Discussion

• November 29, 2006

  8:25 AM

  Patriot writes:

  I've never been to Miami, but I hear it's nice to visit.. I happen to know, through stereotype and hearsay from people who have visited, that cubans inundate the scene. Does that make it a third world country/city? I don't see how. Miami alone probably generates more money than all of Colorado.

• November 29, 2006

  8:44 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  Tancredo is Michael Richards on stage. Allen drives the tour bus.

• November 29, 2006

  8:56 AM

  David Hakala writes:

  None of the above, Mark. As Tancredo's spokesman declared in the article, Tancredo is just saying "what he has said for years about isolated immigrant communities that resist assimilation and cling to their native languages and customs."

  Tancredo is a Borg.

  http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Borg

  "We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile." (Star Trek: First Contact)

  "The Borg have no culture in the traditional sense of the word. Their sole purpose was the assimilation of other beings in their pursuit of perfection. Being a Collective, members lose any sense of individuality. The moment someone was assimilated his or her individuality was integrated within the Borg hive mind and they would be a part of the Borg Collective."

  "The Borg wouldn't know fun if they assimilated an amusement park." - B'Elanna Torres (to Seven of Nine and Tuvok, about recreational activities.

  "The Borg--Party poopers of the galaxy." -The Doctor (to Seven of Nine)

• November 29, 2006

  9:02 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  I think Tancredo pretty much hit the mark. I work with a guy who grew up in Miami and he said he will never go back.

  Of course everyone is focusing on WHAT he said instead of WHY he said it. Tancredo got a strong reaction, which is what he wants. So hopefully people will actually find out what his thoughts are on the subject.

  As Americans, we have to wake the hell up and see what's happening to this country. Of course Tancredo gets called a racist because the vast majority of people invading this country are from Mexico. But if there was a massive wave of illegals coming in through Quebec demanding that we all learn French, I'm sure Tancredo would still be fighting for immigration reform and in no way would he be considered racist.

  I'm so sick and tired of people throwing the "racist" card into the mix. It has nothing to do with this argument! Either you're in this country legally or you're not. Doesn't matter what color your skin is!

  Wake up America!!!!!

• November 29, 2006

  9:09 AM

  Dywane writes:

  How is stating facts racist???? Have any of you ever been to Miami?? Just drive around the city and you will see Tom isn't that far off.
  Of course there are some nice parts, the houses, beaches and water add a nice touch to the city, but come on, this is not racism.
  Illegal immigrants fill a large part of Miami's population. There needs to be some action taken to fix the immigration problem.
  When that occurrs, it could lead to other changes, like lowering the crime rate and stopping all the Blow that come through that town.
  Let's not jump the gun too quickly on racism when he is basically just making an observation about the problems in that city.

• November 29, 2006

  9:10 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  I've been to Miami. To quote from (I think) Bette Davis: "What a dump!"

• November 29, 2006

  9:12 AM

  just sayin' writes:

  Tancreepo received a medical deferment from going to Vietnam due to "Mental Health Issues". I don't think he has ever really recovered.

• November 29, 2006

  9:29 AM

  BZ writes:

  Miami has become a dump.
  When someone has an opinion just call him a racist if you don't agree.

  Keep up the fight TOM!

  BZ

• November 29, 2006

  9:31 AM

  Randy McLean writes:

  Tancredo is so right. I lived in Denver for 42 years Tom was my representitive in Washington. I have now lived in Ft. Laudedrdale for about 3 years. My wife and I have been to Miami twice, they broke into our car the first time and found nothing to steal. The second time they stole the car. I pray I never have to go back there. Amazingly enough the Keys are fine, Ft. Lauderdale North is fine. But Miami is a very large den of inequity, devoid of social or cultural value. It's political climate is the most corrupt in America. Give Miami to Cuba, they already own it

• November 29, 2006

  9:32 AM

  Patriot@usapatriots.net writes:

  To the Trekkie..

  You're taking your Star Trek conventions too seriously, Spock. America is not the Borg. And to say that Americans (I guess you mean white people) have no culture is prejudice itself.

  If people in Miami want to keep talking Spanish, dance salsa, and act like Tony Montana, that's their right. They're isolating themselves, and shouldn't be surprised to be criticized by others. To keep it in a Sci-Fi genre.. many immigrants are Bizzaro -trying to create a Krypton on Earth... Which is exactly what white Americans are afraid of.

  It's the same scenario when a Hispanic or Asian speaks in his tongue in front of an English only speaker without translating. It makes you feel like they're talking about you even if they're not. Nobody likes to feel isolated.

  White Americans, I think, are feeling more and more isolated as time goes on. There is a massive influx of non-whites here. I think white Americans feel like their culture is being undermined.

  MANY immigrants are not the happy go-lucky, I'm here to be an American images they portray themselves to be... much like many natives. Many are here just for the money. Some make their money legally, some illegally.. much like many natives. Some are here to exploit it, and as they benefit from our resources (jobs, market, industry) they criticize our country at the same time. This last factor is what pisses me off. These are the people who I wish drove off a cliff.

  You can grade an American by where his heart and loyalty lies.

• November 29, 2006

  9:44 AM

  jay writes:

  With Detroit and St. Louis having higher crime rates and just as much poverty...why not call them "third world"? Because their populations are predominantly WHITE.

  I travel to Miami a couple times a year on biz and am amazed at the new construction and the diversity of commerce and culture. Like any major American city, it has both affluent and impovershed neighborhoods...but is no more impovershed and less so than many of our majory cities. I guess I'm colorblind in a way that Tom and his supporters aren't.

  I can't believe there are so many apologists for a guy like Tancredo. We have a long way to go to get away from that ugly side of our national psyche.

• November 29, 2006

  9:45 AM

  Ottis writes:

  Tancredo's comments (and those of others here) are comments from people who visit somewhere but don't live there. Yes, parts of Miami are a dump. That's true of most big cities (just as there is crime in most big cities). And yes, there are many non-white people there. Given Miami's location and history, that's understandable. But none of this makes it a "Third World country." And I don't live there, but have visited, and I am able to figure this out (and I am Caucasion). So why can't Tancredo and some others here? Seems like there may be a personal agenda.

• November 29, 2006

  10:05 AM

  JW writes:

  Look, regardless of what you think about Miami, Trancredo is a retard. This guy is a US congressman for fucks sake. Is this the way they are supposed to behave? Amazing that the guy can behave like this on a sem-regular basis, and straight up lie to his supporters about term limits, and still get re-elected.

  Then again, if most of his districts voters are like Hogar, who said Trancredo is "a man I have met and greatly admire" I suppose its not so amazing that he gets re-elected. Whats amazing is that you can pack that many rednecks, homophobes, racists, religious zealots, and straight up dumbshits into one congressional district.

• November 29, 2006

  10:07 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  Thanks, Tom for continually having the guts to "call it like you see it", in regards to immigration, legal and ILLEGAL. There should be a moratorium on immigration from third world countries. To quote Ben Stein "when you import third world people into the country, your country will be come third world."

• November 29, 2006

  10:14 AM

  G.E.Ketchum writes:

  Once again Tancredo is on target with his comments about Miami. Why is everyone so afraid of speaking the truth on immigration? Cuba is a third world nation and Miami is the home of a large population of people from Cuba. Mexico is a third world nation like it or not and we are headed for more Miami type cities with the Mexican immigration problems. You might want to read your own
  Rocky Mountain News headlines on 11/28/06. I find it hard to believe that this is a group of tourists. Could be the next wave of people for Tina Griego and her Border Street.
  

• November 29, 2006

  10:20 AM

  Kevin Jones writes:

  Bad joke time:

  What is a racist? Someone who's winning an argument with a liberal.

  Jay writes: "With Detroit and St. Louis having higher crime rates and just as much poverty...why not call them "third world"? Because their populations are predominantly WHITE."

  Try Black. Both St. Louis and Detroit are majority African-American.

  Trekkie David Hakala writes: "The Borg have no culture in the traditional sense of the word. Their sole purpose was the assimilation of other beings in their pursuit of perfection."

  Tancredo's nationalism is somewhat like this, but not quite. Tancredo thinks there is a national culture. There is no national culture, and it's a good thing too. However, Tancredo is less an enemy of local culture than his opponents in the globalist camp, who in fact see local culture as an obstacle to the advancement of progress and capitalism. Globalists want culture to be reduced to the private sphere, leaving the public sphere free for unconstrained consumption and production of wealth. They believe labor should be just as mobile as capital. In other words, they believe that workers should be as mobile and deracinated as they are, with no culture to speak of. They're the ones with all the wealth and political influence. Tancredo's just a US Rep.

  On the whole, nationalism is to be preferred to internationalism when localism is not an option. At worst Tancredo will just mess up America. His most formidable opponents will mess up the whole world, assimilating everyone and everything into the lowest standards of the market.

• November 29, 2006

  10:23 AM

  Ed writes:

  Why is it when a large group of people in America manage to hold onto their culture a bit more firmly than other Americans it's considered something negative? You'd expect everybody in Chinatown to speak Chinese, wouldn't you? Nobody seems to have an issue with the Greek language and the Greek alphabet being used when they stop in Greektown for a Gyro and Baklava? Why does a large number of brown people in one area make it a slum? And just who is "they" in the "they broke into our car?" : the crackheads, car thieves, illegal immagrants or just brown people in general? Please put Tancredo on the next Space Shuttle. He is embarassing Colorado.

• November 29, 2006

  10:26 AM

  RonT writes:

  I had family that fled the Miami area way back in the early '70's due to the decliining quality of life they had initially found there.

  Those who think Miami is 'nice' are most likey the same folks who think Mazatlan is 'nice', when a drive in from the airport to the beaches exposes anyone to the true nature of the city - squalid, poor, polluted.

  Tancredo is a trogladite most of the time, but on this I think he's correct on the decline seen in urban American cities.
  

• November 29, 2006

  10:27 AM

  Ed writes:

  Delete "Miami" and insert "North Denver."

• November 29, 2006

  10:36 AM

  JW writes:

  "On the whole, nationalism is to be preferred to internationalism when localism is not an option. At worst Tancredo will just mess up America. His most formidable opponents will mess up the whole world, assimilating everyone and everything into the lowest standards of the market."

  This is called fear of the inevitable. People like you are going to cause America to be caught, and passed by those whos desire for prosperity exceeds their fear of change.

  Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way and pray.

• November 29, 2006

  10:41 AM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  I suppose its not so amazing that he gets re-elected. Whats amazing is that you can pack that many rednecks, homophobes, racists, religious zealots, and straight up dumbshits into one congressional district.
  Posted by JW on November 29, 2006 10:05 AM

  Once again JW takes the high road when dealing with the comments of people he disagrees with. All those he disagrees with are to be denigrated, and he feels justified in doing this because he is superior in all ways to those who disagree with him.

  When my parents moved us to the United States, we adopted the culture of America. We celebrate Thanksgiving, Labor Day, the Fourth of July, Memorial Day, Presidents Day and other American traditions. Immigrants who don't want assimilate into American culture should move back to their home countries.

• November 29, 2006

  10:42 AM

  jay writes:

  "Assimilation" is going to happen Kevin...not embracing it is an exercise in futility.

• November 29, 2006

  10:47 AM

  Grandma Tancredo writes:

  Heee's a gooda boy, my little Tommy. He no likea the Mexico people buta he eatsa alla his spaghetti anda he bringsa me a pizza with a spicy meatballs. .

• November 29, 2006

  10:51 AM

  David Hakala writes:

  Patriot@usapatriots.net says, "You're taking your Star Trek conventions too seriously, Spock."

  This from a drone who takes "patriotism" seriously? LOL!

  
  "America is not the Borg."

  Tancredo is not America.

  "many immigrants are Bizzaro -trying to create a Krypton on Earth... Which is exactly what white Americans are afraid of.

  "It's the same scenario when a Hispanic or Asian speaks in his tongue in front of an English only speaker without translating. It makes you feel like they're talking about you even if they're not. Nobody likes to feel isolated."

  THAT is what's bugging you people?! Take a Berlitz course, for Christ's sake! It's a lot cheaper and more practical than deporting 11 million people.

  "You can grade an American by where his heart and loyalty lies."

  WTF are you to grade anyone?

• November 29, 2006

  10:53 AM

  Intelligence' writes:

  Let's site the mid-west crime rate being the fastest growing in this new century. Why? Someone with an inquisitive mind might ask. One only needs to look at the flood of ILLEGAL immigrants to that region. Period, fact, end of subject. How many of you grew up in CA? I did, I fled, and I saw the writing on the wall back in the mid/late '80s. It's time we amend the 14th amendment before we're all wearing burkas and bowing in the direction of the purveyors of peace. Look what Europe is finally awaken to. They cracking back at the islamic takeover via the trojan horse of illiberalism and multicultural insanity. Assimilate or gravitate back to your third world, period.
  Hunter/Tancredo in '08 with Savage as Secretary of State. Footnote, if the illibs don't confirm Bolton for the UN Ambassador, we truly know where the illiberals will stand when we're faced with another world war. With their heads buried even further in the sand. Good luck Patriots.

