A Day Without A Mexican

[AR182]

smurphy quote:"Does DTB actually stand for "Doesn't Tolerate Blacks"? You seem to go out of your way to try and show a statistic or point to cities with large Black populations in attempts to imply something negative on a regular basis."

murph my friend.....after reading most of dtb's posts for the last few years...i can honestly say that i don't think he is a racist. he is just like millions of american's who are fed up with the acceptable low standards some people (african-americans in this case) set for themselves. it's too bad bill cosby's problems over shadowed his recent speeches on this subject...because he was right on point.

as far as the illegal mexican problem......i heard that calif. taxpayers are paying through the nose on services for these illegals.

i heard something interesting on oreilly the other night by newt gingrich.......he said that our politicians (both sides) are afraid do something because they are afraid of losing the hispanic vote. & that he believes that this is the biggest example of blackmail in american history.

i think that our politicans are underestimating the american people...because imo, this will be the biggest topic of the next presidential election.

and why doesn't anybody in the media or in public office hold the mexican gov't. accountable for doing absolutely nothing to better the lives of it's citizens.

 

[kosar]

illegal immigration is about much more than fighting terrorism......although that`s plenty.... the fact is, illegal mexican?s are pouring across our borders and as a result, american tax-paid services like education and healthcare are being pushed to the brink of collapse..... we`ve been over this a million times....

big business will just have to figure out how to get their crops picked,their yards mowed and their hotels cleaned....legally...and by paying at least minimum wage...

the arrogance exercised by both mexican and more so,american officials who, while promoting illegal immigration, see no problem in letting u.s. taxpayers foot the bill.........while big business cleans up.....

where are you hard core democrats?....this should be an issue for you guys....

bush is acting like a big pussy on this...he`s a lame duck.....he can take a stand...you can nail him on this...and get some help from the conservatives...many of whom ,i believe,think bush is shirking on this issue...

Yes, he *should* get hammered more on this and I agree with your thoughts. The problem, sadly, is that this issue is all turned around from the traditional way the parties look at immigration. We have a neo-con pres treating this like an uber-liberal, so i think it kind of freezes most elements of the democratic party, even if they disagree. It's pathetic.

Simply incredible a couple of weeks ago when he told Fox he would do what he could with congress to loosen up those immigration laws. WTF? Then we have the Mexican government sending out pamphlets on 'how to get to America illegally.'

I agree, it's a terrible problem.

 

[smurphy]

murph my friend.....after reading most of dtb's posts for the last few years...i can honestly say that i don't think he is a racist. he is just like millions of american's who are fed up with the acceptable low standards some people (african-americans in this case) set for themselves. it's too bad bill cosby's problems over shadowed his recent speeches on this subject...because he was right on point.

Usually liked John Thompson's views on this stuff too.

Well, I wish DTB would take into account the various issues that are behind his racial statistics. Decades of red-lining ghettos, white flight, housing discrimination, hiring discriminitation, education discrimination, etc cannot simply be wiped away all of a sudden.

We can't after a couple hundred years of injustice just say, "OK now everything's fair and balanced, what's thier problem?" Patience grasshopper, Maybe it takes 50 years or so to really get the ship righted. Maybe soon we can drop a lot of the affirmative action and various welfare programs. There's probably a math formula that would show a ratio of slavery/discrimination recovery time for a country. It gets better steadily, but it's not overnight.

In the meantime, there's no valid comparison with groups of immigrants who've had the benefit of arriving in this country with money, education, and essentially an environment without discrimination - just like there's no valid comparison between Washington DC and rural-suburban America. It's pointless and only makes a person appear race-obsessed.

 

[djv]

Seems I remember a few Universities not letting folks come to get educated. Well at least till the fed's had to show up with guns.
I guess you call that racists. Alabama comes to mind. That was 100 years after the civil war.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

For the record I defintely am not a racist--as I said before I might be statsistically prejudice--but not against minorites-races ect but everything in general. If you have serial killer I'm going to say chances are 80% he's a white male--if it's an arsonist that would go to 90%. I'm not Asian and I'm not Jewish but remarked previously that I believe these two cultures to have the highest work ethics,basically because they are 2 of the oldest cultures.

