Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Main discussion area is here. Reply to a message to continue a discussion thread, or create your own new Topics.
Renegade Mom

Hate-Mongering Left vs. Right

Postby Renegade Mom » 2008 Mar 03 14:35

OK, I tried not to get drawn in to this, but the idea that the Left wing pundits are as bad as the Right needs challenging. Now I will not address leaders of other countries and their hateful rhetoric – Left or Right. When it comes to politically based violence the Left and Right are equally brutal and murderous. When it comes to religiously based violence its always the fundamentalists doing the killing in the name of God.

The American Right-wing pundits continue to prove that they are the leaders of hate and bigotry on a weekly basis. If you go beyond the accusatory smears of the Right-wing pundits against the American liberal media (and it ain't CNN…) and actually look into their hypocritical shrieking, you find that they can not back up their accusations. Unfortunately the smears are broadcast, but the factual rebuttals are never aired. Thank goodness for the Net and the Blogosphere so these hatemongers can be kept accountable somewhere.

If you only get your news from Fox (but I do not consider Fox a reputable journalistic source) or CNN you are bombarded with lies and innuendo. I give prayers of gratitude regularly for Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart for satirizing this crap and shedding light and truth through humor and parody. They are the Tom Paine's and Benjamin Franklin's of our time – true patriots who resist the tyranny of the oppressive (arista-corporate) junta that runs this country and controls the bulk of the media. I strongly disagree with the notion that Left-wing pundits are as hateful as the Right.

Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Chris Mathews, Glenn Beck, and bloody Bill Kristol are constantly spewing vile, hateful, fascist venom at those who disagree with them. In the past several months they have been confronted by those who they have smeared, have been disproved, yet they continue on without pause. In contrast to lefty comedians Colbert and Stewart, these pundits (the one's with their own shows) regularly interrupt and cut off their guests and then will go on to even call them names. Its disgraceful! Now the King of Smear Campaigns, Karl Rove, is even saying that some have gone "too far" in using Barack Obama's middle name in order in imply some fearful connection with Islam. And it is the Christian Right who has been spreading lies to their parishioners in church that Obama is a Muslim and would be "sworn in with his hand on the Koran" if elected. Nice. Real Christian.

While wrapping themselves in the flag, they are often anti-soldier and anti-veteran in reality. Remember in October when Limbaugh said on-air that any soldier that supports an end to the war in Iraq is “phony.” He was then challenged by VoteVets.org with 10,000 signatures to host an Iraqi vet on his show and say that to his face. He ignored them. Limbaugh then likened the soldier who wanted to confront him to a "suicide bomber". Gen. Wesley Clark tried to get him off Armed Forces Radio because he was so offended.

This is also the guy who calls global warming a "liberal hoax issue", has verbally attacked and imitated the disabled voice of a 12-year old boy (Graeme Frost) during the SCHIP debate, blamed another youngster for being abducted and sexually abused, and mocked Michael J. Fox about his Parkinson's disease. He is hateful and mean and a known drug-abusing pervert. Why does he have a platform? Cause the Righties love the hatin'… The well-known Conservative “attack the messenger” trick is all about intimidating people from standing up and having their voices heard for fear of retaliation.

Bill O'Reilly has surpassed Rush with his viciousness. Most recently he compared Arianna Huffington to Hitler (Goebells, and a KKK-er) because of something a poster wrote as a comment on her Blog. He said there is "no difference" between the two. Hateful. Two weeks ago he made a casual and callous use of the phrase “lynching party” in reference to Michelle Obama’s quote about being really proud of this country. Specifically he said, “I don’t want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there’s evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels”. Hateful.

There is no excuse. The Washington Posts's Eugene Robinson put it this way…" You know what lynching was? Lynching was a horrific practice of murder, torture, dismemberment, burning alive, hanging, and the only purpose of lynching was to perpetuate white supremacy in the Jim Crow south. It wasn’t…the idea of course, wasn’t to lynch all black people, but by lynching a few black people…not a few, by lynching some black people to demonstrate to other African Americans that this could happen to you, that you have no power, that we have all the power, and that we can take anything we want from you, including your life. There’s nothing funny about lynching. There’s certainly nothing at all funny or remotely appropriate about the use of a lynching reference to talk about Michelle Obama. And the word “unless” followed by “we’ll track it down,” is way beyond the pale."

And let's remember that this 'great American' was the one who attacked John Edwards from the beginning of the campaign saying that he was a "charlatan" and lying about the huge and shameful number of homeless veterans that are in this country. Then when veterans groups mobilized and a group of homeless veterans confronted Bill at FoxNews HQ, he slithered around insulting them, NBC News, and the Washington Post. He never made good on his promises to help any actual homeless veterans or retracted his bile. Hateful.

And the Golden-haired Princess of Right-wing Hatemongering is Ann Coulter. She never disappoints when it comes to spewing hate. While her perpetual champion Bill O’Reilly leads the pack of apologists for fascism and bigotry, sweet Ann is not far behind. Most recently she has claimed the "Jews need to be perfected" because they are not Christian. She has loudly claimed that "women should not be allowed to vote" According to Ann:
“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women."

