November 27, 2007 12:10 PM
Campos: Tancredo is America's worst Congressman
Rocky columnist Paul Campos weighs in on Rep. Tom Tancredo's TV spot conflating illegal immigration and terrorism, calling him "America's worst congressman."
It's worth emphasizing that Tancredo is not a racist nut exposing his paranoid delusions on some fringe Web site. He's a racist nut who has made his paranoid delusions the centerpiece of a bona fide Republican Party presidential campaign. (Actually I don't know if Tancredo himself is a racist, and the question holds no interest for me. Regarding immigration, he talks and acts exactly like a racist would and, when judging a politician, that's the only thing that matters).And, with the exception of Mike Huckabee, all the first-tier Republican candidates are competing to sound just as "tough" on immigration as the decidedly second-tier Colorado member of Congress. (Don't be surprised if whoever wins the nomination runs ads very similar to Tancredo's next fall.)
A couple of ironies will leap out at anyone who isn't trembling at the thought of backpack-wielding jihadists disguised as hooded Mexican gangbangers blowing up Santa and his reindeer at the local Galleria during this busy holiday season.
The first is that by far the most successful terrorist movement in American political history was inspired by the same nativist and racist ideology that underlies Tancredo's radical immigration views.
I refer to the history of the post-Reconstruction South, where a decades-long terrorist campaign carried out by private citizens, often with the tacit support or active participation of local government and law enforcement, managed to undo much of what was accomplished during the Civil War and the years immediately afterward.
The post-Goldwater Republican Party, of course, has drawn much of its electoral strength from the resentment and rage the modern civil rights movement engendered when it conducted its own war on terror, and rolled back the legal aparthied the Southern terrorists and their sympathizers had imposed on African-Americans for nearly a century.
November 27, 2007
12:58 PM
Ben's Border Street writes:
Tancredo 2008.
This is why the Camposes of America are irrelevant.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312901,00.htmlFox news
November 27, 2007
1:03 PM
Ben writes:
Why isn't the mainstream media on this?
I'll try again.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312901,00.html
November 27, 2007
1:05 PM
just sayin' writes:
Well we already have the worst Senator, might as well have the worst Congressman too.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1183988,00.html
November 27, 2007
1:10 PM
Ben's Border Street writes:
I stand corrected,some of the Mainstream media have reported on this situation.
Terrorist Target Army Base - In Arizona
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071126/NATION/111260034/1001
Campos is looking out for his raza. I will be looking out for the USA. Will you?
November 27, 2007
1:13 PM
jay writes:
I thought this was an interesting compilation of the "Coalition of the Willing" and the effects their support for the war had on their and their party's political health.
Albania PM Fatos Nano
Defeated, July 2005
Australia Pres. John Howard
Defeated, Nov. 2007
Britain PM Tony Blair
Stepped down, June 2007
Denmark PM Anders Fogh Rasmussen
In office ( pledged withdrawal in Feb. 2007)
Dominican Republic Pres. Hipolito Mejia Defeated, May 2004
El Salvador Pres. Francisco Flores Perez
Stepped down, March 2004
Hungary PM Peter Medgyessy
Defeated, Aug. 2004
Italy PM Silvio Berlusconi
Defeated, April 2006
Japan PM Junichiro Koizumi
Stepped down, Sept. 2006
Norway PM Kjell Magne Bondevik Defeated, Sept. 2005
Poland Pres. Aleksander Kwaśniewski Stepped down, Dec. 2005
Romania PM Adrian Năstase
Defeated, Nov. 2004
South Korea Pres. Roh Moo-hyun
In office
Spain PM Jose Maria Aznar
Defeated, March 2004
We can correctly add:
Republican led Congress
Defeated, November 2006
This can't be a good trend for the Republican chances in 2008.
By the way Benny, only in your world is Fox News and the Washington Post not the "mainstream media".
November 27, 2007
1:19 PM
Matt writes:
Americans who want to protect America can explain their position without injecting race. Liberals can't defend any of their positions with out it.
November 27, 2007
1:24 PM
U.S. Citizen writes:
I've never read Campos, and I never will.
November 27, 2007
1:29 PM
Anonymous writes:
Racism, yawn...
November 27, 2007
1:36 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:
Jay,
Your little list is simply a reflection that most of the world would rather ignore terrorism than stub their toe fighting it. They think they will buy "Peace in Our
time." It is the Pphyrric victory of a Chamberlain mindset that will bring its wrathful harvest in the future.
November 27, 2007
1:38 PM
lane filler writes:
Anyone interested in a very different story (and analysis) on illegal immigration should try:
http://goupstate.us/index.php/lanefiller/2007/11/14/the_illegal_immigrant_next_door
November 27, 2007
1:40 PM
Scott writes:
Ben you beat me to the Fox News/Washington Times article. Now let us see what excretions will come out of the liberals' mouths to try and counter this article.
I never read Campos. He is just another loser, err I mean university professor.
Scott
November 27, 2007
1:51 PM
shaggy writes:
Campos is just after his fifteen minutes just like Dave Krieger did when he backed the idiots from California for telling our kids to do drugs and have sex.
Only in Boulder, what else can you say.
November 27, 2007
2:02 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:
Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Democrats are the worst Congressmen ever.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1624620720071017
November 27, 2007
2:11 PM
shaggy writes:
Correction to my 1:51, I meant Dave Kopel.
November 27, 2007
2:20 PM
Ben's Border Street writes:
Lou Dobbs Tonight-CNN
Are you surprised the Bush Administration and DHS caved to special interest groups and will negotiate federal immigration policy with open-borders and amnesty groups?
Yes 6% 596
No 94% 8942
Total Votes: 9538
November 27, 2007
2:24 PM
jay writes:
"Your little list is simply a reflection that most of the world would rather ignore terrorism than stub their toe fighting it."
Hogar how many times do we have to go over the same myths? We are not "fighting terrorism" in Iraq. Less than 5% of the engagements our soldiers in Iraq fight are with AQ. Our policies there, according to our own intelligence and military communities, have made us less safe, increased global terrorism, allowed AQ to restrengthen to 9/10 levels and allowed the Taliban to retake Afghanistan.
THAT's why those folks lost their shirts....that and they, like the Republicans here at home....are being punished for incompetently ignoring the will of their constituency.
By the way Ben...what have we told you about using nonscientific bubble gum polls to support your far right wing positions?
November 27, 2007
2:40 PM
Ben's Border Street writes:
Tonight on Lou Dobbs:
Lou Dobbs topic tonight:
Big business in Arkansas has paired up with church leaders and the ACLU to fight the enforcement of federal immigration laws in the state. We will have a special report, live from Little Rock, Arkansas.
No I better understand the song "Losing My Religion" by REM. Are you listening out there churches?
Big business- I'll be putting a little more coal in the stockings this year.
ACLU- There isn't anything American about them.
November 27, 2007
2:46 PM
Oh Wise One writes:
This should be the byline-
Oh Wise One: Campos is America's worst Columnist
November 27, 2007
2:47 PM
gary writes:
Tancredo has done more for legal Americans than Campos ever will!!
More crap from a College professor out of touch with legal American voters!!
Yes for Tancredo...
No for Campos...
November 27, 2007
2:51 PM
Anonymous writes:
Campos? Isn't that Spanish?
November 27, 2007
2:54 PM
Oh Wise One writes:
Jay how many times do we have to go over the same truths? We are "fighting terrorism" in Iraq.
You are so far left, you should call yourself a Socialist/communist. Go ahead, say it, be honest with yourself. Embrace your inner totalitarianism.
November 27, 2007
2:57 PM
jay writes:
"We are "fighting terrorism" in Iraq."
Hey owo...you wanna buy some beachfront property in Nevada? I hear W is building a new ranch out there.
96% of violence in Iraq is NOT due to AQ.
Our own military and intelligence communities are on record this year as saying that our policies with regards to Iraq have made us LESS SAFE, allowed AQ to GET STRONGER and allowed Afghanistan to go back under the control of the Taliban.
