The leftist mindset just isn’t my world-view Left Hand of Dorkness. I think it is a bunch of flaky ideas for people that don’t know how to even begin to make it happen. However, I do respect you in general and admit that was rude for me to phrase it that way even if we do disagree. I am a moderate libertarian and open borders are part of the platform of strong libertarians so it crosses vastly different different political philosophies. I have never been convinced it is a good thing for the U.S. in particular in the absolute sense but there is room for debate.
My negative reaction to these arguments, like most of them, is simply based on people that like to fight about semantic differences without ever offering in real solutions. The first rule of thumb for any problem should not be to start secondary conflicts like semantic complaints but to offer ideas for good solutions and converge on them based on all available information.
I apologize for phrasing my response that way. There are valid reasons to support open borders but I wish most people that oppose any measures against illegal aliens truly understand that they are fighting for open borders rather than just isolated cases they perceive to be an injustice.
I’m not Marley, but… really? You must be one of those poor, poor souls who have no sacrcasm sense. At all.
But, what’s worse, you don’t even seem to understand how sarcasm is applied in human conversation. So I’ll explain it to you.
Let’s suppose we have two people writing in a thread. Person A says
Person B enters and says
Person B is trying to ridicule Person A’s words through sarcasm. Now, I realize that Person B said blah blah blah as well, but he doesn’t share Person A’s views. And he wouldn’t use “blah blah blah” in normal conversation. At all.
Yes, that’s it, I have no sense of sarcasm. Sometimes sarcasm makes it worse. Fill in the “illegal aliens” blanks in that sentence with something else, and see how offensive it is. And no, not cannibalism, a la Jonathan Swift, but a minority group. It’s just as offensive either way.
No, you can’t seem to comprehend simple interactions on a message board. It is very odd to say the least. You appear to be some sort of bleeding heart who has little comprehensive of the English language and customs and yet you say you got admitted to the legal bar association in California.
I actually believe you are a lawyer but that says really bad things about the California legal system. I don’t want to attack you personally but your responses are so lacking in reading comprehension that I don’t know what else to say.
I don’t even like some of the people you are attacking that much but I have to come their defense because your accusations are so wildly incomprehensible.
Labelling criminals with descriptive words may contribute to skirting responsibility. Calling people, first-and-foremost, child molesters, rapists, murderers, etc. is a way of saying they are evil people. Then you are free to take the belief that you or your friends are incapable of those evil acts because you are not an evil person.
Language can be an ugly beast - obviously it is silly to argue against someone calling Jerry Sandusky a child molester. And it’s almost certainly the most important fact of his life if you had to describe him to a stranger in five words or less. But the ugliness is that subtly encourages one to draw a clean dividing line between “good” people and “bad” people, and then to rationalize away the bad things that “good” people do, especially if they only betray hints of the bad behavior.
Maybe after E-prime (thinking without the verb “to be”, as a mental exercise) we can exercise our brains with E-double-prime: thinking without labelling people by their actions.
Obviously people are more than anything else just the sum of a pile of actions (mostly their own, some others’) so I don’t know of a clean solution to this and I don’t think it’s very helpful in the undocumented v. illegal debate. But I’m sure everyone who reads this has heard that a friend did a bad thing and went on to think, “John Doe couldn’t have done that! He’s not a cheater/thief/shirker/etc!”
Ah. I wasn’t aware that there were no official quotas back then, but I was still raised with the truth that were quotas of some kind - this is not true? With or without any sort of quota, at least all those folks came in legally.
As for not being educated, back then that made much less difference than it does today. Same with the rate of reproduction - having 6,7,8 kids on one persons salary was less likely to be a disaster than today, and there weren’t all these social programs bleeding money to support people who are only employable at the lowest level. These days, a person with not even a high school education, who speaks little or no English, and has more than himself to support is likely to be a burden on society rather than a contributing new citizen.
Exactly! Things are never going to change unless somehow things change drastically south of the border. The PTB down there just don’t seem to care at all about the fact that a vast majority of their people are uneducated, unemployed and living in poverty.
How dare they come here and break their backs working for shit wages while the rest of us sit at home collecting disability and self-administering doses of Fox News pablum like fat, drug-addled lab rats! It’s parasites like those who are bringing this country down!
