On-Topic Ann Coulter Rips Marco Rubio Over Inmigration Reform.

[Just_Believe18]

Most of the illegals swarming across our southern borders are of Meso-American Inddian stock and have very little, if any, Spanish blood in them. Hence, not Hispanic.

FYI the eastern bloc border patrols were set up to keep people in, not to keep people out.

As for shoot to kill, why not? If someone is breaking into your house, you are within your rights in shooting them.
Breaking into your country is no different.

Your logic is disturbing, HenryReardon. What kind of nation would we be if we shot men, women, and children on sight? You do realize many of these illegal immigrants are families of women and children, correct? Are you equating a home invasion to justifying a headshot to an 8 year-old child crossing a river?

It's so easy to just say, "shoot them, kill them. Keep them out. Their deaths will solve the problem." Do you actually understand the weight of your words?

 

[xbuzzerx]

Your logic is disturbing, HenryReardon. What kind of nation would we be if we shot men, women, and children on sight? You do realize many of these illegal immigrants are families of women and children, correct? Are you equating a home invasion to justifying a headshot to an 8 year-old child crossing a river?

It's so easy to just say, "shoot them, kill them. Keep them out. Their deaths will solve the problem." Do you actually understand the weight of your words?

What amazes me is that all these same people justified the colonization of the Americas with "Indians committed atrocities too" but turn right around with so much as a batted eye and say mass slaughtering women and children at the border would be morally justifiable based off some extremist cowboy interpretation of home self defense laws.

 

[Rolyo85]

Does he understand the weight of his words? Has he ever given any indication that he does? Or for that matter - that they are his words at all?

 

[Sausy]

Shooting people on sight as a policy is appalling. We've got to make things easier on legal immigrants, and allow a path to citizenship for illegals that have been here and have made families...self deportation or forcible for that matter runs the gamut from imparactical to ludicrous. Unbridled amnesty, or failure to control borders isn't acceptable either, though to be fair to the Obama Administration many undocumented illegals coming from other sources than the southern borders have been returned to their counties of origin in the past four years.

Delicate balance is needed, as overall immigration is a boon for Americans as a whole as well. If the GOP listens to the Ann Coulters, they indeed will be signing their effective death sentence in the coming years.

 

[kayman23]

It's Ann Cunt-er, enough said...

 

[Centexfarmer]

Shooting people on sight as a policy is appalling. We've got to make things easier on legal immigrants, and allow a path to citizenship for illegals that have been here and have made families...self deportation or forcible for that matter runs the gamut from imparactical to ludicrous. Unbridled amnesty, or failure to control borders isn't acceptable either, though to be fair to the Obama Administration many undocumented illegals coming from other sources than the southern borders have been returned to their counties of origin in the past four years.

Delicate balance is needed, as overall immigration is a boon for Americans as a whole as well. If the GOP listens to the Ann Coulters, they indeed will be signing their effective death sentence in the coming years.

Be careful Sausy.

Sound, reasonable advice doesn't sell newspapers or make fake celebrities.

You need to go and peddle that rational thinking somewhere else.

 

[Sausy]

Be careful Sausy.

Sound, reasonable advice doesn't sell newspapers or make fake celebrities.

You need to go and peddle that rational thinking somewhere else.

There are those here who see me as uncritically right wing, but over the years I have posted in opposition to the hard right elements in the right. Not ever going to be a progressive in all my views, but the right has often gone way over the line in recent years and I don't think a roomful of hard line ultraconservatives would be happy with my stances, either.

What works effectively isn't tied down to uncritical ideological purity in the real world.... governing by mere sound bites and obstructionism (whatever the party) just isn't in the best interests of Americans, period. The GOP has gone further in an ideological direction than the Democrats have and if they want to remain relevant nationally, they have to accept the responsibility of governing a complex country in term of demographics. Easy to say no and always point to cartoonish villains than to be responsible and work hard to do diligently the people's business. Party that does it best is poised to move America forward and despite some Republicans getting the memo it has escaped the fervent base.