• November 29, 2006

  10:56 AM

  JW writes:

  "Once again JW takes the high road when dealing with the comments of people he disagrees with. All those he disagrees with are to be denigrated, and he feels justified in doing this because he is superior in all ways to those who disagree with him."

  LOL. True true. Mostly this was aimed at you Hogar. Trancredo, "a man I have met and admire" pretty much says where you are comming from, and I think the description I put forth does describe Trancredo supporters quite well. The guy is pretty much useless as a legislator because he only has one issue, and most people think hes annoying about it. He spouts off stupid crap like this about Miami, and that about Nuking Mecca, which are pointless wastes of time for a high priced congressman. In short, if you voted for this guy, you voted for an inept, uncooperative jerk with absolutely no ability to get a single thing done in the halls of power. Stupid about summs it up.

  And Hogar, I am superior to you. I dont have delusions of perfection based in a belief that God, who is infallable, told me everything I need to know. I actually learn.

  "When my parents moved us to the United States, we adopted the culture of America. We celebrate Thanksgiving, Labor Day, the Fourth of July, Memorial Day, Presidents Day and other American traditions. Immigrants who don't want assimilate into American culture should move back to their home countries. "

  
  We call it the "melting pot" for a reason you know. Other cultures have something to offer as well. That is what makes this country so great. If we just made everyone be like us, we would not get the excellent qualities from all cultures in the world. Assimilation of immigrants is a two way street unless you are afraid.
  

• November 29, 2006

  10:57 AM

  Bess Bessert writes:

  Tancredo is correct in his statement...........

• November 29, 2006

  11:09 AM

  David Hakala writes:

  "Tancredo is less an enemy of local culture than his opponents in the globalist camp, who in fact see local culture as an obstacle to the advancement of progress and capitalism."

  They're both enemies of humanity, Kevin. Less Borg is not better Borg.

  You're right, capitalists would love to see global standardization of consumers. Makes production and marketing much simpler.

  http://tinyurl.com/ufwut

  "Of course, as the global marketplace grows, so does the eagerness of many to believe that oafish big business regularly gets its comeuppance in foreign lands. Some classic gaffes have taken up permanent residence in the Web's echo chamber: The supposed howlers include the Chevy Nova's flop in Latin America because "no va" means "won't go"; Perdue Farms's translation of its slogan "It takes a tough man to make a tender chicken" into a Spanish phrase meaning "It takes a sexually aroused man to make a chicken affectionate"; and Coca-Cola's misbegotten attempt to render its name in Chinese characters, which came off as "Bite the Wax Tadpole.""

  But globalization is not the goal only of soulless corporations. Many humans wish to eliminate the fictitious differences between themselves, too.

• November 29, 2006

  11:17 AM

  Mimi writes:

  Unchecked illegal immigration is costing us dearly and the same liberal idiots try to shoot any messenger that is brave enough to stand up to the inevitable rants of racism, etc.
  Tancredo should be congratulated for giving rational people a voice in this unfettered invasion of illegal immigrants who steal from the taxpayers every day and leave empty homes and unpaid medical bills in their wake.
  Their refusal to acclimate and adjust to American culture and language is an affront to the legions and generations of immigrants who consider this transition a must in the country that adopted them.
  JW and Co. are perennial morons and serve only to remind us that this problem is being fostered by instigators who delight in trying to paint concerned citizens as racists in an attempt to squelch dissent and more importantly because they have no rational coutner arguement. Small small people these JW's.

• November 29, 2006

  11:22 AM

  jay writes:

  "Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Languages or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion. "--Ben Franklin 1751

  “The Irish fill our prisons, our poor houses. … Scratch a convict or a pauper, and the chances are that you tickle the skin of an Irish Catholic. Putting them on a boat and sending them home would end crime in this country.” --Chicago Post, 1868

  "A set of citizens, German and Irish, wanted to get the Constitution of the U. S. into their own hands and sell it to a foreign power." --Theme of an American Nativist Party rally, 1844

  "Today, instead of a nation descended from generations of freemen bred to a knowledge of principles and practice of self government, of liberty under the law, we have a heterogeneous population, no small proportion of which is sprung from races that throughout the centuries have known no liberty at all… In other words our capacity to maintain our cherished institutions stands diluted by a stream of alien blood, with all of its misconceptions respecting the relationships of the governing power to the governed."
  --Rep. Albert Johnson, 1927, justifying the 1924 National Origins Act

  "The number of purely white People in the World is proportionally very small…in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are Germans also, the Saxons only accepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth."
  --Benjamin Franklin, 1751

  
  We will eventually look upon Tancredo's beliefs and comments the same way we look upon those quotes above.

  
  

• November 29, 2006

  11:23 AM

  Jim Zyles writes:

  BOO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS !
  HOORAY TOM TANCREDO !

  Tom tells it like it is. Jeb Bush is just your typical politician, pandering to the electorate.
  Celebrating "diversity and heritage", as Bush wrote, is the politically correct version of celebrating non-assimilation.

  Why can't immigrants celebrate being AMERICANS, by assimilating into a common culture?

  Certainly the ethnic cleansings and sectarian civil wars of the past and present are drastic cases, but I hope America is not headed down one of those paths.

  Give 'em hell, Tom

• November 29, 2006

  11:29 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  Anyone see the story on how the vanload of illegals went off of I70 yesterday and the driver ran away into the heavy snow.

  Absolutely brilliant! What we need here are MORE of these people! I know they make my life so much better! Bring on taht diversity!

• November 29, 2006

  11:39 AM

  JW writes:

  "JW and Co. are perennial morons and serve only to remind us that this problem is being fostered by instigators who delight in trying to paint concerned citizens as racists in an attempt to squelch dissent and more importantly because they have no rational coutner arguement. Small small people these JW's."

  If Im such a moron, how is it I KNEW months ago that this illegal immigration stuff was just a wedge issue, and would disappear after the election?

  The only person still talking about it is Trancredo, because hes A) a moron and B) a one trick pony (amazingly, this one trick is enough for the idiots in his district to keep electing him).

• November 29, 2006

  11:49 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  Tom Tancredo is an oracle.

• November 29, 2006

  11:52 AM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  We call it the "melting pot" for a reason you know. Other cultures have something to offer as well.
  Posted by JW on November 29, 2006 10:56 AM

  I have no problem with a melting pot. As a matter of fact, an alloy is stronger than its base components. The problem I have is when people want to come to this country but do not want to melt or alloy, but want to hang onto their culture exclusively. That is what is wrong with the Amish, Chinatown, South LA and Miami. They refuse to give an inch regarding their culture, while taking advantage of our collective support of them.

• November 29, 2006

  11:53 AM

  Miami Sammy writes:

  JayDubya said,

  If Im such a moron, how is it I KNEW months ago that this illegal immigration stuff was just a wedge issue, and would disappear after the election?

  It didn't disappear genius. THAT is why you are a moron.

  Cheers,
  Sammy

• November 29, 2006

  11:59 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  The gusanos in Cuba are more U.S.Aers than the whole of you on this website. They're called "gusanos=worms" because they are traitors to their country. They have swarmed Florida for decades in accordance with U.S. anti-Castro policy in Cuba. You posters are just as stupid as they. You're racist sentiments are fueled with hate for their language and culture. They the gusanos got it coming because they always felt like they were your allies. Now they're coming to find that all the anti-Castro hertic really doesn't mean nothing in the end. As we can see it's a White world after all.
  The big idea planted here is if you're of color you're as good as a slave hanging from a tree.

• November 29, 2006

  12:12 PM

  Karen writes:

  I think it was Barry Goldwater who remarked during his presidential campaign that America would be better off without the east coast. While I salute Tancredo for his hilarious and Goldwater-esque comments about Miami, I get the feeling that he is not particularly serious when he says he wants to run for President. To get elected President, you have to grovel to every population that has an electoral vote, even if you despise them; like when John Kerry said he loves NASCAR. The great thing about Tom Tancredo is you know where he stands and he's willing to take a beating in order to get the country talking about a difficult issue. Unfortunately that's also why he'll never get elected anywhere besides his home district.

• November 29, 2006

  12:25 PM

  El Jefe writes:

  One major drawback of a diverse society is that it doesn't stay diverse. It gradually separates along ethnic lines and clusters into enclaves. People of minority ethnicity tend to segregate themselves. They aren't melting in the Melting Pot, they're clumping up and floating around.

  As an individual of minorty descent, I've seen a lot of this...but of course it's all forgotten because "cultural pride" trumps all actual integration and harmonious coexistence.

• November 29, 2006

  12:30 PM

  jay writes:

  "To get elected President, you have to grovel to every population that has an electoral vote, even if you despise them"

  You mean Tom "despises" part of his electorate? Why would he blindly hate a portion of the population?

  "JayDubya said,

  If Im such a moron, how is it I KNEW months ago that this illegal immigration stuff was just a wedge issue, and would disappear after the election?

  It didn't disappear genius. THAT is why you are a moron.

  Cheers,
  Sammy"

  First off...I never wrote that, and I don't know who told you you were a moron...but if the tinfoil hat fits...

  Secondly, the only time immigration returns to the spotlight is when some right wing freak (Tancredo/Rush) sounds the airhorns for a footsoldier propaganda announcement.

  Go back to sleep, Sammy Sheep, the election is over.

• November 29, 2006

  12:35 PM

  Miami Sammy writes:

  Sorry gay, I was referring to JW.

  All the best,
  Sammy

• November 29, 2006

  12:38 PM

  Patriot writes:

  To David Hakala..

  Not sure what coffee shop you take your caffeine at, but you should really calm down..

  Why shouldn't citizens take patriotism seriously? You live here, don't you? You're sheltered? You have certain rights, don't you?

  Like I said before.. there's no law that says you have to become part of mainstream.. it's just going to make it harder for you... but not impossible. I like most cultures, especially Cuban, but I don't feel sorry for any group of people who refuse to learn English or have commerce with people outside their group.

  I'd rather be a drone than a dumbass dud who doesn't beleive in anything except Starbucks, Hugo Chavez, and Danny Glover.

  WTF are you talking about 'you' people? I'm Hispanic.. of Native American, Mexican, and Spanish descent. The statement I made is an observation I've made of others.

• November 29, 2006

  12:59 PM

  jay+hole=jayhole writes:

  We will eventually look upon Tancredo's beliefs and comments the same way we look upon those quotes above.

  Posted by jay on November 29, 2006 11:22 AM

  Unfortunately these quotes related to legal immigration and assimilation concerns. But absolutely consistent that jayhole whould continue to blur the lines between legal and illegal - it's how he can rationalize calling concerned American citizens racist. That and all of the illegal immigrants he employs and/or facilitates.

• November 29, 2006

  1:06 PM

  Truthteller writes:

  The illegal immigration machine is responsible for many tens of thousands of forclosed homes in Colorado - the nation's leader in foreclosure rates. And to think that immigration activists have been saying all along what law abiding people these immigrants are......
  They skip on the mortgage and the tax payers citizens are holding the bag - still.
  That cost benefit ratio keeps tilting to the cost side every time the liberal press if forced to tell the truth given the sheer weight of the effort to hide it.
  GO TANCREDO!

• November 29, 2006

  1:06 PM

  JW writes:

  "The problem I have is when people want to come to this country but do not want to melt or alloy, but want to hang onto their culture exclusively. That is what is wrong with the Amish, Chinatown, South LA and Miami. They refuse to give an inch regarding their culture, while taking advantage of our collective support of them."

  This is short sighted. Yes, there is some resistance when people first come over. And why not? Its hard to learn a new language, and there are pockets of people who speak your native tounge. In essence, you can get along without assimilation. Does this mean you dont contribute? NO. Does this mean your kids dont assimilate? NO.

  Again, this stuff is an issue because politicians know the masses get all bent about it. People are afraid of change. That is the entire premise behind the conservative political movement, which is pretty damn strong in this country.

  Unfortunately, globalization is just changing things way too fast. In the cold war it was friends and enemies. In the last ten years, friends and enemies alike have become COMPETITION. Conservative ideology just isnt going to cut it because its just not fluid enough. Wanting things to stay the same is not the way to keep up with innovation.

  And there are other societies out there who are less concerned with holding on to the past in fear, and more concerned with changing in order to prosper. If we dont learn to do this....THAT will destroy this nation, conservative, liberal, mexican, jew, christian, muslim, white, black, it just wont matter.

