posted
Well, that's one transparent way to generate discussion fodder for a troll: start with the anti-Semitism out of nowhere.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Racism is treating an individual wrongly because of his or her race. How am I being racist?
Actually, isn't racism jumping to conclusions about people based on their race? You can be a racist without revealing it with actions, right?
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
it's only racism if it doesn't fit into my tautology about racism. Since it doesn't fit into my tautology about racism, I'm not a racist
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Geraine- I was discussing immigrating from Mexico, not Albania. Waiting lists are different for every country.
I misunderstood you. I apologize.
The way immigration laws are set up and the outrageous amounts one has to pay to come here legally, I agree with you. Its easier and often times less risky to come here illegally.
It doesn't make it right, but I can't say I blame them.
My definition of "All-American" : Hot Dog and Hamburger cookouts, Baseball, Johnny Cash, 50's diners, Grease, Sock Hops, Rodeos, Nascar, Denny's, Johnny Rocket's, and Ice Cream Parlors.
As far as the cost of deportation... I would be interested to know what the cost of deportation is compared to the cost burden of illegal immigrants on our public education system, the healthcare system, tax revenues, etc. Does anyone know of a good study that has been performed?
quote: My definition of "All-American" : Hot Dog and Hamburger cookouts, Baseball, Johnny Cash, 50's diners, Grease, Sock Hops, Rodeos, Nascar, Denny's, Johnny Rocket's, and Ice Cream Parlors.
Jeez, maybe 2/11 of those am I interested in.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, it's not the be all end all list, just things that popped into my mind. Elvis could also be on the list. I'm a fan of only a few of those on the list, but then again that wasn't the intent.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Geraine- I was discussing immigrating from Mexico, not Albania. Waiting lists are different for every country.
I misunderstood you. I apologize.
The way immigration laws are set up and the outrageous amounts one has to pay to come here legally, I agree with you. Its easier and often times less risky to come here illegally.
It doesn't make it right, but I can't say I blame them.
My definition of "All-American" : Hot Dog and Hamburger cookouts, Baseball, Johnny Cash, 50's diners, Grease, Sock Hops, Rodeos, Nascar, Denny's, Johnny Rocket's, and Ice Cream Parlors.
As far as the cost of deportation... I would be interested to know what the cost of deportation is compared to the cost burden of illegal immigrants on our public education system, the healthcare system, tax revenues, etc. Does anyone know of a good study that has been performed?
Let's not forget that most of the people you are talking about, if they WERE legal, wouldn't be PAYING income taxes, their wages are too low. However, they DO generate millions of dollars for the areas they live in via sales tax. Something that is coincidentally "forgotten" whenever this topic comes up....
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many illegal immigrants DO pay taxes. The IRS is perfectly happy to take their money -- that's what ITIN's are for.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Geraine- no problem. Having heard so many horror stories about immigration (my sister is an immigration lawyer, before in the US, now based in Canada so I hear a lot of stories) I get a little annoyed when people assume the legal method is actually a viable method for most illegal immigrants. Waiting 20 years is just not a feasible option for many immigrants (on top of not having access to legal assistance- my sister is considered dirt cheap in immigration business but I doubt many people could actually afford her rates).
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
Liberals keep saying that the tea-party movement is racist. This charge is nothing but the disparaging version of an obvious truth: the tea-party movement is an ethnic movement. The more endless migration there is from Mexico -- that is, the more Hispanics that are already here aren't assimilated as much as possible (and their cultural differences aren't being reinforced by further heavy immigration from Mexico) the more ethnic tensions and conflict we will experience. Liberals always think they can stop someone they consider a "racist" by labeling them as such, but there may come the time soon enough where whites overwhelmingly just shrug their shoulders at the charge.
Posts: 83 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Geraine- I was discussing immigrating from Mexico, not Albania. Waiting lists are different for every country.
I misunderstood you. I apologize.
The way immigration laws are set up and the outrageous amounts one has to pay to come here legally, I agree with you. Its easier and often times less risky to come here illegally.
It doesn't make it right, but I can't say I blame them.
My definition of "All-American" : Hot Dog and Hamburger cookouts, Baseball, Johnny Cash, 50's diners, Grease, Sock Hops, Rodeos, Nascar, Denny's, Johnny Rocket's, and Ice Cream Parlors.