Doesn't bother me to be called anything by the politically correct crowd who see things as they wish they were and are blind as a bat to facts.They can point the finger all they want--what they can't do if you will notice is disprove any allegation a single fact or even make an attempt to do so.
I call em as I see em as the facts dictate without regard for race.
If you can factually disprove any statement I would be happy to reconsider an issue--but if all you can do is point fingers and and provide chin music--you need to direct to your PC lemmings who live with you in land opinions not facts.

and Asians being here for short time would be a detriment not an assett DJV. They have communication skills they have to overcome.
They as many other cultures do well because of several reasons most dating back through generations--but also many people from all over come here because it is land of opportunity--all you need is effort and ambition--and then there is other side of coin--some have been told for generations by their leaders why they can't succeed here and have given them nothing but excuses for failure.
Attidude is a little thing that makes a BIG differnce--and you can take that to the bank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Well, I wish DTB would take into account the various issues that are behind his racial statistics. Decades of red-lining ghettos, white flight, housing discrimination, hiring discriminitation, education discrimination, etc cannot simply be wiped away all of a sudden."

"Racial statistcs" Why would you call them that?
If I quoted crime rates, illegitacy rates,hate crime rates,serial killer rates ect with reference to only #'s and not ethnic origin would you conclude they are racial? If so I believe you are doing a little subconsious profiling

So ok I take all your points into account--now you tell me what reason ANYONE has to not graduate from high school.

and on opinion vs fact You can get opinions on war in Iraq on the liberal news media and think the majority in Australia-UK and U.S. were against the war--yet today the facts will bear out after elections in UK that the majority will make it unanimous in re-electing the leader that took them to war. If you read NYT and others you'll will note how they are alreaqdy admitting defeat but want to sway readers with their "in spite of anti war sentiment"-- now do you believe the spin or the #'s? One is opinion the other fact

 

[buddy]

Hey everyone -

Happy Cinco de Mayo !!!

 

[djv]

Very good Buddy have agreat day. LOL

 

[smurphy]

si senoir

 

[IntenseOperator]

Attidude is a little thing that makes a BIG differnce--and you can take that to the bank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:clap: :clap:

here here!

 

[kosar]

and on opinion vs fact You can get opinions on war in Iraq on the liberal news media and think the majority in Australia-UK and U.S. were against the war--yet today the facts will bear out after elections in UK that the majority will make it unanimous in re-electing the leader that took them to war. If you read NYT and others you'll will note how they are alreaqdy admitting defeat but want to sway readers with their "in spite of anti war sentiment"-- now do you believe the spin or the #'s? One is opinion the other fact

Here's a 'fact' as reported by Fox News. A poll of Brits shows that 34% of them trust Tony Blair because they felt deceived about the Iraq war. I say again, there isn't one country, except Israel, whose populace supports the Iraq war.

Bush's approval rating is at an all-time low of 46% as reported by Fox News. That's not all because of the Iraq invasion, but surely a good chunk of the reason. You should watch Fox every now and then, Wayne. I think you're reading the New York Times too much for your news.

Re-election is not proof in any way that a majority of the populace endorses any specific issue. And election/re-election sure as hell isn't any mandate for the leader to do whatever the f*ck he wants.

 

[buddy]

Dinner tonight -

3 Coronas
2 Taco Supremes
Tortilla Chips and Guacomole

Ole!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"Re-election is not proof in any way that a majority of the populace endorses any specific issue"

Yep and when one party continues to lose seats it isn't either.

Votes don't count but what media tells you does.
Just in the land of the left.

and Fox news is reporting what BBCand others report--and we all know what direction they lean.Glad you finally noticed that Fox reports both sides.

---and since your referring to polls and evidently are not familiar with some aspects I'll inform you.
A.You can ask same question to different people in diff way and get diff answer
B You can ask one segment of population a question and get very tainted answer.

