Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
immigration isnt destroying America; pandering Progressives catering to illegals for votes is
True... it's just your strident, hyper-active insistence that we still have plenty of room to take in more, that makes your heretofore (within the narrow band of my own awareness of such things) unknown ultimate position suspect... an understandable albeit (possibly) premature assumption whose accuracy may or may not be proved-out over the course of time. Guess I'll have to keep an eye on it; not that it's terribly important in the larger scheme of things.Your arguments in support of the existing crop of 12,000,000 Illegal Aliens ...
I have made no such arguments, you dishonest douche. Tell your straw man to stop slamming you so hard from behind, you're not thinking straight.
Yes.Are you in favor of granting the 12,000,000 current Illegal Aliens a path to citizenship?If you are looking for a "pro-illegals crowd" to argue with you'll have to seek elsewhere, because I haven't seen one on this thread at least.
No, thanks for asking. Do you recognize the fact that anyone born in the US is a US citizen?
immigration isnt destroying America; pandering Progressives catering to illegals for votes is
Right up there with pandering Conservatives catering to the Hispanic vote...
Both parties are acting in direct opposition to the best interests of the United States and its people, in their dealings on immigration.
Both parties are Vote Whores, on this issue.
Both of 'em.
But I agree, that Progressives are the whinier of the two kinds of bitches.
Oh, I supported what I said, alright...Typical pro-Illegals fluff... ...
Typical online idiot... clumsily falling back on a straw man when he realizes he can't sustain a real argument or respond to what is actually being said...
...pathetic, but typical.
At-issue, for the moment, was...
1. whether the term 'Anchor Babies' was an insult
2. whether anti-Illegals were obliged to accept your definition
3. whether anti-Illegals were free to use such a powerful and accurate descriptor
Awwwwww... I don't think you liked my metaphor...tsk... tsk... tsk...NOR for them popping-out puppies ...
Were you born a human or were you popped out as a puppy? Which was it in your case?
Goodness-gracious and golly-gee-whiz Emmy Lou... what to do now?
Within the framework of a related sidebar, born out of the mainstream dialogue, yes, those were the issues, in our little 'confrontation' over the use of the phrase 'Anchor Babies'.Oh, I supported what I said, alright...Typical online idiot... clumsily falling back on a straw man when he realizes he can't sustain a real argument or respond to what is actually being said...
...pathetic, but typical.
At-issue, for the moment, was...
1. whether the term 'Anchor Babies' was an insult
2. whether anti-Illegals were obliged to accept your definition
3. whether anti-Illegals were free to use such a powerful and accurate descriptor
No, you idiot, those were not the issues. Those were what you wanted to be the issues, so you built a straw man to argue with about them. You and your straw man go have fun and leave me out of it, because it is all a matter of your concoction in the first place, moron.
Oh, that was a SERIOUS question, rather than a prod designed to engage in further confrontational behavior... my bad.Awwwwww... I don't think you liked my metaphor...tsk... tsk... tsk...Were you born a human or were you popped out as a puppy? Which was it in your case?
Goodness-gracious and golly-gee-whiz Emmy Lou... what to do now?
Are you afraid to answer the question, douche?
True... it's just your strident, hyper-active insistence that we still have plenty of room to take in more, that makes your heretofore (within the narrow band of my own awareness of such things) unknown ultimate position suspect... an understandable albeit (possibly) premature assumption whose accuracy may or may not be proved-out over the course of time. Guess I'll have to keep an eye on it; not that it's terribly important in the larger scheme of things.Your arguments in support of the existing crop of 12,000,000 Illegal Aliens ...
I have made no such arguments, you dishonest douche. Tell your straw man to stop slamming you so hard from behind, you're not thinking straight.
Oh, that was a SERIOUS question, rather than a prod designed to engage in further confrontational behavior... my bad.Awwwwww... I don't think you liked my metaphor...tsk... tsk... tsk...
Goodness-gracious and golly-gee-whiz Emmy Lou... what to do now?
Are you afraid to answer the question, douche?
Born.
Why?
Within the framework of a related sidebar, born out of the mainstream dialogue, yes, those were the issuesOh, I supported what I said, alright...
At-issue, for the moment, was...
1. whether the term 'Anchor Babies' was an insult
2. whether anti-Illegals were obliged to accept your definition
3. whether anti-Illegals were free to use such a powerful and accurate descriptor
No, you idiot, those were not the issues. Those were what you wanted to be the issues, so you built a straw man to argue with about them. You and your straw man go have fun and leave me out of it, because it is all a matter of your concoction in the first place, moron.
You spotted something you didn't like... you attacked it..
You spotted something you didn't like... you attacked it..
Do you "like" insulting US citizens? Where the hell are you from?
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”
Geography was my major in college, and I graduated with BA in it (and one in economics as well) form the City University of New York. I then taught Geography in 4 colleges of the CUNY for 3 years.
As for your illustrious definition of overpopulation, you're too late, I (the qualified one) already gave the definition of it, in Post # 382. Look that up and you will find the answers that you might be able to comprehend. Try reading the thread before you come tumbling in here, showing off how foolish you can be.
As for affirmative action, it is only mentioned as a slight side point in just one of the 16 items in the list of Harms of immigration. Overall, it is relatively slight, but as the anti-white racist that you are, it's predictable that you would come in here blowing it up as a big issue. We will now return to the topic > immigration.