Compared to many things that she says these are not too bad. They just show what an ass she is. I was sickened by her attacks on John and Elizabeth Edwards this past summer. Here is the bulk of Elizabeth Edwards response (in an Edward's campaign e-mail):

"Last night I had an important talk with Ann Coulter and I want to tell you what happened.On Monday, Ann announced that instead of using more homophobic slurs to attack John, she will just wish that John had been “killed in a terrorist assassination plot.”
Where I am from, when someone does something that displeases you, you politely ask them to stop. So when I heard Ann was going to be on “Hardball” last night, I decided to call in and ask her to engage on the issues and stop the personal attacks. I told her these kinds of personal attacks lower our political dialogue at precisely the time when we need to raise it, and set a bad example for our children.
How did she respond? Sadly, perhaps predictably, with more personal attacks.
John’s campaign is about the issues—but pundits like Ann Coulter are trying to shout him down."

Coulter calls Obama a "terrorist". CNN quotes some unknown/un-named source as commenting that the excitement people have for Obama is "creepy" and then puts just that word in giant type on the screen over a photo of an Obama rally. Now we have people putting some tweaked out, totally irrelevant, emphasis on his middle name. I wish someone had attacked Bush the same way for being a (dry) alcoholic and ex- cocaine addict. (BTW the rumor is that he's drinking again… ;) ).

And I'm afraid it will get uglier. Although the Left-wing pundits are far from perfect, I'll wager a LARGE SUM that the scorecard on bigotry, hate and fascism will be heavily weighed on the Right-wingers side.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1915
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Wise One » 2008 Mar 03 15:27

Magnificent, Renegade Mom!

:clap: The quality of your writing is exceeded only by the clarity and accuracy of your analysis. :clap:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

Renegade Mom

Re: Christian Right vs. Christ

Postby Renegade Mom » 2008 Mar 04 11:34

By the way not all Christians are as your portray them. There are lots of good ones going about quietly helping others in so many ways. It’s interesting to see how each side views the other side, its as if both sides believe the other side is evil and bad. When actually I don’t believe that is true. I think there are good and bad on both sides.


Oh, wait one minute, I do not equate the "Christian Right" with Christianity. Christianity in its purest form is a beautiful religion based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. It has at its central theme LOVE and FORGIVENESS. When the followers of these teachings live their beliefs in the world expressed through acts of love, peace, and forgiveness, it is a powerful and beautiful thing. I'm ALL FOR THAT.

However, there is a huge number of so-called Christians that thump their bibles, scurry to church to fortify themselves and then wield their false sense of superior morality to judge and label others. This is not my understanding of the teachings of Christ.

Much blood has been spilled in the name of Jesus throughout history. People have not changed, just the issues have. There will always be those who wrap themselves in a flag or an ideology to claim their superiority in some way. One must face the truth of this aspect of human nature. It is not enough to claim one is patriotic because they wear a lapel pin or that they are really a Christian because they go to church and broadcast their interpretations of the Bible and "God's will".

Yes, there are multitudes of great Christians. Yet, as with any group, the hypocrites, the 'bad apples', do have an influence on the perception of the rest of the group. Isnt this true for the Muslims and what has been happening to them since 9/11? And the Japanese before them? And African-Americans? And here, now, the poor Mexicans (who had their country stolen by us...remember?) are disparaged and they are a Christian people.

Our forefathers came to this land to escape religious prejudice and persecution. I'm just as uncomfortable with Christian-ists as I am with Islam-sts, or any other -ists that attempt to limit thought. I prefer the Sufi approach that seeks to recognize the Divine in ALL people no matter how difficult or distasteful they may be. ...to SEE God in ALL people... not just those who share our viewpoint. In (Western) Sufism there is no doctrine or dogma. It is a daily PRACTICE of seeking and honoring God in all things and ALL religions.

I share Gahndi's sentiments... "I like your Christ. I don't much like your Christians".


"What I say about you
I say about me
The walls between us long ago burned down.
This voice seizing me
is your voice,
Burning to speak to us
of us."
Rumi (13th century Sufi poet and friend of St. Francis of Assisi)

Renegade Mom

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Renegade Mom » 2008 Mar 04 20:55

beckonwood wrote:I do believe in one God and do believe he is in all people but some just don't recognize him. You can label me in any matter but you are entitled to your beliefs as I am to mine.


In my view, herein lies the crux of the problem: labels. While there is a practical reason to name things to know them, when it comes to people (fallible, hopefully forgiven humans) labeling is a tricky thing. We are multi-dimensional, ever changing, and much of our existence is patently paradoxical. The moment we label a person, in essence, that label becomes instantly obsolete. This degrades the value of the 'knowing' we seek. We can never really know another - the gifts they may bring and the burdens that they carry. So much of 'truth' and 'reality' are matters of perception. We enter dangerous waters when we (all) put labels on groups of people.

