The Briefing Room
Exclusive Content => Editorials => Topic started by: Lazamataz on July 30, 2015, 11:56:02 pm
-
Many people are under the mistaken impression that the political battle lines in America are Democrats vs. Republicans. Some even erroneously believe the battle lines are Liberal vs. Conservative.
But if you wish to understand modern politics in our country -- if you want to make sense of the seemingly-irrational behaviors of both parties -- consider the reality that the battle lines are actually Elitists vs. The People.
In 2014, Republicans were swept into office in the midterms, ostensibly to turn back Obamaism. Obamacare was to be repealed, or, at the least, relief was to be offered for the suffering the program is causing. Iran was to be denied resources for developing a nuclear weapon, or, at the least, slowed in that development. Obama's penchant for going outside the bounds of the Constitution by sidestepping Congress with overreaching and illegal Executive Orders was to be halted, or, at the least, censured. Illegal alien invasion was to be stopped or curtailed, and violators were to be prosecuted and shipped back to their countries of origin.
Instead, the establishment Republicans re-elected the the Crying Cheeto John Boehner (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3243457/posts) and Yertle the Turtle Mitch McConnell to head the two legislative bodies. As an aside: Have we ever had such freakish House and Senate leaders?. Led by those two feckless elitists, we got the following results:
- On Obamacare, many repeal votes have failed. Most recently the Senate vote for repeal failed. (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/obamacare-repeal-vote-fails-in-senate-120638.html)
- Per Iran's quest for the atomic bomb, there has been no action by either party to stop an illegal "agreement" that went outside the bounds of the Constitutional treaty mechanisms. Though they claim to be "irked", there is no followup action. (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/20/world/middleeast/un-vote-on-iran-nuclear-deal-irks-congress.html)
- As regards Obama's lawlessness and failure to heed the Constitution, no one in either legislative body has taken to the podium to denounce Barack's dangerous behavior.
- And on illegal alien invasion, not only are the House and Senate not forcefully demanding that illegal aliens be deported, they cannot even agree to deny illegal aliens drivers' licenses (http://www.wral.com/idea-of-driving-permits-for-illegal-immigrants-divides-house-committee/14684757/) and only barely rejected allowing illegal aliens into the military. (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/242171-divided-gop-rejects-allowing-illegal-immigrants-in-military) Any student of the decline of Rome knows how bad an idea that would have been.
- As a bonus -- and even after videos surfaced that showed Planned Abortionhood ghoulishly selling the body parts of dead fetuses -- the Senate blocked a vote to defund the ghastly enterprise. (http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/249236-senate-blocks-lees-vote-to-defund-planned-parenthood)
The Republicans are acting in a manner most reminiscent of Democrats. It appears that there IS no difference between the two parties... none at all. That is what informed me that those are not the battle lines. That is not the divide. The two parties agree on most of the major issues we face today.
In the Republican grassroots, there was great frustration when the lack of opposition (by the establishment Republicans) to Democrat policies became apparent. There still is. There are murmurings of discontent on the far-left, as well, that the Democrats are only paying lip service to their important issues.
It has become quite clear that the real fight is that of Elitists against The People.
This explains the vigorous support and consistently-meteoric poll numbers (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/gop/3318225/posts) that Donald Trump is seeing. Whether he is truly a Populist remains to be seen, but at minimum, he is speaking as one. This seldom-heard speech in Washington is appealing to a large number of people who feel ignored by the Elitist Party, be they Republican or Democrat. Donald Trump is even appealing to the Democrat-coveted minority population. (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3318182/posts)
Ronald Reagan won as a Populist. He fought the Republican establishment, won the primary in 1980, and went on to become the most anti-big-government, anti-communist, pro-ordinary-citizen President in modern history. His sweeping re-election in 1984, capturing nearly every single state (including liberal ones), showed that Populist policies are popular even in liberal bastions. Of course, there will always be liberals that cling to Elitism, and those are usually the ones who favor Socialism or Communism.
I do not mean to compare Trump to Reagan in any way except to show that Trump's populism is a winning strategy. It appears that -- whatever Trump's other faults, such as a recent political change-of-heart and his many personal issues over the years -- Donald Trump does understand where the actual battle lines lie. His repeated disregard and dislike for the propaganda outlets called the 'news media', his brutal honesty, and his stated positions show a Populism that has not been seen in national politics for more than twenty years. This explains why many of us regard him as a breath of fresh air.
Elitists like Planned Abortionhood. That group helps to reduce the 'surplus population', as Ebenezer Scrooge once called it in Dickens' novel. Elitists like Obamacare, with the Death Panels poised to deny treatment to 'useless old people'. Elitists like Communism and/or Socialism, with its control over the masses and the tendency to gather wealth at the top. Elitists like big government and fascist police-state controls, to better keep the populace from rising up in anger. Elitists like illegal alien invasion (and have encouraged it not only in America, but European nations), because that form of invasion dilutes national identities, erases borders, and leads the world to a nationless Global government. Elitists are using Islam's threat to increase the police-state tactics in nation after nation. Elitists like Agenda 21, with the stated purpose of herding us into vast cities, where we can be more efficiently worked and better controlled.
If you have signed up on the sides of the Elitists, you have many choices, foremost among those being Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. If you are on the side of the people, your choices can be only Ted Cruz or Donald Trump.
-
As Ted Cruz has repeatedly told us, inside the beltway there are only members of one party. The Washington Party! And that is who we must defeat if we are ever again to be a FREE people!
-
Great essay, Laz. :beer:
-
WTF - waaah. Can't do a crybaby from a kindle.
-
Illuminating piece. Certain to spark heated discussion between establishment types and firebrands like me.
-
Illuminating piece. Certain to spark heated discussion between establishment types and firebrands like me.
Imagine for the first time in my life...a member of "the Establshment"..what to do?
-
Imagine for the first time in my life...a member of "the Establshment"..what to do?
Come over to the Darkside...
-
"Imagine for the first time in my life...a member of "the Establshment"..what to do?"
Come over to the Darkside...
We've got cookies.
-
We've got cookies.
No ya don't what you got is General Hospital or something.
-
WTF - waaah. Can't do a crybaby from a kindle.
Great analysis. You really took apart that essay line by line.
Name calling is the last refuge of those who cannot logically disprove an opposing point of view.
-
Kind of a bummer when you can't count on all the sychophants.
-
Great analysis. You really took apart that essay line by line.
Name calling is the last refuge of those who cannot logically dispr
ove an opposing point of view.
This is something to be treated seriously? What a joke
-
This is something to be treated seriously? What a joke
If the TRUTH offends you that's YOUR problem not mine!
-
If the TRUTH offends you that's YOUR problem not mine!
What truth? You are so sure and yet so beholden.
-
What truth? You are so sure and yet so beholden.
To whom do you imagine me beholden?
-
Great essay, Laz. :beer:
Ditto...
-
Society, at its core political and cultural institutions, does not resemble today the America my family came to in 1956. In the last half-century it has become corrupt at nearly every level. It's time to clean house. Starting with the District of Columbia, and reaching into state capitals, and many, many city governments.
They are not the boss of us.
-
Society, at its core political and cultural institutions, does not resemble today the America my family came to in 1956. In the last half-century it has become corrupt at nearly every level. It's time to clean house. Starting with the District of Columbia, and reaching into state capitals, and many, many city governments.
They are not the boss of us.
Bears repeating so I will!
They are not the boss of us.
-
Bears repeating so I will!
They are not the boss of us.
They are if we let 'em!
-
They are if we let 'em!
That is what we've been doing for FAR to long!
-
Nice analysis, Sir!
Riposte: http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,176151.msg692437.html#msg692437
-
If you have signed up on the sides of the Elitists, you have many choices, foremost among those being Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. If you are on the side of the people, your choices can be only Ted Cruz or Donald Trump.
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BqwdNm52Pzg/hqdefault.jpg)
Hello Laz.
I wonder why "the people" are represented by so few real conservatives. As a supporter of the Elitists, I'm proud to have Walker, Perry, Rubio, Kasich, Paul, and all the rest of the GOP Representatives, Senators, and Governors your side has rejected.