Seriously man....beachfront property. Give me a shout.
Turn off the Rush.
November 27, 2007
3:04 PM
Michael writes:
Paul Campos is a f@#&ing left wing ass. He makes the absolute worst mistake by claiming Tom Tancredo is a 'racist'. Mexicans and Hispanics are not a race, they are an ethnic group. So if Campos is going to sling mud like this he should at least use the word bigot, not racist. Why can't these left wing, open borders, and ignore all immigration laws people at least have the intellectual honesty to insert the word ILLEGAL before immigrant when attacking Tancredo???? They never do. They pull out the race card and ignore the word ILLEGAL and paint all of us who want those that break into our country to be held to the same laws the rest of us are. Campos makes me sick to my stomach and the Rocky is getting close for not taking him to task on these absurd mistakes and ommissions he and those like him make when they spew their version of hatred towards those of us that agree with Tom Tancredo.
November 27, 2007
3:35 PM
David writes:
I imagine Mr. Campos works for some big money interests or else he is in some employment where he is forced to be politically correct to keep his job (i.e. big money interest). Big money does not equate to truth. It is good that conscientious people don't go to big money interests to get their truth, but rather untruth. It is not a shocker that someone in his position would write something like he did about Tancredo. If he said anything else he'd probably be out of a job or troubled his career. Writings like this about Tancredo are a dime a dozen.
November 27, 2007
4:01 PM
Scott writes:
Jay,
While most of the violence in Iraq may not be AQ (or other international terrorist) inspired, we are still fighting terrorism there. If we were to leave Iraq now, then AQ, Taliban, etc., would move right in and we would end up with another Afghanistan. That is, a haven for terrorists. Afghanistan is on its way to being cleaned out and Iraq is right behind them. Terrorist free? No. Better than before we went into Afghanistan and Iraq? You bet.
Stabilizing Afghanistan and Iraq allows for democracy to take root and hence the terrorists have one less place to hide out.
Scott
November 27, 2007
4:14 PM
Anonymous writes:
Dave,
Also, remember that Campos is a lawyer. That scumbag profession will assume ANY position ... for a price. As you pointed out his price is keeping his job at the University of Cocaine.
Scott
November 27, 2007
4:47 PM
Ben's Border Street writes:
Not mine, but something to think about.
Tina Griego, journalist for the Denver Rocky Mountain News wrote a column titled, "Mexican visitor's lament" -- 10/25/07. She interviewed Mexican journalist Evangelina Hernandez while visiting Denver last week. Hernandez said,
"They (illegal aliens) pay rent, buy groceries, buy clothes...what happens to your country's economy if 20 million people go away?"
That's a good question - it deserves an answer. Over 80 percent of Americans demand secured borders and illegal migration stopped. But what would happen if all 20 million or more vacated America? The answers may surprise you!
a.. In California, if 3.5 million illegal aliens moved back to Mexico, it would leave an extra $10.2 billion to spend on overloaded school systems, bankrupted hospitals and overrun prisons. It would leave highways cleaner, safer and less congested. Everyone could understand one another as English became the dominate language again.
b.. In Colorado, 500,000 illegal migrants, plus their 300,000 kids and grandkids - would move back "home," mostly to Mexico. That would save Coloradans an estimated $2 billion (other experts say $7 BIL) annually in taxes that pay for schooling, medical, social-services and incarceration costs. It means 12,000 gang members would vanish out of Denver alone.
c.. Colorado would save more than $20 million in prison costs, and the terror that those 7,300 alien criminals set upon local citizens. Denver Officer Don Young and hundreds of Colorado victims would not have suffered death, accidents, rapes and other crimes by illegals.
d.. Denver Public Schools would not suffer a 67 percent drop out/flunk out rate via thousands of illegal alien students speaking 41 different languages. At least 200,000 vehicles would vanish from our gridlocked cities in Colorado. Denver's four percent unemployment rate would vanish as our working poor would gain jobs at a living wage.
e.. In Florida, 1.5 million illegals would return the Sunshine State back to America, the rule of law and English.
f.. In Chicago, Illinois, 2.1 million illegals would free up hospitals, schools, prisons and highways for a safer, cleaner and more crime-free experience.
If 20 million illegal aliens returned "home," the U.S. economy would return to the rule of law. Employers would hire legal American citizens at a living wage. Everyone would pay their fair share of taxes because they wouldn't be working off the books. That would result in an additional $401 billion in IRS income taxes collected annually, and an equal amount for local state and city coffers.
No more push '1' for Spanish or '2' for English. No more confusion in American schools that now must contend with over 100 languages that degrade the educational system for American kids. Our overcrowded schools would lose more than two million illegal alien kids at a cost of billions in ESL and free breakfasts and lunches.
We would lose 500,000 illegal criminal alien inmates at a cost of more than $1.6 billion annually. That includes 15,000 MS-13 gang members who distribute $130 billion in drugs annually would vacate our country. In cities like L.A., 20,000 members of the "18th Street Gang" would vanish from our nation. No more Mexican forgery gangs for ID theft from Americans! No more foreign rapists and child molesters!
Losing more than 20 million people would clear up our crowded highways and gridlock. Cleaner air and less drinking and driving American deaths by illegal aliens!
Drain on America's economy; taxpayers harmed, employers get rich
Over $80 billion annually wouldn't return to their home countries by cash transfers. Illegal migrants earned half that money untaxed, which further drains America's economy - which currently suffers an $8.7 trillion debt.
At least 400,000 anchor babies would not be born in our country, costing us $109 billion per year per cycle. At least 86 hospitals in California, Georgia and Florida would still be operating instead of being bankrupted out of existence because illegals pay nothing via the EMTOLA Act. Americans wouldn't suffer thousands of TB and hepatitis cases rampant in our country-brought in by illegals unscreened at our borders.
Our cities would see 20 million less people driving, polluting and grid locking our cities. It would also put the "progressives" on the horns of a dilemma; illegal aliens and their families cause 11 percent of our greenhouse gases.
Over one million of Mexico's poorest citizens now live inside and along our border from Brownsville, Texas to San Diego, California in what the New York Times called, "colonias" or new neighborhoods. Trouble is, those living areas resemble Bombay and Calcutta where grinding poverty, filth, diseases, drugs, crimes, no sanitation and worse. They live without sewage, clean water, streets, electricity, roads or any kind of sanitation. The New York Times reported them to be America's new "Third World" inside our own country. Within 20 years, at their current growth rate, they expect 20 million residents of those colonias. (I've seen them personally in Texas and Arizona; it's sickening beyond anything you can imagine.) By enforcing our laws, we could repatriate them back to Mexico.
Finally, if we didn't allow them here, the California wild fires would not have occurred: "Radical Hispanic separatist organization MEChA ("Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan") took responsibility for setting the wildfires in California," confirmed Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Also included was a rambling manifesto, stating that the reason for the act of arson was that "Aztlán belongs to indigenous people, the Chicanas and Chicanos of Aztlán. We are sovereign and not subject to a foreign culture."
High integrity, ethical invitation
We invite 20 million aliens to go home, fix their own countries and/or make a better life in Mexico. We invite a million people into our country legally more than all other countries combined annually. We cannot and must not allow anarchy at our borders, more anarchy within our borders and growing lawlessness at every level in our nation.
It's time to stand up for our country, our culture, our civilization and our way of life.
And, to those who say we simply can't deport 20 million people, I remind them that we don't have to. They managed to drag themselves north without our help when they saw they could parasitize our society, and when we finally wake up and arrange for them to no longer be able to do that, they'll drag themselves back south...again without our help. It's not like they have magnetite in their skulls and can only orient north!
I am shocked that the ACLU, La Rasa and other anti-law enforcement groups have not come out against the racist and demeaning assumption that illegal aliens are only capable of traveling in a northerly direction. Why do you suppose they're not all over that?