As far as the cost of deportation... I would be interested to know what the cost of deportation is compared to the cost burden of illegal immigrants on our public education system, the healthcare system, tax revenues, etc. Does anyone know of a good study that has been performed?
Let's not forget that most of the people you are talking about, if they WERE legal, wouldn't be PAYING income taxes, their wages are too low. However, they DO generate millions of dollars for the areas they live in via sales tax. Something that is coincidentally "forgotten" whenever this topic comes up....
Guess what: if immigrants show up illegally and take jobs, they'll end up paying taxes. That doesn't they should have showed up illegally, and it doesn't mean that the people of this country should have been robbed of the choice to select a better quality of immigrant. Instead of 12 million mexicans, there could have been 12 million high quality immigrants from all over the world. Less hispanic voting block and less ethnic tensions! Plus, probably way more in tax revenue!
Posts: 83 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
Liberals keep saying that the tea-party movement is racist. This charge is nothing but the disparaging version of an obvious truth: the tea-party movement is an ethnic movement. The more endless migration there is from Mexico -- that is, the more Hispanics that are already here aren't assimilated as much as possible (and their cultural differences aren't being reinforced by further heavy immigration from Mexico) the more ethnic tensions and conflict we will experience. Liberals always think they can stop someone they consider a "racist" by labeling them as such, but there may come the time soon enough where whites overwhelmingly just shrug their shoulders at the charge.
Fact 1--quoting Pat Buchanan is pretty much automatic trolling.
Fact 2--The moment that 100% European-descended white people tell people with at least some Native American blood that they have to respect national boundaries that the white people set up (in the Americas), is the moment that those white people lose any moral high ground, or indeed, moral credibility. Period, whitey.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
I do think there are a few racist who gather around it as any excuse to attack the black man who dared to be President, but the party itself is not racist.
However, I don't think the Tea Party is ethnic either. The last thing anybody wants to discuss at a Tea Party Gathering is some "Ethnic Cleansing" which is where all this Ethnic talk eventually leads.
I do believe it is very class-oriented. Those with money don't want to give it to the government to pay for programs that mostly go to those without any money. Race and ethnicity is only important as that it can be a cheap and easy way to recognize classes.
Today the rich don't dress that much better than the poor--Jeans and a T-Shirt are comfortable for both groups. So being hispanic, native American, or black is a quick class identifier.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:However, I don't think the Tea Party is ethnic either. The last thing anybody wants to discuss at a Tea Party Gathering is some "Ethnic Cleansing" which is where all this Ethnic talk eventually leads.
I dunno. In fact, I absolutely agree that, yes, the Tea Party is an ethnic movement -- even though very few of them would be interested in committing genocide. (To be honest, I think defining an "ethnic movement" as one which wishes to discuss "ethnic cleansing" is kind of strange.)
I think it's the absolutely predictable -- if pathetic -- last gasp of people who aren't comfortable with the shrinking influence of WASPs in this country.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't believe they should be able to stop people without cause to check their legal status. Unfortunately, police can always come up with a "cause". I was pulled over for "flickering brake lights". I had a diesel VW rabbit with a cracked header and was pulled over because "it sounded like I excessively accellerated". I asked the cop, "What does velocity sound like?" That rabbit had a top speed of 65 and could only break traction on ice.
When anyone is detained, for cause, their status should be verified. Ever heard of "giving a false name to a law enforcement officer"? Who's verifying the identity of the illegal alien? In my city, 50 people are arrested and released with a $250 fine for "no license". Without identification, who verified that one of the 50 Jose Echevaria Rodriquez's isn't a criminal? They can't check their record or validate their identity. They don't check their legal status either. A fine and released. Legal residents have records.
quote:Who's verifying the identity of the illegal alien? In my city, 50 people are arrested and released with a $250 fine for "no license".
What city is that? Because around here, being caught driving without a license involves a court date to say the least. Certainly not just a fine.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Who's verifying the identity of the illegal alien? In my city, 50 people are arrested and released with a $250 fine for "no license".
What city is that? Because around here, being caught driving without a license involves a court date to say the least. Certainly not just a fine.