Your humor is much more subtle than I remember.
Till next time.
-
If you have signed up on the sides of the Elitists, you have many choices, foremost among those being Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. If you are on the side of the people, your choices can be only Ted Cruz or Donald Trump.
So, one of the only two choices available to me, as a conservative, is (according to you) a pro-abortion, pro gun control, pro taxation candidate?
Why haven't "the people" elected more choices for me to consider?
If the "elitists" are not the choice of the people, why do the people keep electing them to office?
Politics is sooooo confusing!
Oh!
How about Jerry Springer?
I mean his positions on abortion, guns and taxes are the same as The Donald, and his show was waaaay more entertaining.
Surely Jerry Springer.
-
So, one of the only two choices available to me, as a conservative, is (according to you) a pro-abortion, pro gun control, pro taxation candidate?
Why haven't "the people" elected more choices for me to consider?
If the "elitists" are not the choice of the people, why do the people keep electing them to office?
Because they have been trained to hold their noses and vote the lesser of two evils
-
"Elitists like illegal alien invasion (and have encouraged it not only in America, but European nations), because that form of invasion dilutes national identities, erases borders, and leads the world to a nationless Global government."
It's a little less grand and esoteric. They like illegal aliens because they own businesses. They like hard-working, less expensive labor...they like "hungry" workers. American kids are spoiled college graduates expecting high salaries for little work...and who won't work with their hands in dirt. Politicians like them because they need an increasing population of legal workers contrbuting to their grand - and now ancient - social schemes like social security and Medicare. Without an increasing population of workers, those ridiculous pyramid schemes, which are the most politically sacred in big government, would fail utterly and most disastrously for incumbent office holders. That's why elitists like the alien invasion...they can't keep their form of government, or their power, propped up without them. The society and government they've created is far too economically and socially unsustainable without them.
-
This is something to be treated seriously? What a joke
Rove? Rove, is that you, you magnificent bastard?
-
Because they have been trained to hold their noses and vote the lesser of two evils
I think it's pretty elite to tell others who they must vote for lest they become "not one of us".
-
I enjoyed reading your take on things, Laz.
I think it is true that Trump is tapping into a populist resentment, but whether he is in the tradition of Reagan remains to be seen. He is more in the vein of William Jennings Bryan or Ross Perot. Many people are investing their hopes and dreams into this man, but I fear he is going to turn out to be quite a flawed vessel when all is said and done.
In the meantime, what political junkie can resist the sideshow? I can't. Look for this upcoming debate to be one of the highest rated Republican primary debates simply because people can't wait to see what this guy is going to do next.
One thing is absolutely apparent, and that is the Republican establishment with its sycophantic tadpoles Bush et al vastly underestimated the Donald. It will be very interesting to see what they do now. Will they too start to say ultra-provocative things to cut through the clutter? Will they attack Trump and risk getting into a mud fight with maybe the best political mud fighter of all time?
One thing is certain. This will not be another boring Republican primary with an establishment coronation at the end.
-
If only our political heroes all that we build them up to be.
Laz wrote:
Ronald Reagan won as a Populist. He fought the Republican establishment, won the primary in 1980, and went on to become the most anti-big-government, anti-communist, pro-ordinary-citizen President in modern history. His sweeping re-election in 1984, capturing nearly every single state (including liberal ones), showed that Populist policies are popular even in liberal bastions.
I've always been a fan of Reagan for his stance against the Soviet Union. He was a good governor and I recall his short radio commentaries that moved me into a thinking rather than reacting mode. But Reagan wasn't the fiscal anti-government champion many hold him up to have been.
During his term of office, civilian employment in the executive branch increased by 200 thousand, federal spending went from $591 billion to $1.14 trillion, the deficit doubled and the national debt went from $907 billion to $2.9 trillion, a trend that has only continued upward to this day.
-
If only our political heroes all that we build them up to be.
Laz wrote:
I've always been a fan of Reagan for his stance against the Soviet Union. He was a good governor and I recall his short radio commentaries that moved me into a thinking rather than reacting mode. But Reagan wasn't the fiscal anti-government champion many hold him up to have been.
During his term of office, civilian employment in the executive branch increased by 200 thousand, federal spending went from $591 billion to $1.14 trillion, the deficit doubled and the national debt went from $907 billion to $2.9 trillion, a trend that has only continued upward to this day.
He wasn't a populist either. Laz apparently has no clue what a populist is.
-
Because they have been trained to hold their noses and vote the lesser of two evils
You're telling me that when the choice was Obama and Romney the lesser of those two evils was Obama?
Or when there was a TEA Party candidate running against an Establishment Elite, the Establishment Elite was the lesser of the two evils?
-
Any student of the decline of Rome knows how bad an idea that would have been.
Regardless of whether or not illegals should be allowed in the military any student of Rome knows that it was Rome's cosmopolitanism that created its greatness in the first place and the decadent Romans relied on barbarians in the military to keep the Empire alive for hundreds of years beyond what would have taken place if they had not done so.
-
Regardless of whether or not illegals should be allowed in the military any student of Rome knows that it was Rome's cosmopolitanism that created its greatness in the first place and the decadent Romans relied on barbarians in the military to keep the Empire alive for hundreds of years beyond what would have taken place if they had not done so.
Two words! B... S...!
-
Two words! B... S...!
Uh no...no BS.
-
Uh no...no BS.
Bigun knew the Romans.
-
Uh no...no BS.
Yes! BS aplenty! But I have not time to teach you history this morning!
-
Yes! BS aplenty! But I have not time to teach you history this morning!
Maybe you should try reading it a little and from the original sources.
-
Yes! BS aplenty! But I have not time to teach you history this morning!
Have you ever considered the possibility that there may be someone out there who actually may have a better understanding of any subject than you?
Maybe he could teach you history.
-
Maybe you should try reading it a little and from the original sources.
What makes you think I haven't?
-
Have you ever considered the possibility that there may be someone out there who actually may have a better understanding of any subject than you?
Maybe he could teach you history.
There are people out there with better understandings than I on a lot of things but when one says "Regardless of whether or not illegals should be allowed in the military any student of Rome knows that it was Rome's cosmopolitanism that created its greatness in the first place and the decadent Romans relied on barbarians in the military to keep the Empire alive for hundreds of years beyond what would have taken place if they had not done so." it indicates to me that that particular person doesn't know what the hell he is talking about on that subject!
Have a GREAT day Luis!
-
There are people out there with better understandings than I on a lot of things but when one says "Regardless of whether or not illegals should be allowed in the military any student of Rome knows that it was Rome's cosmopolitanism that created its greatness in the first place and the decadent Romans relied on barbarians in the military to keep the Empire alive for hundreds of years beyond what would have taken place if they had not done so." it indicates to me that that particular person doesn't know what the hell he is talking about on that subject!
Have a GREAT day Luis!
It makes perfect sense to someone who knows and cares about history and you would know it if you were such a person.
-
There are people out there with better understandings than I on a lot of things but when one says "Regardless of whether or not illegals should be allowed in the military any student of Rome knows that it was Rome's cosmopolitanism that created its greatness in the first place and the decadent Romans relied on barbarians in the military to keep the Empire alive for hundreds of years beyond what would have taken place if they had not done so." it indicates to me that that particular person doesn't know what the hell he is talking about on that subject!
Have a GREAT day Luis!
I hapen to know the subject VERY well, and I agree with his statement.
-
I hapen to know the subject VERY well, and I agree with his statement.
Of course you do!
-
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BqwdNm52Pzg/hqdefault.jpg)
Hello Laz.
I wonder why "the people" are represented by so few real conservatives. As a supporter of the Elitists, I'm proud to have Walker, Perry, Rubio, Kasich, Paul, and all the rest of the GOP Representatives, Senators, and Governors your side has rejected.
Your humor is much more subtle than I remember.
Till next time.
I do appreciate your honesty, that you are an Elitist, and an enemy of the people. You, of course, are my sworn enemy as well, then.
To your question: "I wonder why "the people" are represented by so few real conservatives?"