November 27, 2007
5:04 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:
Jay,
Put whatever label you want, there is a legally elected government in Iraq and those who are fighting them and us are terrorists. Killing civilians and soldiers with roadside bombs is terrorism. We are fighting terrorism. For us to give up and let the terrorists take over Iraq, now there's a good idea. Where have I heard that before?
November 27, 2007
5:04 PM
jay writes:
"While most of the violence in Iraq may not be AQ "
Not most...almost ALL. Nearly 100%.
That's not "fighting the war on terror in Iraq"...that's a small sideshow compared to the civil war taking place there. Let's not try to make Iraq out to be something that it's not. It has nothing to do with the war on terror, 9/11 or Al Qaeda.
Period.
"Better than before we went into Afghanistan and Iraq?"
ABSOLUTELY NOT. We've spent trillions of dollars and thousands of lives further destabilizing the middle east, allowing afghanistan to again become a haven for terrorism, allowed AQ to restrenghten to 9/10 levels and are left with record opium crops in afghanistan and an endless civil war in a politically decimated Iraq...which has less electricity, running water and commerce than it did the day before we invaded. Better?!? What planet have you been on for the last 5 years?
"Over 80 percent of Americans demand secured borders and illegal migration stopped. But what would happen if all 20 million or more vacated America?"
Benny Benny Benny...you're still trying to imply a connection between the support for more border and labor law enforcement with support for making the illegal immigrants already here and working to leave the country. As we've established OVER AND OVER again...the VAST majority of americans would like our immigration laws more robustly enforced, but they don't want the illegal immigranta already here to leave. They support allowing those who qualify to participate in a guest worker program with a path to citizenship. We once again come full circle and are faced with your fair right wing, anti-immigration (legal or not) viewpoints.
Enough said.
November 27, 2007
5:11 PM
Ben writes:
jay,
You must be stoned or drunk again.
You prove again your ignorance on this subject.
November 27, 2007
5:17 PM
jay writes:
Was anything I said not factual Ben?
November 27, 2007
5:31 PM
Anonymous writes:
jay, go to your only source, plastic polling reports. Lets see what it says. Here's a question I want to see on the poll:
"The U.S. has 9 Guest Worker Programs in place already and lets in over 2 million people legally annually, the most of any nation on the planet. Do you believe that a 10th program is needed, or is it a very thinly veiled amnesty for illegal aliens?"
See jay, it's all about how the question is asked or not asked. Once the populace gets more education as it currently is, on any amnesties/GWP's, well, you won't be bringing out pollingreport.com anymore.
November 27, 2007
5:38 PM
jay writes:
Can I assume by your post that you're back to denying that the majority of the country supports a guest worker program with a path to citizenship for those illegal immigrants already in the country?
November 27, 2007
6:17 PM
Ben's Border Street writes:
jay,
Yep. Of course. Americans aren't stupid. Take a look at the benefits of upholding our laws that I posted earlier. Americans are getting screwd and they know it.
I don't think the American people want their wages continually depressed or have to subsidize illegal aliens and illegal immigration. I believe that Americans are growing ever tired of the disrespect to the nation and the nation of our forefathers. Americans are also concerned for their children.
To end the USA allows in more legal immigrants than ALL OTHER NATIONS COMBINED.
jay, since you are cuban i understand your ethnocentric leanings.
November 27, 2007
7:31 PM
jay writes:
lol...I'm not cuban...but why am I not surprised to see yet another member of the far right wing disregarding science when it doesn't support their extremist position?
Scientific, credible, national polling.
Sticking your head in the sand isn't going to make you any less incorrect here, Ben.
November 27, 2007
7:46 PM
Ben-Former Democrat writes:
If any one's head is in the sand on this issue it is you. Irrelevant is the word. But hey, ignorance is bliss. So where is the credible scientific evidence? Be specific.
Oh btw, what did you think of the rebuttal to the ethnocentricist Griego's ethnocentric propoganda?
To end, have you noticed any changes in the Democratic party's stance on this subject? When it is all said and done I bet they will parrot Tancredo, and so will you.
November 27, 2007
8:24 PM
wm brown writes:
"A couple of ironies will leap out at anyone who isn't trembling at the thought of backpack-wielding jihadists disguised as hooded Mexican gangbangers blowing up Santa and his reindeer at the local Galleria during this busy holiday season."
Have you read the GAO report on Border Security? been down to the border lately? Talked to the border patrol?
If you aren't concerned about terrorism, perhaps the drugs, gang crimes, shootings and various other assorted crimes should be a concern. There is nothing much stopping that from coming in the U.S. either, and it does quite frequently.
From one GAO report:
"In 2006, CBP officers turned away over 200,000 aliens who attempted to enter the country illegally, and seized over 600,000 pounds of illegal drugs and more than 40,000 fraudulent documents, according to CBP."
"I refer to the history of the post-Reconstruction South, where a decades-long terrorist campaign carried out by private citizens, often with the tacit support or active participation of local government and law enforcement, managed to undo much of what was accomplished during the Civil War and the years immediately afterward."
That was the Jim Crow Democrats. The mass disenfranchisement of poor white and black voters in the south and the birth of the KKK with its lynchings of blacks and white Republicans.
November 27, 2007
10:21 PM
Anonymous writes:
wm i hear what youre saying but our national guard is fighting an unnecessary war instead serving where they would do the most good. unfortainately it will take a pile of loot to enforce the laws. maybe we need to sell bonds just like they did in 1918. but nobody wants to contribute to the national good except the loonie liberals. everyone else wants to live in their splendid isolated cul de sacs unbloodied and unmuddied. but that is crap and the crapists will soil everything just so they can spew their crap. maybe with a touch of disney but it still is crap.
November 28, 2007
5:47 AM
This I got to hear writes:
"It's time to stand up for our country, our culture, our civilization and our way of life" Ben
So Ben
How do you go about doing this?
November 28, 2007
7:46 AM
just sayin' writes:
Anyone know of a situation where an employer has been punished for hiring illegal immigrants?
November 28, 2007
8:34 AM
Ben writes:
TIGH, Thanks for reading the post.
"It's time to stand up for our country, our culture, our civilization and our way of life" Ben
This is reposting of a different blog and not a direct quote from me, although I totally agree.
Answer:
I guess we can start by becoming aware of the situation. Then, getting back to the issue of accountability and our elected officials.
just sayin,
http://www.pointoflaw.com/archives/003048.php
November 28, 2007
8:43 AM
jay writes:
"So where is the credible scientific evidence? Be specific."
Ben do you have some kind of learning disability? How many times have I posted scientific, credible, national polling that proves, scientifically, that the vast majority of Americans support a guest worker program with a path to citizenship for the illegal immigrants already here? A dozen? More? Did you not retain any of that? Have you seen the movie Memento?
November 28, 2007
8:49 AM
Ben writes:
jay,
Not good enough. You won't get off that easy. I want to see you try to maintain your myth.
November 28, 2007
9:01 AM
Michael Sandblom writes:
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) has really good points. I live in Iowa, I have met a lot of people. The Dem. are trying to push for socialism. & Rudy should be a dem. as far as i am concerened. That does not leave that many left. Tancredo is the one who is trying so hard to keep our morals invested in America. That what no one else has. He isn't going to change his views to get votes from assholes like you. He knows what he stands for, that is something no one else has. People, do your homework before listing to people like this. http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=tancredo+&btnG=Search
November 28, 2007
9:11 AM
just sayin' writes:
Ben, your link was for employees who could sue an employer for hiring illegals and keeping wages low. What I would like to see is an employer who receives a fine and jail time for breaking the law and hiring illegals. I believe the best way to address this issue is to go after employers. If we could get to the point where there is no reason an employer would hire an illegal then we could stop illegal immigration. I don't make boogey men out of the illegals, I blame the employers who entice them to move here and benefit by hiring them at substandard wages.
November 28, 2007
9:16 AM
jay writes:
Check the archives Ben....I've posted that info countless times...in fact...pretty much every time we have to debunk your ridiculous myth that the country doesn't support a GWP.