If you care to take the time to research, here's the link. I know you aren't one to "profile" but click on the long hispanic names and check their charges and release info.
posted
I've only recently noticed the news headlines about this legislation, and I still need to actually read up on it to formulate an opinion on this specific story, but I just want to say, as life-long-resident of southern Arizona, it does really bother me whenever those who are for restricting illegal immigration get broad-brush-painted as xenophobes and racists. I grew up in a conservative home (still identify myself as conservative) so I'd also consider myself on the side of trying to restrict illegal immigration, though I'm seeing it now as a more complicated issue than when I was growing up. I don't care if you're white, off-white, green, blue, black, yellow, maroon, brown, purple (now wait a minute. You got to draw the line somewhere. To HECK with purple people! Unless they're choking...) and/or have an accent, but I do care about rule of law and I would prefer for people coming here to learn English. In any case, I intend to study on it further but I hate when a large percentage of the population get dismissed as racists just because they have a different opinion than others about a complicated issue.
Posts: 132 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, um, Tom, you think the Tea Party movement (besides venting their ethnic/class insecurities at the diminishing WASP influence) might actually be concerned about constitutional limits on government and a rapidly growing national debt like they say? Cause to me those sound like legitimate causes for concern. I haven't been to a Tea Party meeting yet and wasn't really planning to but all these condescending "stupid Tea Partiers" statements I've been seeing/hearing from people lately is doing more than anything else to make me want to get involved with them.
Posts: 132 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm leery about the tea partier's who claim to be against stuff like the growing debt. I don't intend this remark to be inflammatory, but how many tea party members know the difference between debt and deficit? I'm not trying to imply that tea party members are stupider than others, but my purpose is to question the idea that the average person can even have a weak grasp of public policy. I have spent(and plan on spending) many years studying public policy and economics, learning from trained experts, and getting a degree. Is it feasible that the average person can simply get up and understand what exactly is happening with federal spending?
I ask this because I saw this happen a lot with the health care debates - there were thousands of people protesting the issue without even understanding the basics of insurance policy and economics. I don't pretend to fully understand it either, but I'm not about to get up and take a stand given that I recognize my shortcomings.
Am I simply stupid to require years of learning to understand whats really going on with these issues? Or is it that when most people protest they aren't protesting the actual policy issues, but rather finding solidarity in a group and simply going along with the flow?
Posts: 76 | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged |
I would say that all people have the right to express their opinion as they understand the issue to be, and they have the right to change it as more information becomes availble. Those of us who aren't economists still have to get by and do the best we can. I actually think it would be irresponsible of us to leave sweeping policy decisions to others on the grounds that they know what's best.
That said, economics really does make no sense to the average person. Like the recession. We've got a tenth of the country out of work and the news keeps telling me that the economy will eventually grow enough to get new jobs for them. So how does that work? If the other 90% of us are buying and selling at a steady rate and the other 10% are losing money, shouldn't they need a large influx of capital to get them back into the game?
I learned Keynsian economics in school, so I know intellectually that defecit spending is good for a recession. It has a higher multiplier than tax cuts so it's more efficient. I also know that when I run out of money before payday, we pick up some ramen and some mac and cheese and make due - except when we know there's a large bonus in the next paycheck.
So as a non-economist, it's real easy to say, "Hey, the government's out of money. Looks like we need to strip the budget down to the bare minimum to get by or go find that money Madoff stole." As a side note, prosecuting the executives who drove their banks into failure and still got fat bonuses really appeals to me. I do feel like they owe the country that money back - that was straight up legal theft.
But on topic, if the people are making the best decisions they can with the data available, I feel the government has an obligation to tell us why they're right. You'd think "If we stop spending, no one has any money" would be a pretty compelling argument. But what happens next? If everyone's just getting by with stagnant wages and the businesses are all squeaking by on a tiny profit margin, where does the next big burst of capital come from to get the nation back to financial independance from the government? When does spending money we don't have turn into spending money we actually have instead of just spreading around the fake money we owe to Japan and China?
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:So, um, Tom, you think the Tea Party movement (besides venting their ethnic/class insecurities at the diminishing WASP influence) might actually be concerned about constitutional limits on government and a rapidly growing national debt like they say?