The liberals in the GOP ally with the entire Democrat party to take down anyone who is a Populist. That, plus since you guys managed to seize the machinery after Reagan, makes it so you rigged the primary system pretty well. Then, you offer us non-choices.
Oh, you got your way. No question.
Now America is unsustainable, especially economically, and you will rule over smoldering ruins.
I'm reminded of Trent Reznor's song, "Hurt":
I wear this crown of s***
Upon my liar's chair
Full of broken thoughts
I cannot repair
Beneath the stains of time
The feelings disappear
You are someone else
I am still right here
What have I become?
My sweetest friend
Everyone I know
Goes away in the end
You could have it all
My empire of dirt
I will let you down
I will make you hurt
-
I do appreciate your honesty, that you are an Elitist, and an enemy of the people. You, of course, are my sworn enemy as well, then.
You see? Concentration camps are "the people's" preferred solution every time.
-
I hapen to know the subject VERY well, and I agree with his statement.
I'm certainly willing to be corrected on this particular point, per the viability of foreign nationals serving in the Roman army. Curiously, due to a GAME (for goodness sake!) called Total War: Rome II, I have taken to looking into history and especially the history of the Roman professional army. I discover that the two subjects -- foreigner nationals in the Roman army and foreign nationals in the American army -- cannot be compared. Rome was an expanding empire, we are not. Rome would 'romanticize' new territoriality and tribes, creating a new pool of recruits, we do not. Legions Rome tended to have loyalty to one general, ours are not.
The two do not compare. In the period prior to 100BC, Italians made up 65% of the army foot soldiers, some time after that, the numbers dwindled to 1%. However, it didn't seem to make a difference in loyalties, because loyalties were pledged to Generals -- not the nation-state of Rome.
In future distributions of this editorial, I shall be removing the phrase that references the Roman army. Thanks.
-
There are people out there with better understandings than I on a lot of things but when one says "Regardless of whether or not illegals should be allowed in the military any student of Rome knows that it was Rome's cosmopolitanism that created its greatness in the first place and the decadent Romans relied on barbarians in the military to keep the Empire alive for hundreds of years beyond what would have taken place if they had not done so." it indicates to me that that particular person doesn't know what the hell he is talking about on that subject!
Have a GREAT day Luis!
You can have a cosmopolitan place without having to let people in illegally - in fact it works better when we know who is crossing our borders. It's the tired old word games - saying that people who are against illegal migration are against immigrants. What an arrogant attitude some people have.
-
You see? Concentration camps are "the people's" preferred solution every time.
You are a fool, and there is a reason you were blasted from Free Republic.
I celebrate your removal from that forum :beer:, and because you are so nonsensical and utterly devoid of a lick of reason, I shall be either placing you on actual ignore, if the software accommodates it. If it doesn't, I shall keep you on mental ignore, no matter how loud and frenetically you bleat.
No worries, though; I don't frequent GOPBR too often. When I do, though, I will address people of higher merit than you.
Good day.
-
"Elitists like illegal alien invasion (and have encouraged it not only in America, but European nations), because that form of invasion dilutes national identities, erases borders, and leads the world to a nationless Global government."
It's a little less grand and esoteric. They like illegal aliens because they own businesses. They like hard-working, less expensive labor...they like "hungry" workers. American kids are spoiled college graduates expecting high salaries for little work...and who won't work with their hands in dirt. Politicians like them because they need an increasing population of legal workers contrbuting to their grand - and now ancient - social schemes like social security and Medicare. Without an increasing population of workers, those ridiculous pyramid schemes, which are the most politically sacred in big government, would fail utterly and most disastrously for incumbent office holders. That's why elitists like the alien invasion...they can't keep their form of government, or their power, propped up without them. The society and government they've created is far too economically and socially unsustainable without them.
You have applied Occam's Razor successfully, but I still hold that some of the grand, esoteric motivations apply to some extent.
-
We have the *ignore* feature here in your personal settings.
-
You can have a cosmopolitan place without having to let people in illegally - in fact it works better when we know who is crossing our borders. It's the tired old word games - saying that people who are against illegal migration are against immigrants. What an arrogant attitude some people have.
It's a tried and true liberal tactic. If you can't win a debate on the merits of your argument, incorrectly redefine your opponent's position, then declare victory.
-
If only our political heroes all that we build them up to be.
Laz wrote:
I've always been a fan of Reagan for his stance against the Soviet Union. He was a good governor and I recall his short radio commentaries that moved me into a thinking rather than reacting mode. But Reagan wasn't the fiscal anti-government champion many hold him up to have been.
During his term of office, civilian employment in the executive branch increased by 200 thousand, federal spending went from $591 billion to $1.14 trillion, the deficit doubled and the national debt went from $907 billion to $2.9 trillion, a trend that has only continued upward to this day.
True. However, remember what the Congress looked like at the time, and the prevailing tendency to actually follow the Constitution back then. Also remember Reagan had thrust upon him, an extreme Establishment type, G.H.W.Bush, who -- curiously -- had been head of the CIA for quite a while.
Say, doesn't the CIA teach it's agents to be 'handlers' of people and channel them into desired activities? That's a coincidence, right there!
-
We have the *ignore* feature here in your personal settings.
You are a sweety.
Marry me.
Unless you are a guy.
Then we can only date.
-
It's a tried and true liberal tactic. If you can't win a debate on the merits of your argument, incorrectly redefine your opponent's position, then declare victory.
:thumbsup:
-
You can have a cosmopolitan place without having to let people in illegally - in fact it works better when we know who is crossing our borders. It's the tired old word games - saying that people who are against illegal migration are against immigrants. What an arrogant attitude some people have.
That's not what I was doing though. If you go back and read what I said I was only pointing out what was to me a bizarre reference to Rome which to his credit he actually agreed to remove.
-
You are a sweety.
Marry me.
Unless you are a guy.
Then we can only date.
Marry me?...I bet you say that to all the girls......or significant other..or partner...whatever the case may be...lol
-
Marry me?...I bet you say that to all the girls......or significant other..or partner...whatever the case may be...lol
I'd say so. He's famous for wanting to "hit" anything with at least two legs over on FR.
-
That's not what I was doing though. If you go back and read what I said I was only pointing out what was to me a bizarre reference to Rome which to his credit he actually agreed to remove.
I was merely pointing out that cosmopolitanism doesn't require the presence of people of different cultures that have entered a place illegally. The argument that I've seen many times is that somehow, these illegals enrich our culture. I will acknowledge that your comment was directed toward the barbarian military - but you felt the need to include the cosmopolitan comment. I took that as a commentary on the positive aspects of cosmopolitanism, without providing a clarification as to whether that is achieved by allowing illegals of different cultures to run amok - as opposed to the controlled presence of different cultures mingling together to create a vibrant mix. You were the one that used the term cosmopolitan, so it is fair game to comment on it's usage.
-
I was merely pointing out that cosmopolitanism doesn't require the presence of people of different cultures that have entered a place illegally. The argument that I've seen many times is that somehow, these illegals enrich our culture. I will acknowledge that your comment was directed toward the barbarian military - but you felt the need to include the cosmopolitan comment. I took that as a commentary on the positive aspects of cosmopolitanism, without providing a clarification as to whether that is achieved by allowing illegals of different cultures to run amok - as opposed to the controlled presence of different cultures mingling together to create a vibrant mix. You were the one that used the term cosmopolitan, so it is fair game to comment on it's usage.
Only in reference to Rome...only in reference to Rome. The Roman reference was a mistake which he acknowledged. People see things that aren't there sometimes. Personally I think immigration needs a halt for a time to allow assimilation.
-
I'd say so. He's famous for wanting to "hit" anything with at least two legs over on FR.
He's just teasing....I've known Laz for a long time and I know he cheats on me.... :whistle:
-
Illuminating piece.
The battle lines aren't new and Illuminating was a good choice of words...
-
True. However, remember what the Congress looked like at the time, and the prevailing tendency to actually follow the Constitution back then. Also remember Reagan had thrust upon him, an extreme Establishment type, G.H.W.Bush, who -- curiously -- had been head of the CIA for quite a while.