I shouldn't have to keep reposting the same info just because of your learning disability.
November 28, 2007
9:18 AM
jon writes:
give me a break- tancrado is no where as bad as even one dumbacrate. when campos spouts non sence, he knows him self that the tar should be heated up, and that he should be feathered.
November 28, 2007
9:42 AM
Henri Demarche writes:
Point to recall: Latino-surnamed individuals provided fake identification documents, including driver licenses, for a number of the 9/11 terrorists. Now, tell me with a straight face that ILLEGALS are not a threat to the USA, border security is just a GOP concern and Mr. Tancredo is a nut.
November 28, 2007
10:04 AM
Watchdog Bulldog writes:
Tancredo is nowhere near as bad as Rick Renzi (R-AZ).
Renzi is as corrupt as they come, and has been for years. The prosecutor is in the same "good ol boy" crowd as Renzi, which is why Renzi is not in Prison.
Voters in his rural Arizona area vote for him because he is a Republican.
Let's just say that those voters could use a little more "education".....
November 28, 2007
10:19 AM
Modern Republican writes:
It's really cold out today, which proves that Global Warming does not exist.
November 28, 2007
10:31 AM
citizen writes:
If what Tancredo says makes him a racist in Campos eyes then I thank God I am also in the racist camp. It is time for the founders of America - Whites of European descent to stand firm on illegals.
November 28, 2007
10:42 AM
Ben writes:
jay,
That's what I thought.
November 28, 2007
10:46 AM
history buff writes:
I would disagree that Tom Tancredo is the worst member of Congress. First of all, I don't know enough about all the other Congressmen, but I would certainly put him ahead of Marilyn Musgrave and that Lamborn freak from Colorado Springs.
November 28, 2007
10:51 AM
just sayin' writes:
Well at least you are honest "citizen". Stupid, but honest.
November 28, 2007
10:59 AM
Ben writes:
Did Campos use some type of rubric to determine that Tancredo hates people?
Crying racism is the death knell for the open borders-socioethnic crowd. It does not hold water.
I would submit that Campos is racist. I would also submit that any Hispanic who advocates amnesty for illegal aliens or interfers with the soviergnty of the USA via the current silent invasion of the USA by their ethnic group is also practicing racism at various levels.
November 28, 2007
11:17 AM
Vet writes:
Right on Ben.
Campos is a card carrying la raza member.
Jay you are still just an Ass.
Vet
November 28, 2007
11:31 AM
history buff writes:
"Did Campos use some type of rubric to determine that Tancredo hates people?"
LOL. I like how people use words they don't understand to sound educated.
November 28, 2007
11:57 AM
Michael writes:
Question?? Why is that when any other country on Earth openly tries to defend their culture, their borders, their national identity, and what they consider their "sovereignty" (France comes to mind as well as many Middle Eastern counties) they are generally applauded and praised? This is particularly true when these nations are trying to repel anything American in nature whether it is a Big Mac from McDonalds or the latest Britney Spears CD or Bruce Willis movie. But when Americans try to do the same we are villified and labeled racists and bigots? Did I miss something or is this just another example of the double standard that exists on this topic?
November 28, 2007
12:26 PM
Observer writes:
citizen is smarter than you just sayin.
November 28, 2007
12:33 PM
just sayin' writes:
wait a minute Observer, I am white of European descent.
November 28, 2007
1:04 PM
shaggy writes:
Campos is a liberal idiot.
I heard him on the Caplis/Silverman show last night on the way home and this guy couldn't back up ONE thing he wrote about.
He made an ass out of himself.(as most moonbats do)
I guess becoming a professor in Boulder is equivalent to getting a Drivers license. No credibility.
The whole article bashes Tancredo as a racist but he decided to put in a little waver that said he doesn't personally know if he is a racist but the whole article is based on Racism.
There needs to be Laws against this kind of defamation.
The 1st amendment was not intended to protect the liberal moonbats for this kind of defamation BS.
November 28, 2007
1:12 PM
Observer writes:
just sayin,
That's why Citizen is twice as smart as you, your both of the same ethnic group and you put him down like a stupid white liberal was re-educated to do.
November 28, 2007
1:17 PM
shaggy writes:
Michael,
Good Q.
The answer is because other Countries get rid of their traitors.
Our traitors hide behind the 1st amendment and the ACLU.
Maybe we should follow Irans policy, I hear they found out a way to solve problems. I also heard they don't have any gays living in Iran.
November 28, 2007
1:26 PM
just sayin' writes:
so Observer, you agree that it is time for the founders of America (whites of European descent) to stand firm on immigration too? Newsflash, they're all dead
November 28, 2007
1:47 PM
Observer writes:
just sayin,
Go ahead. Keep your head in the sand.
November 28, 2007
1:57 PM
Tbone writes:
Speaking of amnesty....could someone remind me, which president gave amnesty to illegals in the 80's?
November 28, 2007
2:09 PM
Scott writes:
Speaking of amnesty....could someone remind me, which president gave amnesty to illegals in the 80's?
Posted by Tbone on November 28, 2007 01:57 PM
That was Reagan. However, you need to remember that Reagan called it "amnesty". He did not B.S. people by referring to it under any other name. I totally disagreed with what he did. However, he told the truth regarding what he wanted to do, give amnesty.
Scott
November 28, 2007
2:11 PM
Ben-Independent-Former Democrat writes:
Tancredo is hands down better than the entirety of the Democratic party,( excluding Shuler of N.C., McCaskill of Mo. and Dorgan out of N.D.) who actively and obediently follow the minority open borders ultra radical left wing element while this country loses it's soviergnty by the day. Throw in the neo-con Republicans tethered to big business interests. Tancredo is way ahead of the curve on both sides of the aisle.
Hey, T-Bone, It was wrong then and looks were it's gotten us now. Now join us in the 21st century and ditch the Democratic party. They will be the ruination of this nation.
Scott, Reagan also refered to it as the "Never Again" amnesty.
November 28, 2007
3:01 PM
shaggy writes:
Tbone,
Before Reagon died he stated giving amnesty to the illegals was the single worst decisions he ever made.
November 28, 2007
3:07 PM
jay writes:
Okay Ben...if I site the sources for the 20th time, those being the scientific, credible, national polls that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that your myth is incorrect (once again) do we have to have this conversation again in a month? Can I get an agreement that you will forever concede the point and will never make the same mythical, ridiculous claim again on this blog?
November 28, 2007
3:09 PM
Anonymous writes:
Stop worshipping Tancredo. Chickenhawk avoided Vietnam due to a "mental illness". Apparently he was too depressed to actually serve his country.
November 28, 2007
3:34 PM
jay writes:
I found this interesting:
http://colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200711280001
November 28, 2007
4:03 PM
shaggy writes:
jay,
Do you know who runs media matters??
Your losing what credibility you have left.
November 28, 2007
4:12 PM
history buff writes:
That's right, Jay. If you were a hick from Wyoming, an immigrant from New Jersey, or a Neo-Nutzi from New Mexico transplanted here to mock civilization, then you would have credibility.
The key to credibility is to think one thought, to think it well, and to think it over, and over, and over...
November 28, 2007
5:44 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:
HB,
I would rather think one right thought, than a million wrong thoughts. ;-)
November 28, 2007
5:52 PM
Ben writes:
jay,
Enough with the stalling. For the what? The 5th time, put up or shut up.
Mediamatters? lol
November 29, 2007
6:01 AM
Ben's Border Street writes:
From today's El Paso Tx. Times:
Border fence
Americans stood up to Congress and the president to demand secure borders before granting amnesty. They know what happened after the 1986 amnesty bill.
But Vicente Fox disagrees. He recently echoed LULAC saying the American economy needs illegal Mexican workers. Not true.
They are taking our jobs by driving down wages. If these jobs were in globally competitive industries like automobiles, this might be an economic plus (though not for UAW workers).
But the work is primarily in agriculture, hospitality and construction.