No "Deflectionist" YOU are the one who is using immigration as a platform to go on a tirade about Affirmative Action. Furthermore, I am not "anti" anyone when it come to race, and I invite you to produce any post that I have put up that even appears as such.
Since you like to reference post numbers so much, look at your post #384' where you actually make the statement that the presence of non white immigrants takes jobs from American whites, which is a joke because of the fact that many of these immigrants that you are so distressed over are standing in front of Home Depot stores all over America looking for work as day laborers.
Doing the kind of work without benefits, and other privileges that those like you won't do, but by the same token get angry about them being here to do it.
We know the drill with you and Affirmative Action, so yes, let's go back to immigration. And leave geography out of it too, because you do not converse on that subject like one who has mastered that either.
Regarding immigration, you claim that your own mother immigrated here in 1929 from Denmark.
Since your theory is that immigration was effective until 1860, how do you feel about her "invading" America when America did not improve by her presence here?
After all, according to you, legal as well as illegal immigration is having a negative impact on the country.
Take your time and think about it.
1. This is one of the absolutely DUMBEST things I've ever heard in 15 years of computer posting. DUDE! I have been writing on immigration for at least 8 years. I have written HUNDREDS of OP's on the subject in about a dozen different forums. I have supplied hundreds of factual links on immigration, mostly from FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform), NumbersUSA, and CIS (Center for Immigration Studies). In contrast, I could count on one hand how many OPs I've written on Affirmative Action. In no way, is affirmative action a main subject to me, with immigration just a platform for it.
While I oppose Affirmative Action vigorously, it is a very minor subject in my history of computer posting, compared to 1) immigration and 2) Muslim jihad.
The next time you want to cast aspersions, do a little checking first, so you'll at least be remotely close to being right. In this case you were about as close as Florida to Pluto.
2. About as dumb as that, is your feeble attempt to pass off the billion times refuted notion of "jobs Americans won't do". HA HA. Hopefully after this, you'll have some idea of how ridiculous that is, (And how many times it's been refuted just in this thread alone). The myth that Americans won't touch the jobs immigrants take, was debunked 10 years ago by the CIS study that found of the 472 civilian occupations checked, only six were majority immigrant (legal and illegal). These six occupations account for 1 percent of the total U.S. workforce. Moreover, native-born Americans still comprise 46 percent of workers even in these occupations.
Many jobs often thought to be overwhelmingly immigrant (legal and illegal) are in fact majority native-born:
Maids and housekeepers: 51 percent native-born
Taxi drivers and chauffeurs: 58 percent native-born
Butchers and meat processors: 63 percent native-born
Grounds maintenance workers: 64 percent native-born
Construction laborers: 66 percent native-born
Porters, bellhops, and concierges: 72 percent native-born
Janitors: 73 percent native-born
In addition, the toughest, dirtiest, and most dangerous jobs in America are being done almost entirely by Americans, without an immigrant anywhere in sight. Some of these are coal miners, firefighters, troops in Afghanistan, and combat construction specialists in the Army Corps of Engineers. The last one I did for 5 years. Many immigrants, if not most, wouldn't touch this work, and might faint just watching the work we did (which is simply the hardest work there is in America). It is not only the hardest work, but being military, we did it in all kinds of weather, hot or cold, rain or shine, from sunrise to sunset, and wearing heavy fatigues, combat boots, steel pot helmets, a loaded pack, and a pistol belt with a full canteen.
Now comes the interesting part. After getting the BIG, black, rubber floats strapped together, and all across the river, we then started loading the BALKS. They're 20 feet long, 2 feet wide, 2 feet tall, made of steel, and weigh half a ton each. IN the army, there are no cranes. These balks have HANDLES on them. 10 on each side. After unloading these monsters off the truck. WE lug them. From the truck, down a rough, bumpy slope to the bridge site. Then again, the sergeant says "Ready....Heave" And we lift (50 pounds per man), and we carry it on to the bridge, and put it in place. Hopefully, it's not wet and slippery.
This is absolutely the hardest work there is in America. No, there were no foreigners there. No Mexicans. Good thing. We didn't have any paramedics on hand to administer to them, when they faint, just from watching us.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7I43q1j60zo/TXWVH9L0MEI/AAAAAAAAA3Q/qf0tffZT8sY/s1600/M4t6+argentina.jpg
3. If you really must know, I don't know how I feel about my mother's immigration. I would oppose the idea of it, especially being in 1929 at the beginning of the great depression, when so many American were out of work. On the other hand, as I've stated many times (including in this thread which you'd find if you ever read it) there are 2 exceptions to my opposition to immigration. These are 1) immigrants bring capital to open business, and create jobs FOR AMERICANS and 2) immigrants bringing specialized skills uncommon here, which can help to make us a better country.
It so happens that my grandfather does fit this description, having been a well-establish Danish carpenter in Denmark, which is a skill rare in the US in 1929, and highly in demand, since Danish carpentry and furniture (like pastry-making) is highly regarded throughout the world. So I would say yes and no. I do know that my grandfather was employed within 3 days of his arrival in America, was not unemployed a single day during the 1930s, an indication that he had something the Americans of his time did not have, so he wasn't really taking a job away from anyone, because they didn't have the skill he had.
