On the Border . . .

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: cwjerome
How freaking stupid can anyone really be? The Minutemen were the result of British "oppression." If anything, the Brits should be wary about their presence at the Mexican border

The Minutemen of the past were concerned with defending AMERICA against foreign "tyranny." How sick and twisted of some idiots here to turn the modern theme of this group into anti-American BS. Only the most warped logic could view the historical Minutemen as "terrorists." It really gives a lot of insight into the out-of-touch way such people think. I would say it's disgusting but it's a hilarious way for these people to keep shooting themselves in the foot :laugh:

Are you really that dim-witted that you cannot see the direct analogy between British occupation of America and the Minutemen fighting them and U.S. occupation of Iraq and the Iraqi "insurgents" fighting us? Oh I'm sure you'll wave your flag real hard and shout some lame-brained jingoistic crap about how I hate America or whatever. So go ahead, get it off your chest, I know you want to.

Well, I have no problem with anyone's opinion but there is no analogy between Iraq and the Revolutionary War. You see, Iraq is not a colony of the United States mostly populated by descendents of Americans. It has nothing to do with flag waving or anything like that. It is simply a bad analogy.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Look above you & I've bolded a sentance. How is that leaving something out ?

Don't you realize that coming across the border ILLEGALLY is a crime?



Tell ya what, I don't care - it's not their job, and they shouldn't be interfering where they're not needed.

If they're so damn concerned, why aren't they taking care of buisness back in their own community instead of galavaanting
around in the dessert of another state so they can get some headlines ?

10 to 1 - they're not gonna do squat in their own backyard, they don't have the comittment or the followthrough - Fair Weather Milita, not too cold and not too hot, but just right - Goldielocks likes her porrige in April, when it's just right . . . don't wanna be there in May when it starts gettin' warm. Might miss the Baseball season.

Goin' back to the 9 -5 & be the dad blam city slicker hotshot as seen on TV.

They're phoney.

To me this is just like a protest. I haven't seen too many people asking the question 'How do all of these people always have the time to protest 'X'?' Well, that is until a group of apparent right-wingers decided to have their own little protest. But hey, at least when we're talking about this group we do assume that they have jobs!

 

[DangerAardvark]

What happens when they actually find some illegal immigrants? Shoot em?

 

[Rhin0]

Originally posted by: DangerAardvark
What happens when they actually find some illegal immigrants? Shoot em?

Yeah, they'll just execute them on the spot.

Read some before blabbing.


:roll:

 

[Rhin0]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

interfering where they're not needed.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[DangerAardvark]

Originally posted by: Rhin0

Originally posted by: DangerAardvark
What happens when they actually find some illegal immigrants? Shoot em?

Yeah, they'll just execute them on the spot.

Read some before blabbing.


:roll:

Too lazy, too drunk, too etc...
Too much time on ATOT...

 

[Specop 007]

So far they've been doing a fine job, and I support them 100% NO MATTER WHAT ACTIONS THEY TAKE.

You break the law, your a criminal. Simple as that. Its very sad to see so many fellow Americans that are willing to COMPLETELY disregard the laws.

 

[CaptnKirk]

To me this is just like a protest. I haven't seen too many people asking the question 'How do all of these people always have the time to protest 'X'?' Well, that is until a group of apparent right-wingers decided to have their own little protest. But hey, at least when we're talking about this group we do assume that they have jobs!


And in part, that's the gist of the whole matter.

The same one's who bitch and moan about what the 'Protesters' do in one situation are waving their flag in support of this action.

Look, a protest is a protest, either both groups and their actions are right, or both are wrong. You can't have it one way or the other, equality and all.

The hypocrites can't support one with out supporting the rights of the other, but they always do,
their perception of individual rights is agenda driven, and it if is not in the contest of their narrow viewpoint it's wrong,
and they play the fcking 'Patriot' card to back stab others.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Meanwhile conveniently forgetting that the original 'Minutemen' were the insurgents of the day, overthrowing the Government of the time - enforcing their radical doctrine, and forcing out the occupation by the invaders from another country.