Hey, did my gummint check come yet? Damn post office… they ought to close them down, the lazy ingrates…
The first step in recognizing you have a problem is admitting it, so good job there.
Okay. I’ll go with “faggot,” since that’s a slur that describes a group of which I am a member.
Aaand… I’m not remotely insulted by that. Y’know why? Because I can recognize sarcasm. Also because I’m aware of Marley’s actual stance on gay rights, and know that it’s not remotely homophobic. Since I’m not an idiot, I can reconcile the use of a hateful term from a person who has consistently opposed hatred of that group with out shorting out a fuse. And, lastly, I understand that the position a person actually takes is vastly more important than the language he uses, even if he’s not using the language sarcastically. Which, again, is what Marley was clearly and unambiguously doing from the start of this thread.
And this is the idiot cherry on top of your gigantic fudge sundae of stupid, because A Modest Proposal is, in fact, entirely about racism directed at a severely disadvantaged minority group.
I’m still amazed that even if people hadn’t heard of Jonathan Swift’s* A Modest Proposal,* they still couldn’t realize that it was clearly meant as satire.
I’d think even most people who suffered from Asberger’s would recognize it as such.
I’m still amazed that someone could be so egocentric to assume that simply because he knows something, everyone else must too, but so oblivious to not realize that he doesn’t know everything. And so small minded to make a big deal out of something so insignificant.
I’m still amazed you have the courage to post in this thread, when you’ve made a laughingstock of yourself and virtually everyone hates you. But, then, you’ve proven to be exceptionally stupid, so I’m not really all that amazed.
Er… yes, I think that except for people with Asberger’s, some comparable condition or the jaw-droppingly stupid virtually everyone can recognize satire even if they don’t know who Jonathan Swift is.
Free and open border, subject to registration and renewal every so often [haven’t really thougth out the time frame here] at your local State Police Headquarters. Your registration number doubles as your state and federal tax ID/employee number. Basically this elevates everyone’s status to resident worker. Taxes are removed from your paycheck on a per worker basis (no deductibles) and no tax returns. Just a flat rate.
Resident workers enjoy all rights under the U.S. Constitution.
All resident workers are subject to removal for criminal activity as currently outlined by ICE (although there are some pretty stupid rules within the current ICE framework). If the resident worker qualifies for a public defender for their criminal charges, they should also be appointed an immigration attorney for their removal proceedings.
Naturalization process remains the same, I suppose. Service in any one of the US Military branches is a quicker path to citizenship.
Non-citizen children of Resident Workers get their own registration number, and it functions just like a social security number.
When you are first registered, you must submit finger prints. You are issued a Resident Worker ID card, and like a drivers license, it must be renewed every so often.
All of the obscene amount of money we spend on border enforcement and the war on drugs should be redirected to investigating and prosecuting human traffickers (sp?) and employers who hire “unregistered workers.”
Obviously it isn’t true that “virtually everyone hates me” if for no other reason than most haven’t even met me.
The courage to post in this thread? It doesn’t take courage to post in any thread.
My IQ tested out a the high end of normal twice, so I am not exceptionally stupid.
That’s three strikes, so you are out in only one paragraph. Wanna try again?
Again, this is another example of your egocentric outlook on the world. You are also avoiding the fact that you can no longer discuss the subject at hand because you keep putting your foot in your mouth, so all you have left is insisting that “everyone” would know that was satire. Whatever makes you happy…
Since the vast majority of people who would come to California from Mexico and points south will be uneducated and won’t speak English, the fact they will have payroll taxes deducted will not even be a drop in the bucket towards the expense of supporting them. Do you have a plan for finding that money, or will it just be the status quo of each state trying to deal with it?
Also, no quotas? At what point will you or someone decide we are over-populated?
That’s because everybody else understood the post without an explanation. That includes Machine Elf, who I was arguing against. Only you were stupid enough to require additional information.
There’s no racism there in the first place. I quoted a term someone else used to argue that that term wasn’t the only possible word that can be used in this discussion. (And even then, you said I used a word I didn’t use.) Maybe your argument is that if you say certain things, you are a racist regardless of the context - but if so, wow, you’re even stupider than I thought.
On thing is for sure: if a bunch of people tell you you’ve misunderstood a post, you definitely should not stop to consider whether you might’ve misunderstood the post. (See that? That’s more sarcasm.)