentator.
YUP

* You confuse Lenin with Lennon.

LOL, so true taking his lifetime struggle with INS.

Houston,
I have no faith, no empathy, and no sympathy for White House correspondents whatsoever. To me, they exemplify Stalin's quote: "They are useful idiots."

quote:

Originally posted by davdah:
Its the object not the scenery that dictates its authenticity. A wise man will see the diamond in the mud. Its just as credible in the mud or on your wifes finger

With the constant shroud of anonymity, each and every posted message on this board is being taken on its face value. Being so, our judgment is always based on the projected (or perceived) credibility of the poster.

The syllogism that I used previously is directed at the perception of the "wearer" and not what's "worn." Again, the analogy is as per the context of this forum - the credibility of the poster vis-a-vis what's posted.

The truth, the real truth, and nothing but the truth, has an innate character of remaining constant. It's how the poster presents it and how we perceive it that's variable. Again, the determinant is the poster's credibility.

Back to the analogy. Gold is gold and diamond is diamond. In the context of universal perspective, the value of each doesn't need to be qualified nor quantified. It's where it's at that's changeable.

I used gold to lend a masculine touch. You preferred diamond. Oh well...

They say it takes a minute to find a special person, an hour to appreciate them, a day to love them, but then, an entire life to forget them.

Iperson: I didn't say that. You did. At least, directly.

I didn't know minerals or metals had a gender. Gold is masculine? I used a diamond only for sake of clarity and convenience. A gold ring or diamond is what it is regardless of location. A person should not allow the surrounding environment to cloud their judgment.

That is why you can walk through the streets of South America wearing a Rolex while the rest of your cloths look a bit shabby and not be touched. Try wearing a Timex and a suit. You'll probably lose a hand.

Say something here that everyone agrees with and your a great guy, intelligent, one of the buds. Do otherwise and your labled f a t , ugly, g a y, retarded, and what ever else comes to mind. Just as the thieves are easily blinded so are a lot of people.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: davdah,

You guys are really reaching. (lol).

Sorry, not g.a.y. But you know what. You guys claim to be liberal. I thought you embraced that sort of thing. Hmm, true colors come out. You might be a Republican after all.

quote:

Originally posted by republicanwriter:
Just to be clear. I am not talking about something I picked up in the Media. I am talking about sitting in a room with other members of the GOP who have no clue about how offensive their racial remarks have become. I am talking about incidents I have witnessed firsthand, not a soundbite I heard on the six o'clock news.

I have watched the GOP morph from the party of small government, a balanced budget, limited foreign intervention and Constitutional rights (remember Barry Goldwater?) to the party of big government, massive deficits, global dominance and a lockstep dictatorship. As a person of reason and good conscience, I cannot accept the hi******* of my core values.

There is not outcry of Harm or Foul by party leadership when Republican employers break the law by hiring undocumented workers. Withing the GOP there is a collective outcry that is harsh and inhumane against mainly Mexicans. We are quick to deny them the benefits of any worker including a driver's license to drive to their place of employment, all the while supporting laws that make these undocumented workers, felonious criminals. Its politics but it is also self-serving, mean-spirited, with strong racial undertones. No one should reward Republicans for breaking the law by hiring undocumented workers.

It is a fact, not my opinion that judicial review has been tampered with, and that the Detention Centers are being run by Haliburton Subsidiaries. It's a fact that prosecution and Enforcement have been selective in Immigration cases. If its a dicey unpopular case that will bring some heat to DHS/ICE they just back off.

The Attorney General and Department of Homeland Security are being given marching orders from the Bush administration. They could go after business and could have done so all along. Keep a couple of Swift Meat Packing executives in a Detention Center in a remote undisclosed location and deny them access to their attorneys, families and restrict phone access. House them in an open bay room with 30-50 other detainees for a couple of years while they decide what to do with them. (BTW this is not Gitmo this is Lumpkin GA) That would send a message, and you would not have to clean a whole house just one room. Haliburton would not be happy though would it?