Say, doesn't the CIA teach it's agents to be 'handlers' of people and channel them into desired activities? That's a coincidence, right there!
Still, Reagan had a Republican Senate for most of his term in office. He did manage to get issues that he wanted done, like cutting the highest marginal tax rate, but at time of dramatic new spending, that doesn't add up to fiscal conservatism, IMHO.
Yeah Bush 41 was CIA director for a year. But are you saying Reagan was being "handled" by Bush to run up the debt and expand government? The debt growth had almost stabilized by 1980, but started an upward trend that has risen 20 fold since 1981. Trump has already said he would cut taxes for everyone and eliminate the corporate income tax. I'm waiting for what he's going to do about the debt that' being handed to my grandchildren.
And it's not just Trump; none of them wants to address the elephant in the room. It's too easy to give rather than take away. Democrats promise more spending and higher taxes; Republicans promise lower taxes and less spending, but in the end, neither pays much attention to the growing debt.
-
And it's not just Trump; none of them wants to address the elephant in the room. It's too easy to give rather than take away. Democrats promise more spending and higher taxes; Republicans promise lower taxes and less spending, but in the end, neither pays much attention to the growing debt.
Yep, the problem isn't the "elites" vs. us or any other conspiratorial nonsense. It's like economics. People find they can "vote the key to the public treasury" and that's the end. People have known about this for a long time.
-
Also remember Reagan had thrust upon him, an extreme Establishment type, G.H.W.Bush, who -- curiously -- had been head of the CIA for quite a while.
Say, doesn't the CIA teach it's agents to be 'handlers' of people and channel them into desired activities? That's a coincidence, right there!
Well, they did have to shoot Reagan early on because he was getting too big for his britches. He was a lot more cooperative after that. The Hinckleys (http://www.hereinreality.com/hinckley.html), of course, gave a lot of money to the Bush campaign and John's brother Scott was scheduled to accompany his girlfriend to Neil Bush's house for dinner the evening of the day that Reagan got shot as reported by the Houston Post.
Needless to say... that event was postponed and the Bushes honestly couldn't remember ever meeting the Hinckleys... :silly:
-
Yeah Bush 41 was CIA director for a year. But are you saying Reagan was being "handled" by Bush to run up the debt and expand government?
Nope. But it sure is a coincidence.
Also, wasn't Reagan nearly assassinated mere months after his first election?
Wow, these coincidences. Yikes. :thud:
-
Well, they did have to shoot Reagan early on because he was getting too big for his britches. He was a lot more cooperative after that. The Hinckleys (http://www.hereinreality.com/hinckley.html), of course, gave a lot of money to the Bush campaign and John's brother Scott was scheduled to accompany his girlfriend to Neil Bush's house for dinner the evening of the day that Reagan got shot as reported by the Houston Post.
Needless to say... that event was postponed and the Bushes honestly couldn't remember ever meeting the Hinckleys... :silly:
MORE coincidences!!!! :thud:
-
MORE coincidences!!!! :thud:
Nothing to see here, citizen... move along...
-
Nothing to see here, citizen... move along...
Heading quickly towards looneyville now. There's precious little daylight between the loony left and the loony right.
-
Heading quickly towards looneyville now. There's precious little daylight between the loony left and the loony right.
The point of the OP and the thread is that left/right is the creation of the elitists.
That knee-jerk stuff is Pavlovian, don't you think?
-
The point of the OP and the thread is that left/right is the creation of the elitists.
That knee-jerk stuff is Pavlovian, don't you think?
So they've got you right where they want you?
-
So they've got you right where they want you?
They've certainly got you putting me right where they want me...
-
They've certainly got you putting me right where they want me...
:laugh:
-
Mr. Dan, I believe that it is important to point out all the odd coincidences. I do not make any positive assertion thereupon, I merely point out the coincidences.
-
I think it undeniable that there exists a significant chasm between the American public at large and those who may be fairly characterized as our Elite.
But the nature of America's "Ruling Class" elite today seems quite different than it has been in the past, and especially from those of other societies, historically speaking.
Ours are not Earls or Dukes or other such hereditary grand pooh-bahs. They are not oil tycoons or railroad magnates or captains of industry. They are not members of shadowy societies with secret symbols, handshakes and Illuminati lapel pins.
What they are, are people who went to Harvard.
Seriously. Well, sort of.
Our elites are more broadly speaking people who went to Ivy league schools and who now thoroughly dominate the universities, think tanks, news media and government offices and bureaucracies.
They don't tend to create or produce very much of value. But then, they don't have to. What they do is to effectively control the powerful levers of government to enrich themselves and their families.
-
I think the elites are the opinion-makers and they didn't go to Harvard. The more likely went to the Columbia School of Journalism or never went to school at all but became famous and influential.
-
You can have a cosmopolitan place without having to let people in illegally - in fact it works better when we know who is crossing our borders. It's the tired old word games - saying that people who are against illegal migration are against immigrants. What an arrogant attitude some people have.
You're responding to a point that wasn't being directly discussed.
The discussion was about the Roman Empire as Laz applied the example in his piece, and the issue has been resolved. HOWEVER, the fact that a nation is trying to elevate its citizens out of the lower rungs of the economic ladder does not eliminate those lower rungs, or the market's needs for people to fill them. Those lower rungs have ALWAYS been occupied by immigrants.
The problem is that a segment of our population thinks that we need to stop or seriously curtail all immigration, so increasing the number of legal immigrants entering the country is a candidacy killer for any politician. It's far easier to let them come in illegally, and use that subject as political ammunition.
-
You're responding to a point that wasn't being directly discussed.
The discussion was about the Roman Empire as Laz applied the example in his piece.
The issue has been resolved. HOWEVER, the fact that a nation is trying to elevate its citizens out of the lower rungs of the economic ladder does not eliminate those lower rungs, and those lower rungs have ALWAYS been occupied by immigrants. The problem is that a segment of our population thinks that we need to stop or seriously curtail all immigration, so increasing the number of legal immigrants entering the country is a candidacy killer for any politician.
I wonder who'd be screaming if, for the past 10 years, only Nordic Europeans were allowed into our country at the same rate as Hispanics, for example.
Also, would said Nordic people do the jobs Americans 'refuse to do'?
-
I wonder who'd be screaming if, for the past 10 years, only Nordic Europeans were allowed into our country at the same rate as Hispanics, for example.
Also, would said Nordic people do the jobs Americans 'refuse to do'?
Never seen any Nordic Europeans picking oranges in Florida.
Something about the sun and their skin.
-
Also, would said Nordic people do the jobs Americans 'refuse to do'?
It's not that Americans 'refuse to do certain jobs'.
It's that Americans 'refuse to do certain jobs for wages that Mexicans will accept'.
Big difference...
-
Never seen any Nordic Europeans picking oranges in Florida.
Something about the sun and their skin.
Good point, Luis.
But I'm sure they make beds and lay carpet and concrete. :laugh:
-
It's not that Americans 'refuse to do certain jobs'.
It's that Americans 'refuse to do certain jobs for wages that Mexicans will accept'.
Big difference...
I think this is mostly exaggerated. I know the farmers want Mexicans because the Mexicans are so good at what they do. Go ask 'em. I also know an illegal who cleans houses and makes a fairly good living at it..owns a house and a car. There are not many legals in competition with her.
-
It's not that Americans 'refuse to do certain jobs'.
It's that Americans 'refuse to do certain jobs for wages that Mexicans will accept'.
Big difference...
You're probably right, Dan.
But my main point was...would the race hustlers have screamed bloody murder is only Caucasoid immigrants were favored during said time?
-
I think this is mostly exaggerated. I know the farmers want Mexicans because the Mexicans are so good at what they do. Go ask 'em. I also know an illegal who cleans houses and makes a fairly good living at it..owns a house and a car. There are not many legals in competition with her.
I, too, have known dozens of successful 'illegals' who have thriving businesses and homes...one owns several properties.
