Just When You Think Things Couldn't Get Any Worse...

[JoeB131]

Well, that's what I get for posting this at three in the morning.

Well, it's not like you got a job to get to.

Try bringing something of value to the thread, or GTFO.

I am. I'm reminding everyone who TK is when he bloviates.

 

[JoeB131]

I think joe is right, most all of us would like our immigration policy concerning at least the southern border reformed.

Myself I would like to see it changed so it is not so porous so that disease ridden little spark keep flooding in infecting our children.

I am not even sure I understand the open border crowd. It is not like these people are engineers or doctors. It is not like we don't already have a boat load of low skilled and low educated people living off of those who do work. It is not like we don't have chronic high unemployment, and yes 5.9 is stitll high. The only thing driving down the UE rate are people dropping off the roles.

Then the open border crowd will cry about wealth inequality meanwhile letting thousands flood our borders. No wonder inequality is going up what would any sane person expect? At least one would think that the open border left wingers wouldn't cry about a problem they created.

Yeah I want reform but I seriously doubt it is what Obama or joe wants. Which is interesting since we already have immigration laws. So apparently it isn't laws they want they want what they want and nothing else will do.

Guy, you are putting words in my mouth. I'm indifferent to "the border". Mostly because it's kind of a silly place to address the problem.

Fences can be dug under, climbed over, cut through or gotten around, and MOST "Illegals" who are here got here on legal visas that they either are abusing or have expired.

Quite honestly, from my viewpoint, a illegal fence hopper can't ever do my job. But the skilled worker from India or China who got in here on a work visa legally can, and we are allowing 1.2 million of them to enter the country every year despite the recession.

You could end the illegal problem right now, simply by going after the mostly rich, mostly republican people who employ them.

This is why i think the GOP is in a quandry. The rich people who run the GOP, the Koches and the Waltons- they want that cheap labor to come in and keep labor costs down.

And the dumb, slack-jawed, gun-toting bible thumping redneck from a red state lives in mortal fear that a Mexican might date his daughter.

It's kind of how dysfunctional the GOP is in a nutshell.

 

[percysunshine]

Well, that's what I get for posting this at three in the morning.

Well, it's not like you got a job to get to.

Try bringing something of value to the thread, or GTFO.

I am. I'm reminding everyone who TK is when he bloviates.

Oh, sure. Bring carbon footprints into the debate.

.

 

[Mac1958]

[

Not sure what you're looking for.

You're going to get what you want, I can't be more direct and honest than that. I realize that you're accustomed to partisan rhetoric, in which you and a hardcore rightwinger spin and distort and deflect and just make stuff up, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. But many of us don't communicate in that way.

I concede, absolutely. How much more clear do I need to be?

Wow, that's a great strategy. Dismiss any point of fact that you don't want to argue as "partisan rhetoric". And then pretend you aren't a hardcore rightwinger, just a freedom loving soul who is against "Political Correctness'.

Here we go again.

What are my beliefs on foreign policy, war, gay rights, abortion, health care, individual income taxation and regulation, Joe?

Here, let me help.

"Gosh Mac, I don't know, I pretend not to see your posts on those topics, I'm so paralyzed by my partisan ideology that since you don't agree with me on everything, I have to make the simplistic assumption that you are my polar opposite, a hardcore right wing partisan ideologue, because I'm willing to practice virtually zero intellectual elasticity or curiosity and assume that everyone is as binary and closed-minded as I am."

You're welcome.

You continue to fight with a ghost, Joe. You're so goddamn miserable that you can't even take "yes" for an answer.

.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Not sure what you're looking for.

You're going to get what you want, I can't be more direct and honest than that. I realize that you're accustomed to partisan rhetoric, in which you and a hardcore rightwinger spin and distort and deflect and just make stuff up, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. But many of us don't communicate in that way.

I concede, absolutely. How much more clear do I need to be?