The choice in Immigration Enforcement has been calculated and profitable. It's much easier to harass those least able to defend themselves. Its time the Republicans learn we are a nation of laws, and those laws apply to them, and there is a penalty for breaking laws. Until that becomes the case, we will continue on this road mimicking the third world dictatorships who we incredulously criticize for the same Human Rights violations.

The Party that supported Bush for two terms is not the party that supports the rule of law.

BTW.. who the hell calls America "the homeland"? Is this Nazi Germany and we have co-opted the "motherland"?

Someone accused me of falling off a ladder here. Well maybe I bounced off a "Reality Rung".

RW,
So, what makes you think that a local GOP dinner party is indicative of the GOP as a whole? This is the same type of argument that believes all racists are white. Or does Jim Traficant represent the Democratic Party as a whole? Or how about Dan Rostenkowski? Or how about Zoe Baird who hired illegals while being confirmed by a cabinet post? Or how about Walter Rayford Tucker III and his bribery conviction? Or how about Robert Torricelli? The problem you have is you forget both parties have scandals, both parties have used the Constitution to gain the ends to the means. Both parties have misplaced the voters trust. This is what I am referring to. You forget what happened politically 30 seconds ago, 30 minutes ago, 30 days ago, 30 months ago, or 30 years ago.

Another thing you need to do is learn how to research how government agencies come into being. Would it surprisel you that the Department of Homeland Security was a proposed agency in the Hart-Rudman Commission in 1999? Or that President Bush was originally opposed to such but was swayed by Congress, particularly Sen Lieberman? or how about Enron, which Kenneth Lay was the CEO, paid for the Democratic Presidential Inauguration in 1996 and the California Gubernatorial Party of Greg Davis in 2000. Yet Kenneth Lay is typically shown as the poster child of "Republican Corruption?" Again, you have a lot to learn about politics in general.

With terrorism, there is no room for negotiation. Since 9/11, we, as a nation and the world as a whole, should not try to investigate terrorism as some international crime. It has gone beyond that. As we have seen wit the Madrid bombings, the terrorist attacts in Afghanistan, Thailand, Philippines, and other places, it is a position we can no longer afford to assume. If another terrorist attack is successful within the US, this nation will go into schizophrenia mode.

Finally, the illegal immigration situation has been going on for the past three decades. The failures of the 1986 amnesty law still have not been learned by either side. On the one hand, immigrants should not, nor need not, to wait long periods to enter the US. But on the other hand, internal vigilance is the price of Liberty, so says Thomas Jefferson. I approve, in principle only, the use of enforcement, but I disapprove in most of the tactics being used. The problem with immigration is not whether we should or should not enforce the law, the problem is with the immigration system itself. Just like the immigration system did not fit into reality in 1954 and 1928, so does the current system. We need total reform, not the patchworks of the Dream or Skil act (I am not saying I am against these bills, just indicating that these are only stop gap measures of a much larger problem). Neither the Democratic or Republican party has gotten this systematic failure.

Iperson, actually I'm at work today. Didn't even realize it was a holiday until my manager called and made sure it was ok to be out today. As much as I dislike the idea of free time off had to cut em loose. Columbus didn't even discover America, so why should I let my people go?

The closest I get to g.a.y. is listening to Elton John. Calms the nerves.

I have but one plane and its grounded at the moment. In for its annual inspection. My putter is in Texas. No time for golf, haven't had a chance to play in many months.

Diamonds are a girls best friend. I'll agree with that. Mine likes hers very much.

See Hudson, that is part of my philosophy. Do more than you promise. That is how you make your customers and your spouse happier. Just because someone is from somewhere else doesn't mean all they want is a GC. To some its just a means to stay with whom their with. Imagine that! Especially when they find out they were legal all along and are still with you. WOW, incredible isn't it.

The Dems and Reps are a lot like divorce lawyers. They will yell and call each other names in front of their clients. Afterwards they can be seen together toasting the spoils of war.

quote:

Originally posted by davdah:
..... Say something here that everyone agrees with and your a great guy, intelligent, one of the buds. Do otherwise and your labled f a t , ugly, g a y, retarded, and what ever else comes to mind. ...

iperson, I don't care what people say on this board but this is my motto then, now, tomorrow, and thereafter.... "I may not like what you say but I've defended your right to say it."