They work hard and long hours, and still attend Church on Sunday. Their children are all-county sports star athletes who speak without a hint of an accent. Yet, can speak both languages fluently.
It was the love and respect for them while I was an active Realtor that made me a pariah on TOS.
I warned them for years that "today" was coming. Fell on deaf ears.
-
I think this is mostly exaggerated. I know the farmers want Mexicans because the Mexicans are so good at what they do. Go ask 'em. I also know an illegal who cleans houses and makes a fairly good living at it..owns a house and a car. There are not many legals in competition with her.
I know that it is not exaggerated.
I live in an area where livestock barns must be cleaned. That was done by a company employing white citizens. Then the illegals moved in and started doing the job cheaper. Guess who has all of the business now?
Duplicate this thousands of times across our country...
-
I know that it is not exaggerated.
I live in an area where livestock barns must be cleaned. That was done by a company employing white citizens. Then the illegals moved in and started doing the job cheaper. Guess who has all of the business now?
Duplicate this thousands of times across our country...
And of course you are aware that there is another huge aspect to this. Then one HAD to work in order to feed and clothe himself and his family. Now all you need do is get on some kind of government assistance and Uncle sugar takes care of all that for you!
-
And of course you are aware that there is another huge aspect to this. Then one HAD to work in order to feed and clothe himself and his family. Now all you need do is get on some kind of government assistance and Uncle sugar takes care of all that for you!
Oh this happened in just the past couple of years...
-
I think this is mostly exaggerated. I know the farmers want Mexicans because the Mexicans are so good at what they do. Go ask 'em. I also know an illegal who cleans houses and makes a fairly good living at it..owns a house and a car. There are not many legals in competition with her.
It is. After Hurricane Katrina, the residents of New Orleans took the credit cards and left, laughing at $16.50 an hour to help rebuild their homes. The illegals took $10 an hour and were happy to get the work, and they had to take less because of the difficulty of getting work, not because they were just cheap labor.
-
It's not that Americans 'refuse to do certain jobs'.
It's that Americans 'refuse to do certain jobs for wages that Mexicans will accept'.
Big difference...
Don't know why people can't wrap their noodle around this.
It is not just Mexicans tho, it is all of the immigrants, legal or otherwise.
Our lives, economy, real estate values, retirement funds, require "inflation" so the things we do and buy are worth more tomorrow than when we purchased them.
Our political parties in collusion with corporate American has spent the last 20 years deflating salaries by intentionally flooding the American labor market with cheap labor from overseas. The H1b/illegal can live on less as they are not buying houses as noted in the latest homeowner report showing the lowest home ownership rate since the '60s. I personally have seen them living 5 to a 1 bedroom apartment in sleeping bags and sending their money home. An American cannot afford to work for the same low wages as their expenses are too high and they could not afford the payments on their house they purchased in good faith. I know, I heard all the accusations about buying too much house also, but it is not true in most cases. So we had a flood of repo'd homes and that is finally getting cleared up but RE values are still not climbing as they should and I believe there will be another RE downturn to bring home prices in line with salaries.
If you are going to lose anyway, why not get the easy money because the feds are just going to flush it down some hole anyway.
-
It is. After Hurricane Katrina, the residents of New Orleans took the credit cards and left, laughing at $16.50 an hour to help rebuild their homes. The illegals took $10 an hour and were happy to get the work, and they had to take less because of the difficulty of getting work, not because they were just cheap labor.
If I had my way illegals would not have been able to get work at all!
-
Don't know why people can't wrap their noodle around this.
It is not just Mexicans tho, it is all of the immigrants, legal or otherwise.
Our lives, economy, real estate values, retirement funds, require "inflation" so the things we do and buy are worth more tomorrow than when we purchased them.
Our political parties in collusion with corporate American has spent the last 20 years deflating salaries by intentionally flooding the American labor market with cheap labor from overseas. The H1b/illegal can live on less as they are not buying houses as noted in the latest homeowner report showing the lowest home ownership rate since the '60s. I personally have seen them living 5 to a 1 bedroom apartment in sleeping bags and sending their money home. An American cannot afford to work for the same low wages as their expenses are too high and they could not afford the payments on their house they purchased in good faith. I know, I heard all the accusations about buying too much house also, but it is not true in most cases. So we had a flood of repo'd homes and that is finally getting cleared up but RE values are still not climbing as they should and I believe there will be another RE downturn to bring home prices in line with salaries.
If you are going to lose anyway, why not get the easy money because the feds are just going to flush it down some hole anyway.
For God's sake it's more complicated than that. I can't believe how uneducated some Americans are about the whole history of our country.
-
If I had my way illegals would not have been able to get work at all!
I've no doubt.
-
I've no doubt.
Pesky little thing called the law!
-
Pesky little thing called the law!
Yeah, it's really worked well over the past ten years.
-
Yeah, it's really worked well over the past ten years.
NO! Ir hasn't! But that is not the fault of the law! It is the fault of a citizenry that stands by and allows those charged with enforcing the law to get away with not doing that!
-
NO! Ir hasn't! But that is not the fault of the law! It is the fault of a citizenry that stands by and allows those charged with enforcing the law to get away with not doing that!
Friggin hell Bigun..you are telling me that these folks have cost you a job? I'll give you a job..come and cut our lot.
-
My neighbor is a large regional painting contractor, and very conservative. He is against illegal immigration, but he admits they are the workers he can hire that actually show up to work reliably.
White boys will take a few days off after pay day, to tweak on meth etc.
-
Friggin hell Bigun..you are telling me that these folks have cost you a job? I'll give you a job..come and cut our lot.
:mauslaff: :mauslaff: :mauslaff:
You're a real barrel of laughs aren't you?
It isn't about ME! it's about the LAW you damned fool!
-
My neighbor is a large regional painting contractor, and very conservative. He is against illegal immigration, but he admits they are the workers he can hire that actually show up to work reliably.
White boys will take a few days off after pay day, to tweak on meth etc.
Truth sux.
-
My neighbor is a large regional painting contractor, and very conservative. He is against illegal immigration, but he admits they are the workers he can hire that actually show up to work reliably.
White boys will take a few days off after pay day, to tweak on meth etc.
Great story! Unfortunately it is totally irrelevant to the law regarding illegals!
-
Great story! Unfortunately it is totally irrelevant to the law regarding illegals!
Just asking, what would you do if you were one of these people!
-
I do appreciate your honesty, that you are an Elitist, and an enemy of the people. You, of course, are my sworn enemy as well, then.
To your question: "I wonder why "the people" are represented by so few real conservatives?"
The liberals in the GOP ally with the entire Democrat party to take down anyone who is a Populist. That, plus since you guys managed to seize the machinery after Reagan, makes it so you rigged the primary system pretty well. Then, you offer us non-choices.
The MAN be keeping you down Laz!!!
(http://images.politico.com/global/2015/07/27/20150727_kruse_trumpandhillary_getty.jpg)
Lots of people who feel powerless create conspiracies to explain their powerlessness. The reason why "the people" reject fringe conservatives is that those fringe conservatives don't represent the views of "the people." It is that simple.
Oh, you got your way. No question.
Now America is unsustainable, especially economically, and you will rule over smoldering ruins.
Well the good news is Senator Cruz says the American people will rise up this time...unlike the 2013 shutdown, or the midterm primaries.
-
:mauslaff: :mauslaff: :mauslaff:
You're a real barrel of laughs aren't you?
It isn't about ME! it's about the LAW you damned fool!
People who buy into the "Dreamer" fantasy think the law is irrelevant.
Yep. Right up until one of them drives drunk, unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured, after having been let go by the "law" for the umpteenth time... and kills one of their family members and then walks because... they're only doing the jobs Americans won't do. Like selling crystal meth and whoring on the streets of Manchester. Every damned day I see it, and I've had enough.
I don't know about where you live but when you read the police blotter in newspapers around this region, it sounds like the El Salvador phone book.
If immigrants truly want the American Dream, then I think we need to let them in. But they first need to earn it legally, the same way that my great-grandparents did, when they arrived here with no money, only the clothes on their backs, and speaking only a few words of English.