Yes, when fencing is completed, we will pay more for lettuce, etc. But this will be offset by higher wages and tax collections (illegals don't pay income taxes) and less crowded schools and prisons (per El Paso Times, of 1,300 "violent" criminals caught in a nationwide roundup, 1,000-plus were illegal).
And there are the many benefits of billions of dollars recirculating in our economy instead of being sent to Mexico.
Understandably, Mexican officials are frantic. Calderon has joined the LULAC campaign to make fencing an anti-Hispanic issue. It's not.
Having recently celebrated "Day of the Dead" at a central Mexico cemetery, I'm amused that Fox labels me "xenophobic" and "racist" for wanting a secure, fenced border.
Bill Levin
Santa Teresa
November 29, 2007
7:24 AM
just sayin' writes:
Still no evidence that any employer has been fined or jailed for hiring illegals??
November 29, 2007
8:56 AM
Ben writes:
just,
Google it. You'll find what you need, or did you just want to play?
November 29, 2007
9:23 AM
Anonymous writes:
Are you kidding me? I am sure jay thinks this is interesting, and a "credible, peer-reviewed source"...
http://www.nickjr.co.uk/shows/backyardigans/index.aspx
November 29, 2007
9:27 AM
just sayin' writes:
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/challenges.php?id=609507
All I can find are articles about how we don't do anything to employers. Articles about how maybe we should go after the employers if at all serious about stopping illegal immigrants. I guess it's easier to blame the illegals than it is to hold employers accountable. It's a GOP thing, employees bad, employers good.
November 29, 2007
9:42 AM
Ben writes:
just sayin,
You didn't try very hard, but of course you really wanted to go somewhere else.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6626823
November 29, 2007
9:52 AM
Anonymous writes:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/18/AR2006061800613.html
November 29, 2007
10:12 AM
just sayin' writes:
Well that is an interesting article. A company hired to build a border fence is using illegals?? I googled "employers hiring illegal immigrants" and the vast majority of articles were about how we really don't punish them. I think we have an "illegal employer" issue more than an illegal immigrant problem. I believe that we should invest in technology to get to the point where there is absolutely no excuse for an employer to hire an illegal and then start throwing employers of illegals in jail and fining them to the point there is no monetary gain for hiring illegals. I guarantee you that illegal immigrants will stop coming here if they cannot find a job.
November 29, 2007
11:12 AM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:
js,
I am all for employer sanctions as long as the government has a verifiable protocol for the employer to acertain immigration status. Without that, the employer is faced with an insurmountable obstacle, verifying immigration status, and no way to be sure they have do what is needed.
Although I have called for a national ID card, I know it is very unpopular, so maybe what is needed is a national employment card. If you want someone to hire you, you have to go to the government and obtain a secure and unforgeable ID card which verifies your legal status in this country. Then all employers would only need to scan the card into an online system used by the government to verify the card.
November 29, 2007
11:36 AM
just sayin' writes:
I think we have found something we agree on Hogar. I don't know the specifics but it seems to me that if we invest in the technology rather than trying to build a fence we could get to the point where there is no excuse for an employer to hire illegals. Once we get to that point a few fines some jail time and no more illegal immigrant issue.
November 29, 2007
12:31 PM
jay writes:
Again Ben...if I site the sources for the 20th time, those being the scientific, credible, national polls that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that your myth is incorrect (once again) do we have to have this conversation again in a month? Can I get an agreement that you will forever concede the point and will never make the same mythical, ridiculous claim again on this blog?
November 29, 2007
1:09 PM
Ben writes:
jay,
This is what? Time number 7 or 8 that you haven't produced your "evidence"?
Fences make good neighbors sayeth Robert Frost. I agree, that's why they are around the majority of people's homes.
November 29, 2007
1:50 PM
jay writes:
Ben, again....I'll be happy to source the same information I have countless times before, if you agree that we won't have to do this ridiculous dance again in a month. Have you ever seen the movie Memento? It's painful watching you go through this debunking process over and over again, simply because you either can't remember or refuse to remember the last time we debunked your mythical talking point on the country's support for a GWP.
So...I'd be happy to source that for you again...but from this point forward I'm going to assume that this will be the last time we have to debunk this myth.
It gets old.
Furthermore, just to cut you off at the pass. Credible, national, non online random polling done scientifically invalidates your mythical talking point. Cleanly. I am going to take a guess and assume that you haven't taken that college level stats class that several folks here have asked you to take in the past....so....just so we don't have to go through THAT ridiculous exercise again...scientific polling is accurate, credible and completely invalidates your position on the GWP.
Any questions before I source the info for the 100th time?
November 29, 2007
2:12 PM
Ben writes:
That's 9 jay.
November 29, 2007
2:25 PM
jay writes:
What's wrong Ben? Why don't you want to agree to concede the point after I've sourced the info for the umpteenth time?
Is it because you don't want to be called out on it? Here's me debunking this myth a year ago:
http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/rockytalklive/archives/2006/11/what_happened_to_illegal_immig.html
Here it is again debunked just three months ago:
http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/rockytalklive/archives/2007/08/denvers_barely_changing_comple.html
To be clear...this debunking has nothing to do with enforcing our labor and border laws. It has to do with what the American people support in regards to the undocumented workers ALREADY HERE.
Now....do us a favor so we don't have to watch this painful process go down again in january.
Put that last link in your favorites folder. The next time you want to spout the myth that the vast majority of americans don't support a GWP, try to remember (although that my be asking to much) this conversation and refer to the pages above once again.
Thanks in advance.
November 29, 2007
2:49 PM
shaggy writes:
LoL jay,
How are those plastic debunkings going there bud.
When it comes election time ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION WILL BE THE SINGLE BIGGEST ISSUE TO CONFRONT ALL THE CANDIDATES, or at least to the Candidates that want to win.
My guess is Hillarys stance will once again change and she will impose or impostor a tougher stance on illegals.
Want to wager?????
BTW,
Let me ask you something serious, do you have an investment in media matters???
November 29, 2007
2:55 PM
Ben writes:
jay, That's weak. Make the 10 jay.
If the American People had wanted or supported a Guest Work Program they wouldn't have made sure that these amnesties never made it past cloture, not once, not twice, and not piecemeal. Give it up. You know not of which you blog.
November 29, 2007
3:00 PM
jay writes:
"If the American People had wanted or supported a Guest Work Program they wouldn't have made sure that these amnesties never made it past cloture"
Seriously Ben...just admit when you're wrong. I am going to put those pages in my favorites...including this one...and every time you go back to the well and try to spout the myth that the American people don't support a GWP, I'm going to just repost them for you. Should suffice....as you can't refute the findings.
Furthermore, PLEASE take a college level civics class....your statement above is ignorant at best. The Congressional wranglings seen during the last debate on immigration in no way involved the american people...and the fact that you think they did is laughably pathetic.
Civic class. Stats class. Soon. PLEASE
Shagman..you to...get an education and stop making a fool out of yourself here.
Do I need to post again the list of issues from most to least important according to the american people or are you going to stop with the myths too?
November 29, 2007
3:05 PM
shaggy writes:
Hey Ben,
Have noticed that when Liberals get backed into a corner and they know their nuts are being squeezed by the truth they start calling people uneducated or liars?
November 29, 2007
3:12 PM
jay writes:
I've debunked your statements on GWP many times at this point shaggy...if you use them again...knowing that they're not true...yes...that makes you a liar.
If you don't know that the people have nothing to do with cloture votes in the US Congress or are unable to understand the validity found in scientific polling...yes...that makes you uneducated.
Any questions?
November 29, 2007
4:00 PM
shaggy writes:
Jay,
I think you have the word "debunked" confused with the word "dodge".
You always DODGE our questions, you never DEBUNK anything.
November 29, 2007
4:29 PM
Ben writes:
Shaggy, Yes I have noticed.
jay, That's what I thought. That's time 11 that you have not provided substinance to maintain your myth.