• November 29, 2006

  1:13 PM

  Cody T. writes:

  JW has absolutely NO CLUE what he is posting. Everyone is aware of the phenomenon of racial and language isolation and active resistance to language and cultural adaptation that is balkanizing America. It has nothing to do with conservative or liberal politics.

  It has everything to do with the growing industry of illegal immigration that idiots like JW are happy to ignore. When the empty homes start appearing in JW's neighborhood and his property value bottoms out he will be singing a different tune. That is real life, not the monkey-spanking existence of morons like JW.

• November 29, 2006

  1:35 PM

  jay writes:

  I kind of figured you wouldn't be able to keep up Anonymous Hole, or A-hole for short.

  The same quotes and sentiments are shared by certain folks whether the act of immigration is legal or not. That fact effectively illustrates that the issue is not about the legality of the act, but an inherent dislike of certain cultures by a certain type of people.

  I'm not saying that illegal immigration isn't an issue that needs attention...but I don't look at it the same way that Tancredo and his supports do(and their predecessors did).

• November 29, 2006

  1:46 PM

  JW writes:

  "It has everything to do with the growing industry of illegal immigration that idiots like JW are happy to ignore."

  
  Illegals send $20 B______ out of our economy which is bad.

  There is $10 T_______ hidden in off shore accounts to avoid taxation under our current system, which is worse (by a long shot, but you wont hear about it from a politician!).

  Now, whos an idiot for ignoring a problem? Me? Or you? Although technically you didnt ignore this one, you just didnt bother to look at it at all. Too busy worrying about illegals, and dancing to the tune of those who want your vote.

  I hate to tell you this, but our current power structure has those in power dictating to everyone else. They dont tell you whats really wrong, because to them, its not wrong, they have the power! They tell you to worry about things they couldnt care less about; Illegals, abortion, church in schools, gay marriage. And you just blissfully go along.

  Im worried about the tax SYSTEM in general, globalization and the stance we are going to take as a country, the environment, healthcare. This is stuff politicians dont want you voting on. This is the stuff they dont even want you THINKING about, and if these blogs are any indication, most of you ARENT!

  Anyone notice that the environment wasnt mentioned even once in the last election?

  And here is some advice to help you think;

  If someone says something that really pisses you off, take a second to calm down, then go try to prove its CORRECT with research. If you cant, then you can go ahead and discount it. Otherwise you need to accept the fact that emotion does not help you think, and therefore anything you get emotional about should be considered something you know absolutely NOTHING about.
  

• November 29, 2006

  1:52 PM

  american me writes:

  I don't care about the latinos half as much as the hillbillies. Don't ask me to put a gun rack in my pickup and listen to honky tonk achy breaky heart whining for some floozy down at the bar warmongering brain dead tripe or any other kind of worthless twangy george bushleage wannabe racecar driving nimrod whitebread reactionary devolutionary anticulture deliverance banjo playing crackerism.

• November 29, 2006

  1:55 PM

  Patriot writes:

  ....but this average American is sick and tired of seeing the USA being turned into a third world shit hole by the Hypocraps and Repubicants for their own personal gain.

  Posted by Civilized Anarchist Arnie on November 29, 2006 01:27 PM

  
  Have you even ever travelled to a true 3rd world nation? I have.. to many. No where in the US is it even comparable you dumbass.

  We have black ghettos, mexican barrios, china town (which I'm not sure if crime is a big issue), but what about trailer park white trash? What about redneck Mobile, Alabama? What about hicksville, montana, or nowhere, ohio... where crime can also be abundant. There are plenty of places where "American" aka "whites" live where they refuse to 'assimilate' and choose to isolate.

  Even in the worst conditions.. Compton, Detroit, the 'Boogie Down Bronx, East LA... Aurora, hahaha... just joking.. none of these places compare to Mogadishu, Mexico City, Tijuana, Bogata, etc.. I agree with you to a point, Anarchist.. I'd like to preserve what we have.. but

  The US is far from a '3rd world shithole' but is full of arrogant shitheads.

  I'm 100% against illegal immigration and beleive legal immigration should have reform.. let more qualified immigrants enter (of all ethnicities) rather an unqualified so that unqualified don't end up commiting crimes, or living off US citizen's tax dollars. I could give a shit if little Timmy (aka Pablo) is a citizen because he was born here and daddy is illegal...which leads to the whole don't split up families arguement. Timmy can stay, but dad has to go.. he can try to get back in with proper documentation.. Or Timmy can go too. John and Judy (not to mention Pedro and Maria) taxpayer shouldn't have to pay the bill just because others don't want to obey the law.

  Then you have the 'human rights' idiots.. It's not a human right to be an American!! It's a privilege!

• November 29, 2006

  1:57 PM

  Tim James writes:

  I lived in downtown Miami 5 years ago in the Brickell community. As a white guy who grew up in the Midwest, I felt how it was to be a minority for the first time in my life. If you don't speak Spanish (and I tried my best) and/or aren't Cuban in Miami, you don't get service in shops and stores and you're regarded as a foreigner of sorts. Miami was fine to live in, as long as you avoided the rougher parts of the city... just like EVERY other big city in the USA. I decided that Miami is no place to raise a family, but it's a great place to visit.

  Tancredo issuing this statement is discouraging, since he represents Colorado many miles away and has never lived in Miami. I guess Tom doesn't like Mexicans illegally immigrating to the country; now add on to his list Cubans. I would really like Tancredo to work and focus on the rougher areas of Denver (oh yeah, I forgot... he represents "Vanillaton" and Highlands Ranch :^P ) instead of using insultive rhetoric to attack other communities. Let those Miami-Dade County representatives worry about their own community.

  And I voted for Tancredo in this year's election and I'm in favor of legal immigration... just like if I were to try and immigrate to another country... I would have to jump through those same hoops.

• November 29, 2006

  2:18 PM

  Kevin Jones writes:

  JW writes: "This is called fear of the inevitable. People like you are going to cause America to be caught, and passed by those whos desire for prosperity exceeds their fear of change."

  You believe in inevitability? How quaint. Are you a lapsed Calvinist by any chance?

  The last inevitable international economic ended in 1991 after causing tens of millions of deaths. You should understand why I can't take inevitability very seriously.

  Since we've already fallen into psychoanalysis, do you think you might be driven by fear of stability?

  An object at rest cannot be stopped. Being at rest lets me laugh at the parade of would-be Progressives surfing the Wave of the Future right into the sewage treatment plant.

  Karen writes: "I think it was Barry Goldwater who remarked during his presidential campaign that America would be better off without the east coast."

  Heck yeah! Why have we let nostalgic Southerners become the only real anti-Yankees? Goldwater was a good Westerner. The Northeastern establishment has started most of our wars and colonized other regions with their degenerate progeny, like Neil and George Bush.

  "American me" should be ashamed of associating the preppie patrician Dubya with the redneck people.
  

• November 29, 2006

  2:22 PM

  David (R) writes:

  JW - one of the problems in America today is that relatively few folks actually know how to research and debate, while leaving the emotions and name-calling out of it.

  But I would also like to add that you've had several very 'colorful' responses to things the last few days as well. Ideally, I would like to see the majority of posters here take the time to be very thoughtful about their posts - to take the time to research topics using reputable and reliable resources - and then to formulate questions from which all might learn.

  This name-calling, back-biting, and divisive behavior really doesn't contribute one positive thing and it discourages others from participating for fear of being flamed.

  Now, on to the topic issue: I've been to Miami a number of times in the past 10 years or so. Some of it is absolutely beautiful, some of it is a slum. The Hispanic portion is fairly easy to discern, because many different, bright colors are used - most of you probably know what I'm referring to - yellows, greens, reds adorn houses and businesses. On a recent trip to Phoenix, I noticed the area on Indian School Road and parts south of there are taking on the same color usage. The same can be said for the Federal Blvd area in Denver, much of the east portion of LA, a significant area in downtown Kansas City, and I would dare to guess many, many other cities.

  Is it okay that this is happening? Well, a lot of that schema tends to come from the Hispanic cultures from what I've seen over the years. I've noticed that my black friends have certain clothing tastes for patterns and colors. My white friends tend to be more 'conventional', for lack of a better word, preferring earthtones for homes and furnishing, not to mention clothing. Isn't this okay? Isn't is allright for each person to have preferences? If not, why not? There aren't any codes or HOA conventions being stepped on, are there? If we deny one group the right to enjoy things they like, do we really have any right to our own likes?

• November 29, 2006

  2:25 PM

  jay writes:

  Inevitable like evolution in schools, stem cell research and giving voting rights to women and minorities...right Kevin?

• November 29, 2006

  2:31 PM

  Patriot writes:

  To Tim James..

  I appreciate your comments.. They make a lot of sense and wanted to mention them myself but was distracted by reacting to others' blog entries..

  What the hell was Tancredo doing in Florida anyway? A 6th district gettaway veiled by an uncontrolled immigration convention?

  You're right.. he should stick with the home team.. and I don't mean Blackjacks pizza. He could have easily travelled to west Denver, Brighton, or some other densely Mexican populated area. And I only mention Mexican because I don't hear of illegal Itallion, or German immigration. The illegal cuban, columbian, and venezuelan immigration runs low in Colorado.

  I think all major politicians are out of touch with the common man, like Tim James or I.

  To the last blogger, David.. Hoooah! on your last paragraph...

• November 29, 2006

  3:01 PM

  JW writes:

  "But I would also like to add that you've had several very 'colorful' responses to things the last few days as well."

  Several months of the same shit from the same idiots makes me go all vulgarian. What can I say? Its satisfying. I still throw out some rational discourse.

  Hey KJ, nice post jackass. Too bad its off topic. Globalization aint Calvinist you idolater! Its reality, despite what you and your fantasy worshiping idiot clan believe.

• November 29, 2006

  3:02 PM

  H.S.T. A.S. writes:

  In the Age of Cell Phones, I find myself playing phone tag with greater regularity than before the damn things were invented.

  There is a connection with the current topic.

• November 29, 2006

  3:07 PM

  Patriot writes:

  Civilized..

  You measure a culture's worthiness by their 'contributions' to 'mankind'.
  So just because Mexicans and those countries to the south had nothing to do with the light bulb, electricity, the assembly line, flight, they are sub-human? That's socialist bullshit. The fact is, there are shitheads in every culture, race, and ethnicity...

  There ARE doctors, lawyers, philosophers, and entrepreneurs south of the border... Not just maids, landscapers, and fruit pickers.

  You go around judging people by their 'contributions to mankind' feeling all superior about things you didn't even do... taking credit for things you have nothing do do with.. your only and sole association being ethnicity.

  Go plan a school shooting or something you POS.

• November 29, 2006

  3:13 PM

  True Patriot writes:

  It looks like Time Magazine said the same thing in an article "There's Trouble -- Lots Of It -- in Paradise" on November 19th. It is at www.time.com. Unfortunately, Tancredo's detractors are likely to ignore such "Inconvenient Truths" (maybe someone should make a movie about it).

  I have been to Miami and own property in Florida (not swamp). Outside of the resorts, third world is a fine description.

• November 29, 2006

  3:20 PM

  Another True Patriot writes:

  http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1561128,00.html

• November 29, 2006

  3:22 PM

  True True Patriot writes:

  Formerly just Patriot..

  True Patriot.. can you even name any of these places you call 3rd world?

  You probably have no idea what a real 3rd World country is... These places may be shitholes compared to Park Meadows, Highlands Ranch, Superior.. but they're not 3rd World.

  Go do something more useful than blowing smoke.. like make a finger painting..

• November 29, 2006

  3:26 PM

  Anonymous writes:

  The poorest county in the US is in Kansas

• November 29, 2006

  3:37 PM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  The poorest county in the US is in Kansas
  Posted by on November 29, 2006 03:26 PM

  Poverty is not a crime.

• November 29, 2006

  3:55 PM

  jay writes:

  Neither is being born not White:)

• November 29, 2006

  4:02 PM

  Reversed Racist writes:

  Ed @ 10:27a.m.

  Insert North Denver???????????

  Where you been Maan???
  Sounds like you just got off the boat.
  North Denver always been Mexican despite the fact that all you Honkie Tonks are on your Manifest Destiny mission and invading the homeland with white honky tonk trash.
  Go back to Europe Gringo you are not wanted here AT ALL!!!

• November 29, 2006

  4:02 PM

  Patriot writes:

  Hogar.. where are you 'returning' from?
  