I think some individual members of the party might care. I think the vast majority, however, do not, although they've been trained to give lip service to it.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by daventor: So, um, Tom, you think the Tea Party movement (besides venting their ethnic/class insecurities at the diminishing WASP influence) might actually be concerned about constitutional limits on government and a rapidly growing national debt like they say? Cause to me those sound like legitimate causes for concern. I haven't been to a Tea Party meeting yet and wasn't really planning to but all these condescending "stupid Tea Partiers" statements I've been seeing/hearing from people lately is doing more than anything else to make me want to get involved with them.
Where were they when the government started warrant-less wiretapping, imprisoning without trial (of course they weren't, for the most part, doing that to white people) spending obscene amounts of money on a needless war and giving the wealthy tax cuts instead of paying down the debt when it would have made economic sense to do so?
Their concern for those things would have been considerably more credible had they started protesting 7 or 8 years.
posted
For that matter, since many of those issues haven't gone away, where are they on those issues now?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually the most recent spurt of Trolls helped me discover what I found untrustworthy in the TEA party movement.
They came to fame during this past years health care debate, where they yelled, screamed, and rudely forced their opinions at public meetings, screaming down others and creating placards and web-sites calling President Obama and others everything from Nazi's to Baby Killers, to base liars.
Then when someone else calls them wing-nuts or even right-wing, they go all "oh, poor me. They are calling me names. I am the victim here, help me."
This self-victimization and crude hypocrisy is just a very big bit of garbage to swallow. Do they have real complaints? I can't tell because of all the PR Pranks, shallow slogans, and cry-baby whimpering that they are doing.
After they call someone a Nazi and a Baby-Killer I find it hard to believe much else of what they are saying.
Finally is their response to more concrete criticism. When its pointed out the taxes have dropped for 90% of the population under President Obama, the response I hear reported from various news sources is.."I don't believe it."
No counter argument.
Just a refusal to believe anything that proves them wrong.
On a local station they were talking to the Tea Party inspired Republican running for office. He was rabidly against health care because it took away our rights.
When asked, "What rights does it take away." he paused. I was expecting a reasoned argument about forcing people to buy a product.
nope.
"By itself it doesn't take away any rights. But if it passes, the next thing the Democrats will do is pass the public option. This public option will slowly destroy the current insurance system, forcing us all to by into the public option. This will destroy our right to choose our own health care."
He was fighting health care law because--it might lead to something else that might cause us to have to buy health care from the government and that might limit our choices? How can you claim "If A then D" when what you really mean is "If A then maybe B which may lead to C which can cause D."
basically what I'm saying is that my trouble with the TEA Party is not their politics but their double talk and hypocrisy.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenos: I'm leery about the tea partier's who claim to be against stuff like the growing debt. I don't intend this remark to be inflammatory, but how many tea party members know the difference between debt and deficit? I'm not trying to imply that tea party members are stupider than others, but my purpose is to question the idea that the average person can even have a weak grasp of public policy. I have spent(and plan on spending) many years studying public policy and economics, learning from trained experts, and getting a degree. Is it feasible that the average person can simply get up and understand what exactly is happening with federal spending?
I ask this because I saw this happen a lot with the health care debates - there were thousands of people protesting the issue without even understanding the basics of insurance policy and economics. I don't pretend to fully understand it either, but I'm not about to get up and take a stand given that I recognize my shortcomings.
Am I simply stupid to require years of learning to understand whats really going on with these issues? Or is it that when most people protest they aren't protesting the actual policy issues, but rather finding solidarity in a group and simply going along with the flow?
Statistics that quote things like debt, defecit and the popular, "percentage of GDP" mean nothing to most people.
The tea party movement arose during a time of unprecedented debts and deficits. I'm as right wing as you can get and I can tell the difference between an annual debt and a total debt. An African American Tea Party member was beaten by SEIU thugs and there was no Al Sharpton to the rescue. The Tea Party isn't racist but it is politically beneficial to brand them as such. There are racist tea party members and racist liberal democrats. If the media can capture a video of one racist at a Tea Party Rally, it'll be all over the news to prove conservatives are racist. 95% of African Americans voting for the African American candidate isn't considered racism. I guarantee if 95% of white people voted against Obama, he wouldn't be president and they would be called racist. White people elected Obama and the Conservative African American Tea Party member who got a beat down has no Al Sharpton outrage.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting. I've heard many Tea Party Supporters and Tea Party Members calling President Obama and the "Entire Liberal Elite" racist or reverse racist, but maybe one or two liberal groups referring to the Tea Party as a racist group.