Some Republicans have stated recently the party has to stop being one of stupid comments and reflexive anti intellectualism. It still has a long way to go in that regard!

 

[Centexfarmer]

There are those here who see me as uncritically right wing, but over the years I have posted in opposition to the hard right elements in the right. Not ever going to be a progressive in all my views, but the right has often gone way over the line in recent years and I don't think a roomful of hard line ultraconservatives would be happy with my stances, either.

What works effectively isn't tied down to uncritical ideological purity in the real world.... governing by mere sound bites and obstructionism (whatever the party) just isn't in the best interests of Americans, period. The GOP has gone further in an ideological direction than the Democrats have and if they want to remain relevant nationally, they have to accept the responsibility of governing a complex country in term of demographics. Easy to say no and always point to cartoonish villains than to be responsible and work hard to do diligently the people's business. Party that does it best is poised to move America forward and despite some Republicans getting the memo it has escaped the fervent base.


Some Republicans have stated recently the party has to stop being one of stupid comments and reflexive anti intellectualism. It still has a long way to go in that regard!

Yessir!

And I've had the honor of rubbing elbows with you while sharing a beer, face to face, and this debate isn't it.

Our Media, and many in this forum want to see our country as "divided."

Those of us who "think" and aren't afraid to share our ideas and thoughts with each other, who aren't willing to hold a grudge because we disagree, because we love our country, and respect each other as friends and neighbors, should always matter more.

It's never as bad as some would want us to believe.

There isn't an "us and a them."

We are the "them."

I'd rather make fun of you because your team lost, or take jibes from you because my team did, than to allow hucksters to divide us over politics, or any issue of the day that really effects us.

 

[palemale]

If you were to substitute Catholic, Jewish, Irish, Italian, for Hispanic or Latino, our right-wing JUB posters would have fit right in with the KKK of the 1920s. They seem to forget that vehemence of the anti-Catholic and anti-Jewish hatred for immigrants of the last century.

 

[Benvolio]

It appears that you are unwilling to acknowledge that Republicans want immigration reform. Instead you have introduced an alternate theme – limiting illegal immigration.

How should the US go about limiting illegal immigration?

Most immigrant reform efforts contain some attempt to limit illegal immigration. I don't think Republicans want more immigrant. But alas, we have passed the tipping point. We have so many voters of recent immigration, who want more immigration by their ethnic group, that any politician who votes against immigration is likely to loose. In the last election the Hispanic vote was overwhelmingly Democrat and Hispanics seem to want, not only "reform"--a quick road to citizenship-- but more influx of Hispanics. You can hear the result in the public discussion by Republicans: how can we survive as a party if we do not join in pandering to the Hispanics. How can I survive as a politician if I do not?
By labeling as racist and xenophobic any one who questions it, the liberals have foreclosed discussion of the broader questions, including poverty and unemployment. How can we every overcome poverty and unemployment when we are faced with a virtually unlimited influx of more poverty?

 

[Benvolio]

If you were to substitute Catholic, Jewish, Irish, Italian, for Hispanic or Latino, our right-wing JUB posters would have fit right in with the KKK of the 1920s. They seem to forget that vehemence of the anti-Catholic and anti-Jewish hatred for immigrants of the last century.

I suggest you try to separate your hatred for Republicans for a moment, and try to consider the effects today of immigration. We will never again have the world-dominating and expanding economy that we did as late as WWI. We have competition from all over the world and will never again be able to create new, good paying, jobs as rapidly as we did before. Your reliance on the good old days when we could absorb masses of new workers is just bad logic. Times have changed.
And please remember the effect which all that immigration, you described, had on African Americans. While the new people got jobs, the blacks have not climbed the ladder. Immigration and discrimination have gone hand in hand, and are continuing to do so today.
Instead of focusing on how bad conservatives are, please answer the question, how can we make progress against poverty and unemployment if we continue to have a massive influx of new poverty?