• November 29, 2006

  4:16 PM

  Patriot writes:

  to reversed racist..

  it's not really reversed.. you just are racist. lol.

  you're one of those nation of azlan people, huh? listen, mexico isn't getting all this land back no matter how pathetic you sound in insisting it will.

  what would mexico have done with all this land anyway? Just make what is denver tijuana.. the mexican government sucks.. that's why they move at the progressive level of a snail -if at all.

  the spanish, the english, the italian, the german.. they're the real wetbacks, to put it more accurately... the atlantic is much larger body of water than the rio grande.. sure they killed the native american's off (not the 'indians'), exploited and claimed the land for themselves.. but who gives a cat shit.. it's over with.

  I have white friends, I have black friends, I have asian friends, who I guess are yellow, I have hispanic friends.. who I guess are brown. White people can't dance, black people can dance, asians can't drive, and hispanics can't drive, can dance, and eat tacos.. right?

  Chill out and have a Corona..
  

• November 29, 2006

  4:31 PM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  Hogar.. where are you 'returning' from?
  Posted by Patriot on November 29, 2006 04:02 PM

  One of the scandinavian countries.

• November 29, 2006

  5:26 PM

  mmi writes:

  Tancredo for President - I wish more politicians were like him and would tell it like it is. Los Angelos is another city ruined by the illegals, and Denver is closing in mighty close. Time to wake up and do something before its too late.

• November 29, 2006

  6:58 PM

  David (R) writes:

  "Several months of the same sh........"

  lol - yes JW, I understand - it surpasses maddening at times.

• November 30, 2006

  9:22 AM

  james writes:

  It's fun to spout rhetoric when the people spouting it have never traveled 100 outside Brighton.

  Those that have traveled outside of our borders understand it's far more complicated than "keep the browns out" and that the human rights and world economic issues far surpass the simplistic border and working permit issues.

  If I could hike through the nortthwest forest to Canada and make $500,000 a year sweeping floors I'd have my backpack ready and be on a truck tonite. The drive for a better life will always override any border whether physical or political.

  james :: http://www.futuregringo.com

• November 30, 2006

  9:40 AM

  Michael writes:

  I was also just in Miami a month ago. I agree with Tom Tancredo 100%. It does remind me of a 3rd world country - in certain areas a very RICH 3rd world country with the 40+ cranes I saw putting up million dollar condo buildings - but there is a LOT of poverty, street vendors, dirt, and not a lot of English being spoken by anybody.

• November 30, 2006

  9:58 AM

  jay writes:

  "not a lot of English being spoken by anybody."

  And there's the rub for most of Tancredo's supporters.

  Otherwise Miami is no different socio-economically than any other large American city.

• November 30, 2006

  10:03 AM

  james writes:

  Otherwise Miami is no different socio-economically than any other large American city.

  Jay is 100% correct.

  james :: www.futuregringo.com

• November 30, 2006

  11:14 AM

  Ken in Rocky Ford writes:

  Tancredo's latest racist bombastic statements were predictable, as are
  the majority of posts from similarly inclined ignorami on this page.
  Colorado can lay claim to having three of the most embarrassingly
  odd/vicious/useless/dangerous (take your pick) representatives in the
  United States in Tancredo, Musgrave, and the new Dobson clone in
  Colorado Springs. They need to be fitted for their new brown shirts as
  they battle the evil of a multicultural society and find homosexual
  conspirators behind every sage brush, while wanting the bible to be the
  basis for the new American constitution. It doesn't seem to matter
  whether they produce any good for America, as long as these three
  disgraceful bigots produce the hate that fuels their local supporters.

  Change has always produced hate-filled reactionaries. They once hid
  under pointed white robes. Now they wrap themselves in the flag, cite
  Ronald Reagan as their hero, and goose step in harmony with Jesus rock.
  

• November 30, 2006

  11:45 AM

  james writes:

  If you doubt Ken in Rocky Ford's statements as all simply watch this:

  http://www.futuregringo.com/index.php/2006/11/04/ted-haggard-vs-richard-dawkins-2/

  Science and reason will always conquer religious politicizing and fear mongering in the end.

• November 30, 2006

  2:16 PM

  David (R) writes:

  James -

  One of the things that presents a fundamental problem for Christianity is that too many preachers have insisted it's all a matter of "faith" for most things of God.

  I used to be a Christian and no longer am. This happened by journeying outside the boundaries that most Christains are taught/trained/required to stay within. What I believe I have found is that there are many answers based in science if people will only look for them. People need not be threatened by science as though it was an 'either/or' situation in which, if science is right, it contradicts God.

  What I found is that there are many things that we don't know how God did/does, but I'm convinced that He does very high-order mathematics, physics, cosmology, etc. For example, there really are rational explanations for the age of the universe being billions of years old, and they in fact are even taught by Jewish theologians and scientists using Einstein's Law of Relativity.

  If we can ever get people to understand that their belief in a divine Creator won't be shattered by embracing science, I believe we'd be a lot better off. Just for fun, here's a question that I occasionally try to wrap my brain around from time-to-time: Most people ask "What is the Universe?", but ask yourself this one instead: "Where is the Universe?"

• November 30, 2006

  2:18 PM

  Anonymous writes:

  Ken - You may want to lay off the meth for a while. It's making you WAY too paranoid.

• November 30, 2006

  2:27 PM

  Anonymous writes:

  This is going to haunt Tancredo when Jeb gets elected president in 2008

• November 30, 2006

  3:06 PM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  David(R)

  I have never discovered anything related to science which is in conflict with what the Bible teaches. It is only when scientists leave the realms of science and begin to venture into speculation that discrepancies arise.

  Faith only relates to what the Bible talks about. The Bible does make reference to elemental principles, but it is not meant to be a source for the answers to all questions, only those necessary for life and faith.

• November 30, 2006

  3:28 PM

  David (R) writes:

  Hi Hogar -

  Unless I misunderstand, which is always possible, the argument of the age of the Earth has been a classic disagreement between fundamental Christians and science, although there are many issues that fall into disagreement. The former argues that Earth is less than 10,000 years, and the latter says the actual number is in the billions. Perhaps you don't personally have a disagreement with the scientific view, but many, many fundamentalists do.

  My only point is that the reason for this disagreement is because they don't have understanding of the words presented to them, so they tend to believe it in a very literal sense - i.e., the Book says 24 hours, it was 24 hours.

  I believe, it was in fact 24 hours, but using Einstein's Law we can understand that E=MC2 (energy = mass times the speed of light squared) requires that time doesn't take hold of an object if it is moving at the speed of light, and time in fact slows down at speeds that are sub-light - so how fast did the Universe expand as a result of the Big Bang? How about near the speed of light, as postulated by very accurate measurements of late. So in what was / is a standard '24 hours' to us at our rate of speed/time, would have been far greater than that initially, and slowing as time has passed.

  There is a very well-written book on the co-existance of God and science written by Dr. Gerald Schroeder (MIT - Doctorates in Oceanography and Physics) called "The Science of God", if you're interested. I'm not saying it's all fact or perfect, but it provides very plausible explanations, based in scientifically verifiable facts, for many questions - so people don't simply have to "take it on faith" - I don't think God asked us or wants us to do that - there is ample proof if a person searches.

• November 30, 2006

  3:32 PM

  history buff writes:

  "I have never discovered anything related to science which is in conflict with what the Bible teaches. It is only when scientists leave the realms of science and begin to venture into speculation that discrepancies arise."

  If that is so, then where did Cain's wife come from? And how did Joshua stop the sun in the sky?

• November 30, 2006

  3:35 PM

  jay writes:

  What about Gensis...creation...terracentrism...immaculate conception...bodily ascension of mary...etc...etc...etc....

• November 30, 2006

  3:41 PM

  JW writes:

  HB,

  You dont want to start this with Hogar man. Where God is concerned, hes got an answer for everything that fits his beliefs. Its truely disgusting.

  Didnt you see yesterday when Hogar told us all how Jesus said Capitalism is the natural system?

  So far Hogar has taught us that Jesus was a capitalist, a geneticist, the savior of man, the son of God, and the only person ever to be raised from the dead.

• November 30, 2006

  4:05 PM

  Patriot writes:

  JW..
  If one is a Christian, he does beleive that Jesus was the son of God, He was resurrected 3 days after his death, and he is the Savior.. if you're not a Christian, then you obviously don't beleive it..

  The other things this guy claims Jesus is or isn't is his own interpretation.. maybe reading into it too deeply.

  If you read the New Testament you'll see that Jesus could care less about Capitalism.. which is really possession driven. Jesus is more for the Golden Rule...

  I also don't beleive the Bible contradicts science in the historical sense.. I beleive that it contradicts evolution.. Evolution is not science.. it is a theory.. an interesting one, but not science. Science is a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws (right out of the dictionary). All 'facts' that back up evolution are really theories themselves.. carbon dating isn't accurate, and neither do a lot of other tests. Evolution is a religion. So his Christianity.. the difference is that I'm willing to admit that my beleif is a religion which needs faith to fully beleive.

  Look up the videos on www.drdino.com if you're open minded. . . you gotta be if you're open to evolution.

  I just logged on.. how the hell did this thread 'evolve' into this debate?

• November 30, 2006

  4:37 PM

  FYI writes:

  Evolution is no more a theory and no less provable than gravity is. The bible, a bunch of heavily revised and self contradictory hearsay, cannot hope for one hundredth the credibility of Darwin's "On The Origin Of Species".

  Besides, Tancredo proves Evolution. He obviously evolved from dung beetles...but not very far.

• November 30, 2006

  4:38 PM

  jay writes:

  wow

• November 30, 2006

  4:48 PM

  john writes:

  Way to go Tom your my hero the Liberal Rocky Mountain News is so far left Im gonna puke :(

• November 30, 2006

  4:52 PM

  jay writes:

  How inaccurate do you believe carbon dating to be Patriot?

  +/- 10 years, 100 years?

  1,000,000,000 years?

  Do you belive all the science supporting evolution as a "theory" is also flawed and inaccurate?

• November 30, 2006

  4:52 PM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  I don't think God asked us or wants us to do that - there is ample proof if a person searches.
  Posted by David (R) on November 30, 2006 03:28 PM

  I happen to be a believer in a yound earth. That is not to say that you relativity theory may reconcile the two, and I do not dismiss that possibility. My point is that science by definition is that which is observable and repeatable. So only those things which are observable and repeatable are truly scientific. As we cannot go back and observe the Big Bang, it cannot be proven scientifically. That means that all things related to it are theories or hypothesies.

  I am all for the benefits of true science, but I do not want to fund work on theories or hypothesies of origins out of my tax money. I don't even want to fund science out of my tax money. I want the Edisons, the Teslas, the Westinghouses, the Bells and the Gates of the world to discover and fund their own discoveries. Then they can get rich selling the fruit of their labors.

  Believe what you want about origins, just don't take my money to study it.

• November 30, 2006

  4:58 PM

  jay writes:

  Hogar,
  Does that mean that existence of the meteor that hit the Yucutan peninsula and decimated parts of life on earth isn't provable because we can't repeat the phenomenon on cue?

  You and I both know that's not how science works.

  Speaking of...if you believe in a "young" Earth...how do you explain the fossil record, carbon dating, evolution, etc...

• November 30, 2006

  5:14 PM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  If that is so, then where did Cain's wife come from? And how did Joshua stop the sun in the sky?
  Posted by history buff on November 30, 2006 03:32 PM

  Obviously Cain married his sister, but that is by way of deduction, as the Bible is silent about it.

  I don't know how God caused the shadow to retreat on the staircase. But then again that sort of phenomenom would be outside the realm of scientific explaination as well.

  JW

  So far Hogar has taught us that Jesus was a capitalist, a geneticist, the savior of man, the son of God, and the only person ever to be raised from the dead.
  Posted by JW on November 30, 2006 03:41 PM

  Glad to see you listen, and remember. I don't need you to agree with me, but it would be nice if you were a little more civil.

  Jay
  bodily ascension of mary...etc...etc...etc....
  Posted by jay on November 30, 2006 03:35 PM

  The bodily ascension of Mary is not taught in the Bible.

  Patriot

  Please read the definition of capitalism. It is all about private property ownership, which is dealt with extensively, private enterprise with profit as the goal. But it does not stop there, it is also very much about giving part of your profit back to God and to those who are less fortunate. If you do not have capitalism, you do not have the ability to give to others out of your surplus. This last part is remembered by many, but they forget that your have to earn in order to give.

  Have a great weekend.

• November 30, 2006

  5:26 PM

  David (R) writes:

  Hi Hogar -

  While I understand the premises of scientific study that requires observability and repeatability in order to provide absolute verification, we must also accept that for some things all we can do is allow a gain in understanding as time goes by, with tests that 'nearly prove' that something could or did happen a certain way.