Insurgents who wore the uniform of a disciplined, professional army...and insurgents who faced the British occupation force toe to toe and face to face...I understand that one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...but the British were not invaders...the British established the colonies, and the colonists ultimately decided they were better off being autonomous...not quite the same thing.

Wow, that's quite a conspiracy theory you've got going there! It's funny how you complain about the veracity of the story I was commenting on, but then offer up your own fantastic theories w/o nary a shred of evidence! Nice.

No you are right...I often complain about unsubstantiated theories, and here I am providing one myself...however, I do not think it was my intent to claim that this is what really happened...more an observation that some of you are so willing to believe this illegal immigrant's story because it supports your predisposed assumption that the Minutemen are a bunch of right wing racist loonies running around with guns.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
To me this is just like a protest. I haven't seen too many people asking the question 'How do all of these people always have the time to protest 'X'?' Well, that is until a group of apparent right-wingers decided to have their own little protest. But hey, at least when we're talking about this group we do assume that they have jobs!


And in part, that's the gist of the whole matter.

The same one's who bitch and moan about what the 'Protesters' do in one situation are waving their flag in support of this action.

Look, a protest is a protest, either both groups and their actions are right, or both are wrong. You can't have it one way or the other, equality and all.

The hypocrites can't support one with out supporting the rights of the other, but they always do,
their perception of individual rights is agenda driven, and it if is not in the contest of their narrow viewpoint it's wrong,
and they play the fcking 'Patriot' card to back stab others.

I don't know who you are talking about, but I haven't caught anyone on P&N saying the right to assemble and the right to free speech should be restricted to some protests and not others, or, more specifically that the grungy shrieking mobs from the Left (like those recently in Cali) should not be allowed to demostrate. Maybe you can find me a link of that.

Once again your concrete-bound approach interferes with conceptual (ie. contextual) thinking. Yes, people like me generally think those people and protests that our little radical friend here at P&N tells us about are basically stupid (and yeah, some of what they do IS illegal). We usually view such demonstrations, the ideas expressed, and the people involved as fairly dumb. At the same time, I see the Minuteman Project as the opposite: a good protest with a good message. It's not about the RIGHT to protest, it's all about the ideas and actions involved... and you are trying to do the same thing here that you do with the Minutemen vs the Minutemen of old: remove the context and act like they are the same. Well I'm here to tell you that all protests are not the same. They may all have an equal RIGHT, but that doesn't mean I have to believe they have equal validity.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Still see the rightist additude of it's OK for my agenda, but not from any other viewpoint.
It's like in the Terri Schiavo case where one side sticks their noses in where it's none of their business.

They're too busy minding everyones elses business to mind their own.

They want to protest - fine, take it up with the Federal and State Government, there are ways to do that.

It's not about taking the situation into your own hands and doing it because you feel like it's your business, is it.

Let's say that overall they to get the full backing of their 'Volunteers' all 1,200 of them during the month. That's still a few people short of the balance of the 290+ Milllion in the country that aren't finding it in their interest to partake in this joke.

Minority Reactionary Adenda. These fools aren't 'Partiots' by any streach of the imagination.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
To me this is just like a protest. I haven't seen too many people asking the question 'How do all of these people always have the time to protest 'X'?' Well, that is until a group of apparent right-wingers decided to have their own little protest. But hey, at least when we're talking about this group we do assume that they have jobs!


And in part, that's the gist of the whole matter.

The same one's who bitch and moan about what the 'Protesters' do in one situation are waving their flag in support of this action.

Look, a protest is a protest, either both groups and their actions are right, or both are wrong. You can't have it one way or the other, equality and all.

The hypocrites can't support one with out supporting the rights of the other, but they always do,
their perception of individual rights is agenda driven, and it if is not in the contest of their narrow viewpoint it's wrong,
and they play the fcking 'Patriot' card to back stab others.