 

[Centexfarmer]

I suggest you try to separate your hatred for Republicans for a moment, and try to consider the effects today of immigration. We will never again have the world-dominating and expanding economy that we did as late as WWI. We have competition from all over the world and will never again be able to create new, good paying, jobs as rapidly as we did before. Your reliance on the good old days when we could absorb masses of new workers is just bad logic. Times have changed.

I'm glad to see that you're finally recognizing that the wild Eyed Liberal Republican known as Dwight D. Eisenhower is no longer our Nation's President!

Baby steps.

And please remember the effect which all that immigration, you described, had on African Americans. While the new people got jobs, the blacks have not climbed the ladder. Immigration and discrimination have gone hand in hand, and are continuing to do so today.

But squashing Union Labor from the right doesn't play into your scenario/narrative WHY?"

Instead of focusing on how bad conservatives are, please answer the question, how can we make progress against poverty and unemployment if we continue to have a massive influx of new poverty?

Or better yet, how about you answering the question:

"Why should anyone answer your straw man question when it's clear that you and so called "conservatives" don't really give a shit about an honest answer?

It's called "credibility."

Which, if you have any, must admit is lacking.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Most immigrant reform efforts contain some attempt to limit illegal immigration. I don't think Republicans want more immigrant. But alas, we have passed the tipping point. We have so many voters of recent immigration, who want more immigration by their ethnic group, that any politician who votes against immigration is likely to loose. In the last election the Hispanic vote was overwhelmingly Democrat and Hispanics seem to want, not only "reform"--a quick road to citizenship-- but more influx of Hispanics. You can hear the result in the public discussion by Republicans: how can we survive as a party if we do not join in pandering to the Hispanics. How can I survive as a politician if I do not?
By labeling as racist and xenophobic any one who questions it, the liberals have foreclosed discussion of the broader questions, including poverty and unemployment. How can we every overcome poverty and unemployment when we are faced with a virtually unlimited influx of more poverty?

Somebody apparently didn't explain to Benvolio that in order to vote in this country you need to have citizenship, and if you are a citizen you are someone to whom politicians need to pander in order to get votes. In fact I think someone failed to explain this to the entire GOP, given their disconnect as to why they're losing elections and why they're massively losing the hispanic vote when they platform heavily on making life for illegals and immigrants, which they virtually equate with being hispanic, as miserable possible so that they'll stop coming or leave voluntarily.

 

[palemale]

I suggest you try to separate your hatred for Republicans for a moment, and try to consider the effects today of immigration. We will never again have the world-dominating and expanding economy that we did as late as WWI. We have competition from all over the world and will never again be able to create new, good paying, jobs as rapidly as we did before. Your reliance on the good old days when we could absorb masses of new workers is just bad logic. Times have changed.
And please remember the effect which all that immigration, you described, had on African Americans. While the new people got jobs, the blacks have not climbed the ladder. Immigration and discrimination have gone hand in hand, and are continuing to do so today.
Instead of focusing on how bad conservatives are, please answer the question, how can we make progress against poverty and unemployment if we continue to have a massive influx of new poverty?

This isn't about hating Republicans. My point is that what animates the anti-immigrant forces today is the same thing that animated the anti-immigrant forces in the late 19th and the 20th Century, right up to the election of JFK. Back then, it was the fear that Catholic and Jewish immigration would dilute and ruin the white, protestant culture of the United States. Today, the anti-immigrant forces believe that largely non-white immigrants will dilute and ruin the white protestant culture. In post 24, I printed what purports to be a Tea Party manifesto. In fact, it was an excerpt from the "Klansman's Manual" from 1925, but substituting "Tea Party" for "Ku Klux Klan." The original is as follows:

The Knights of the Ku Klux Klan is a movement devoting itself to the needed task of developing a genuine spirit of American patriotism. Klansmen are to be examples of pure patriotism. They are to organize the patriotic sentiment of native-born white, Protestant Americans for the defense of distinctively American institutions. Klansmen are dedicated to the principle that America shall be made American through the promulgation of American doctrines, the dissemination of American ideals, the creation of wholesome American sentiment, the preservation of American institutions.

http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/mmh/clash/imm_kkk/kkk pages/Documents/klanmanual.htm

You can see how if you substitute "Tea Party" for "Ku Klux Klan," and remove the reference to white Protestants, as I did, it would fit nicely into a Tea Party manifesto.