But back then, they had respect and love for the United States and for the rule of law. Today, our President doesn't even have that.
-
My neighbor is a large regional painting contractor, and very conservative. He is against illegal immigration, but he admits they are the workers he can hire that actually show up to work reliably.
White boys will take a few days off after pay day, to tweak on meth etc.
And brothers don't show up on time...or at all. :police:
-
Great story! Unfortunately it is totally irrelevant to the law regarding illegals!
Yeah...but if you're a business owner, it's the ONLY thing that's relevant.
-
(http://images.politico.com/global/2015/07/27/20150727_kruse_trumpandhillary_getty.jpg)
"And honey, you make sure you don't find yourself in a hallway alone with this guy here!"
-
People who buy into the "Dreamer" fantasy think the law is irrelevant.
Yep. Right up until one of them drives drunk, unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured, after having been let go by the "law" for the umpteenth time... and kills one of their family members and then walks because... they're only doing the jobs Americans won't do. Like selling crystal meth and whoring on the streets of Manchester. Every damned day I see it, and I've had enough.
Does it hurt less if that drunk, unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured scofflaw is native-born?
-
Right up until one of them drives drunk, unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured, after having been let go by the "law" for the umpteenth time... and kills one of their family members and then walks because... they're only doing the jobs Americans won't do.
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,176159.0.html
"I love our country, but sometimes it’s jobs that a citizen of the United States doesn’t want to do. I mean, there are jobs that a lot of people don’t want to do." - Trump
Respectfully Andy, I take no joy in writing this...you are being played.
-
From Conservative Tribune, 7/31/15:
Notice the Asterisk on Your Social Security Statement? What It Means Has Seniors Panicking
We’ve all been taught, in spite of the utter improbability of it, that whatever we pay into Social Security will be there when we retire. However, even the Social Security Administration admits that’s not true … and if you don’t believe me, just look at the asterisk on your Social Security statement.
A writer for National Review explained that his statement said he could expect to receive “about $2,136 a month” if he were to retire at age 70. However, the asterisk that appeared on the statement revealed there was a bit of a catch.
“The law governing benefit amounts may change because, by 2033, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to pay only about 77 percent of scheduled benefits,” the footnote read.
That would be a reduction of about $492 a month for the writer — quite a significant chunk.
But wait, there’s more — and it only gets worse.
The same writer referred to his 2009 Social Security statement, which bore a similar asterisk. The text, however, was different.
“The law governing benefit amounts may change because, by 2041, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to pay only about 78 percent of your scheduled benefits,” that message read.
In a period of six years, the timeline has shifted eight years earlier and one percentage point down. And, if the 2014 Social Security Trustees Report is any indication, we can continue to expect both numbers to get lower.
More at http://conservativetribune.com/asterisk-social-security-means/
So, how is any of that relevant to this discussion that seems to have descended into another argument about illegals?
Well, there's this:
STOCKTON, Calif. - Since illegally crossing the Mexican border into the United States six years ago, Ángel Martínez has done backbreaking work, harvesting asparagus, pruning grapevines and picking the ripe fruit. More recently, he has also washed trucks, often working as much as 70 hours a week, earning $8.50 to $12.75 an hour.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Martínez, 28, has not given much thought to Social Security's long-term financial problems. But Mr. Martínez -- who comes from the state of Oaxaca in southern Mexico and hiked for two days through the desert to enter the United States near Tecate, some 20 miles east of Tijuana -- contributes more than most Americans to the solvency of the nation's public retirement system.
Last year, Mr. Martínez paid about $2,000 toward Social Security and $450 for Medicare through payroll taxes withheld from his wages. Yet unlike most Americans, who will receive some form of a public pension in retirement and will be eligible for Medicare as soon as they turn 65, Mr. Martínez is not entitled to benefits.
He belongs to a big club. As the debate over Social Security heats up, the estimated seven million or so illegal immigrant workers in the United States are now providing the system with a subsidy of as much as $7 billion a year.
While it has been evident for years that illegal immigrants pay a variety of taxes, the extent of their contributions to Social Security is striking: the money added up to about 10 percent of last year's surplus -- the difference between what the system currently receives in payroll taxes and what it doles out in pension benefits. Moreover, the money paid by illegal workers and their employers is factored into all the Social Security Administration's projections.
Illegal immigration, Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, co-director of immigration studies at New York University, noted sardonically, could provide "the fastest way to shore up the long-term finances of Social Security."
It is impossible to know exactly how many illegal immigrant workers pay taxes. But according to specialists, most of them do. Since 1986, when the Immigration Reform and Control Act set penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, most such workers have been forced to buy fake ID's to get a job.
Currently available for about $150 on street corners in just about any immigrant neighborhood in California, a typical fake ID package includes a green card and a Social Security card. It provides cover for employers, who, if asked, can plausibly assert that they believe all their workers are legal. It also means that workers must be paid by the book -- with payroll tax deductions.
IRCA, as the immigration act is known, did little to deter employers from hiring illegal immigrants or to discourage them from working. But for Social Security's finances, it was a great piece of legislation.
Starting in the late 1980's, the Social Security Administration received a flood of W-2 earnings reports with incorrect -- sometimes simply fictitious -- Social Security numbers. It stashed them in what it calls the "earnings suspense file" in the hope that someday it would figure out whom they belonged to.
The file has been mushrooming ever since: $189 billion worth of wages ended up recorded in the suspense file over the 1990's, two and a half times the amount of the 1980's.
In the current decade, the file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year, generating $6 billion to $7 billion in Social Security tax revenue and about $1.5 billion in Medicare taxes.
In 2002 alone, the last year with figures released by the Social Security Administration, nine million W-2's with incorrect Social Security numbers landed in the suspense file, accounting for $56 billion in earnings, or about 1.5 percent of total reported wages.
Social Security officials do not know what fraction of the suspense file corresponds to the earnings of illegal immigrants. But they suspect that the portion is significant.
"Our assumption is that about three-quarters of other-than-legal immigrants pay payroll taxes," said Stephen C. Goss, Social Security's chief actuary, using the agency's term for illegal immigration.
Other researchers say illegal immigrants are the main contributors to the suspense file. "Illegal immigrants account for the vast majority of the suspense file," said Nick Theodore, the director of the Center for Urban Economic Development at the University of Illinois at Chicago. "Especially its growth over the 1990's, as more and more undocumented immigrants entered the work force."
Using data from the Census Bureau's current population survey, Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, an advocacy group in Washington that favors more limits on immigration, estimated that 3.8 million households headed by illegal immigrants generated $6.4 billion in Social Security taxes in 2002.
A comparative handful of former illegal immigrant workers who have obtained legal residence have been able to accredit their previous earnings to their new legal Social Security numbers. Mr. Camarota is among those opposed to granting a broad amnesty to illegal immigrants, arguing that, among other things, they might claim Social Security benefits and put further financial stress on the system.
The mismatched W-2's fit like a glove on illegal immigrants' known geographic distribution and the patchwork of jobs they typically hold. An audit found that more than half of the 100 employers filing the most earnings reports with false Social Security numbers from 1997 through 2001 came from just three states: California, Texas and Illinois. According to an analysis by the Government Accountability Office, about 17 percent of the businesses with inaccurate W-2's were restaurants, 10 percent were construction companies and 7 percent were farm operations.
Most immigration helps Social Security's finances, because new immigrants tend to be of working age and contribute more than they take from the system. A simulation by Social Security's actuaries found that if net immigration ran at 1.3 million a year instead of the 900,000 in their central assumption, the system's 75-year funding gap would narrow to 1.67 percent of total payroll, from 1.92 percent -- savings that come out to half a trillion dollars, valued in today's money.
Hmmmm...
Illegal aliens floating Social Security?
Can that be possible?
Well, this research group seems to think so:
From Reports on America, Vol 3, No.1 "Government Spending" by the Population Reference Bureau:
Many attempts have been made to estimate the fiscal impact of immigration, which not only generates demand for public education, health care, and other services, but also expands the tax base and slows the aging of the population. Some economists rely on cross-sectional estimates, using current data on immigrant households to compare benefits received from the government at all levels and taxes paid this year. But to investigate the long-term fiscal impact, analysis must take into account the expected payments over the life of an immigrant, and even the lifetimes of the immigrant’s children and grandchildren.