  For example, in reference to the big bang, Penzias and Wilson have provided reasonable proof (to a scientific mind) that an 'echo' exists in the Universe that could well have happened from an initial explosion (see http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4655517)

  Is it absolute? Nope. But their work, and that which has followed it, provides a very high degree of credibility.

  Evolution? Well, I ain't buying because I'm good with numbers. (A reference to my college Statistics prof who always said, "The lottery is for people who aren't good with numbers.") The numerical odds of one of the essential amino acids necessary for life occuring randomly, as calculated and validated by myriad numbers of mathemeticians, is so far beyond astronomical, that I simply cannot accept it.

  Am I right in my belief? I have no idea, and neither does anyone else here. Does God absolutely exists, and did He or She or It create the Universe. Well I think so, but I can't prove or disprove it, and neither can anyone else here.

  That is why I believe we have to research, study, and think - new information is being discovered daily that changes how we view and understand the Universe.

• November 30, 2006

  6:15 PM

  JW writes:

  "Glad to see you listen, and remember. I don't need you to agree with me, but it would be nice if you were a little more civil."

  Sorry Hogar, you are part of the problem. Civil is for people who actually think. You are worthy only of ridicule.

  Speaking of which;
  "My point is that science by definition is that which is observable and repeatable. So only those things which are observable and repeatable are truly scientific. As we cannot go back and observe the Big Bang, it cannot be proven scientifically. That means that all things related to it are theories or hypothesies."

  Yea, I totally get why you wouldnt be interested in observable stuff. Rather throw your entire philosophy behind a 2000 year old fantasy in order to bolster your belief that you are always right, about everything, because God said so. Guess what....The Flying Spaghetti Monster told me you are a total asshole and deserve to be stoned to death...with the best pot available! :) God damn traitor to the hippie movement. Too bad, because I bet you were a better person when you were addled by drugs instead of quoting Jebus.

  "Evolution is not science.. it is a theory.. an interesting one, but not science."

  Actually Patriot, Evolution is a scientific theory. Religion on the other hand is completely unfounded philosophical fantasy. Unless you believe, which you clearly do, and as long as it betters your life (without turning off your brain as it did with Hogar) Im all for it. In otherwords, if Ive offended you, sorry. I never mean to belittle anyone's beliefs provided they dont result in some idiot who thinks God valitdates his stupidity. I havent seen that in your case (Hogar on the other hand...).

• November 30, 2006

  6:38 PM

  JW writes:

  "The numerical odds of one of the essential amino acids necessary for life occuring randomly, as calculated and validated by myriad numbers of mathemeticians, is so far beyond astronomical, that I simply cannot accept it."

  David, Not to belittle you, but while you may be good with numbers, your logic sux.

  So Ill try to put this in numerical terms rather than logical.

  You say the possibility of randomly created life is so low its astronomical. And that is scientific thinking. Nice.

  Now tell me what the numerical probability is that there is a randomly created GOD that is so powerful he could not only make the universe, but create life from NOTHING, and a world in 7 days.

  Seems like the probability for a God is lower than the probability for randomly created life. Maybe thats just me though.

  Oh, and just for your benefit, the flaw in logic goes like this-

  "I refuse to believe in random life because the numerical odds say it is extremely unlikely, so I will chose to believe in something that is even MORE unlikely instead."

  
  

• November 30, 2006

  6:57 PM

  Bonnie Hylton writes:

  You GO! Tom Tancredo! We need MANY more people, just like you, that will tell it like it is! Not only is Miami a "Third World Country," AMERICA is becoming that way! Largely because of ILLEGAL ALIENS that are contaminating our society, draining the social services that are supposed to help Legal American Citizens, and trashing our country! GO, TOM, GO!!!!!
  

• November 30, 2006

  7:17 PM

  David (R) writes:

  JW -

  You're really quite a condescending fellow - it makes me wonder if you try to be that way, or if it is a natural occurance - perhaps you're not even aware of it. No matter.

  Who said the idea of God is of even greater improbability than the theory of evolution? Got proof? You claim that I said the probability of one amino acid being randomly created is astronomical. I didn't make the claim - I am merely repeating it. I attended a conference a number of years ago that dealt with many topics of scientific and mathematical issues. The number that was stated was something like 10 to the 332 power, and the attempt was being made to calculate the odds of all the essential amino acids being randomly created. You seem to read a good many things into the comments people make, and you didn't even ask where my data came from - you simply attacked the messenger.

  I made the declaration that nobody on here can prove either theory - evolution or creation, including me. Why have you chosen to take such a negative tack about things? If you don't agree with my belief, that is your right - and vice versa, but I'd hoped to engage a discussion. I guess I will know better than to expect courteous, rational, and thoughtful discourse from you in the future.

• December 1, 2006

  6:40 AM

  We will all be assimilated writes:

  Lets be honest here.

  In 3 generations, we will all be Speaking Spanish and looking part Meesssakin in this one great melting pot.

  Tancredo will have relatives named Alien Gonzales.

  And we will all be American.
  Some of us will be related to Bush and be speaking Spanish with a Texas Hillbilly Accent too. LOL

• December 1, 2006

  7:45 AM

  The Borg writes:

  You will all be assimilated. You will paint your houses odd combinations of bright colors, and make your cars so they bounce and nearly drag the ground. You will prepare for us all manner of meals containing firey pepper concoctions. You will keep pink flamingos on your front lawns as a sign of allegiance, and you will mate like rabbits thus creating a vast line of workers to service us. We are the borg.

• December 1, 2006

  8:57 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  I am so happy to actually hear a politician actually speak their mind and not placate the "political correctness" movement.

  I am an american and proud of it. Immigration, like most real issues, will not have a happy "cinderalla story" ending for all. Someone is going to lose, I'd just prefer it if it was not the legal americans. If your country is not run the way you want it, change it. Our american forefathers did - and I am proud of that heritage.

• December 1, 2006

  9:10 AM

  jay writes:

  David R,
  I think JW has a valid point. If you're using the "by the numbers" method to determine the validity of evolution...by that logic you would be an athiest. The chances of evolution, again by the numbers, is astronomically more likely than is the presence of a omnipresent being that magically made the universe. Can't have it both ways:)

• December 1, 2006

  9:46 AM

  from The Onion writes:

  Kansas Outlaws Practice of Evolution

• December 1, 2006

  9:53 AM

  David (R) writes:

  Hi Jay -

  I guess that's the thing - I wasn't disagreeing with his point or trying to change his mind to believe something else. I understand completely where believers in evolutionary theory are coming from, and I even consider that evolution could well have had a significant role in things.

  Further, I would be one of the last people on the planet to push my views on others as being the only thing they should believe too. I comprehend the difficulty in believing the Creationist view, and frankly, it simply isn't for everyone.

  I only object to the presentation of the message. I try very hard to not criticize other's views, and I'm not aware of ever having called anyone a name like moron, imbecile, tool, fool, or anything else. I also try to not speak to others in condescending terms such as, in essence, "you're obviously too stupid to use logic so I'll speak slowly and use numeric terminology so that you might actually understand what I, a superior mind, am likely wasting my time to convey."

  In all sincerity, I come here to read the views of others because it sometimes helps me see things from the perspective of another. Many times I have researched others claims and been able to help them understand something they didn't really see before, but by far, I am the one who has enjoyed a number of learning experiences. I just wish that people would talk to others as they would like to be spoken to. Being respectful of others isn't really a difficult chore if one wishes to come across that way.

• December 1, 2006

  10:01 AM

  JW writes:

  Jay,

  Its nice to see SOME people can grasp simple concepts.

  
  That said, I was kind of a jerk about it, so sorry David (R). Stupidity gets me going and the fact is, while you dont seem stupid, you start talking religion and its like youve turned off 9/10ths of your brain. Its ok though, religion is about faith. Nothing smart about it. I dont look down on it untill you start trying to validate your faith with numbers. Then I start talking crap.

  Have your faith man, its your choice and again, if it makes you happier, good! But dont try to argue its validity. Its valid to YOU, and YOU only.

  Religion should be between a man and his God, period. This is why I dislike Hogar so much. Hes got no ability to see hes wrong because God says hes right, and hes fully capable of pushing what he believes toward laws that everyone will have to deal with. Sucks, unamerican, hes part of the problem, I wish hed go back to scandanavia (though really, I wouldnt wish Hogar on ANYONE) because he doenst value American freedom, he abuses his own in order to belittle others, and to top it all off hes a liar and a fraud about his motivations.

  Its not about saving babies, its about making abortions illegal no matter who or how many it kills.

• December 1, 2006

  10:08 AM

  JW writes:

  ""you're obviously too stupid to use logic so I'll speak slowly and use numeric terminology so that you might actually understand what I, a superior mind, am likely wasting my time to convey."

  
  hehe, Like I said Dave, I dont really feel that way talking to you, and so I appologized about sounding that way.

  However, if you recall our discusion the other day about WHY I get like this, you'll remember that Ive heard the same crap out of most of these people for the last few months. Very few of them have anything new to offer. At some point, your post above became very true, not because Im superior, but because I have actually decided to become less ignorant, rather than continue blissfully along, espousing the same ignorant crap.

  And since Im sure thats likely to elicit some nasty responses about my character I offer you an olive branch;

  Post the last 5 books youve read, and Ill do the same. :)

• December 1, 2006

  10:27 AM

  David (R) writes:

  JW said "Have your faith man....."

  In going back and re-reading my original posts, I can see where someone could think I was pushing my thoughts. In making the statement regarding the numerical odds, I should have related that those weren't my numbers, but that they did coincide with my personal views. As a person of faith I just don't have difficulty believing in an all-powerful being. That said, I can certainly see why some people do.

  Regarding the five books, I'm afraid you would likely find them to be hopelessly boring, given that they are all about systems analysis and design, programming, and telecommunications because I've been trying to improve my skills for my job.

  
  And, by the way Mark - what the heck is "comment spam", and how does entering this number "prevent" it?

• December 1, 2006

  10:48 AM

  jay writes:

  The choice to believe in creationism over evolution doesn't make you a moron David. It does, however, mean that you've chosen to disregard science in this manner and rely on your faith. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I think what raises JW's and my hackles is when we hear someone try to justify creationism through a means devoid of religious faith. It's nice that you're upfront about why you believe in creationism....I wish everyone with your viewpoint was so candid.

• December 1, 2006

  11:00 AM

  JW writes:

  "Regarding the five books, I'm afraid you would likely find them to be hopelessly boring, given that they are all about systems analysis and design, programming, and telecommunications because I've been trying to improve my skills for my job."

  Nothing wrong with that. Im currently two months from my Business degree, but those arent the books I would post.

  This blog is directly responsible for the 5 I would list. It got to the point where I just thought, "jeez, none of us are adding anything. Reading the paper each day keeps you current on events, but it does nothing to update your analitical framework, so regardless of what happend yesterday, or what happens tomorrow, the information does nothing to change how you see things."

  Abortion is a perfect example. Whatever happens day to day regarding abortion laws, the new events are seen through a "pro-life" or "pro-choice" filter. Both are equally emotional. Neither actually take reality into account. So I did some research on abortion rates and abortion laws around the world. The results are that laws on abortion are basically ineffectual. They literally say nothing about the rate of abortion. Yet that is the framework this topic is discussed through time and time again. Its unproductive to the point where I actually feel people are irresponsible to continue on that path. This concept can be applied to almost all political debate.

  Iran for instance. If you deal with new info on Iran from the current standpoint of "Iran is a radical islamic regime bent on the destruction of Israel" nothing new comes of it. The arguement becomes one of how to destroy or subjugate Iran, rather than how to most effectively deal with Iran. In this particular discussion, I find it incredibly ironic that the current leader of Iran is vilified, despite being ideologically similar to Bush in MANY ways.

  And I think to a large extent, this kind of thinking is why we as a society have government that simply does not represent us. They represent what we think in our ignorance! That is what the people in power cater to. It is very bad of them, but since we allow it by remaining ignorant and allowing them to dictate what little new info we get, it is ultimately our own damn fault.

  State of Denial by Bob Woodward.

  Perilous Power by Chomsky and Achcar.

  Jawbreaker, by Gary Berntsen and Ralph Pezzullo

  The Lexus and the Olive Tree by Thomas L. Friedman

  Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger

  The Fair Tax Book by Neal Boortz and John Linder

  The J Curve by Ian Bremmer

  
  Its all good stuff (though Diplomacy is dry AND long). I would say that if you want to get a new understanding of what we are faced with in the future, the J Curve and The Lexus and The Olive Tree would be good books to start with. State of Denial just gives you a broader perspective on how incompetent an ideolog Bush really is. The Fair Tax Book is only 198 pages, and should be REQUIRED reading for every American RIGHT FUCKING NOW! hehe. Im actually sending copies to eveyone I know for Christmas.

  www.fairtax.org

• December 1, 2006

  11:48 AM

  David (R) writes:

  JW -

  What is the premise of The Fair Tax book?