You should also be aware that organized labor for years opposed immigration, especially illegal immigration. However, corporate America loved it because it did in fact depress wages. The problem for organized labor is that it was extremely difficult to organize work places with large numbers of undocumented workers. These workers were afraid of deportation. Because penalties for employing undocumented workers was so week, to non-existent, it was a common occurrence for an employer to call INS himself if he was facing a National Labor Relations Board election for representation, had a lot of undocumented workers and feared the union was going to win the election. Many of the workers get deported or simply leave and don't show up for work, people are intimidated, and the effort to unionize is thwarted.

 

[JustMe5]

By labeling as racist and xenophobic any one who questions it, the liberals have foreclosed discussion of the broader questions, including poverty and unemployment. How can we every overcome poverty and unemployment when we are faced with a virtually unlimited influx of more poverty?

Notice how in any political discussion its always Democrats who bring up race? And this whole idea that a politician has to run on an immigration-friendly platform in order to win votes from Hispanics is pretty ridiculous. I'm Hispanic and I don't give two fucks about the nation's current immigration reform proposals. It doesn't affect anyone in my family. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, the government can go ahead and evict/deport every single last one of the illegals.

It's like you said on the first page:

The reason the Democrats want immigration "reform" is that they want to rush illegals to voting status to join the class/race war and vote Democrat. Their idea of Democracy is that if the American people don't want the party's socialist agenda, flood the country with poor immigrants who will vote socialist.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Notice how in any political discussion its always Democrats who bring up race? And this whole idea that a politician has to run on an immigration-friendly platform in order to win votes from Hispanics is pretty ridiculous. I'm Hispanic and I don't give two fucks about the nation's current immigration reform proposals. It doesn't affect anyone in my family. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, the government can go ahead and evict/deport every single last one of the illegals.

It's like you said on the first page:

Who employs illegal immigrant labor and reaps a financial benefit from having undocumented workers they aren't paying payroll taxes on, JustMe5?

I'll give you a hint. In general it's not Democrats.

But yeah, I'm sure a DNC recruiter going down to Mexico or elsewhere in Latin America and telling people to come up just to help us hedge the vote for Democrats is the main reason they're coming.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Um, who is bringing up race? Immigration is an issue in this country and the process needs to be streamlined. And I understand some don't give a fuck. I don't care for Hispanic republicans either honestly (about as much as I care about gay republicans). And evict and deporting a bunch of people simply doesn't fly and doesn't work.

I guess the facts just get disregarded for those on the right as they rely on strawman arguments.

What's far more interesting to me than the weak-kneed implication that "Democrats always bring up race" is that when discussing the Hispanic vote Republicans constantly bring up "illegals." People who incidentally can't vote. So yeah Republicans-- keep kidding yourself that the reason you're losing elections is because Democrats purportedly hand out free toys to illegals, who can't vote, in order to win the election. Keep that mindset till 2016. I won't complain.

 

[JustMe5]

Who employs illegal immigrant labor and reaps a financial benefit from having undocumented workers they aren't paying payroll taxes on, JustMe5?

I'll give you a hint. In general it's not Democrats.

Typical Democrat talking point. What proof is there of that??? Y'all need new material.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Typical Democrat talking point. What proof is there of that??? Y'all need new material.

Wool. Eyes.

Check out George W Bush approving the Chamber of Commerce's request that the government stop doing checks on social security numbers in employment documents.

 

[JustMe5]

the American citizens already here support the democrats in large numbers over Republicans. One fact that must be noted is republican party membership has been in steady decline and has dropped below 30%.

And another fact that needs to be noted is Obama's vote tally in last year's election was far less (numbering in the millions) than his tally in 2008. First time ever that a president got reelected with less votes. Who was the real loser in this election?