The stated purpose of all religion is bringing people closer to God. The structures and rituals of religions are designed to remind us the Truth; of the God of our understanding. But the big caveat is that the moment we declare ourselves to be one thing/religion or another, we immediately set up a wall of division between others and ourselves. This is in direct conflict with the all-encompassing unity of being One with the Divine. So as soon as we separate ourselves from one another (all God's children) we initiate a problem. Whatever path or religion brings us closer to the Divine is what's best for us. The issue centers on the inherent value judgments we set up when we label ourselves and our ability, or lack there of, to remain open and humble to those who may not share our experiences and/or viewpoint.

The issue I have targeted is not about the value of Christianity or any religion. I do not perceive you, Beckonwood, as a spokesperson for the Religious Right movement (whether you may actually be or not...). Nor am I aware of your being a Right-wing pundit publicly broadcasting fear and bigotry. So, please, release yourself from feeling like you have something to defend here. My rant is not about you, though we may differ with our opinions about these issues. Taking Bill Mahrer's obnoxious Lefty rhetoric to task is a better target, turning this discussion into a defense of Christianity and Christians is off-target. I don't have a problem with any peaceable religion (... another debate... ;) ), but I do have a problem with judgmental hypocrites in government and the media cultivating hate and divisiveness. Especially if they wrap themselves in a religious shroud of faux-moral superiority or the American flag. Whatever religion.

I never actually got into the subject of immigration, just the growing fear and prejudice against Mexicans. Immigration issues are very complex with no easy solutions. You may know from stories from your daughter-in-law about how difficult and lengthy the process is to become a citizen. It is not a direct linear route for most people, and many wait for years to get their paperwork through the system. The people in charge of the system freely admit is not working well at all. It is interesting that the opinion of legally integrated immigrants is overwhelmingly supportive of amnesty proposals for those who have entered illegally despite the apparent unfairness to them. It is also interesting how much of corporate America is just fine with the illegal population because it provides them with an available, cheap workforce that they do not have to protect from harm nor provide any benefits. The fear of deportation and lack of English make them prime targets for abuse and exploitation. The cancer rates for migrant apple pickers is 600% higher than for the average person due to the grotesque neglect of pesticide precautions. Then these sick workers have no insurance, access to medical care or legal recourse. The illegals are the vulnerable ones. I have never heard them demand anything.

Businesses are recognizing the need for Spanish in their materials and packaging because their Spanish speaking customer base is growing, not because anyone is demanding anything. It is a practical, business-savvy adjustment. The presupposition that illegal immigrants are behind a push that is supposedly demanding we accommodate them seems far-fetched to me. It may be uncomfortable for some to accept that the Hispanic demographic is growing very quickly in a totally legitimate way. They spend a lot of money and advertisers are hip to that. Hispanics may be the largest demographic represented when it comes to illegals, but there seems to be some fearful projecting going on as well. We need Hispanic workers. There are several restaurants in Lexington that would need to close save for the Hispanic workers in the kitchen. Americans do not want many of the jobs being filled by foreigners. The resort areas across the US are staffed in great part by Eastern European students because American kids don't want to work. I support people who want to work and better their families. I would hope they follow the rules, but considering how corroded our system is, I have forgiveness for many who have chosen differently. May I walk a mile in their shoes before I judge...

Be-lief Be-live

User avatar
fangz1956
Posts: 1124
Joined: 2007 Jul 07 10:16

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby fangz1956 » 2008 Mar 05 13:54

http://changeservant.blogspot.com/2008/ ... legal.html


My hat's off and two thumbs up to RenegadeMom............thanks for reading my mind and being able to express those thoughts in such a clear and eloquent manner.

Illegal immigration, like so many other issues facing this country, is not simple and is generally not a stand-alone issue. Trying to fix it this way or that way without paying heed to the bigger picture is like trying to slap a band-aid on a gushing artery. We all know how well that works.

And to speak to the issue of lables, division, divisiveness, and disunity in this culture of ours, I am reminded of the Aphorisms of Pantajali.............the first one in particular. It very simply states "Define yourself beyond ignorance". In striving to do that in my life on a daily basis, there is no room for labels and name-calling. Those are the very things that keeps us all shackled in the chains of ignorance.


:2cent:
Ever looked at someone and thought "the wheel is turning but the hamster is dead"?

Renegade Mom

Re: Immigration, Pundits, and Religion

Postby Renegade Mom » 2008 Mar 06 07:24

[Sorry I did not get to post this yesterday ( more timely). My post was lost in process and it took a while to have the free time to write again]

Thank you for the feedback.

And thank you, Beckonwood for trying to stay open to a different point of view. I would have preferred that the discussion had not become focused on personal expressions of religious belief as my issue is with pundits who cloak themselves in religion or the flag to manipulate their audiences and incite derisiveness. I regret any personal discomfort the discussion may have initiated for you. That was not my intention. And I hope, dear gentle-woman, that you got some rest.