  I will keep this list of books as there are several that would likely appeal to me, especially those on governmental issues. I have long felt that the founding fathers, and many people of that era, were generally far more educated in real world matters, and that they probably had a far better gift of "horse sense" than many today.

  I don't mean to sound harsh, but there are far too many people today who simply don't think for themselves. There is such a lack of understanding and logic. Seems like it's easier to bury one's head in the sand rather than to seek answers.

  By the way, several of the non-schoolastic readings I am able to enjoy include New Scientist, Natl. Geographic, and Discover - much more interesting than Object-Oriented Programming with Visual Basic.NET by Dan Clark - though not as profitable.

• December 1, 2006

  12:11 PM

  john jacobs writes:

  So, isn't Jeb Bush married to a POS Mexican citizen? His wife wouldn't let him tell the truth, even if he wanted to. Where is that Polonium 210 when you need it!

• December 1, 2006

  12:22 PM

  JW writes:

  Fair Tax-

  23% sales tax on all NEW goods and services.

  This would REPLACE our current tax system, and I mean ALL OF IT. No more IRS, no more Income tax, No more corporate tax, no more capital gains tax....

  And it would still generate the amount needed to run the government. Its just WAY more efficient, WAY more business friendly, and WAY more people friendly (promotes savings, actually takes less of your money for the govt, makes sure everyone pays into the tax system at the same rate.)

  These guys have some pretty good support now. Bush had to talk to them this year. On www.Fairtax.org there is a list of congressmen and senators that support it.

• December 1, 2006

  12:28 PM

  JW writes:

  "I don't mean to sound harsh, but there are far too many people today who simply don't think for themselves. There is such a lack of understanding and logic. Seems like it's easier to bury one's head in the sand rather than to seek answers."

  When Democrats or Republicans hand you nice, compact blurbs for understanding the world today in ways you like, its hard to convince yourself you need to go digging for the real dirt. Fact is, the world is far too complicated to allow some politician to define it in terms you like, in about 30 seconds. My dad clued me in about three years ago.

  He said, "If you are listening to a politician and you disagree with him, look at it again to make sure you arent the one whos wrong. If you are listening to a politician and you agree with him...Look twice as hard!"

• December 1, 2006

  2:00 PM

  Anonymous writes:

  JW your fair tax system would shift 80% of the taxes down to the lower half of the income bracket. It would also make billionaires practically tax exempt. Try using your head for something other than a bong stand.

• December 1, 2006

  2:09 PM

  780days to go writes:

  JW here is an alternative that would work and reduce taxes for most of us and reduce debt. Eliminate all taxes for incomes below 60K a year. Flat tax with no deductions all income above 60K at a flat 40%. This would not only eliminate taxes for most people it would reduce our debt and would not jeopardize families like your sales tax system. The other benefit is that our economy would immediately soar with the increase in discretionary income. I would go into how balancing our budget multiplies our government spending back into our economy but that may be too much for you. Next we can discuss how National Healthcare actually makes small and independent businesses more competitive in the labor market. Seeing how a vast majority of our economy is small business this could give us a big boost too.

• December 1, 2006

  2:11 PM

  David (R) writes:

  Having been a proponent of the "flat tax" method for some time now, I can tell you that I think it would be a good idea.

  Post at 2:00PM - under most of the proposals I've seen, including one from several years ago by John McCain, citizens who make under a certain amount would pay less than the specified amount. In fact, as I recall, some plans had as many as five tiers, the first for folks 20,000 and under, who would pay only 7% - if memory serves.

• December 1, 2006

  2:12 PM

  JW writes:

  Cruton, if you know absolutely nothing about a subject, its probably not a good idea to comment on it.

• December 1, 2006

  2:14 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  National Healthcare could also provide us a mechanism to ensure that not only do employees have medical insurance no matter who they work for but they are LEGALLY WORKING AS A US CITEZEN OR LEGAL IMMIGRANT. It is funny how right some ideas are.

• December 1, 2006

  2:22 PM

  JW writes:

  "This would not only eliminate taxes for most people it would reduce our debt and would not jeopardize families like your sales tax system. "

  It wont hurt families for a number of reasons. Read the book.

  
  "The other benefit is that our economy would immediately soar with the increase in discretionary income. "

  Same is said of the fair tax.

  "I would go into how balancing our budget multiplies our government spending back into our economy but that may be too much for you. "

  Blow me. Besides, youre an idiot if you think thats a good thing. I dont want my government spending back into our economy. I WANT TO SPEND MY OWN MONEY. I DONT NEED THE GOVERNMENT TO DO IT FOR ME. And if the government is spending money, its spending my money, period.

  Your flat tax rate just penalizes the rich. It is essentially the same thing we have with a few tweaks. Its called a graduated income tax, and it was the second item in Marx's "communist manifesto". Yep, our tax system is based on communism.

  Before you just go blowing this thing off, maybe you should actually check it out...but that will require some reading BEFORE YOU REACT.

  
  Anyone realized that with a sales tax, even TOURISTS will be contributing to our taxes?
  

• December 1, 2006

  2:31 PM

  JW writes:

  "Your flat tax rate just penalizes the rich. "

  Sorry, this is kind of wrong. Since the really rich dont actually make "income" it wont do a thing to them. It will however penalize the "psudo rich" which is basically anyone who makes alot of money, but isnt actually rich and therefore still has to work.

  23% sales tax means you pay it on whatever you buy, whether you are psudo rich or really rich.

  and since there is already a 22% corporate tax on all goods you buy currently, the prices will stay the same. You will just have your full paycheck to buy it with.

  Anyone in here know how much you paid in taxes last year?

• December 1, 2006

  2:32 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  I knew you would go off JW; I have studied national sales tax before I blasted the idea. It is propagandized to cover its flaws. How do you propose the people below the poverty line will be impacted by a 23% increase in cost of living? They pay no tax now so they would see a 23% tax increase. I think you need to put some deep thought into what you are proposing. Also, I knew the money multiplier would fly over your head so why don't you explain why you think it is a bad idea? It is definitely better than the diminishing returns you ilk has left us with.

• December 1, 2006

  2:43 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  I will not give JW a cheat sheet for money multiplier but diminishing returns is where the debt increases so every tax dollar is worth less the farther in debt we are.

• December 1, 2006

  2:47 PM

  JW writes:

  "How do you propose the people below the poverty line will be impacted by a 23% increase in cost of living?"

  There is currently 22% corporate tax built into the price of goods. Also, the fair tax (which is actually a bill in congress right now) gives a rebate for all taxes up to the poverty line. It just gives them to everyone. The poor dont have to pay it, and neither do the rich.

  "They pay no tax now so they would see a 23% tax increase."

  No, because of the 22% imbeded taxes that would be eliminated, and because they would have the 23% taxes refunded, they would actually pay 23% less, not 23% more.

  "I think you need to put some deep thought into what you are proposing. "

  Dude, I just got done reading 200 pages about this, and there are answers for all your bs. You on the other hand havent read the book at all, and are just popping off at the mouth. That said, believe what you want. Im not about to post all 200 pgs to inform you about the whole thing.

  "Also, I knew the money multiplier would fly over your head so why don't you explain why you think it is a bad idea? It is definitely better than the diminishing returns you ilk has left us with."

  Uhh, I havent ever made one decision about our tax code, so Im not sure how me and my ilk have left us with diminishing returns.

  As for your multiplier thing, what exactly is it? What you said, "I would go into how balancing our budget multiplies our government spending back into our economy but that may be too much for you. " is not really all that clear. What was clear is that you think this kind of government spending is a good thing, and I disagree. Again, if the government is spending money, its because they took it from me.

  
  

• December 1, 2006

  2:47 PM

  David (R) writes:

  The multiplier effect, which changes from month-to-month and year-to-year, is generally accepted to be between 2.5 and 3.0 or so times face value if the funds are being spent by government. If private individuals spend the same money, it is generally accepted to be between 3.5 and 5.0+ times face value. Of course, these numbers are not perfect, but rather, representative.

  Most economists would generally tend to lean toward the idea that money is always better spent in the private sector than by government, which is also recognized to have what are sometimes tremendous inefficiencies and wastes that are inherent in the system.

• December 1, 2006

  2:52 PM

  JW writes:

  Thanks David.
  As for this...

  "I will not give JW a cheat sheet for money multiplier but diminishing returns is where the debt increases so every tax dollar is worth less the farther in debt we are."

  Bush has us in a situation where this actually matters, because we owe more than we are owed. Before Bush, it was never that way, and the size of the debt and the concequential interest on that debt was always smaller than the size of our credit, and the interest we were realizing on that credit. In other words, debt is only half the equasion, and our politicians love the fact that you dont know it.

• December 1, 2006

  2:53 PM

  David (R) writes:

  Interesting website and concepts they have Jw - I'm going to order the book and check it out. I would sure be all for a fair tax system. I've never tried to say the government doesn't need money to operate, but it would be nice if the burden were spread fairly.

• December 1, 2006

  3:03 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  David,

  The money spent by government goes through our economy five times if is in not spent on interest on the debt. Thanks for at least researching it but your source on private spending may be a bit skewed since this is measuring number of private transactions so how could you measure a private transaction with a private transaction?

  Also JW, how do you have a 22% corporate tax imbedded on the price of eggs you buy from a local farmer? Your dog don't hunt and this anti tax group is the group that has authored much of our current tax code that is horribly in debt so I have identified you with them and the problems they have created. Stop selling their wares and I won’t call you one of them. Please explain this "22% corporate tax" since I think it is a creation of the author to sell his snake oil. You base everything on this assumption and I think your assumption is wrong.

• December 1, 2006

  3:09 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  Also JW if you want to eliminate bureaucracy a system of refunds is out of the question.

• December 1, 2006

  3:14 PM

  David (R) writes:

  Hi 780 -

  I apologize, but I'm not following your question. The multiplier effect factor I used for government was roughly within that range as of 2000 (though it is widely accepted that the number is higher when we are involved in military actions), as was the span for citizen spending, although I honestly don't recall my website for the sources I think I recalled them from.

  A somewhat strange, yet I suppose to be expected side-effect, of the multiplier is that, because of the so-called Bush tax cuts, but the fact that M1 money supply is up (thanks to Fed policy of just printing more), the government multiplier effect is higher than we would expect with less revenue going into government coffers.

• December 1, 2006

  3:20 PM

  JW writes:

  "Also JW if you want to eliminate bureaucracy a system of refunds is out of the question."

  First off, there was nothing about eliminating bureaucracy in any of my statements BUT...the system to do these remitances is already in place.

  "Also JW, how do you have a 22% corporate tax imbedded on the price of eggs you buy from a local farmer?"

  Who buys eggs from a local farmer? And yes there are imbedded taxes in those eggs you moron. The farmer has to pay taxes!

  " Your dog don't hunt and this anti tax group is the group that has authored much of our current tax code that is horribly in debt so I have identified you with them and the problems they have created."

  This "Fair Tax" system was first propsed by Economists. These economists were funded by a group of Business men who wanted to research alternative tax codes that would be less prohibitive to business. In other words, you dont know shit about it.

  " Stop selling their wares and I won’t call you one of them."

  Its pretty damn funny, but all your detractions are put forth by k street lobbiests who make alot of money manipulating the current tax code, and would be out of work if the fair tax bill is enacted.

  " Please explain this "22% corporate tax" since I think it is a creation of the author to sell his snake oil."

  Corporations pay taxes. But guess what, they dont pay them out of their proffits. They offset them with the price of their goods. This works out to about 22% of the price you pay for goods.

  
  "You base everything on this assumption and I think your assumption is wrong."

  Actually, I base all this on the reading of an entire book which explains it. You havent read the damn thing.

• December 1, 2006

  3:21 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  David,

  Thanks for explaining the resource. I would believe that private sector spending does have a good effect on our economy but I assume you are right about how the numbers were derived. Printing more money is definitely a good way to make it look good. I am afraid that most of these returns will be in the form of inflation however. You have made my Friday and I hope your parenthetical statement was tongue in cheek because it is hilarious. Have a great Friday;.)

• December 1, 2006

  3:24 PM

  David (R) writes:

  By the way 780, I don't know if it's true or not, and I'm not sure where I'd look to see, but I've heard a number of sources the past year or so claim that all tax revenues from income taxes are going to pay the interest on the debt, and nothing more. Seems like the government would want to keep this on the QT if at all possible.

  I am also intrigued by the fact that down through history, there has never been a paper currency which hasn't eventually failed. Is this where the dollar is headed?