I don't know who you are talking about, but I haven't caught anyone on P&N saying the right to assemble and the right to free speech should be restricted to some protests and not others, or, more specifically that the grungy shrieking mobs from the Left (like those recently in Cali) should not be allowed to demostrate. Maybe you can find me a link of that.

Once again your concrete-bound approach interferes with conceptual (ie. contextual) thinking. Yes, people like me generally think those people and protests that our little radical friend here at P&N tells us about are basically stupid (and yeah, some of what they do IS illegal). We usually view such demonstrations, the ideas expressed, and the people involved as fairly dumb. At the same time, I see the Minuteman Project as the opposite: a good protest with a good message. It's not about the RIGHT to protest, it's all about the ideas and actions involved... and you are trying to do the same thing here that you do with the Minutemen vs the Minutemen of old: remove the context and act like they are the same. Well I'm here to tell you that all protests are not the same. They may all have an equal RIGHT, but that doesn't mean I have to believe they have equal validity.

Yes, you've made it abundently clear that everything you don't personally believe in is "stupid" and everything you do believe in is righteous. So what's your problem when the other 1/2 of us believe the exact opposite? I think your protests are stupid and mine are great! How could you possibly argue with that?

My final point on this -- I don't have a problem with any group protesting in whatever peaceful means they deem appropriate. What I do have a problem with is when those protestors start strapping on 9s and potentially interfering with official personnel while placing themselves in situations that have the potential for violence.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
To me this is just like a protest. I haven't seen too many people asking the question 'How do all of these people always have the time to protest 'X'?' Well, that is until a group of apparent right-wingers decided to have their own little protest. But hey, at least when we're talking about this group we do assume that they have jobs!


And in part, that's the gist of the whole matter.

The same one's who bitch and moan about what the 'Protesters' do in one situation are waving their flag in support of this action.

Look, a protest is a protest, either both groups and their actions are right, or both are wrong. You can't have it one way or the other, equality and all.

The hypocrites can't support one with out supporting the rights of the other, but they always do,
their perception of individual rights is agenda driven, and it if is not in the contest of their narrow viewpoint it's wrong,
and they play the fcking 'Patriot' card to back stab others.

I don't know who you are talking about, but I haven't caught anyone on P&N saying the right to assemble and the right to free speech should be restricted to some protests and not others, or, more specifically that the grungy shrieking mobs from the Left (like those recently in Cali) should not be allowed to demostrate. Maybe you can find me a link of that.

Once again your concrete-bound approach interferes with conceptual (ie. contextual) thinking. Yes, people like me generally think those people and protests that our little radical friend here at P&N tells us about are basically stupid (and yeah, some of what they do IS illegal). We usually view such demonstrations, the ideas expressed, and the people involved as fairly dumb. At the same time, I see the Minuteman Project as the opposite: a good protest with a good message. It's not about the RIGHT to protest, it's all about the ideas and actions involved... and you are trying to do the same thing here that you do with the Minutemen vs the Minutemen of old: remove the context and act like they are the same. Well I'm here to tell you that all protests are not the same. They may all have an equal RIGHT, but that doesn't mean I have to believe they have equal validity.

Yes, you've made it abundently clear that everything you don't personally believe in is "stupid" and everything you do believe in is righteous. So what's your problem when the other 1/2 of us believe the exact opposite? I think your protests are stupid and mine are great! How could you possibly argue with that?

My final point on this -- I don't have a problem with any group protesting in whatever peaceful means they deem appropriate. What I do have a problem with is when those protestors start strapping on 9s and potentially interfering with official personnel while placing themselves in situations that have the potential for violence.

Then perhaps you should argue against the laws that allow these protestors to strap on 9s instead of the protestors who are simply exercising their rights.

Then again, if all of us focused our energy arguing against how our government has never taken the control of our southern border seriously then we wouldn't even be having this discussion in the first place.