Why do you try to strawman illegal immigration like that perpetually, anyway? Do you smuggle illegal aliens? Is it for business purposes?
Hell, I'll take that back. You don't even have a straw to grasp at much less a strawman.
November 29, 2007
4:43 PM
BET ON IT writes:
Tom Tancredo will be remembered as a hero--after Mexico becomes America's 51st state!
November 29, 2007
4:57 PM
jay writes:
Okay...I think we're done here as neither of you are going to refute the debunking sources I've provided...so i'm just going to keep pasting the same sources over and over and remind you where you can find them (and no ben, refusing to read the sources isn't going to work for you pal). They are right there...all the scientific polling sources and questions are clearly listed. They haven't changed much since the first time I debunked your ridiculous statement more than a year ago.
Stop using them...and stop pouting every time you get slapped around about it. Please come to terms with it.
Here they are again for the cheap seats.
I don't expect we'll need to debunk this crap again in a month right ladies?
http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/rockytalklive/archives/2007/08/denvers_barely_changing_comple.html
http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/rockytalklive/archives/2006/11/what_happened_to_illegal_immig.html
November 29, 2007
5:14 PM
Ben writes:
jay,
That's dodge # 12.
November 29, 2007
5:19 PM
jay writes:
Ben, simply refusing to read the sources doesn't allow you the luxury of claiming that I'm "dodging".
Read them and put up or shut up.
Simple as that.
I'm calling you out. Either refute the evidence that proves my position...and debunks your myth or concede the point.
November 29, 2007
5:26 PM
Ben writes:
jay, Dodge #13.
November 29, 2007
5:37 PM
jay writes:
Wow...you're a child. Here is an excerpt from the link I source several times today that you've refused to actually read. I am not sure if this is a perfect example of intellectual laziness or intellectual denial...my guess is as little of both:
Verbatim...from the debunking session from just a couple of months ago...look familiar?
Ben, why do we have to go through this same exercise every month or so?
(Hopefully) for the last time....nonscientific, online polls from Lou Dobbs, Anti-Immigration Lobbyists or Anti-Immigration factions like Tancredo's supporters ARE NOT VALID OR ACCURATE...and therefore IRRELEVANT. You are actually doing your credibility harm by erroneously believing differently. If you don't understand why that's the case...Metro is no enrolling students for an Intro to Stats class right now.
The polling below however is scientific, national, credible and has been extremely consistent:
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll. June 7-10, 2007. N=1,183 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
"One proposal would allow undocumented immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record, to start on a path to citizenship by registering that they are in the country, paying a fine, getting fingerprinted, and learning English, among other requirements. Do you support or oppose this, or haven't you heard enough about it to say?"
Support 67%
Oppose 18%
Haven't Heard 12%
Unsure 3%
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Neil Newhouse (R). June 8-11, 2007. N=1,008 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.
"Would you say that, in general, immigration is a good thing, a bad thing, or neither a good nor bad thing?"
Good 45%
Bad 19%
Neither 33%
Unsure 3%
"Regardless of how you feel about it personally, do you think that deporting all illegal immigrants who are currently in the United States back to their native countries is a realistic and achievable goal, or not?"
Is 13%
Is Not 85%
Unsure 2%
"Regardless of how you feel about it personally, do you think that having illegal immigrants who are currently in the United States voluntarily return to their native countries before applying to become legal citizens is a realistic and achievable goal, or not?"
Is 20%
Is Not 76%
Unsure 4%
I tell you what...let's try to avoid this predictably lopsided debate in another month when you shake the etch-i-sketch again okay? Print out this post, keep it handy and refer to it the next time you have the urge to give one of your infamous "sources" more credibility, accuracy or validity than it deserves.
As far as the article about Iran goes....it is obvious you didn't bother reading it. Your loss...as usual.
Oh...and by the way...it makes you sound like an uneducated fascist when you refer to those who disagree with you as things like "traitors", "pro-illegal immigration", "anti-American", etc.
I would hope you're too smart for that...but I've been wrong before...
"Let the American people vote and decide."
Couldn't agree more...and now that we've once again taken a look at valid polling, we know how that vote would turn out, don't we Benny?
November 29, 2007
6:05 PM
Ben writes:
jay,
Where is the link to this info? That would really make me not count your last post as dodge 14.
So jay, Based on what you typed and did not link: The polls are sponsered by unabashedly bastions of left wing and radical left wing ideology save the neo-cons at the WSJ.
It looks like they polled 183 people in one poll and 1000 in the other. Yes that is convincing...not.
jay, how many times in the last year have GWP's been attempted to be shoved down the throats of the American People?
That's right 3. How many times did this fraud make it past cloture? O.
Why? More than 183 American people where involved with another poll. Do you get it now? Do you want to get it?
jay, The illegitamate terminology "undocumented immigrant' automatically brings the validity of this poll into doubt. That and the sponsors.
November 29, 2007
6:16 PM
Ben writes:
hey jj, I gots a poll for you. It is even from CNN- the Clinton News Network,
Would you support legislation that cuts off federal money to states that give licenses to illegal aliens?
Yes 97% 9245
No 3% 324
Total Votes: 9569
November 29, 2007
6:16 PM
jay writes:
"So jay, Based on what you typed and did not link: The polls are sponsered by unabashedly bastions of left wing and radical left wing ideology save the neo-cons at the WSJ."
These same questions have been asked by a myriad of folks....and all have consistently proven your myth wrong.
Ben, we are back to the same place we always get. You don't have the education necessary to understand why sceintific polling is valid and credible...and why in this case it completely invalidates your point.
I'm begging man...take a college level stats class, PLEASE
"How many times did this fraud make it past cloture?"
Once again we're back to the same flaw in your argument and understanding of this issue. PLEASE understand that the fact that the ridiculously amended immigration bill's failure to receive an adequate cloture vote has NOTHING TO DO with the fact that the VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS support a GWP with a path to citizenship.
Again man, I'm BEGGING. Take a college level civics class.
By the way....what does this say?
N=1,008 adults nationwide
N=1,183 adults nationwide
Now...do we have to go through this again in a month or do you understand why your myth has been debunked?
November 29, 2007
6:27 PM
Anonymous writes:
jay,
"immigration bill's failure to receive an adequate cloture vote has NOTHING TO DO with the fact that the VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS support a GWP with a path to citizenship."
Oh it didn't? LOL. Damn dude you are truly in denial. Whatever, so is the Democratic party.
As for the scientific polling. Do you know the parameters that makes it "valid"?
To end: What did you think of the Lou Dobbs numbers in tonights polls? Pretty convincing for a T.V. show on CNN, the Clinton News Network.
Are you still in high school?
November 29, 2007
6:31 PM
shaggy writes:
"Is it for business purposes?"--Ben
jay is a recruiter!!!!
hmmmmmm
Heres another one for ya ta debunk jay,
" * 55% consider illegal immigration a “very serious problem.” (Roper ASW for Negative Population Growth, March 2003)
* 65% disagree with granting amnesty to illegal Mexican immigrants in the U.S. (Zogby Intl., May 2002)
* 55% think that granting amnesty to illegal immigrants is a bad idea. (Zogby Intl., Sept. 2001)
* 65% believe that granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would encourage further illegal immigration, and that for this reason amnesty should not be granted. (Harris Interactive for FAIR, August 2001)
* 67% think the U.S. should not make it easier for illegal immigrants to become citizens. (Gallup, August 2001)"
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_polldataamn
November 29, 2007
6:41 PM
Shaggy writes:
Sorry, those were old polls
Here are the latest ones at the same web site.
"The general public overwhelmingly favors immigration reform. Poll after poll shows that Americans want well-enforced, sensible, and sustainable immigration laws.
* 89% of Americans think illegal immigration into the U.S. is a problem (30% "extremely serious," 33% "very serious," and 26% "somewhat serious." (Time Magazine, Jan. 2006)
* 82% think that not enough is being done along the borders to keep illegal immigrants from crossing into the country. (New York Times/CBS May 2007)
* 68% feel that the number of immigrants who cross the border, whether legal or illegal is “too high”. (Polling Company, Sept. 2006)
* 62% oppose making it easier for illegal immigrants to become citizens of America. (Quinnipiac Univ., Feb. 2006) ".