• December 1, 2006

  3:29 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  JW,
  I will never read the "damn thing" because it is a waste of ink and paper. It is based on a false assumption that every good is produced by a corporation and that is patently wrong. A vast majority of your food is produced by sources that don't fit the mold the author has created. Just because it is in print does not mean it is the truth.
  

• December 1, 2006

  3:35 PM

  JW writes:

  Ok 780. thats fine.

  The only thing you are missing is that, produced by a corporation or not, when you buy it, you pay the costs associated with getting that product to market, and part of those costs are taxes....

• December 1, 2006

  3:41 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  JW,

  I do buy almost all of my dairy and meat directly from the farmers. I save hundreds of dollars a year by buying half a beef and I have the freshest eggs and dairy around. I also buy most produce locally all summer too. You should try it. Colorado is rich in farm goods.

• December 1, 2006

  3:44 PM

  benn writes:

  780 is right,

  You can purchase farm fresh eggs, milk, beef, chicken, veggies and fruit without going to any sort of market. Many times these farmers even deliver their food directly to your door once a week. It is a good way to go.

• December 1, 2006

  3:47 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  A few weeks ago I spent forty bucks on a bushel of roasted dynamites and a fifty pound bag of pintos too. This state has wonderful farmers.

• December 1, 2006

  3:54 PM

  JW writes:

  "Interesting website and concepts they have Jw - I'm going to order the book and check it out. I would sure be all for a fair tax system. I've never tried to say the government doesn't need money to operate, but it would be nice if the burden were spread fairly."

  
  You know there is part of this that makes me think "hey, this thing is too good to be true." Basically they make some claims about how much it will boost the growth of our economy (10% a year in some projections) which seem somewhat inflated. Still, economics professors come up with those numbers, and since Im not an economics PhD, I have a hard time telling myself they are wrong.

  Anyway, the end result of reading that book was that more than anything, it sounds like a possible solution, and Im willing to go gung ho after it because what we currently have is sooooo messed up. And as you can see with 780's reaction, there is just never going to be a system that everyone says "YEA! That will work!". So I say fuckit, lets try this one. At the very least I will get my entire paycheck. :)

• December 1, 2006

  4:02 PM

  JW writes:

  Ok look, thats fine 780. But you are in the VERY SMALL minority that does that. The VERY LARGE majority buys their groceries from safeway (or something like it). Safeway pays taxes. For fucks sake! Are you being this obtuse on purpose??

  Have fun buying everything from local farmers but remember....

  IF those farmers pay taxes, they are imbeded in the price you pay for their products!!!! The taxes Ford payed the government are imbedded in the price you paid on your truck! The coat you wear probably wasnt made by a sheep farmer/weaver/tailor! It was probably made by a company that had to pay taxes and you paid for them when you bought your coat!
  If you own your house, YOU paid the taxes the construction company owed!
  And the list goes on and on and on...

  There are taxes built into every product you buy, or every product excluding those you buy from people who dont pay taxes. And you pay them all on what remains of your income after you pay taxes on that!

• December 1, 2006

  4:15 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  JW,

  Let me be fair and reframe what you are proposing. What would you do if you knew that you would be taxed 23% on the price of that used car you buy from a private party? I think this idea would be fine if everyone was a corporation but a majority of businesses do not fit this picture. I have no intent in being obtuse I just hope you would examine this idea with a little more critical eye. I am open for tax reform. I feel this solution is bad and propagandized to hide its real flaws.

• December 1, 2006

  4:23 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  Speaking of houses would your 23% sales tax be on houses too? Or would we have this huge system to figure out what was taxed?

• December 1, 2006

  4:54 PM

  David (R) writes:

  Hey 780 -

  JW had this in his original post .. "23% sales tax on all NEW goods and services." - thought I remembered it once you asked about it.

  In some of the proposals I've seen, housing is exempt because of the size of the purchase and because it would discourage home-ownership which is a highly desireable portion of the economy to keep growing.

  The hit on new cars could be a real issue too. Think about 23% on top of a $40K Lexus or Lincoln - ouch. The auto makers will fight that like wildcats. But, maybe it would be a good thing - it would slow demand for new autos and people would get back to driving and maintaining their cars instead of changing them like underwear. I don't know. It's got good and bad.

  This tax seems include most all new goods and all services. If costs of those actually drop by 15 or more percent as a result, and then we pay on the lower price, there's no doubt we'd be better off - I think I'm paying a total of about 42 to 45% in overall taxes now - it's crazy. I'm going to have to read the book to see how they address things first though.

• December 1, 2006

  5:03 PM

  780 days to go writes:

  Even taxes on only new goods would be a problem with big ticket items. Add 23% to all depreciation. Thanks for the debate, have a great weekend.

• December 1, 2006

  5:19 PM

  JW writes:

  "Let me be fair and reframe what you are proposing. What would you do if you knew that you would be taxed 23% on the price of that used car you buy from a private party? I think this idea would be fine if everyone was a corporation but a majority of businesses do not fit this picture. I have no intent in being obtuse I just hope you would examine this idea with a little more critical eye."

  New Items only. Like I said, you should read the book. Every single arguement youve raised has a good explanation in the book The book even goes so far as to admit that the system isnt perfect! Immagine that! But it debunks your reasons against it as well.

  "In some of the proposals I've seen, housing is exempt because of the size of the purchase and because it would discourage home-ownership which is a highly desireable portion of the economy to keep growing."

  No, houses are not exempt. Nothing is exempt because then you get into arguements about what should be exempt, giving politicians power to gain advantage for their friends and its a slippery slope. Obviously politicians could do that...but it would be our fault. Democracy requires vigilance (something we are sorely lacking right now). Anyway, the cost of new houses should end up the same in the end, as there will be no taxes paid by the construction company to put into the price.

  "Think about 23% on top of a $40K Lexus or Lincoln - ouch."

  Accept that its still a 40k lexus WITH the 23% tax because the 22% in taxes that lexus currently pay are...gone! The price stays exactly the same because the ammount of taxes paid is basically the same, just in a different form.

  "Even taxes on only new goods would be a problem with big ticket items. Add 23% to all depreciation. "

  Sigh. The taxes are already there. You should at least read the book. Im sure you can still come up with some arguements about why its bad as you are obviously pre-disposed to do so, but atleast they would be INFORMED arguements rather than IGNORANT arguements.

• December 1, 2006

  5:32 PM

  David (R) writes:

  Ah, okay - I see what you're saying. For the most part, even in cars and houses, the taxes are included in the total price. But under the new tax system, we would pay them at the time of purchase but to the governement, and the price we pay for the finished item would be lower by roughly that same amount. For all intents and purposes, it would be a wash.

  The real difference comes in when we realize that more Americans are likely to have to pay their fair share, as there are no, or fewer, exceptions to the rule.

• December 1, 2006

  5:44 PM

  JW writes:

  "The real difference comes in when we realize that more Americans are likely to have to pay their fair share, as there are no, or fewer, exceptions to the rule."

  Exactly.

  And the environment for business becomes much better here in America. Our tax system is horribly detrimental compared to others. Just wipe them off the board and....companies dont even have to THINK about the tax implications of doing business in America because...there are none!

• December 1, 2006

  5:48 PM

  David (R) writes:

  Here is a good information link on their website if anyone wants more on it:

  http://www.fairtax.org/fairtax/thumbnail.htm

  Have a great weekend.

• December 1, 2006

  5:48 PM

  JW writes:

  Sorry, in addition to all that last....

  You will pay 23% tax only on what you spend. The rest of your paycheck will be entirely tax free, and you will be free invest it however you like WITHOUT any tax implications. Put it in the stockmarket? Fine, pull it out when you want and no capital gains. Think about what that means for investment in this country.

• December 1, 2006

  6:04 PM

  Liberal Hypocrisy writes:

  The lovers of free speech once again crashed an event in Michigan whose message they did not like and proceeded to deny the speaker his rights.

  This is your Democratic Party. Do what we say....not what we do.

• December 2, 2006

  10:14 AM

  Manuel A. Tellechea writes:

  I must wonder again why no one in the mainstream media has ever "outed" Tom Tancredo as an Hispanic, since nothing is more plain or certain. If any man ever carried his heritage on his face, it is Tom Tancredo.

  Tancredo's hatred for all Hispanics must have a pathological basis, and the easiest explanation for such an obsession is the cumpulsion seen in racists and homophobes to purge their own desires by making war on those who openly profess what they conceal.

  Hitler always feared that he was Jewish because his grandmother had given birth to an illegitimate child (Hitler's father) while in the employ of a Jewish family and it was rumured that she identified her employer as the baby's father on the birth certificate. When he assumed power, Hitler's first act was to order the destruction of all family records in state archives as well as the Jewish cemetery where his putative grandfather was buried. Of course, this was not enough for him: he also had to destroy his father's bloodline in order to "free" himself from that psychological burden.

  Tancredo's compulsion is identical to Hitler's. He has also concealed the origins of his father, preferring, instead, to favor his mother's Sicilian heritage. To those who know anything about history that is a distinction without a difference. Spain ruled Sicily for 500 years and the two stocks are enmeshed beyond separation.

  I have googled "Tancredo" with every Spanish first name I know, and guess what? The world is full of Hispanic Tancredos. And nowhere are they more common than in Mexico.

  When Tancredo's mother died earlier this year, her hometown newspaper, The Denver Post, published a long obituary which never mentioned her husband (Tancredo's father). Tancredo's mother, incidentally, was an exemplary first-generation immigrant who worked as a clerk at a department store for 45 years. She must also have been rather free of race prejudice because she married an Hispanic (and likely a Mexican) at a time when nice Italian (or Sicilian) girls didn't do that.

  What she was not able to do, however, is inculcate in her son respect for his father's people. I suspect that Tancredo's father must have abandoned his family as Hitler's father Alois did. Hence Tancredo's pathological hatred for all Hispanics.

• December 2, 2006

  12:45 PM

  Manuel A. Tellechea writes:

  Tom Tancredo says that he's of Italian ancestry, though Tancredo is not an Italian surname. The nearest equivalents in Italian are Tancredi and Tangredi.

  Tancredo, however, is a Spanish surname.

  Tancredo's remarkable resemblance to the great Indo-Mexican statesman Benito Juárez makes me suspect that his ancestry, on his father's side at least, must be an admixture of Hispanic and Zapotec Indian.

• December 2, 2006

  10:58 PM

  Manuel A. Tellechea writes:

  Anarchist::

  Both of Tom Tancredo's parents were first-generation Americans. I do not see why they would have changed their names to "Tancredo." When such changes were made, it was always to Anglosize the family name, never to Hispanicize it. Hence, the Italian name "Martini" might be changed to "Martin," but never to "Martínez."

  I have read numerous Spanish-language articles on Tancredo, all of them admittedly critical. What they all have in common, however, is their antonishment at the fact that the great scourge of Hispanic immigrants happens himself to have a Hispanic surname.

  But more than that, Tom Tancredo's appearance is unmistakably Hispanic. In fact, he is the archtypical Hispanic.

• December 3, 2006

  8:34 AM

  Manuel A. Tellechea writes:

  Well, one thing we can know for sure now. Thanks to Tom Tancredo's ill-considered remarks about Miami, he will never be president of the U.S. (if that was ever in the offing).

  It is Miami's Cuban-American community which has already twice in this century handed the presidency to the Republicans.

  It is unlikely that they wil look with favor at Tancredo's remarks. Miami is considered by the nation to be a Cuban-American enclave, which to some degree it is. But Cuban-Americans are no longer even a majority there. Yet the onus of Tancredo's remarks will fall on them.

  And yet, according to George Gilder, Cuban-Americans are the "most successful immigrants in the history of this nation of immigrants." In the last U.S. census, they led the nation in all indices of social and enonomic progress.

  Because they are fervently anti-Communist and practically the only minority solidly in the Republican camp, Cuban-Americans have always been savaged by the liberal press. They did not, however, expect to be attacked by a conspicious (let us not say prominent) Republican.

  Now Tancredo's secretary says that the congressman did not include Cuban-Americans in his negative remarks about Miami, which is like saying that an attack on Israel exempts the Jews.

  I hope that Tancredo has learned his lesson and will refrain in the future from attacking, directly or indirectly, traditionally Republican constituencies.

  I can assure you that if the Republican Party had to choose between Tancredo and one-million Cuban-American voters, it wouldn't even be close.