 

[0roo0roo]

good for them. keeping the status quo just leads to crime and exploitation. lawlessness and neglect only encourage evil. its just how it is. malcolm gladwells book "blink" has a bit on that idea. once the border is secure, if we really need labour, we will set up systems to lawfully import it as many countries already do. if a few jobs require slightly higher wages to attract legal workers, so be it. rest is bullsh*t. mexico is one of the richest latin american countries. they secure their own southern border against the flood of illegals trying to enter. we should do the same. we do no favours to mexico by taking in so many. they just cover their problems by actively exporting their poor. lock down the borders and both countries will finally have to stare their problems in the face and solve them.

cheap labour also stifles innovation. when faced with labour shortages countries mechanize.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Then perhaps you should argue against the laws that allow these protestors to strap on 9s instead of the protestors who are simply exercising their rights.

You see, it's not just the guns by themselves that's an issue (I don't necessarily have a problem with open-carry laws), it's the confluence of factors that can lead to vigilante-style violence on our borders.

Then again, if all of us focused our energy arguing against how our government has never taken the control of our southern border seriously then we wouldn't even be having this discussion in the first place.

Well, just like the anti-war protestors have virtually no chance to influence our administration's policies, neither does the minuteman project. In fact, Bush has already characterized the minutemen as "vigilantes" ...

"I'm against vigilantes in the United States of America," Mr. Bush said at a joint press conference. "I'm for enforcing the law in a rational way."

In fact his only response thus far to the problem of illegal immigration in this country has been to push for looser immigration laws, failure to fund the required 2,000 additional border agents as directed under intelligence-overhaul legislation, and has proposed a "guest worker" status for illegals working in the States. Christ, you guys elected this goon -- make him do something about it!

And at least I can sympathize with the issue and even the protestors (although not necessarily their tactics), unlike some around here who profess nothing short of spittle-spewing rage for the anti-war protestors. People care passionately about certain issues and want to do something about it. I just think sometimes they can go about it the wrong way.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Christ, you guys elected this goon -- make him do something about it!

Hah, you know that the irony here is that the Republican party is the party I would expect to do something about it. Hell, if Bush will do nothing about it then I have absolutely no faith that Kerry would have done anything either.

 

[cwjerome]

Make him do something about it? Well, I suppose that's what those Minutemen are hoping to do, eh?

I'm all for a rational guest worker program, but for that or anything else to work there needs to be some major improvements to American border security. The only candidate I remember ever taking the problem serious was Pat Buchanan and that guy's a nut. In my eyes, this is definately a situation Bush is faultering on, but the Dems are even worse when it comes to this issue.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
but the Dems are even worse when it comes to this issue.

LOL. Neither party is at all interested in doing anything about legal or illegal immigration. Please explain how the Dems are worse...

 

[MisterCornell]

Most Mexicans (who have U.S. citizenship) vote Democrat. Allowing more Mexicans into the country and giving them amnesty will be suicide for the Republican party. Already Colorado is 20+% Hispanic, as is Arizona, and even Utah is 10%. CO used to be a GOP stronghold, but it's not anymore because of changing demographics. I'm sure the Democratic party would love more Mexican illegals and an amnestry program for them. Why GWB is tripping over himself to attract and give amnestry to Mexican illegals is beyond me. They will not repay the favor by voting GOP, if thatt's what GWB is thinking.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
Most Mexicans (who have U.S. citizenship) vote Democrat. Allowing more Mexicans into the country and giving them amnesty will be suicide for the Republican party. Already Colorado is 20+% Hispanic, as is Arizona, and even Utah is 10%. CO used to be a GOP stronghold, but it's not anymore because of changing demographics. I'm sure the Democratic party would love more Mexican illegals and an amnestry program for them. Why GWB is tripping over himself to attract and give amnestry to Mexican illegals is beyond me. They will not repay the favor by voting GOP, if thatt's what GWB is thinking.