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_researchd74c
November 29, 2007
6:51 PM
Ben writes:
jay,
Notice how Shaggy actually gives us a link, a valid link? Just because they snow you on mediamatters et. al. doesn't mean it will work out here in the real world.
November 29, 2007
6:58 PM
Shaggy writes:
"Just before Presidents Bush and Fox met in Washington to plot an amnesty for illegal aliens, FAIR released a national Harris poll it commissioned, confirming that the majority of Americans oppose an amnesty for illegal aliens in the United States. Based on a survey of over 1,000 voters, the poll found that Americans oppose an amnesty for illegal aliens by a 60 percent to 29 percent margin and are specifically against the proposed amnesty for Mexican illegal immigrants by 59 to 31 percent. Dan Stein, executive director of FAIR, announced the poll results at a press conference on August 30th that was covered by Telemundo, the Los Angeles Times, The Arizona Republic, La Opinion, Gannett News Service, and McClatchy Newspapers, among others."---
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_research7172
November 29, 2007
7:05 PM
jay writes:
"What did you think of the Lou Dobbs numbers in tonights polls? Pretty convincing for a T.V. show on CNN, the Clinton News Network."
See...there's a difference here between stupidity and ignorance. You guys are obviously ignorant because of your inability to understand the validity of scientific polling (and why it's completely different from invalid web polls obviously) and your belief american's support or lack thereof has anything to do with cloture votes in Congress....but you're not stupid. Your ignorance simply stems from you being grossly misinformed....albeit willingly...and that is where these exchanges become truly pathetic on your part.
Please come to terms with the fact that the vast majority of americans support a GWP. It gets old having to tutor you guys every couple of months.
Ben...I've posted the links all day long...each of those pages contain the links you're looking for...knock yourself out. I'm done cutting and pasting stuff and forcefeeding it to you. Just read the links I've provided all day.
Okay...this should do it for another couple of months...and remember...the next time you try to float that same tired old myth...I'm just going to send you a link to this page...as well as the pages listed below.
By the way shaggy...do you not understand the difference between granting widespread amnesty to millions of people and a GWP for which one would have to qualify and complete various steps in order to gain citizenship?
What was I just saying about ignorance and stupidity?
November 29, 2007
8:30 PM
Ben- Former Democrat writes:
jay,
Look, the gig is up. Isn't it painfully obvious that the American people understand that a 10th "Guest Worker Program" is no such thing other than another amnesty for illegal aliens after 1986's "Never Again' amnesty? Thinking Americans are not fooled. The copious and contemporary polls provided by Shaggy should indicate to you the realities of our times. Take solace however, in the fact that the U.S. allows 2 million people LEGALLY and ANNUALLY into THE U.S.A., more than ALL of the nations on earth COMBINED.
P.S. I have written the first three chapters of a doctoral thesis as part of my master's degree. The wife is a PHD. So I would say I have some experience in scientific analysis. I am also fluent in 2 languages as is the wife. Not the same 2 but 2 none the less. Sure, I am ignorant in some things, but I do believe have common sense at least....
November 29, 2007
9:23 PM
jayisanidiot writes:
Jayhole just cannot let go of the engineered poll results that props up his lame arguement that America wants to enter into another amnesty cycle.
It is finally dawning on the masses that an illegal population that steals identities, social services, healthcare, and public education while exporting their ill-gotten gains out of our economy to the tune of Tens of Billions to Mexico alone is a really bad deal for our country.
One more time jayhole, tell us how illegal immigration benefits the United States.
LOL.
November 30, 2007
10:54 AM
jay writes:
"I would say I have some experience in scientific analysis."
Then why don't you understand the validity of scientific polling, Ben? Why in the world...if that were the case...would we have to remind you of these facts every couple of months?
Can I get your agreement that we won't have to repaste this conversation the next time you shake the etch-i-sketch and start spouting the same mythical talking points about the country's wishes on a GWP?
November 30, 2007
11:09 AM
Anonymous writes:
jay,
Just post a valid link like your owner Shaggy did. That's all. The truth shall set you free.
November 30, 2007
11:12 AM
jay writes:
I've posted them several times. Please read them. Everything you've asked for is there....still. Please do some reading....education is your friend.
November 30, 2007
11:32 AM
Ben writes:
jay,
And apparently you think deceiving people is your friend.
November 30, 2007
11:56 AM
shaggy writes:
jay,
Why did the last several immigration reforms die?
Was it do to the overwhelming vast majority of people supporting it or was it do to the FACT that the overwhelming vast majority of people are against it?????
The proof is in the pudding.
But then again you still think Algore won the election.
Ben, you do know that jay is a recruiter don't you????
That explains his eagerness to keep the floodgates open. To Hell with the Country as long as his needs are taken care of.
November 30, 2007
12:27 PM
Ben writes:
Shaggy, Yep I knew. I'm trying to get other people to wake up to the likes of him before his type "kills the golden goose" so to speak.
November 30, 2007
2:41 PM
jay writes:
'Why did the last several immigration reforms die?
Was it do to the overwhelming vast majority of people supporting it or was it do to the FACT that the overwhelming vast majority of people are against it?????"
shaggy...I'm going to say this one last time with the hope that your reading comprehension has improved since yesterday. The inability of the amendment-laden immigration bill to receive a vote of cloture has ZERO to do with the country's overwhelming support for a GWP with a path to citizenship. The fact that you're still having trouble understanding this concept speaks volumes.
Okay...so we're done here right?
Any thing else or can I just put this conversation in my favorites list so I can post it the next time one of you spouts the myth that the vast majority of Americans don't suppport a GWP with a path to citizenship for those illegal immigrants already here?
November 30, 2007
2:43 PM
jay writes:
"That explains his eagerness to keep the floodgates open."
One more thing, baby huey.
My debunking of your myth about the lack of support for a GWP has NOTHING to do with my support of increasing the enforcement resources for our labor and border laws.
Like playing dodgeball with children.
November 30, 2007
3:35 PM
shaggy writes:
I think jay and Larry Craig have something in common.
Larry taps is toes and jay taps his heels.
Just because you keep repeating it to yourself jay does not mean it will come true.
November 30, 2007
3:42 PM
jay writes:
shaggy, I'm sorry you're having trouble coming to terms with the fact that the country overwhelmingly supports a GWP with a path to citizenship for those already here...but hey...no need to start with the attacks.
Again...are we done here...is everything clear?
Can I plan on pasting the link to this post in another couple of months or did this tutoring session finally sink in?
November 30, 2007
6:05 PM
Ben's Border Street writes:
Shaggy,
jay is right. The vast majority of the country does want a GWP and a path to citizenship. The country he is refering to is Mexico.
November 30, 2007
6:27 PM
Soldier of Bens Brigade writes:
LoL Ben,
Good one:)
I still can't get over the fact that jay uses Media Matters as his sources.
Yet what is funnier still is he truly believes them.
I never thought I would run into someone in my life time that can be so brain washed like the idiots that committed suicide when Hale-Bopp comet flew over but I was wrong.
December 1, 2007
12:13 PM
Marcos writes:
Dave Koppel's piece in today's RMN puts to rest who and what Campos is.
Pithy and right to the point.
Congrats Dave.
December 1, 2007
8:16 PM
Ben writes:
An international example and why Tancredo is so far ahead of the politicians that "represent" this nation.
By Susan MacAllen
In 1978-9, I was living and studying in Denmark .
But in 1978 - even in Copenhagen, one didn't see Muslim immigrants.
The Danish population embraced visitors, celebrated the exotic, went
out of its way to protect each of its citizens. It was proud of its
new brand of socialist liberalism - one in development since the
conservatives had lost power in 1929 - a system where no worker had
to struggle to survive, where one ultimately could count upon the
state as in, perhaps, no other western nation at the time.