Wow, that's a great strategy. Dismiss any point of fact that you don't want to argue as "partisan rhetoric". And then pretend you aren't a hardcore rightwinger, just a freedom loving soul who is against "Political Correctness'.

Here we go again.

What are my beliefs on foreign policy, war, gay rights, abortion, health care, individual income taxation and regulation, Joe?

Here, let me help.

"Gosh Mac, I don't know, I pretend not to see your posts on those topics, I'm so paralyzed by my partisan ideology that since you don't agree with me on everything, I have to make the simplistic assumption that you are my polar opposite, a hardcore right wing partisan ideologue, because I'm willing to practice virtually zero intellectual elasticity or curiosity and assume that everyone is as binary and closed-minded as I am."

You're welcome.

You continue to fight with a ghost, Joe. You're so goddamn miserable that you can't even take "yes" for an answer.

.

Guy, you are someone who sees the evil PC Police under his bed, trying to "transform" the country.

Frankly, you are just like Sil, except he sees a flaming gay dude under his bed. And Sil has some views I agree with on economics, it's just that he's so fanatic on that one issue that it kind of blots out everything else.

 

[Mac1958]

[

Not sure what you're looking for.

You're going to get what you want, I can't be more direct and honest than that. I realize that you're accustomed to partisan rhetoric, in which you and a hardcore rightwinger spin and distort and deflect and just make stuff up, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. But many of us don't communicate in that way.

I concede, absolutely. How much more clear do I need to be?

Wow, that's a great strategy. Dismiss any point of fact that you don't want to argue as "partisan rhetoric". And then pretend you aren't a hardcore rightwinger, just a freedom loving soul who is against "Political Correctness'.

Here we go again.

What are my beliefs on foreign policy, war, gay rights, abortion, health care, individual income taxation and regulation, Joe?

Here, let me help.

"Gosh Mac, I don't know, I pretend not to see your posts on those topics, I'm so paralyzed by my partisan ideology that since you don't agree with me on everything, I have to make the simplistic assumption that you are my polar opposite, a hardcore right wing partisan ideologue, because I'm willing to practice virtually zero intellectual elasticity or curiosity and assume that everyone is as binary and closed-minded as I am."

You're welcome.

You continue to fight with a ghost, Joe. You're so goddamn miserable that you can't even take "yes" for an answer.

.

Guy, you are someone who sees the evil PC Police under his bed, trying to "transform" the country.

Frankly, you are just like Sil, except he sees a flaming gay dude under his bed. And Sil has some views I agree with on economics, it's just that he's so fanatic on that one issue that it kind of blots out everything else.

It only "blots out everything else" because you're intellectually lazy.

The world is a far more complicated place than you think it is.

.

 

[JoeB131]

[

It only "blots out everything else" because you're intellectually lazy.

The world is a far more complicated place than you think it is.

.

No, it blots out everything else because it shows you are a fanatic.

It reminds me of the Ancient Roman politician who ended every speech with "Carthage Must be destroyed".

You seem to think that liberals are trying to transform America because they want to destroy some traditional American values.

I would say those values were destroyed when the GOP gutted the middle class in the 1980's.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

He feels that since no one has done anything to stop him so far that he can just do whatever the f..k he wants. Apparently he is right.

I think he might be in for a surprise

 

[Youch]

Elections have consequences.

In 2012, the Republicans were running against a badly flawed incumbent and lost.

The Left wants to change, fundamentally transform and re-make America, and they're doing it.

Enjoy.

Obama should be arrested.

Oh shut the fuck up you ignorant turd.

You just defined yourself.

Got anything intellectual to offer?

Hey go ahead and pretend you are me and lets see your form an intellectual response to the statement "Obama should be arrested".

This should be good. Just go ahead and state; no he shouldn't. Can't argue with intellect like that now can ya?
You ever read any of that bullshit that guy writes? Of course, you believe every word of what he writes don't cha?

Why would I pretend I am you?