I have no idea how we, as a nation, will be able to solve our immigration issues. It is a very complex subject with many, many facets - a bit of a quagmire. We could go on and on for hours here hashing over all the nuances and injustices on all sides of the issue. It will surely not be solved by this Forum.

When I am faced with a very complex and confusing problem, both on the micro- and macro- level, I maintain a practice of returning to universal spiritual principles to guide me. These universal 'truths' can be found in all the old religions worldwide, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism, albeit in different language and syntax.

The search for a home is an ancient spiritual metaphor. In the story of Exodus, the Hebrews, enslaved and abused in Egypt, suffered under their bondage. No matter how unfaithful or sacrilegious they proved to be along their way to "the land of milk and honey", the promise of the gift of belonging was never taken away. They were not given land because of their 'performance'; they were given the land because they required a home. Because you are the children of the Earth, said their God, you may live upon the Earth with my blessing.

If we look, we can see that the fabric of our history as a species is woven with conflicts between people seeking a rightful place. Whether it was the Hebrews struggling with the Egyptians, Greeks with Romans, Hindus with Muslims, Native Americans with Spanish Conquistadores and other European settlers, sharecroppers with landowners, blacks with Afrikaaners, Jews and Nazis, Palestinians with Israelis, women with men, rich with poor, we have been terribly clumsy in allocating a rightful place to all the children of creation.

All of us need a place of safety; we all seek refuge. Our hearts all ache for home.

Even the Christmas story, one of Christianity's most familiar tales, tells the story of a child who was denied a place to be born. The world made no room, and so the infant Jesus was born a refugee in a food trough for farm animals, homeless among his own people. As an adult, Jesus would speak about the kind of belonging the world provided for him: "Birds of the air have nests, and foxes have holes," he said, but he was given "no place to lay his head."

Safety and belonging are not freely granted by the world. Millions of homeless people in our cities and refugees in Africa, the Middle East and Latin America reveal our inability – or unwillingness- to provide a homeland for all our children. Any child in pain claims kinship with all others who live in exile from true belonging.

Jesus taught that whatever one does to any other being – whether they feed the hungry, clothe the poor, help or hurt someone – they are doing it to God. Every being, however awkward or unappealing, harbors a spark of the divine light within him. Mother Teresa said that her practice was to seek out that spirit in the most difficult leper, the troublesome beggar, the most demanding vagrant. In doing this she said she was attending to Jesus "in all his distressing disguises."

I don't know what the human answer is to our very human problem with immigration. I do wish that those who broadcast their bigotry while hiding behind their faux-religiousness would actually embrace the spiritual teachings at the heart of their religion. I have a problem with bullies and especially bully pulpits. I feel a moral obligation to bear witness and speak up when I perceive these forces at work on our psyches.

I am retiring from this discussion...

Om shanti shanti shanti

Peace

10thFO

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby 10thFO » 2008 Mar 25 13:56

Renegade Mom, I have been off the board for a few weeks trying to catch up on taxes, and a bunch of other stuff. I wanted to respond to your view on Right Wing Christians.

Your view is that their is nothing more bigoted than the names on the right which you listed. You know, I don't listen to those people, so I know you aren't talking about me, but to sit at your computer and not think that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and now we learn the Rev. Wright are not of the same ilk as the ones you listed is hypocrisy in it's purest form. Race bating and the such should never, ever be taking place in this day and time. I don't by the argument that it's because of the past indiscretions that were levied upon them by our people. To me a bigot is a bigot, and there are just as many flapping their jaws on the left as there are on the right. "Air America" was full of them.

It is funny to a moderate Republican that you think CNN is right wing. Like Beckonwood said it's good that we can have the discourse on the subject though in a civilized manner.

Now back to the original part of the post, I am for immigration, as long as it's legal. If the people are already here, I say give 'em an ID card and put them to work. I don't agree with those that are coming here and getting on our "system". Hell we got enough problems with people abusing the system without allowing "illegals" to get the free lunch too.

The biggest problem facing this country right now, and is partly a reason why we are falling behind, is that our very own that have been raised here feel that they are above doing the types of work that made this country. That somehow working for $7-$10 and hour is beneath them. Hell look at Rockbridge County and how hard it is to find people to work here. There are jobs here, they just tend to be jobs that people feel are beneath them. not everyone feels that way of course, I don't want to step on those toes, but I've seen it in my own family with a person who couldn't even give sunder to the thought of a hard, labor intense sort of job. We need the immigrants just as much as they need us.

As for the corporations that use illegals? I'm against any company that does things illegal of that nature. It places further burden on our "social systems" and every other system we have for that matter.

Renegade Mom

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Renegade Mom » 2008 Mar 27 16:17

10thFO wrote:Renegade Mom, I have been off the board for a few weeks trying to catch up on taxes, and a bunch of other stuff. I wanted to respond to your view on Right Wing Christians.