The rest of Europe saw the Scandinavians as free-thinking,
progressive and infinitely generous in their welfare policies.
Denmark boas ted low crime rates, devotion to the environment, a
superior educational system and a history of humanitarianism.
Denmark was also most generous in its immigration policies - it
offered the best welcome in Europe to the new immigrant: generous
welfare payments from first arrival plus additional perks in
transportation, housing and education. It was determined to set a
world example for inclusiveness and multiculturalism. How could it
have predicted that one day in 2005 a series of political cartoons in
a newspaper would spark violence that would leave dozens dead in the
streets - all because its commitment to multiculturalism would come
back to bite?
By the 1990's the growing urban Muslim population was obvious - and
its unwillingness to integrate into Danish society was obvious. Years
of immigrants had settled into Muslim-exclusive enclaves. As the
Muslim leadership became more vocal about what they considered the
decadence of Denmark 's liberal way of life, the Danes - once so
welcoming - began to feel slighted. Many Danes had begun to see Islam
as incompatible with their long-standing values: belief in personal
liberty and free speech, in equality for women, in tolerance for
other ethnic groups, and a deep pride in Danish heritage and history.
The New York Post in 2002 ran an article by Daniel Pipes and Lars
Hedegaard, in which they forecasted accurately that the growing
immigrant problem in Denmark would explode. In the article they
reported:
"Muslim immigrants.constitute 5 percent of the population but
consume upwards of 40 percent of the welfare spending."
"Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark's 5.4 million people but make
up a majority of the country's convicted rapists, an especially
combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are
non-Muslim. Similar, if lesser, disproportions are found in other
crimes."
"Over time, as Muslim immigrants increase in numbers, they wish
less to mix with the indigenous population. A recent survey finds
that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would readily marry a
Dane."
"Forced marriages - promising a newborn daughter in Denmark to
a male cousin in the home country, then compelling her to marry him,
sometimes on pain of death - are one problem"
"Muslim leaders openly declare their goal of introducing Islamic
law once Denmark 's Muslim population grows large enough - a
not-that-remote prospect. If present trends persist, one sociologist
estimates, every third inhabitant of Denmark in 40 years will be
Muslim."
It is easy to understand why a growing number of Danes would feel
that Muslim immigrants show little respect for Danish values and
laws. An example is the phenomenon common to other European countries
and the U.S. : some Muslims in Denmark who opted to leave the Muslim
faith have been murdered in the name of Islam, while others hide in
fear for their lives. Jews are also threatened and harassed openly by
Muslim leaders in Denmark, a country where once Christian citizens
worked to smuggle out nearly all of their 7,000 Jews by night to
Sweden - before the Nazis could invade. I think of my Danish friend
Elsa - who as a teenager had dreaded crossing the street to the
bakery every morning under the eyes of occupying Nazi soldiers - and
I wonder what she would say today.
In 2001, Denmark elected the most conservative government in some 70
years - one that had some decidedly non-generous ideas about liberal
unfettered immigration. Today Denmark has the strictest immigration
policies in Europe. ( Its effort to protect itself has been met with
accusations of "racism" by liberal media across Europe - even as
other governments struggle to right the social problems wrought by
years of too-lax immigration.)
If you wish to become Danish, you must attend three years of
language classes. You must pass a test on Denmark's history, culture,
and a Danish language test. You must live in Denmark for 7 years
before applying for citizenship. You must demonstrate an intent to
work, and have a job waiting. If you wish to bring a spouse into
Denmark , you must both be over 24 years of age, and you won't find
it so easy anymore to move your friends and family to Denmark with
you.
You will not be allowed to build a mosque in Copenhagen . Although
your children have a choice of some 30 Arabic culture and language
schools in Denmark , they will be strongly encouraged to assimilate
to Danish society in ways that past immigrants weren't.
In 2006, the Danish minister for employment, Claus Hjort
Frederiksen, spoke publicly of the burden of Muslim immigrants on the
Danish welfare system, and it was horrifying: the government's
welfare committee had calculated that if immigration from Third World
countries were blocked, 75 percent of the cuts needed to sustain the
huge welfare system in coming decades would be unnecessary. In other
words, the welfare system as it existed was being exploited by
immigrants to the point of eventually bankrupting the government. "We
are simply forced to adopt a new policy on immigration. The
calculations of the welfare committee are terrifying and show how
unsuccessful the integration of immigrants has been up to now," he
said.
A large thorn in the side of Denmark 's imams is the Minister of
Immigration and Integration, Rikke Hvilshoj. She makes no bones about
the new policy toward immigration, "The number of foreigners coming
to the country makes a difference," Hvilshøj says, "There is an
inverse correlation between how many come here and how well we can
receive the foreigners that come." And on Muslim immigrants needing
to demonstrate a willingness to blend in, "In my view, Denmark should
be a country with room for different cultures and religions. Some
values, however, are more important than others. We refuse to
question democracy, equal rights, and freedom of speech."
Hvilshoj has paid a price for her show of backbone. Perhaps to test
her resolve, the leading radical imam in Denmark, Ahmed Abdel Rahman
Abu Laban, demanded that the government pay blood money to the family
of a Muslim who was murdered in a suburb of Copenhagen, stating that
the family's thirst for revenge could be thwarted for money. When
Hvilshoj dismissed his demand, he argued that in Muslim culture the
payment of retribution money was common, to which Hvilshoj replied
that what is done in a Muslim country is not necessarily what is done
in Denmark. The Muslim reply came soon after: her house was torched
while she, her husband and children slept. All managed to escape
unharmed, but she and her family were moved to a secret location and
she and other ministers were assigned bodyguards for the first time -
in a country where such murderous violence was once so scarce.
Her government has slid to the right, and her borders have
tightened. Many believe that what happens in the next decade will
determine whether Denmark survives as a bastion of good living,
humane thinking and social responsibility, or whether it becomes a
nation at civil war with supporters of Sharia law.
And meanwhile, Americans clamor for stricter immigration policies,
and demand an end to state welfare programs that allow many
immigrants to live on the public dole. As we in America look at the
enclaves of Muslims amongst us, and see those who enter our shores
too easily, dare live on our taxes, yet refuse to embrace our culture,
respect our traditions, participate in our legal system, obey our laws, .
speak our language, appreciate our history . . we would do well to
look to Denmark, and say a prayer for her future and for our own.
December 2, 2007
7:53 AM
jay writes:
I'll ask again....are we done here shsggy/ben?
I don't want there to be any loose ends this time. Are we clear on why your myth about the nation's lack of support for a GWP is completely ridiculous?
I just want to make sure you guys are up to speed. I'd like a clean break here so when I have to paste this post in another month there are not questions left open.
December 2, 2007
8:30 AM
Ben writes:
jay,
You must be in fairy tale land if you think you've done anything other than blow smoke, as usual. Notice how you have been all alone with your myth for what.... 8 months? Uh-huh, whatever you say jay. I noticed that when Carrie mentioned that the "vast majority of Americans" overwhelmingly were opposed to Amnesty via the trojan horse of "Guest Worker Program" you didn't want to address it on the GOP blog. Why do you continue with your nonsense?
December 2, 2007
8:57 PM
jay writes:
For the last time, Ben. Do you have anything else? All I hear now is whining and pouting. I've tutored you long enough for you to understand that Carrie's rhetoric about "amnesty" has nothing to do with any of the gwp's on the table. If you're simply going to choose to ignore the validity of scientific data (again) that's fine...but let's call it that...instead of pretending that you have any type of credible argument for your position (that the US doesn't support a GWP).
Sound good?
December 3, 2007
4:47 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:
The attached link is from the testimony of a Danish professor on GW, where he calls GWPs a "Bad Opportunity." Looks like the Danes are waking up to the negative aspects of unfettered immigration, let's hope the US does too.
http://gop.science.house.gov/hearings/energy07/March%2021/lomborg.pdf