T1B

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:32 am**

ChargerMike wrote: ...from the looks at downtown we may soon be at war on the homeland!

Why do you say that, Mike?

By all accounts I've seen, they've been pre-dominantly peaceful demonstrations, not riots.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:41 am**

War Wagon wrote:
ChargerMike wrote: ...from the looks at downtown we may soon be at war on the homeland!
Why do you say that, Mike?

By all accounts I've seen, they've been pre-dominantly peaceful demonstrations, not riots.

Wait until they don't get what they want.
Fasten your seatbelt and hang on as parts of this country explode.
Lucky ole me is at Ground Zero.
Wish us luck here in "Illegalville."

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:46 am**

mvscal wrote: You bet. I would cheerfully volunteer a few hours of my time to drive a busload of those worthless pepper bellies back to MayHEEko.

There's the rub. They're not all "worthless", not even close.

I think the proposal the Senate judiciary committee came up with to give illegals a chance at becoming legal is a step in the right direction. And no, it's not "amnesty" nor a free ride by any stretch.

This issue is really turning some peoples pre-conceived notions about Liberal vs. Conservative upside down.

Who'd a thunk Ted Kennedy and Arlen Specter could ever agree on anything?

Probably even less than that mvscal and BSmack could share some common ground.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:05 am**

War Wagon wrote:
ChargerMike wrote: ...from the looks at downtown we may soon be at war on the homeland!
Why do you say that, Mike?

By all accounts I've seen, they've been pre-dominantly peaceful demonstrations, not riots.

...the rallies appear to be gaining momentum, it hit Bakersfield today. Wag's the problem is that they are high school kids who don't know squat about the bill they are suppose to be against. All they know is they are getting out of school. It is getting more unruly each day. Next step, call in the Guard.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:11 am**

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Uh, "create" it?

psssst...smacker...it's ALREADY HERE. And has been all along, yea, big corps have always kinda liked that. WalMart, as you know, really likes it. Anyway, the issue is one of adjustment of a system, as paradoxical and unweildly as it is. And while the notion of creating eleven million felons with the stroke of a pen may very well be making the prison industry execs' eyes glaze over, the insanity of this is off the chart--and would backfire so ridiculously it would make the Quagmire and Katrina look cool and clean. Wake the fuck up.

Oh, so because it's always been there, we should just let it continue?

BTW: I'm not in favor of the idea of making illegals felons. Not yet at least. The solution to this crisis lies in making working conditions in Mexico better, not in making things worse here in the United States.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:16 am**

BSmack wrote:?
BTW: I'm not in favor of the idea of making illegals felons. Not yet at least. The solution to this crisis lies in making working conditions in Mexico better, not in making things worse here in the United States.

Ok. Obvious question.

How in the hell do we do that?

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:23 am**

I relish the thought of not only continuing support for "Illegals" but improving living conditions in all of Central America. Whoop! Whoop!

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:24 am**

War Wagon wrote:
BSmack wrote:?
BTW: I'm not in favor of the idea of making illegals felons. Not yet at least. The solution to this crisis lies in making working conditions in Mexico better, not in making things worse here in the United States.
Ok. Obvious question.

How in the hell do we do that?

Now there's the 64 dollar question.

We might just have to suck it up and do a Marshall Plan for Mexico. But if we do, there better be a fucking watchdog and then some watching where that money goes. Better for the whole country to pay on a capital investment in Mexico than to put the wieght of the illegals all on the state systems of Texas, California etc....

But I'm just thinking out loud. I'd welcome some other ideas.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:12 am**

ChargerMike wrote:
War Wagon wrote:
ChargerMike wrote: ...from the looks at downtown we may soon be at war on the homeland!
Why do you say that, Mike?

By all accounts I've seen, they've been pre-dominantly peaceful demonstrations, not riots.
...the rallies appear to be gaining momentum, it hit Bakersfield today. Wag's the problem is that they are high school kids who don't know squat about the bill they are suppose to be against. All they know is they are getting out of school. It is getting more unruly each day. Next step, call in the Guard.

Drove thru bakersfield today. Lots of pissed off people, pissed off at student blocking traffic, waving mexican flags. A local radio guy sent a MOtS to interview the protestors. The dumb fucks had NO IDEA what either bill proposal was actually about, which one was which, who their senators in washington are, who the VP is, who their local representative is.

It's obvious that they're not learning any thing in school, but hell at least they got some exercise today.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:12 pm**

ChargerMike wrote:
PSUFAN wrote:So if you are in some Mexican shithole, would you illegally cross the border and work under the table in the US, or would you stay in the shithole?

...look, the freeking Mexican government doesn't want these people in Mexico! They provide manuals on how to cross the border and how to work the U.S. system for all it's worth. They come in, work, send all their money back to mexico and ...walla, we end up with the cast-offs draining our system, and Mexico ends up with the $$$$$$$. NICE.

Are you telling me as an American you sanction this?