Your view is that their is nothing more bigoted than the names on the right which you listed. You know, I don't listen to those people, so I know you aren't talking about me, but to sit at your computer and not think that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and now we learn the Rev. Wright are not of the same ilk as the ones you listed is hypocrisy in it's purest form. Race bating and the such should never, ever be taking place in this day and time. I don't by the argument that it's because of the past indiscretions that were levied upon them by our people. To me a bigot is a bigot, and there are just as many flapping their jaws on the left as there are on the right. "Air America" was full of them.

It is funny to a moderate Republican that you think CNN is right wing. Like Beckonwood said it's good that we can have the discourse on the subject though in a civilized manner.



Glad to have your opinions here, but once again you misrepresent my position. I never said nothing was more bigoted than the people I mentioned, just that they are great and very prominent examples. I can provide a list of lefties that are bigots as well, but that was not the subject. I even teased Beckonwood for not 'calling me out' on that very issue in a later post.

I agree, a bigot is a bigot. Al Sharpton and Rev. Wright are giant obnoxious bigots, however they are not the hosts of their own television shows and/or masquarading as an impartial news source. There is a difference. I will however argue on that the shear volume of bigotry and race-baiting is weighed to one side. One side has a huge corporate conglomorate platform.

BTW, I also never said that CNN was right-wing, just that it was not left-wing. There are examples of both on the network. If you care, I think CNN is a gigantic corporate whore that will get in bed with whoever is paying the bucks.

It all stinks!

"Nobody's right if everybody's wrong" Crosby, Stills and Nash

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1915
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Wise One » 2008 Mar 27 16:49

Renegade Mom wrote:... you misrepresent my position. I never said ...

Well said!

There is an almost irresistible human tendency to extrapolate beyond the facts, when people wish to emphasize or support a position. And when it happens, it should be called down. It's better to get folks to stick to the facts, and then move on to opinion.

:wink: Even Hillary did it. Remember her Bosnia sniper remark? :wink:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

10thFO

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby 10thFO » 2008 Mar 27 19:23

If you agree that Sharpton and Jackson are bigots as well as Wright then why didn't you say so in your original post that I called in to question. Sorry, but you did say the Republican Right Wing Christians were the worst.

" Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Chris Mathews, Glenn Beck, and bloody Bill Kristol are constantly spewing vile, hateful, fascist venom at those who disagree with them. In the past several months they have been confronted by those who they have smeared, have been disproved, yet they continue on without pause. In contrast to lefty comedians Colbert and Stewart, these pundits (the one's with their own shows) regularly interrupt and cut off their guests and then will go on to even call them names. Its disgraceful! Now the King of Smear Campaigns, Karl Rove, is even saying that some have gone "too far" in using Barack Obama's middle name in order in imply some fearful connection with Islam. And it is the Christian Right who has been spreading lies to their parishioners in church that Obama is a Muslim and would be "sworn in with his hand on the Koran" if elected. Nice. Real Christian.

While wrapping themselves in the flag, they are often anti-soldier and anti-veteran in reality. Remember in October when Limbaugh said on-air that any soldier that supports an end to the war in Iraq is “phony.” He was then challenged by VoteVets.org with 10,000 signatures to host an Iraqi vet on his show and say that to his face. He ignored them. Limbaugh then likened the soldier who wanted to confront him to a "suicide bomber". Gen. Wesley Clark tried to get him off Armed Forces Radio because he was so offended.

This is also the guy who calls global warming a "liberal hoax issue", has verbally attacked and imitated the disabled voice of a 12-year old boy (Graeme Frost) during the SCHIP debate, blamed another youngster for being abducted and sexually abused, and mocked Michael J. Fox about his Parkinson's disease. He is hateful and mean and a known drug-abusing pervert. Why does he have a platform? Cause the Righties love the hatin'… The well-known Conservative “attack the messenger” trick is all about intimidating people from standing up and having their voices heard for fear of retaliation.

Bill O'Reilly has surpassed Rush with his viciousness. Most recently he compared Arianna Huffington to Hitler (Goebells, and a KKK-er) because of something a poster wrote as a comment on her Blog. He said there is "no difference" between the two. Hateful. Two weeks ago he made a casual and callous use of the phrase “lynching party” in reference to Michelle Obama’s quote about being really proud of this country. Specifically he said, “I don’t want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there’s evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels”. Hateful.

There is no excuse. The Washington Posts's Eugene Robinson put it this way…" You know what lynching was? Lynching was a horrific practice of murder, torture, dismemberment, burning alive, hanging, and the only purpose of lynching was to perpetuate white supremacy in the Jim Crow south. It wasn’t…the idea of course, wasn’t to lynch all black people, but by lynching a few black people…not a few, by lynching some black people to demonstrate to other African Americans that this could happen to you, that you have no power, that we have all the power, and that we can take anything we want from you, including your life. There’s nothing funny about lynching. There’s certainly nothing at all funny or remotely appropriate about the use of a lynching reference to talk about Michelle Obama. And the word “unless” followed by “we’ll track it down,” is way beyond the pale."