How hard is it to site Obama's Constitutional transgressions:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/opinion/obamas-betrayal-of-the-constitution.html?_r=0

High court rules against Obama on recess appointments











Blog Naked Contemptuous Assault on Constitution by Obama IRS Unmasked

Republicans to sue Obama over health law - CNN.com

Podcast Did President Obama violate the Constitution in the Bergdahl case

Obama violates the Constitution





Not sure what "guy" to which you refer.

Please try again....

Elections have consequences.

In 2012, the Republicans were running against a badly flawed incumbent and lost.

The Left wants to change, fundamentally transform and re-make America, and they're doing it.

Enjoy.

Obama should be arrested.

Oh shut the fuck up you ignorant turd.

You just defined yourself.

Got anything intellectual to offer?

Hey go ahead and pretend you are me and lets see your form an intellectual response to the statement "Obama should be arrested".

This should be good. Just go ahead and state; no he shouldn't. Can't argue with intellect like that now can ya?
You ever read any of that bullshit that guy writes? Of course, you believe every word of what he writes don't cha?

Why would I pretend to be you?

I notice you've not been able to refute a single thing he's said in this thread. Instead of debating the topic, you are debating the posters. See how that is weak?

Please list the number of Constitutional violations, and the utter ineptness, that leads you to believe out President should not be subject to impeachment?

I'm not advocating it, necessarily. But the case against him is extremely strong. Go ahead, list all the reasons. It will do you good, like a glass of milk.

 

[Youch]

Elections have consequences.

In 2012, the Republicans were running against a badly flawed incumbent and lost.

The Left wants to change, fundamentally transform and re-make America, and they're doing it.

Enjoy.

Obama should be arrested.

Oh shut the fuck up you ignorant turd.

You just defined yourself.

Got anything intellectual to offer?

Hey go ahead and pretend you are me and lets see your form an intellectual response to the statement "Obama should be arrested".

This should be good. Just go ahead and state; no he shouldn't. Can't argue with intellect like that now can ya?
You ever read any of that bullshit that guy writes? Of course, you believe every word of what he writes don't cha?

Why would I pretend I am you?

How hard is it to site Obama's Constitutional transgressions:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/opinion/obamas-betrayal-of-the-constitution.html?_r=0

High court rules against Obama on recess appointments











Blog Naked Contemptuous Assault on Constitution by Obama IRS Unmasked

Republicans to sue Obama over health law - CNN.com

Podcast Did President Obama violate the Constitution in the Bergdahl case

Obama violates the Constitution





Not sure what "guy" to which you refer.

Please try again....

Obama should be arrested.

Oh shut the fuck up you ignorant turd.

You just defined yourself.

Got anything intellectual to offer?

Hey go ahead and pretend you are me and lets see your form an intellectual response to the statement "Obama should be arrested".

This should be good. Just go ahead and state; no he shouldn't. Can't argue with intellect like that now can ya?
You ever read any of that bullshit that guy writes? Of course, you believe every word of what he writes don't cha?

Fuck you Zeke I don't give a shit what you think about me. I pay my taxes and have a right to an opinion. Why don't you give us an intellectual reason why illegals need to be given citizenship in this country. What is the crisis that Obama is curing?

In case you missed it. Republicans in the House have had plenty of opportunity to stop the flood of illegals into our country. They could do this by simply offering jail time to any and every employer caught employing illegals in their workforce. Some American employer is giving these people jobs. Why don't you support going after the employers?

Why won' they do that?

You do realize that these illegals are here to work? Right? At least most of them are.
Then you have the problem of kids born here with no knowledge of any other home than the USA. Do kids deserve to be punished for the crimes of their parents? I don't think they do.

But the real problem is that the Republicans in both the House and Senate have decided that a non functioning form of government is somehow to the Repubs advantage.

And Obama has had to pick up the slack and do his job and the Congress's jobs as well.

When there is real work to be done, leave it to a fucking Republican to wuss out and let someone else do the heavy lift. Then they bitch about it for months cause they didn't get what they wanted.