Absolutely not. I'm saying that if I were in a shithole, I would do what it took to try to improve my lot, or at least try.

I'm not applauding the Mexican government, or those in the US government who want to look the other way while a subterranean labor force is used by employers.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:31 pm**

War Wagon wrote:we're gonna' need about 10,000 buses

I have a few hundred just sitting around that you can borrow.

- Ray Nagin

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:38 pm**

For the Clinton and Bush administrations, the status quo with Mexico is more than acceptable. Mexico is a place that regulations of safety and health can be avoided, where peanuts can be paid for labor, where graft can be taken part in, where drugs can be developed for deployment on US streets, where toxic shit can be dumped, and where a subterranean workforce for US employers can be cultivated.

Improving conditions in Mexico is not on the table for any of our leaders, past, current, or future. Protesters and rioting help to demonize Mexicans in the minds of Americans, so that the attendant issues will once again be obscured.

A class of privilege depends utterly on a class of underprivilege.
--MA

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:10 pm**

PSUFAN wrote:Improving conditions in Mexico is not on the table for any of our leaders, past, current, or future. Protesters and rioting help to demonize Mexicans in the minds of Americans, so that the attendant issues will once again be obscured.

So? It doesn't mean that the problem is going to be solved in any other way. It may well be that this issue is never resolved. But that doesn't make the answer any different.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:16 pm**

We don't need any more busboys or lettuce pickers.

Horseshit. It's not as if blacks or whites will do that work.

In the US, we're not building factories, refineries, or good school systems, to take a few examples. Instead, we're building strip malls, where busboys will be required to pick up what remains of the lettuce. So basically, you couldn't be more wrong, shit-for-brains.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:17 pm**

What's more, Mexicans will do that work, and do it well.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:24 pm**

Believe it or not, our economy does not depend on unskilled manual labor.

The growing portions of it certainly do.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:25 pm**

PSUFAN wrote:
We don't need any more busboys or lettuce pickers.
Horseshit. It's not as if blacks or whites will do that work.

Teenagers and machinery will.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:26 pm**

Not as readily or as well as Mexicans, they won't.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:30 pm**

PSUFAN wrote:Not as readily or as well as Mexicans, they won't.

and slaves will do it even more readily.

hell, can even roll back the child labor laws. someone can always be found who will (or who can be forced) to do something for cheap.

china uses prisoners. the south used slaves.

americans who want short term cash flow over long-term economic health use the mexicans that Mexico itself wants nothing to do with.

and now, Mexico is trying to force Canada to take on more of Mexico's trash (for lack of a better word).

don't be a dumbass, psufan.

besides, mvscal's point about just how much money is flowing out of America into Mexico by these people instead of remaining here can't be repeated enough.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:36 pm**

It's no surprise to me that you're this dense. I'm not arguing for the status quo, I'm merely remarking upon it. If you think that a central valley CA lettuce grower (or the corporation that he has been swallowed by) is going to stop using cheap mexican labor because a machine might be able to do the work, then you're badly mistaken. If you think that middle-class teens or blacks will perform the duties of a busboy better or more enthusiastically than mexicans, then you're equally mistaken.

The people who provide this kind of work are happy with the status quo. There's no pressure on them to change a thing.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:42 pm**

He sure as shit will if it means ten years in federal prison.

Yep, that'll happen...never.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:54 pm**

Yep, sure. Anti-illegal immigration is proceeding like campaign finance reform recently did.

Um, swimmingly.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:24 pm**

...let's see, by last count I see we have exactly ONE freeking politician (Sensenbrenner) who has the balls to even address the illegal crisis with any sincerity. We can't even enforce the current laws on the books and these idiots in Washington are spending all their time trying to agree on new laws. What the hell good will it do? they won't lift a finger to enforce them!
Political suicide!

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:27 pm**

ChargerMike wrote:...let's see, by last count I see we have exactly ONE freeking politician (Sensenbrenner) who has the balls to even address the illegal crisis with any sincerity. We can't even enforce the current laws on the books and these idiots in Washington are spending all their time trying to agree on new laws. What the hell good will it do? they won't lift a finger to enforce them!
Political suicide!

Only if you actually believe Americans have a voice.

You can't vote the bums out, if the bums control the voting machines.

What was it Malik El-Hajj Shabazz said, long ago...

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:35 pm**

Risa wrote: What was it Malik El-Hajj Shabazz said, long ago...

Hopefully, he told you to cancel your internet.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:37 pm**

Risa wrote:What was it Malik El-Hajj Shabazz said, long ago...

I think the words were "by any means necessary".

This issue along with the quagmire in Iraq and our overdependence on oil are converging upon a decisive moment in American politics. Something is going to break.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:45 pm**

BSmack wrote: This issue along with the quagmire in Iraq and our overdependence on oil are converging upon a decisive moment in American politics. Something is going to break.