And let's remember that this 'great American' was the one who attacked John Edwards from the beginning of the campaign saying that he was a "charlatan" and lying about the huge and shameful number of homeless veterans that are in this country. Then when veterans groups mobilized and a group of homeless veterans confronted Bill at FoxNews HQ, he slithered around insulting them, NBC News, and the Washington Post. He never made good on his promises to help any actual homeless veterans or retracted his bile. Hateful.

And the Golden-haired Princess of Right-wing Hatemongering is Ann Coulter. She never disappoints when it comes to spewing hate. While her perpetual champion Bill O’Reilly leads the pack of apologists for fascism and bigotry, sweet Ann is not far behind. Most recently she has claimed the "Jews need to be perfected" because they are not Christian. She has loudly claimed that "women should not be allowed to vote" According to Ann:
“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women."

Compared to many things that she says these are not too bad. They just show what an ass she is. I was sickened by her attacks on John and Elizabeth Edwards this past summer. Here is the bulk of Elizabeth Edwards response (in an Edward's campaign e-mail):

"Last night I had an important talk with Ann Coulter and I want to tell you what happened.On Monday, Ann announced that instead of using more homophobic slurs to attack John, she will just wish that John had been “killed in a terrorist assassination plot.”
Where I am from, when someone does something that displeases you, you politely ask them to stop. So when I heard Ann was going to be on “Hardball” last night, I decided to call in and ask her to engage on the issues and stop the personal attacks. I told her these kinds of personal attacks lower our political dialogue at precisely the time when we need to raise it, and set a bad example for our children.
How did she respond? Sadly, perhaps predictably, with more personal attacks.
John’s campaign is about the issues—but pundits like Ann Coulter are trying to shout him down."

Coulter calls Obama a "terrorist". CNN quotes some unknown/un-named source as commenting that the excitement people have for Obama is "creepy" and then puts just that word in giant type on the screen over a photo of an Obama rally. Now we have people putting some tweaked out, totally irrelevant, emphasis on his middle name. I wish someone had attacked Bush the same way for being a (dry) alcoholic and ex- cocaine addict. (BTW the rumor is that he's drinking again… ;) )."

I'm sorry but maybe you need to reread your post, and don't bother to edit it because i have saved it. Just in case that is how you choose to rectify your error on this post. You also stated.....

"And I'm afraid it will get uglier. Although the Left-wing pundits are far from perfect, I'll wager a LARGE SUM that the scorecard on bigotry, hate and fascism will be heavily weighed on the Right-wingers side."

Now go back and read your reply,.... "once again you misrepresent my position. I never said nothing was more bigoted than the people I mentioned, just that they are great and very prominent examples. I can provide a list of lefties that are bigots as well, but that was not the subject. I even teased Beckonwood for not 'calling me out' on that very issue in a later post.

I agree, a bigot is a bigot. Al Sharpton and Rev. Wright are giant obnoxious bigots, however they are not the hosts of their own television shows and/or masquarading as an impartial news source. There is a difference. I will however argue on that the shear volume of bigotry and race-baiting is weighed to one side. One side has a huge corporate conglomorate platform."

I'm sorry, you can't sugar coat half of your post and then get the last jab in at the end about Wright, and Sharpton being obnoxious bigots, but then saying that on the shear volume of bigotry and race baiting is weighted to one side...... I'm sorry, but isn't Sir Billary Race Baiting as we speak.

I'm sorry but it is equal, but that statement doesn't meet Sen. Obama's campaign so you choose to overlook it.

Oh and by the way, nice cheap shot at the CIC. Call him dumb and stupid but to spread innuendo about him drinking and on drugs is hyperbole, Clinton style. Nice way to take the eye off the subject once again. I would expect nothing less from a left leaning Democrat. So are you going to vote for Hillary if Obama loses? Just curious about your parties latest polls. I don't need polls I vote on my conscious.


Oh and Wise one, what a moniker, I didn't need to extrapolate, I took the general discourse of her post and tore it down, maybe you should try the same sometime, without comments like, "duh, " I stuck to the facts, but the facts don't meet your agenda do they? If you wish to add something to this conversation, please by all means do it in a debate style, and not by just jumping on the bandwagon, hell one would think you took lessons from Rush, or Al Franken. Carry on.

10thFO

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby 10thFO » 2008 Mar 27 19:30

Wise One wrote:
Renegade Mom wrote:... you misrepresent my position. I never said ...

Well said!

There is an almost irresistible human tendency to extrapolate beyond the facts, when people wish to emphasize or support a position. And when it happens, it should be called down. It's better to get folks to stick to the facts, and then move on to opinion.

:wink: Even Hillary did it. Remember her Bosnia sniper remark? :wink:


Hillary didn't extrapolate, she flat out lied. Seems to be becoming of all politicians now doesn't it. As for her "extrapolation on sniper fire" If she would have been under Sniper fire, or fire period she would have known, cause it would have been unlike any sound she had ever heard, but she would have known what was snapping over her head, or beside her feet. Her remarks just disgraced the men and women that served their under her husbands command.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1915
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Wise One » 2008 Mar 27 23:02

10thFO wrote:Hillary didn't extrapolate, she flat out lied ... If she would have been under Sniper fire, or fire period she would have known, cause it would have been unlike any sound she had ever heard ... Her remarks just disgraced the men and women that served their under her husbands command.