The Tea Party people keep saying, "its only a rare number of our members who actually are racists, and we try to get rid of them once they show their true selves" yet it only takes one or two folks claiming that the Tea Party is racist before the entire media and Democratic Party are smeared with the claim that they are trying to smear the Tea Party.
The Tea Party attacked political debates with yells and rude behavior, but then keep going back to the "we're being victimized" cry when ever anyone disagrees with them.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I imagine the first legal Mexican who is asked for proof of citizenship will be filing the first lawsuit.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I still wonder how easy it would be for cops to tell the difference between illegal immigrants and tourists (who wouldn't have immigration papers either). I don't think the US even stamps my passport on the way across. Perhaps a state to avoid for Canadians on travel.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not really, from what I understand, there are many mainland Chinese illegal immigrants going through Arizona which could be confused with Chinese Canadian tourists.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Canadians may not get their passports stamped; people going through immigration control at the airport do.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure how that helps (also, when travelling, one might leave their passport in the hotel safe as well making the situation even worse. Could be quite a hassle)
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aren't you required to carry your passport with you, when in a foreign country? Otherwise, it is much less satisfying for Immigration Officers to say, "Your papers, please!"
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, unless you are driving a vehicle, I can't see any situation where you'd be required to carry ID, let alone proof of citizenship.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Though Lord knows the cops back home tried to claim it was required by law. *sigh* Got to love small town cops with nothing better to do.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't think the Canadian tourists need to worry unless they are well-tanned.
Yes, because all Canadians are white.
While it can be super fun to get a good case of righteous indignation going, the point is that this isn't tourist profiling, it's Mexican profiling. Nobody needs to worry because they're from another contry, they just need to worry if they look Mexican.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which some Canadians do, because they're Mexican. I used to know a bunch of Mexican, Columbian, Cuban etc... Canadians. Mostly brown, some with accents. Some of whom might have gone on vacation to Arizona, but now, I guess, won't be able to.
ETA - Mucas, of course. But I was replying specifically to MightyCow's 'No need to worry unless they're Mexican' statement. Obviously, being Asian could be an issue too.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to admit, it's a bit odd to see you getting on someone else's case for being unduly righteously indignant, MightyCow:)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I have to admit, it's a bit odd to see you getting on someone else's case for being unduly righteously indignant, MightyCow:)
I guess I should be flattered that you've lately taken to stalking me, just to make inane insults in response to my posts, but honestly it's kind of creepy.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, you must be stalking an awful lot of people on Hatrack if that's your definition of the word.
As for whether or not I'm really stalking you...
Aside from today, the last time I even spoke to you was nearly a week ago, rejecting the notion that you 'don't have a problem' with people praying. If you're of like mind with King of Men, and if you're not you only have yourself to blame if people think so, then you most certainly do have a problem with people praying.
In the past ten posts I've made here, over a period of six days, two or three have been to or about you. One was expressing amusement at your rejection of righteous indignation when it's clear you enjoy it too, another was in response to a pretty pointed yet unsubstantiated insult ('the irony is so thick...'), and the third was the one I described above.
So, like I said, if that's stalking...
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't let actual facts stop you from thinking that, MC. Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It just struck me what I dislike about this law.
Its not the Racist/Profiling/boo-hoo its gonna hurt the Hispanic community that has gotten all the attention. We already have Conservative AM Radio defending all of that, and calling it bogus as loudly as they can scream.
Its the simple anti-American thing--Innocent Until Proven Guilty.
Those the police suspect are being forced to prove their innocents. The police don't have to prove that anyone is guilty, but those questioned must prove that they are innocent.
That goes against the most basic fiber of our judicial system, and it is on those grounds I expect this law will be taken to court.
You have the constitutional right not to incriminate yourself. Does refusing to show your "papers" equal a refusal to incriminate yourself?
Some argue that if you do not have papers then you are not a citizen then you do not have rights. That is a very narrow definition of inalienable rights. But if you are a citizen must you legally present papers that prove your innocents?
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