Let's see, ohhh, thanks, I'm reminded it's Columbus Day today. I didn't know that, I'll work at home, err, manage my conglomerates at home. I'm into shipping, you see. Not moving things, that's small time, no, I mean, building ships. I'm into IT too, I'm meeting with Bill Gates this Friday. We're cooking up a big contract with Pentagon. I'm keeping an eye with Berkshire Hathaway also. Warren Buffett had a sneaky wink after our last luncheon. He's old what the h e c k. Oh, last Friday, I had a dinner in a restaurant on the Strip in Vegas, with politicians, mostly Dems. When I asked for the tab, the head waiter nervously came to me and said: "Ma'am, you own this place."

Good for you. Likewise, I've never told anyone to shut up or that they should be banned.

quote:

See Hudson, that is part of my philosophy. Do more than you promise. That is how you make your customers and your spouse happier. Just because someone is from somewhere else doesn't mean all they want is a GC. To some its just a means to stay with whom their with. Imagine that! Especially when they find out they were legal all along and are still with you. WOW, incredible isn't it.

Davdah,
You basically called Alex, the OP, a sexual pedophile. This is what brought my ire and was the point of the diatribe. In other words, if you are going to explain the law, you need to do so without passing judgment. That was the point.

As for my wife, mine likes jade, the green jade from China. Wearing gold or silver, even with a diamond on top of it, creates a serious allergic rash. And putting a diamond on stainless steel or leather doesnit seem to work for the texture.

Opps, iperson, you're invited. Bill didn't mention that. He just said a couple more friends are in attendance. Ow, the last time we talked you're into buying a yacht. Was the sale finalized? Or you've got a couple now?

Hudson, yes I did. Only because if she starts the process and makes the case for their long term relationship it may be be an issue. I would think they would take that into consideration, don't you think?

Me passing judgment? So your saying no one is permitted aside you? At least when I do its based on the material presented. I'm still waiting for an explanation as to why you called her a w h o r e.


Iperson, I wouldn't have guessed you had a feminine voice. Your right, I wouldn't date a women who was physically strong. Too creepy. I see your degree was in art (lol). What the hell is that? But since your Polish it explains a lot.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/705344/polish_girls_joke_from_dajoker_ning_com/

quote:

Hudson, yes I did. Only because if she starts the process and makes the case for their long term relationship it may be be an issue. I would think they would take that into consideration, don't you think?

If he, the boyfriend, entered without inspection, it will not matter how long or short their relationship is. They simply cannot adjust status while living in the U.S. If the boyfriend leaves the US, he then faces a 3 or 10 year ban. If they adjudicated based on marriage, a waiver must be filed because the boyfriend is inadmissible. And even with the best of circumstances and reasons, it is not guaranteed or reasonably expected for the waiver to be approved. That is the problem Alex and her boyfriend has.

But when you generalized pedophilia, you also condemned three fourths of all American teenagers and young adults. It is quite common nowadays for boyfriend/girlfriend is a freshman or sophomore in college while the girlfriend/boyfriend is still a junior or senior in high school. Will you condemn them as well, Davdah? She even explained Colorado law about pedophilia, yet you ignored it.

The boyfriend is paying for the sins of his parents. To put into perspective that you might understand, imagine your own children paying for your own sins. It happens in todays society. How many times have we, as a whole, condmenmed the son or daughter of someone, or the grandson or granddaughter of someone because of what their parents or grandparents did. Germany, Israel, and japan, as nations, face this. So does the United States when people judge American foreign policy 50 years ago or 150 years ago. We call it anti-Americanism. Others call it non cordial critiquue of American foreign policy. As with your wife/fiancee/girlfriend, the same can be said from certain ant9-immigration groups, Davdah. They will not care what the facts and circumstances are, they will not cae who you are. They will only revel in the fact of gross generalizations of what an illegal alien is. To some, any immigrant who violates the any US law is illegal, no matter how small or minuscule that law is. You used the same type of argument and I used your significant other as the object of that exercise.

NOTEL I am not discussing the merits for or against American foreign policy, just using an anology.