What a great example of extrapolation and exaggeration -- you've done very well!

She didn't say she was under sniper fire. She said "I was told we had to land a certain way, we had to have our bulletproof stuff on because of the threat of sniper fire."

While both may be false, the two statements are quite different. Yours is an extrapolation and exaggeration of the actual statement. I fail to see how her statement disgraced anybody but herself, but you are entitled to an opinion I believe to be ridiculous.
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1915
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Wise One » 2008 Mar 28 08:38

Thanks for the video clip, which is helpful as a supplement to her other quotation. I was wrong. She did, indeed, say "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was no greeting ceremony, and we basically were told to run to our cars."

From the same video clip, her apologists claim that what she meant was that there was sniper fire in the surrounding hills above. But I agree that her words, in the context in which they were spoken, could mislead the audience.

It is an example of extrapolation and exaggeration that deserves condemnation. In my opinion, any disgrace falls on her alone.

:oops: I gotta go to bed earlier. :oops:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

10thFO

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby 10thFO » 2008 Mar 28 08:43

Wise One, thank you for reconsidering your position on that one point. I wouldn't have made that comment about Hillary, if I didn't think it were true. Not only think, but I saw the clips where she said what she said.

I'm a veteran, and I hold service in high regard, I was just very offended by her comments thats all.

Renegade Mom

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Renegade Mom » 2008 Mar 29 09:22

"I'm sorry, you can't sugar coat half of your post and then get the last jab in at the end about Wright, and Sharpton being obnoxious bigots, but then saying that on the shear volume of bigotry and race baiting is weighted to one side...... I'm sorry, but isn't Sir Billary Race Baiting as we speak.

I'm sorry but it is equal, but that statement doesn't meet Sen. Obama's campaign so you choose to overlook it.

Oh and by the way, nice cheap shot at the CIC. Call him dumb and stupid but to spread innuendo about him drinking and on drugs is hyperbole, Clinton style. Nice way to take the eye off the subject once again. I would expect nothing less from a left leaning Democrat. So are you going to vote for Hillary if Obama loses? Just curious about your parties latest polls. I don't need polls I vote on my conscious."


Well I see I got your pulse going - GOOD!

I still say you are misrepresenting my position.

While everything in the universe is open to interpretation, and you have the Constitutional right to express your opinion as freely as I do, I will hold to my position that you are missing the point (again).

I do take real issue with one thing- you suggest that I might sneakily go try to edit my post rather than defend or amend what I wrote. That is an insult and attack of MY CHARACTER, and an example of the tactics the pundits use every day - nice job. Bite Me.

The cheap shot was an obvious joke to lighten up the discussion a bit and highlight the absurdity and bad behavior from both sides. I still suspect you did not read the whole conversation over a series of posts or were so entrenched in your position that the filter was too dense to really get the spirit of the conversation. This is not a joke - I believe that our Commander in Chief is a politically savvy operator who is a huge LIAR and sent young people to die while draining our nations coffers in Iraq under false pretenses and that he does not really care about the American people especially the troops beyond his own ego and political/financial agenda. Deal with it.

I have no idea where you got the Hillary stuff or conclude that I like her or ANY politician. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican, but you sure are confident in your assumptions. Your frothing and lathering up is really quite amusing.

As an intellectual exercise you may want to try to hold two opposing ideas in your mind simultaneously and see if you can find merit and detriment on both sides. Brush up on the Socratic method of debate of a change of pace.

I have read your jabs at Obama and am inclined to believe that you have not looked at the subject from more than one viewpoint. Natch.

You reveal perhaps more than you want to by your mutating Sen. Clinton's name and positions. I don't like her much myself but your characterizations certainly fit my definition of "take the eye off the subject once again" - as you put it. Good Job - Rush and BillO would be proud. That's respect?

I have no desire to sugar-coat anything...that BS. I most humbly aim to uncover the dirt and the jewels wherever they are found. I do not know the TRUTH in its totality about anything - nor does any human being. I know my feelings and I know my intentions. I won't be bullied into a corner by anyone who wishes to twist and warp my words or shout me down. Oh well...

Perhaps after you unknot your star-spangled panties we could have a real discussion.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1915
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Wise One » 2008 Mar 29 10:25

Nice posting, Renegade ... I love to see our motors revved up around here.

Not that you really meant it, but you triggered an alarm in me that goes off big-time when I hear folks use the phrase:
Renegade Mom wrote:... our Commander in Chief ...

The President is not, was not, and never will be "our Commander in Chief."