So why are the Republicans leaving immigration law up to the President. Is it just so they have something else to complain about? That's a crisis brewing that the Republicans are making cause they won't do their job.
And you support that? Why?

It's like talking to a wall.

The Republican Party is abdicating their responsibility because of politics. The GOP Establishment is corrupt, just like the libs.

They are not "leaving" immigration to the President, as that is unconstitutional.

Who and/or what voice is speaking out for the American people and the rule of law? The Tea Party! But the Tea Party is a threat to both the libs and the GOP establishment.

 

[The Rabbi]

Elections have consequences.

In 2012, the Republicans were running against a badly flawed incumbent and lost.

The Left wants to change, fundamentally transform and re-make America, and they're doing it.

Enjoy.

And the right doesn't?

The right did fundamentally change and transform America. They eliminated the bedrock of the progressive state that we built up in this country between 1901 and 1968 that made us all more equal, more free and more prosperous.

They put the interests of big multi-national corporations ahead of the interests of average Americans with their wars for profit and their free trade treaties.

The problem you guys don't ever address is WHY we have an "Illegal Alien" problem that now has to be resolved.

I'll give you a hint. Your candidate from 2012.

"I can't have illegals here! I'm running for office, for Pete's Sake!!!"

Keep in mind, this rich Mormon Asshole had enough money garnered from putting Americans out of jobs at KB Toys, AmPad and GS Steel (Sorry about that cancer, Mrs. Soptic!) to be able to buy four mansions, and he was STILL too fucking cheap to pay Americans a fair wage to upkeep them.

Illegals would never have come here if there weren't Rich Americans who were willing to exploit them.

No need to explain Joe, you're getting what you want.

Done deal.

.

Not that I really thought you were going to come up with a counter argument, because whenever anyone challenges you, you just retreat behind your pomposity.

Concession duly noted.

All those unskilled uneducated immigrants are competing for your job, Joe. And they'll work for much less.

Watch out!

 

[JoeB131]

All those unskilled uneducated immigrants are competing for your job, Joe. And they'll work for much less.

Watch out!

An undocumented immigrant couldn't do my job. ON a similar note, probably you couldn't do it, either.

 

[S.J.]

All those unskilled uneducated immigrants are competing for your job, Joe. And they'll work for much less.

Watch out!

An undocumented immigrant couldn't do my job. ON a similar note, probably you couldn't do it, either.

I know I couldn't go on message boards and defend Obama the way you do. How much do they pay you?

 

[TemplarKormac]

I think joe is right, most all of us would like our immigration policy concerning at least the southern border reformed.

Reformed without making concessions to the people we're supposed to be keeping on the other side of the fence in the first place. But my question here is, why aren't Democrats pushing for immigration reform? If they are, why does their policy include giving amnesty to illegals?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Guy, you are someone who sees the evil PC Police under his bed, trying to "transform" the country.

Frankly, you are just like Sil, except he sees a flaming gay dude under his bed. And Sil has some views I agree with on economics, it's just that he's so fanatic on that one issue that it kind of blots out everything else.

Joe, you are someone who sees the evil 'gun nutters' under your bed. Frankly, you are like any other troll on this board. Your fanaticism blots out any objectivity you have in any debate. You never wish to be wrong, and here you are hounding Mac, a libertarian by all definitions of the word, because he doesn't fit your mold. To be honest, he tore you a new hole. I hope you learned your lesson.

 

[JoeB131]

Guy, you are someone who sees the evil PC Police under his bed, trying to "transform" the country.

Frankly, you are just like Sil, except he sees a flaming gay dude under his bed. And Sil has some views I agree with on economics, it's just that he's so fanatic on that one issue that it kind of blots out everything else.

Joe, you are someone who sees the evil 'gun nutters' under your bed. Frankly, you are like any other troll on this board. Your fanaticism blots out any objectivity you have in any debate. You never wish to be wrong, and here you are hounding Mac, a libertarian by all definitions of the word, because he doesn't fit your mold. To be honest, he tore you a new hole. I hope you learned your lesson.