You sound all Huey Newton today, but what you really mean is, "Vote Democrat '06 & '08"

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:48 pm**

Martyred wrote:
BSmack wrote: This issue along with the quagmire in Iraq and our overdependence on oil are converging upon a decisive moment in American politics. Something is going to break.
You sound all Huey Newton today, but what you really mean is, "Vote Democrat '06 & '08"

The answer to these problems will not be found within the major parties. Not yet at least. What mvscal was saying about the Whigs is very relevant. One of the two major parties will likely have vanished from the landscape by 2020. Book it.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:51 pm**

FTFY wrote:You can't vote the bums out, if you're either too apathetic to vote or too stupid to correctly operate the voting machines.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:52 pm**

BSmack wrote:
Martyred wrote:
BSmack wrote: This issue along with the quagmire in Iraq and our overdependence on oil are converging upon a decisive moment in American politics. Something is going to break.
You sound all Huey Newton today, but what you really mean is, "Vote Democrat '06 & '08"
The answer to these problems will not be found within the major parties. Not yet at least. What mvscal was saying about the Whigs is very relevant. One of the two major parties will likely have vanished from the landscape by 2020. Book it.

Maybe eventually, but by 2020? Not a chance.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:03 pm**

BSmack wrote:
Martyred wrote:
BSmack wrote: This issue along with the quagmire in Iraq and our overdependence on oil are converging upon a decisive moment in American politics. Something is going to break.
You sound all Huey Newton today, but what you really mean is, "Vote Democrat '06 & '08"
The answer to these problems will not be found within the major parties. Not yet at least. What mvscal was saying about the Whigs is very relevant. One of the two major parties will likely have vanished from the landscape by 2020. Book it.

....well conservatism has certainly disappeared already. I can't tell the Republicans from the freekin Democrats. Bush is worse than Clinton ever was. If JFK were running today, he'd be run out of town on a rail as a Right wing lunatic.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:15 pm**

Van wrote:
BSmack wrote:The answer to these problems will not be found within the major parties. Not yet at least. What mvscal was saying about the Whigs is very relevant. One of the two major parties will likely have vanished from the landscape by 2020. Book it.
Maybe eventually, but by 2020? Not a chance.

Please do tell me why you think I am wrong. When you have guys like CMike saying "Bush is worse than Clinton ever was", this tells me that we are on the verge of a political sea change the likes of which we have not seen since 1932. Be it by the inclusion of a 3rd party, or through an intra party insurgency, by 2020 what we now know as Democrat and Republican will not be the same.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:26 pm**

Now where's did I put that mp3 of The Beatles Revolution?
hmmmm

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:34 pm**

B, we've had a two party system comprised of the Democrat and Republican parties for a hundred and fifty plus years. We also haven't had a truly viable third party in recent memory, and we still don't.

We have to at least have two parties and since there still isn't a viable third party option we're going to be stuck with our usual two parties for at least the next few decades, if not quite a bit longer.

We just don't move that quickly.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:42 pm**

Not to mention that these two current parties will see to it that no third party gets a chance.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:25 pm**

Van wrote:B, we've had a two party system comprised of the Democrat and Republican parties for a hundred and fifty plus years. We also haven't had a truly viable third party in recent memory, and we still don't.

We have to at least have two parties and since there still isn't a viable third party option we're going to be stuck with our usual two parties for at least the next few decades, if not quite a bit longer.

We just don't move that quickly.

We may well have had the same two major parties in name since 1856, but they damn sure haven't stayed the same since then. Neither the Democrats or Republicans of today bear even the slightest resemblence to the Democrats and Republicans of 1928, much less those of 1856.

And yes, we do move that quickly. One need only see the history of Amendments to the Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_constitution

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:41 pm**

There won't be any Constitutional Amendments requiring the disbanding of either of the two existing parties or the elevation to equal representation of any third (or more) parties.

The U.S. House and Senate will not look like Italy's fractious government any time soon.

Will our two existing major parties continue to morph back and forth between various practical incarnations of each other? Sure they will.

They'll both continue to exist though and they'll both continue to be our only two viable voting options. That's not going to change in a mere fourteen years.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:47 pm**

Van wrote:There won't be any Constitutional Amendments requiring the disbanding of either of the two existing parties or the elevation to equal representation of any third (or more) parties.

The U.S. House and Senate will not look like Italy's fractious government any time soon.

Will our two existing major parties continue to morph back and forth between various practical incarnations of each other? Sure they will.

They'll both continue to exist though and they'll both continue to be our only two viable voting options. That's not going to change in a mere fourteen years.

We're talking apples and bowling balls here. I'm talking about a political sea change. You're talking about the complete destruction of our system as we know it. If we can get on the same page, we can have an intelligent conversation.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:53 pm**

BSmack wrote:If we can get on the same page, we can have an intelligent conversation.

Probably not going to happen by the year 2020.

Posted: **Thu Mar 30, 2006 9:27 pm**

mvscal wrote:It has put IB and myself in the same camp.

Then why don’t you two head off to your tent and you try to make her humble.

T1B

_why do Mexicans wave the flag?