According to a study panel under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences, the longterm impact of a newly arrived immigrant turns out to depend greatly on the immigrant’s age at arrival. An average 20 year-old has many years in which to work and pay taxes before reaching the age when individuals typically receive more from the government than they pay in taxes. A 50-yearold, by contrast, is expected to work for only a few more years before becoming a net consumer of government services. The long-term impact also varies significantly with the immigrant’s education: Those with more education are likely to pay higher taxes during their working years, and the benefits they receive from government are not proportionately higher.
In a recent update of estimates prepared for the panel, Ronald Lee and Timothy Miller found that each additional immigrant with characteristics (such as age, education, and family size) typical of recent immigrants has a “net present value” of $46,000. That is, a new immigrant’s impact over the next 75 years is expected to be equivalent to a one-time investment of $46,000. But Lee and Miller estimate that the country would need to admit an additional 5 million immigrants per year, quintupling the current level of immigration, in order to achieve long-term balance in the Social Security trust fund. A recent report from the United Nations Population Division reached a similar conclusion for European countries, announcing that even much larger migration flows than are currently permitted would not counterbalance the effects of population aging.
To maintain the 2000 ratio between the working-age population (people between the ages of 20 and 64) and the older population (people ages 65 and older), the United States would need roughly 95 million more working-age persons in 2025, in addition to those already expected at current levels of immigration. In other words, if the entire working-age population of Mexico were to move to the United States in 2025, there still would not be enough people to restore the old-age dependency ratio of 2000.
Carry on.
-
From Conservative Tribune, 7/31/15:
So, how is any of that relevant to this discussion that seems to have descended into another argument about illegals?
Well, there's this:
Hmmmm...
Illegal aliens floating Social Security?
Can that be possible?
Well, this research group seems to think so:
From Reports on America, Vol 3, No.1 "Government Spending" by the Population Reference Bureau:
Carry on.
LUIS! You are opening up Pandora's box. Fat, single language stupid, and lazy 'Mericans don't want to hear that sh*t. Their government checks are funded on the sweaty backs of the people they despise as diseased criminal subhumans...tread lightly. You will not be thanked for revealing TRUTH.
-
Does it hurt less if that drunk, unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured scofflaw is native-born?
It provides a focused, justified rage in so much that if the perp wasn't here illegally with the blessing of the government that the victims would still be alive or uninjured.
All of us realize "sh*t happens", but it's hard to accept, when in our minds it shouldn't have happened at all.
-
The MAN be keeping you down Laz!!!
Lots of people who feel powerless create conspiracies to explain their powerlessness. The reason why "the people" reject fringe conservatives is that those fringe conservatives don't represent the views of "the people." It is that simple.
Well the good news is Senator Cruz says the American people will rise up this time...unlike the 2013 shutdown, or the midterm primaries.
A) Mockery is right out of Alinsky. Congrats on your storied mentor!
B) Everyone is powerless. If you believe otherwise, welcome to a life of disappointment.
C) Conspiracies that are true are called 'plans'.
I am unsurprised at your response. I'm sure you are either a RINO/Establishment official, or a huge backer thereof -- one that is likely to see a payoff, either monetary or otherwise. You've got some skin in the game.
-
Hey Luis. Just an aside: Fairly happy this editorial generated a good deal of traffic. I'm even grateful for the flak. That means I'm over the target. :)
Stay safe brother. Times will be getting 'interesting'.
-
It provides a focused, justified rage in so much that if the perp wasn't here illegally with the blessing of the government that the victims would still be alive or uninjured.
All of us realize "sh*t happens", but it's hard to accept, when in our minds it shouldn't have happened at all.
It should never happen at all, but if we're going to justifiably rage then we should do so for all the victims of drunken scofflaws illegally driving.
We criticize black rabble rousers for only crying about black lives mattering when those black lives are ended by a Caucasian while completely ignoring the fact that black lives are ended in far greater numbers by other blacks than by whites, but we ourselves then turn around and exhibit a far higher degree of justifiable rage when the deaths are caused by someone whose legal status is part of a political issue than when not.
If the victims (as it is the case with another story in the news today) had been gunned down in a road rage incident by a native son with a criminal record because they offered him assistance, then the left would be using those victims as poster children in their argument for higher gun control, while we stood firm on the Second Amendment, arguing that "guns don't kill people".
We all have our thing I guess.
-
Hey Luis. Just an aside: Fairly happy this editorial generated a good deal of traffic. I'm even grateful for the flak. That means I'm over the target. :)
Stay safe brother. Times will be getting 'interesting'.
Dude, when writing a piece like this what you want is to stir interest and an interesting (and heated) debate.
You nailed it.
-
Late to the discussion as is my station, it seems. Thanks for the contribution, Laz.
In time, a choice will be presented to us on a Tuesday in a not-so-distant November. I hope it provides an option better than (E) vs. (E). I am not optimistic, but I will choose. As must we all.
My hope, because there is little else, is the pipeline. My fear is nothing will matter a hell of a lot short of a truly sudden, existential "snap-to" event. Our reality may be; given a generational indifference to traditional tenets of this society, driven and enabled by the political elitists, absolutely nothing may matter.
-
It provides a focused, justified rage in so much that if the perp wasn't here illegally with the blessing of the government that the victims would still be alive or uninjured.
All of us realize "sh*t happens", but it's hard to accept, when in our minds it shouldn't have happened at all.
Same goes every time a "native born" repeat offender finally takes out a family or a limo with a young bride and her brides' maids. If the SOB hadn't been let out or let off after the first DUI/DWI and kept in jail, then the victims would still be here.
-
Dude, when writing a piece like this what you want is to stir interest and an interesting (and heated) debate.
You nailed it.
LOL, yeah, I guess I did.
Hey, quick story: It was about 2001 or 2002, and you are the very first person who did the "Wow, Laz, you write well" thing on Free Republic. I was taken aback, no one had ever posted anything like that to me before. Now I get quite a few posts like that, and my answer today is what my answer was back then: "Meh. I'm just some jerk with a keyboard."
:)
-
LOL, yeah, I guess I did.
Hey, quick story: It was about 2001 or 2002, and you are the very first person who did the "Wow, Laz, you write well" thing on Free Republic. I was taken aback, no one had ever posted anything like that to me before. Now I get quite a few posts like that, and my answer today is what my answer was back then: "
"Meh. I'm just some jerk with a keyboard."
:)
Aren't we all?
P.S. Did you do that Jabberwocky spoof?
-
Aren't we all?
P.S. Did you do that Jabberwocky spoof?
I did. It's dated, now, but I feel it was one of my better works.
I cannot readily find it... :(
-
I did. It's dated, now, but I feel it was one of my better works.
I cannot readily find it... :(
That was brilliant..
I may have it. Let me look around.
-
I did. It's dated, now, but I feel it was one of my better works.
I cannot readily find it... :(
So Laz did you ever turn in those illegals that you know to ICE? I remember you made it a major argument to JR that I refused to inform on them then I asked yoy why you didn't inform and you said by God you would and thanked me for pointing out youe slackness. So have yoy turned any in?
-
So Laz did you ever turn in those illegals that you know to ICE? I remember you made it a major argument to JR that I refused to inform on them then I asked yoy why you didn't inform and you said by God you would and thanked me for pointing out youe slackness. So have yoy turned any in?
This is TBR...what happened at FR stays there..it has nothing to do with this site or this thread...if you want to pick a fight with Laz take it to Pm's....I would also consider utilizing the ignore feature.
-
This is TBR...what happened at FR stays there..it has nothing to do with this site or this thread...if you want to pick a fight with Laz take it to Pm's....I would also consider utilizing the ignore feature.
So a guy can pretend to be one thing on one site and another on another site and no one should call him out on it because in both instances he makes himself a favorite? Ok but it is dishonest in my opinion to portray yourself as a moderate on one site and an extremist on the other and evev to be encouraged to do this by the site mngmnt.