Guy, 32,000 gun deaths a year. Gun nutters are are a reasonable fear. It's like we have ten 9-11's every year, and no one says a thing.

If Mac debated, instead of just responding to any counter argument with "There you go again", I might have more respect for him. Just like i might have more respect for you if you did less talking and more doing.

 

[JoeB131]

Reformed without making concessions to the people we're supposed to be keeping on the other side of the fence in the first place. But my question here is, why aren't Democrats pushing for immigration reform? If they are, why does their policy include giving amnesty to illegals?

Again, Runs with Scissors, the fence isn't the problem. It's the people on THIS side of the fence who are offering them jobs to undercut working people's salaries.

And the Democrats are pushing for reform.

 

[Mac1958]

If Mac debated, instead of just responding to any counter argument with "There you go again", I might have more respect for him.

That's actually a fair point. I guess it depends on your definition of the word "debate".

If "debating" means to (1) only push one side of an issue, (2) ignoring, minimizing, deflecting and distorting all contrary evidence, (3) being willing at all times to be intellectually dishonest to "win" a point, and (4) lacing all comments with straw men, outright lies, personal insults and name-calling, I guess the bottom line here is that I don't like to "debate".

I'd rather have honest conversations in which two mature, civil, intelligent adults see, understand, appreciate and acknowledge all sides of an issue and calmly discuss the pros and cons of both sides.

I'm glad you brought that up.

So, I guess the bottom line is that I don't like to "debate", based on your definition of the word. Or at least the way you practice it.

.

 

[zeke]

If Mac debated, instead of just responding to any counter argument with "There you go again", I might have more respect for him.

That's actually a fair point. I guess it depends on your definition of the word "debate".

If "debating" means to (1) only push one side of an issue, (2) ignoring, minimizing, deflecting and distorting all contrary evidence, (3) being willing at all times to be intellectually dishonest to "win" a point, and (4) lacing all comments with straw men, outright lies, personal insults and name-calling, I guess the bottom line here is that I don't like to "debate".

I'd rather have honest conversations in which two mature, civil, intelligent adults see, understand, appreciate and acknowledge all sides of an issue and calmly discuss the pros and cons of both sides.

I'm glad you brought that up.

So, I guess the bottom line is that I don't like to "debate", based on your definition of the word. Or at least the way you practice it.

.

LMAO. That's the funniest thing I have seen you write. You post up regularly on a message board full of partisans, including me and you are looking for "honest conversation"? That is funny.

Maybe you should try conversing with all your clients in your "business". They should be more receptive to your line of bullshit. Or at least they will listen to you. After all, they are paying you for your supposed expertise.

Wonder what they get for their money. I already know what you present here.

 

[LoneLaugher]

If Mac debated, instead of just responding to any counter argument with "There you go again", I might have more respect for him.

That's actually a fair point. I guess it depends on your definition of the word "debate".

If "debating" means to (1) only push one side of an issue, (2) ignoring, minimizing, deflecting and distorting all contrary evidence, (3) being willing at all times to be intellectually dishonest to "win" a point, and (4) lacing all comments with straw men, outright lies, personal insults and name-calling, I guess the bottom line here is that I don't like to "debate".

I'd rather have honest conversations in which two mature, civil, intelligent adults see, understand, appreciate and acknowledge all sides of an issue and calmly discuss the pros and cons of both sides.

I'm glad you brought that up.

So, I guess the bottom line is that I don't like to "debate", based on your definition of the word. Or at least the way you practice it.

.

If you didn't blow your credibility with your take on "you didn't build that" and if you didn't put honest people who disagree with you at times on iggy.....you might be able to make that claim.

I am aware that you and I agree on many issues, Mac. I wonder if you.....being so perceptive....could list a few of them.

If you are so inclined to respond in a civil, honest manner.....I'd also love for you to tell me who the USMB PC police are. I'd like to engage these people in conversation. Thanks.