• December 3, 2006

  10:16 AM

  Anonymous writes:

  NO CAA

  Your grandfather changed his name....like so many immigrants from Eastern Europe, Italy, Ireland, etc because racist freaks like you didn't appreciate him being here sucking up the public services, competing for the jobs and bringing his culture to "America". That's why it is so ironic that you are now the one hating on the equivalent of your grandfather today. What is even more disgusting is that you fall back on the old adage that well...my ancestors came here legally. The only difference between the folks that came through Ellis Island and the millions of illegal immigrants is that the rich, white people in this country decided there were enough people here for their tastes. You're standing on third base and pretending that you hit the triple to get there.,

• December 3, 2006

  3:36 PM

  Manuel A. Tellechea writes:

  Anarchist:

  Northern Spaniards are generally fair, blonde and blue-eyed; Southern Spaniards are swarthy, brown-haired and dark-eyed. This is also the case in Italy. Regardless of whether fair or swarthy, however, all are whites.

  There is a tendency among Americans, due to their monumental ignorance about everything that lies beyond their borders, to regard the American descendents of the 16th century conquistadors as "Spanish." Some, no doubt, have never mixed with other races and remain essentially of Spanish stock. The majority, however, are the product of intermarriage with other races, usually the native Indians or African slaves, and bear little or no resemblance to their remote Spanish forebears. Yet is is these racially diverse people which Americans wrongly associate with the present-day inhabitants of Spain.

  In the case of Tom Tancredo, he is descended on his mother's side from Sicilians (the most mixed people in Europe, with a predominant African strain) and on his father's side from an admixture of Spanish and Zapotec Indian (as I have already pointed out).

  His mixed Spanish, Indian and African (by way of Sicily) heritage is certainly as diverse as that of any inhabitant of Mexico or Latin America; yet Tancredo, a first-generation immigrant, wants to strip the children of immigrants of their American citizenship. If this law were made retroactive, it would strip Tancredo himself of his citizenship.

• December 4, 2006

  8:25 AM

  Manuel A. Tellechea writes:

  Anarchist:

  As far as I am concerned, Tom Tancredo is free to be a nativist xenophobe if he wants. His is certainly one of the oldest traditions in American politics, stretching back to the earliest days of the Republic. Nor do I reject the notion of an Hispanic being a nativist, since Hispanics settled in the continental U.S. 150 years before the Pilgrims. Indeed, Spaniards were the first white inhabitants of more than half of the 50 states.

  What I object to most strenuously is Tancredo's concealment of his self-evident Hispanic roots. Of course, this is not an uncommon phenomenon. The head of the American Nazi Party for many years was a concealed Jew.

  My probrem with Tancredo is that he is not honest about who he is. Personally, I think he would be a far more effective advocate for his beliefs if he embraced his Hispanic roots. At least then he would be validating two important points: not all Hispanics in this country are illegal (in fact, most are legal); and not all Hispanics are monolithic in their beliefs (some, in fact, are nativists).

  As for illegal immigration, I am not personally in favor of it. Not because it hurts this country (which is a debatable point), but because every nation should have the right to control its borders and decide for itself whom should be admitted and whom should be refused.

  I do not favor, however, the construction of 700-mile walls between friendly countries. Or if such a wall is to be put up, then there should be a similar wall along the Canadian border, so that U.S. motives may not be construed as racist.

  Neither would I deny persons born in the U.S. of their citizenship regardless of whether their parents were born here or not. Besides, such a proposal is the grossest demagoguery on the part of Tancredo, since there is absolutely no chance that such a constitutional amendment would ever be adopted.

• December 4, 2006

  8:49 AM

  JW writes:

  My problem with Trancredo is that if you take away the illegal immigration issue and his pro-fair tax stance, the man is a useless blowhard.

  That said, I suppose I am ok with him being in govt for now because A) the fair tax is a big deal, and since he supports it, I can ignore everything else about the idiot, and B) For everyone else, illegal immigration seems to have disappeared, just like I said it would.

• December 4, 2006

  10:51 AM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  David(R)

  "For example, in reference to the big bang, Penzias and Wilson have provided reasonable proof (to a scientific mind) that an 'echo' exists in the Universe that could well have happened from an initial explosion"

  And I can just as easily say that the echo is the result of God speaking the Universe into existence.

  JW

  You attempt to assign a probability to the existence of God is flawed. Those who promote evolution claim that it is a random and natual occurence. Those who believe in God generally believe his existence is supernatural. He is outside of creation and not subject to the elemental principles of the creation.

  Science is acceptable up to its limits. Humanists want to take the principles of science outside its realm, (observable and repeatable) and take its reliability in that area and claim that level of reliability in an area where it simply cannot prove anything.

  People are certainly entitled to their opinions, but they cannot claim scientific proof for that which is no more provable than the religious viewpoint.

• December 4, 2006

  10:57 AM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  Posted by jay on November 30, 2006 04:58 PM
  Speaking of...if you believe in a "young" Earth...how do you explain the fossil record, carbon dating, evolution, etc...

  The fossil record is a product of the flood. Carbon dating make assumptions that are not provable because no one was their to make observations. I have yet to see any proof of evolution. I believe that all life was created at the same time.

• December 4, 2006

  11:05 AM

  JW writes:

  Yea whatever Hogar.

  You seriously crack me up.

  You have found every flaw with science that you can in order to foster your belief in your religion, which has no possible flaws becasue it is simply made up.

  Its like saying Superman is better at fighting crime than a Police Officer, and using the flaws associated with Police Officers to back it up.

  
  Insane.
  

• December 4, 2006

  11:29 AM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  JW

  We both believe in the Police Officer. The difference is that I admit that the God that I believe in is supernatural and cannot be proven with scientific methods. You believe in the supernatural also, but you try to say that your supernatural character is really the Police Officer.

  So tell me about the scientific proof for Dark Matter.

• December 4, 2006

  11:58 AM

  JW writes:

  "We both believe in the Police Officer."

  You just got done saying that carbon dating wasnt real, and that the fossil record happened because of the flood. How is that "believing in the police officer"? That is where you are "believing in Superman because the Police Officer is flawed".

  "The difference is that I admit that the God that I believe in is supernatural and cannot be proven with scientific methods."

  How is that an admission? Thats an EXPLANATION. Without that explanation, you got...nothing.

  "You believe in the supernatural also, but you try to say that your supernatural character is really the Police Officer."

  I think you are confused. Either that or this is horribly worded. If you are trying to say that science is supernatural, you are confused. If not, go ahead and try it again.

  "So tell me about the scientific proof for Dark Matter."

  I know nothing about Dark Matter. Ive SEEN fossils.

  And that is the difference between religion and science. Science ATTEMPTS to explain reality through tangible proofs. When it cant, it creates theories to start, but has no problem if reality disproves those theories.
  Religion explains reality with complete faith, no proof whatsoever, ever! You either belive or not. The only way you will ever find out is to die. And it is NEVER wrong. Once you believe, you are done. No room for improvement (and you seriously need improvement Hogar. Asside from the bible and Republican marketing, you are about the most Ignorant fool Ive talked to).

  And you mistake me Hogar. I have no problem with people believing in God. I dont disbelieve. Im agnostic, not atheist. I have a problem when you try to take the right to choose a belief away from others because you believe God supports you.

• December 4, 2006

  1:43 PM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  JW

  I am refering to true science (that which is observable and repeatable) as the police officer. I have no problem with true science.

  Your believe in the supernatural is to say that your view of origins is scientific. You were not there when things came into being, so you cannot report what happened or why. You can make guesses, but you can never validate what you believe because you were not there to make observations.

  "Im agnostic, not atheist."

  a=without gnositc=knowlege
  agnostic=without knowledge

  "I have a problem when you try to take the right to choose a belief away from others because you believe God supports you. "

  When have a tried to take away the right to choose what a person believes?

• December 4, 2006

  2:06 PM

  JW writes:

  "Your believe in the supernatural is to say that your view of origins is scientific. You were not there when things came into being, so you cannot report what happened or why. You can make guesses, but you can never validate what you believe because you were not there to make observations."

  1. I dont have a belief. I do think the "big bang THEORY" is pretty good, but is someone proved it wrong tomorrow, I wouldnt lose any sleep. It would be more like, "Huh. Ok then." And there are LAWS as well as theories. Additionally, reality does function in certain ways. We can extrapolate. That aint supernatural.

  "agnostic=without knowledge"

  True. Guess why.

  Science doesnt know for sure.
  Religion has NO proof whatsoever.

  There is no definite answer to how the universe, life, or matter itself was created. Therefore, there is no knowledge to make a decision, unless you are willing to go on blind faith, and turn it into IGNORANCE about your own lack of knowledge (and that applies to religious freaks and scientific nusts alike).

  You have no knowledge that God does exists. You have BELIEF. They arent the same.

  "When have a tried to take away the right to choose what a person believes?"

  When you try to say your Christian beliefs are good basis for laws. They can still chose different beliefs, but they are FORCED to follow yours should you succeed.

  This is the last time I discuss this with you. You are unAmerican in you beliefs concerning this issue, and consistantly obtuse about understanding that concept. Continue to push your God backed beliefs, and I will continue to think you are a freaking Nazi for doing so.

• December 4, 2006

  2:21 PM

  jay writes:

  Hogar you are welcome to your head in the sand stances on evolution, the fossil record and carbon dating....but don't clothe your disregard for science in a lab coat…it doesn’t fit over the priest’s robes.

• December 4, 2006

  3:24 PM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  "When you try to say your Christian beliefs are good basis for laws. They can still chose different beliefs, but they are FORCED to follow yours should you succeed."

  And I am forced to follow yours when you succeed. So where is the difference?

  The Constitution specifically forbids a religious test in Article VI

  "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. "

  I am only looking for you honor that in the same way that you honor so many other provisions of the Constitution. If you don't want to honor that provision you should campaign to remove it.

  I think what really bothers you is that my religiously based opinions are not as far off the beaten path as your hatred of religious thought is.

• December 4, 2006

  3:33 PM

  JW writes:

  "And I am forced to follow yours when you succeed. So where is the difference?"

  First, my stance is based on the rights in the constitution, not some fantasy doctrine. I wouldnt want to push a law that was unconstitutional. Yet by their very nature, pushing religious belief as law is unconstitutional. In the end, laws like that will be struck down by the Supremes, but at what cost? How many people have to sit in jail waiting to have their rights returned so that you can feel this nations laws follow your belief of Christianity?

  "I think what really bothers you is that my religiously based opinions are not as far off the beaten path as your hatred of religious thought is."

  Get it through your head Hogar;

  I dont hate your religious beliefs.

  I hate YOU for thinking YOUR religious beliefs are correct and should be applied to EVERYONE by LAW.

  Jackass.

  BTW, hate is a bit strong, but I think the point is made.

• December 4, 2006

  4:03 PM

  Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:

  JW

  And slavery was once Constitutional. I simply want to use the procedures that the Constitution provides to change the laws. What is unconsitutional about that? I am not an anarchist, I am not a Nationalist (I want states to have the power they originally had so that people have local autonomy.).

  You want to introduce a religious test to participation in the political process. I believe that you would actually prevent me from engaging in the political process if you could. I have a different view of things from you, but I don't want you disenfranchised. I don't hate your desire to affect how the government affects my life, but I will work to get my view enforced rather than your view.

  You find nothing wrong with laws that take more of my money to be spent how you think it should be spent. That is more intrusive than anything that I want to see enacted.

• December 4, 2006

  4:20 PM

  JW writes:

  "And slavery was once Constitutional. I simply want to use the procedures that the Constitution provides to change the laws. What is unconsitutional about that?"

  Nothing, provided that the change in those laws does not make them unconstitutional.

  " I am not an anarchist, I am not a Nationalist (I want states to have the power they originally had so that people have local autonomy.)."

  Good for you.

  
  "You want to introduce a religious test to participation in the political process."

  No, a CONSTITUTIONAL test. Different, and already in place.

  " I believe that you would actually prevent me from engaging in the political process if you could."

  I dont know about that. You have a constitutional right to vote. I have a deep respect for that. Unfortunatley, I am also deeply afraid of what ignorant people can accomplish with that power. You are an ignorant person so...

  " I have a different view of things from you, but I don't want you disenfranchised."

  Good. Im more informed, less affected by propoganda from either political party, and better able to ensure you continue to live the American dream. Also, I wont be turning it into the American Talliban any time soon. Your rights are safe from religious persicution of ANY type with me!

  " I don't hate your desire to affect how the government affects my life, but I will work to get my view enforced rather than your view. "

  Again, thats your right. If you werent so prone to buying 30 second political snippets about very complicated issues, if you would actually learn about them instead of buying whatever the nearest Republican said, Id be happier about it.

  "You find nothing wrong with laws that take more of my money to be spent how you think it should be spent."

  BS! You voted for these pricks who went on a spending spree, not me!

  "That is more intrusive than anything that I want to see enacted."

  True for me. Not so true if I was a woman.