He is the commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States, well at least by reasonable extrapolation of his exact Constitutional duty (the Air Force did not then exist), which is:
The United States Constitution wrote:The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

Renegade Mom

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Renegade Mom » 2008 Mar 29 11:10

Wise One wrote:The President is not, was not, and never will be "our Commander in Chief."

He is the commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States, well at least by reasonable extrapolation of his exact Constitutional duty (the Air Force did not then exist), which is:
The United States Constitution wrote:The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.

Oh my, you are right! I should have called that one! But the ONLY reason I chose the phrase was in direct response/reflection to 10thFO who used the initials CIC while he was 'calling me out' on the GW joke/comment. I was doin' the language dance with him and not paying attention...

Good Call!

10thFO

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby 10thFO » 2008 Mar 31 09:24

Renegade, I am more than capable, of looking at two sides of a situation. The truth usually lies somewhere in between. Sadly many in this country aren't capable of that, they just see the black or white of their chosen party, not the gray area that we live in.

Just because a man misspeaks doesn't mean that one is stupid. Personally the worst part of the internet, is that people come out and just use the tried and easy of slamming something about a candidate without adding anything else. I'm sorry if I missed your humor, your right, I didn't go back and read the whole thread, becuase I do believe a lot of these threads started back in August or September of last year, and I just read what has been posted in this year mostly.

I'm engaged on another board as well with a lot of traffic, and while this one isn't so heavily used, I am delighted it is here, for local discussion, and national ones.

Sadly when I look at message boards in general, when it comes to politics they are very devisive and the largest issue is that it is hard to tell when one is just making a tongue in cheek or joking comment.

Peace.

User avatar
nudgewink
Posts: 161
Joined: 2008 Mar 19 13:07

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby nudgewink » 2008 Jun 03 12:10

On June 3, 2008, NYT wrote:The Great Immigration Panic

Someday, the country will recognize the true cost of its war on illegal immigration. We don’t mean dollars, though those are being squandered by the billions. The true cost is to the national identity: the sense of who we are and what we value. It will hit us once the enforcement fever breaks, when we look at what has been done and no longer recognize the country that did it.

A nation of immigrants is holding another nation of immigrants in bondage, exploiting its labor while ignoring its suffering, condemning its lawlessness while sealing off a path to living lawfully. The evidence is all around that something pragmatic and welcoming at the American core has been eclipsed, or is slipping away.

An escalating campaign of raids in homes and workplaces has spread indiscriminate terror among millions of people who pose no threat. After the largest raid ever last month — at a meatpacking plant in Iowa — hundreds were swiftly force-fed through the legal system and sent to prison. Civil-rights lawyers complained, futilely, that workers had been steamrolled into giving up their rights, treated more as a presumptive criminal gang than as potentially exploited workers who deserved a fair hearing. The company that harnessed their desperation, like so many others, has faced no charges.

Immigrants in detention languish without lawyers and decent medical care even when they are mortally ill. Lawmakers are struggling to impose standards and oversight on a system deficient in both. Counties and towns with spare jail cells are lining up for federal contracts as prosecutions fill the system to bursting. Unbothered by the sight of blameless children in prison scrubs, the government plans to build up to three new family detention centers. Police all over are checking papers, empowered by politicians itching to enlist in the federal crusade.

This is not about forcing people to go home and come back the right way. Ellis Island is closed. Legal paths are clogged or do not exist. Some backlogs are so long that they are measured in decades or generations. A bill to fix the system died a year ago this month. The current strategy, dreamed up by restrictionists and embraced by Republicans and some Democrats, is to force millions into fear and poverty.

There are few national figures standing firm against restrictionism. Senator Edward Kennedy has bravely done so for four decades, but his Senate colleagues who are running for president seem by comparison to be in hiding. John McCain supported sensible reform, but whenever he mentions it, his party starts braying and he leaves the room. Hillary Rodham Clinton has lost her voice on this issue more than once. Barack Obama, gliding above the ugliness, might someday test his vision of a new politics against restrictionist hatred, but he has not yet done so. The American public’s moderation on immigration reform, confirmed in poll after poll, begs the candidates to confront the issue with courage and a plan. But they have been vague and discreet when they should be forceful and unflinching.

The restrictionist message is brutally simple — that illegal immigrants deserve no rights, mercy or hope. It refuses to recognize that illegality is not an identity; it is a status that can be mended by making reparations and resuming a lawful life. Unless the nation contains its enforcement compulsion, illegal immigrants will remain forever Them and never Us, subject to whatever abusive regimes the powers of the moment may devise.

Every time this country has singled out a group of newly arrived immigrants for unjust punishment, the shame has echoed through history. Think of the Chinese and Irish, Catholics and Americans of Japanese ancestry. Children someday will study the Great Immigration Panic of the early 2000s, which harmed countless lives, wasted billions of dollars and mocked the nation’s most deeply held values.

User avatar
Juggler
Posts: 675
Joined: 2007 Jun 11 03:51

Carry this sign, if you happen to be brown

Postby Juggler » 2010 May 17 19:57

Image
(Photo of the Governor of Arizona)