-
So a guy can pretend to be one thing on one site and another on another site and no one should call him out on it because in both instances he makes himself a favorite? Ok but it is dishonest in my opinion to portray yourself as a moderate on one site and an extremist on the other and evev to be encouraged to do this by the site mngmnt.
I don't care what he does on another site..as long as he behaves here and breaks no rules he is welcome here...act up and cause trouble, you're outta here!
-
That was brilliant..
I may have it. Let me look around.
I hope you do! I'd love that one back in my library! :)
-
Late to the discussion as is my station, it seems. Thanks for the contribution, Laz.
In time, a choice will be presented to us on a Tuesday in a not-so-distant November. I hope it provides an option better than (E) vs. (E). I am not optimistic, but I will choose. As must we all.
My hope, because there is little else, is the pipeline. My fear is nothing will matter a hell of a lot short of a truly sudden, existential "snap-to" event. Our reality may be; given a generational indifference to traditional tenets of this society, driven and enabled by the political elitists, absolutely nothing may matter.
I've heard a little chatter about a September 2015 time frame for major problems. I pray that chatter is noise, not signal. I like air conditioning and I hate bugs.
-
So a guy can pretend to be one thing on one site and another on another site and no one should call him out on it because in both instances he makes himself a favorite? Ok but it is dishonest in my opinion to portray yourself as a moderate on one site and an extremist on the other and evev to be encouraged to do this by the site mngmnt.
Have you ever know anyone whose name is mystery-ak, Lazamataz, Lando Lincoln, Once-ler, sinkspur or Oceander out in the real world?
Pretending you're someone that you're not is the cornerstone of online forums.
-
A) Mockery is right out of Alinsky. Congrats on your storied mentor!
B) Everyone is powerless. If you believe otherwise, welcome to a life of disappointment.
C) Conspiracies that are true are called 'plans'.
I am unsurprised at your response. I'm sure you are either a RINO/Establishment official, or a huge backer thereof -- one that is likely to see a payoff, either monetary or otherwise. You've got some skin in the game.
A. Mockery comes naturally for me, and with fringers it comes easily.
B. My guys are all in leadership position in the Congress and most Governor and state legislatures. Next year the GOP will own the White House too.
C. Conspiracies that are false are still stupid.
I've been working hard at being unsurprising. I do have skin in the game. I love my country, I have young children who I hope live in a better world, and I pay taxes.
Good job recognizing my support for the RINO/Establishment Sherlock...did the red white and blue rhino avatar, or the "RINO Libtard" line underneath give me away?
-
B. My guys are all in leadership position in the Congress and most Governor and state legislatures. Next year the GOP will own the White House too.
Yes, congratulations on rigging the system for liberal Republicans. WHOOO HOOOOO!
I've been working hard at being unsurprising. I do have skin in the game. I love my country, I have young children who I hope live in a better world, and I pay taxes.
Good job recognizing my support for the RINO/Establishment Sherlock...did the red white and blue rhino avatar, or the "RINO Libtard" line underneath give me away?
Well, you actually to admit you are a liberal. That is to your credit.
To your deficit, is that you are helping to destroy America.
So you can take pride in that.
-
Have you ever know anyone whose name is mystery-ak, Lazamataz, Lando Lincoln, Once-ler, sinkspur or Oceander out in the real world?
My pen name actually IS Laz A. Mataz.
So it's somewhat 'real world'.
-
Yes, congratulations on rigging the system for liberal Republicans. WHOOO HOOOOO!
Well, you actually to admit you are a liberal. That is to your credit.
To your deficit, is that you are helping to destroy America.
So you can take pride in that.
Come on Laz.... :whistle: Is that necessary?
Once-Ler has always presented himself as a thoughtful, ever-lucid poster, who shouldn't have to read crap like that in here....regardless of it being a hidden category for members.
Just my opinion....
-
.....and you are correct
-
Have you ever know anyone whose name is mystery-ak, Lazamataz, Lando Lincoln, Once-ler, sinkspur or Oceander out in the real world?
Pretending you're someone that you're not is the cornerstone of online forums.
Actually, on the 1870 (I think) census records, my great-grandfather is listed as "Oceander".
-
Come on Laz.... :whistle: Is that necessary?
Once-Ler has always presented himself as a thoughtful, ever-lucid poster, who shouldn't have to read crap like that in here....regardless of it being a hidden category for members.
Just my opinion....
Sorry bro, apology to you.
Not to him, though.
Liberals are my enemy.
-
Sorry bro, apology to you.
Not to him, though.
Liberals are my enemy.
Completely loony.
-
Sorry bro, apology to you.
Not to him, though.
Liberals are my enemy.
No need to apologize to me, Laz. I've always been a huge fan of yours. :patriot: "Love you long time!"
Simply believe that Once-Ler's opinions are valued by a lot of us in here. Go to any well read thread where poop was flying and you'll find him presenting a well reasoned, polite, thoughtful argument. :laugh:
-
No need to apologize to me, Laz. I've always been a huge fan of yours. :patriot: "Love you long time!"
Simply believe that Once-Ler's opinions are valued by a lot of us in here. Go to any well read thread where poop was flying and you'll find him presenting a well reasoned, polite, thoughtful argument. :laugh:
Well, since liberalism IS poop to me, I suggest that however polite, he was slinging poop too.
And of all the liberals in the world, ones that have infiltrated the Republican party are the most treacherous of all.
-
And of all the liberals in the world, ones that have infiltrated the Republican party are the most treacherous of all.
I think you're doing fine, Laz. Some of us feel a lot more like you do anyway. :silly:
-
Well, I don't think that America is in a deep, deep hole because of unfettered government conservatism.
I believe the blame for this mess lies with the loony left AND the feckless milquetoast Republicans breaking campaign promises to conservatives (who are the ones who get them elected), and for their giving in to each and every of Obama's illegal and unconstitutional actions.
-
Well, I don't think that America is in a deep, deep hole because of unfettered government conservatism.
I believe the blame for this mess lies with the loony left AND the feckless milquetoast Republicans breaking campaign promises to conservatives (who are the ones who get them elected), and for their giving in to each and every of Obama's illegal and unconstitutional actions.
I think the voters also have something to do with it.
-
I think the voters also have something to do with it.
Ain't universal suffrage wonderful...
-
Ain't universal suffrage wonderful...
Americans get outraged if you suggest some people should not be allowed to vote.
-
Americans get outraged if you suggest some people should not be allowed to vote.
IMO, only property owners should be given the vote.
Wanna vote?
Buy a house! :laugh:
-
IMO, only property owners should be given the vote.
Wanna vote?
Buy a house! :laugh:
I agree but even fairly conservative folks think that is un-American or something.
-
IMO, only property owners should be given the vote.
Wanna vote?
Buy a house! :laugh:
I agree that you should have some kind of investment in America to have the privilege to vote - at least be a taxpayer!
-
I agree that you should have some kind of investment in America to have the privilege to vote - at least be a taxpayer!
How about if you are on any subsistence you cannot vote.
I think welfare pay some sort of taxes don't they?
-
How about if you are on any subsistence you cannot vote.
I think welfare pay some sort of taxes don't they?
I don't have a problem with that at all - people on welfare should not have a vote.
-
How about if you are on any subsistence you cannot vote.
I think welfare pay some sort of taxes don't they?
It's all a dream. The "people" know they have the keys to the treasury they're not likely to give it back. Makes you admire all the more our ancestors who did understand and apply similar rules and even those denied the vote understood why.
-
I don't have a problem with that at all - people on welfare should not have a vote.
Since we are talking pipe dreams, nor should public employees at the level they are employed. Federal employees should not be allowed to vote in federal elections.
-
Since we are talking pipe dreams, nor should public employees at the level they are employed. Federal employees should not be allowed to vote in federal elections.
Excellent point!
-
I agree with massa.
-
Americans get outraged if you suggest some people should not be allowed to vote.
Simply because they have been conditioned to respond in that manner.
To not be 'outraged' would be racis...