On the whole you are correct. The South American wave is probably going to be the end of current Republican hegemony within the next couple of decades.

 

[MisterCornell]

On the whole you are correct. The South American wave is probably going to be the end of current Republican hegemony within the next couple of decades.

It's not South American. Mexico is in fact in North America.

 

[cwjerome]

Well I disagree with the assumption that Mexicans or Hispanics in general are big Democratic supporters and will always be that way. Most of what I've seen in Arizona indicates it's split about 60-40 favoring the Dems, which isn't some giant stronghold. These people do not have the same history and Blacks, and Hispanics are not held down by an elite shakedown apparatus that perpetuates their misery to create a dependent victim class that keeps so-called leaders in power. Basically I think things will stabalize close to 50-50 in the next 10-20 years.

Now I will explain why I think the Dems are worse at dealing with illegal immigration:

I think Dems are lax on national security in general.
Judging Clinton's job, when illegal immigration truly skyrocketed from nuisance to insane proportions
Dems in Arizona are against erecting decent walls and barriers
Dems in Arizona are for "day work centers" where illegals can hang out and look for work
Dems in Arizona are against prop 200 and any attempts to deny illegals costly services
Dems in Arizona are against barring illegals from voting or getting driving licenses
Dems in Arizona support water stations and other services illegals can use to cross

These are just a few of the reasons... it boils down that they are basically softer on illegal immigration than the Reps. (even though there's a lot of Reps that are pissed at other Reps for not being strong enough also)

 

[CaptnKirk]

Now I will explain why I think the Dems are worse at dealing with illegal immigration:

I think Dems are lax on national security in general.
Judging Clinton's job, when illegal immigration truly skyrocketed from nuisance to insane proportions
Dems in Arizona are against erecting decent walls and barriers
Dems in Arizona are for "day work centers" where illegals can hang out and look for work
Dems in Arizona are against prop 200 and any attempts to deny illegals costly services
Dems in Arizona are against barring illegals from voting or getting driving licenses
Dems in Arizona support water stations and other services illegals can use to cross


That's bogus. - the Republicans are in charge of the Country - Senate, House, & President at the Federal level, and they are in charge of Arizona at the State level.

They are the ones who run the agenda, and they have the means to have their way. Problem is - they're not doing anything about it.

How can they blame the 'Other' party for their own failures - they and their means and methods are pure unadulterated bullshit, they're the ones at fault.

Someday they have to step up to the plate and accept a glimmer of responsibility instead of blaming someone else for them not doing their own jobs themselves.

You can't blame the Dem's forever when the GOP's are the perpa-traitors.

 

[cwjerome]

They do not have the means to have their way like you say. As if the Reps can just do whatever they want and get anything passed and have their way all the time. Are you on crack? By the way, Arizona has a Democratic governor and voted for Clinton.

Please notice what I said at the end: "even though there's a lot of Reps that are pissed at other Reps for not being strong enough also"

I'm not saying the Reps are gods and the Dems are devils, I'm saying that there's is more, and stronger desires to get tough on the border from the Republican side, especially in Arizona. Although not perfect, at least there's a sprinkling of common sense within the Right. Actually I'm surprised you are even arguing that the Reps aren't generally tougher on immigration and border issues... seems fairly obvious to most I think.

Oh I forgot, you just want another excuse to exercise your anger towards Reps and conservatives :roll:

 

[CaptnKirk]

Arizona has a Democratic governor and voted for Clinton

So what ? Clinton hasn't run in the last two elections, Bush carried Az.

Both Senators, and all but 2 Congressmen


State Senate 18 GOP to 12 DEM, State Legislature is 37 GOP to 22 DEM

If that's not in control, who is - the ToothFairy ?

Arizona has been in the GOP camp since Barry 'Nukem' Goldwater.

I seriously doubt that Janet Napolitano has more power than, say, the Antichrist.