If you want "factual" results of those that voted--count the votes

"And election/re-election sure as hell isn't any mandate for the leader to do whatever the f*ck he wants."

I most definately agree with you here--and might add I personally think his attitude has changed since re-election and not for the better.
His party needs to give him a reality check. I would suggest his wife and friends have a little chat with him.

 

[IntenseOperator]

Here's a 'fact' as reported by Fox News. A poll of Brits shows that 34% of them trust Tony Blair because they felt deceived about the Iraq war. I say again, there isn't one country, except Israel, whose populace supports the Iraq war.

Bush's approval rating is at an all-time low of 46% as reported by Fox News. That's not all because of the Iraq invasion, but surely a good chunk of the reason. You should watch Fox every now and then, Wayne. I think you're reading the New York Times too much for your news.

Re-election is not proof in any way that a majority of the populace endorses any specific issue. And election/re-election sure as hell isn't any mandate for the leader to do whatever the f*ck he wants.

The same as here, those people are most likely too busy to vote :clap:

 

[IntenseOperator]

I responded not yet making it to DTB's post.

Think he said the same thing.

 

[kosar]

"Re-election is not proof in any way that a majority of the populace endorses any specific issue"

Yep and when one party continues to lose seats it isn't either.

Votes don't count but what media tells you does.
Just in the land of the left.

and Fox news is reporting what BBCand others report--and we all know what direction they lean.Glad you finally noticed that Fox reports both sides.

---and since your referring to polls and evidently are not familiar with some aspects I'll inform you.
A.You can ask same question to different people in diff way and get diff answer
B You can ask one segment of population a question and get very tainted answer.

If you want "factual" results of those that voted--count the votes

You may have missed the word specific. Or to phrase it another way, any one particular issue.

Or we can try it a different way:

Just because somebody gets elected doesn't mean that a majority of the countrys citizens endorses everything the leader does. That's just silly. You're pretty much saying that everybody who voted for Bush agrees with every single thing he's done. Obviously, that's absurd.

Also, I doubt very much that the poll that Fox conducted about Bush's approval rating was slanted against Bush by phrasing it in a certain way.

The British poll was pretty phrased in a pretty simple way: ' Do you trust Tony Blair?' Then it was followed up and was determined that the reason for such a low % that trusted him was that people feel deceived about the war.

 

[kosar]

The same as here, those people are most likely too busy to vote :clap:

Not sure I understand, I/O.

 

[IntenseOperator]

Dinner tonight -

3 Coronas
2 Taco Supremes
Tortilla Chips and Guacomole

Ole!

6 - Quesadillas
1 order - rice and beans
6 - Modello Negras
1 - 1/2 Mexican female

:clap:

 

[AR182]

kosar quote:"Here's a 'fact' as reported by Fox News. A poll of Brits shows that 34% of them trust Tony Blair because they felt deceived about the Iraq war. I say again, there isn't one country, except Israel, whose populace supports the Iraq war."


kosar,

correct me if i am wrong.....

are you implying that we should go to war only if the population supports it ?

btw, i think history will show that saddam did indeed have wmd's.......& that they were sent to syria.

 

[kosar]

kosar quote:"Here's a 'fact' as reported by Fox News. A poll of Brits shows that 34% of them trust Tony Blair because they felt deceived about the Iraq war. I say again, there isn't one country, except Israel, whose populace supports the Iraq war."


kosar,

correct me if i am wrong.....

are you implying that we should go to war only if the population supports it ?

btw, i think history will show that saddam did indeed have wmd's.......& that they were sent to syria.

Of course i'm not saying that. I'm just correcting Wayne, once again, on his assertion that the world is behind us in Iraq, when in fact nobody is.

I don't know how much more (lack of) evidence we can produce that proves that he didn't have them. Our own CIA, our inspectors, UN inspectors, some other independant entity that did a report all agree that he had not had a program since 1991.

And isn't it counter-intuitive to believe that Saddam managed to sneak every single weapon out of the country and cover every single piece of evidence in the whole country? Doesn't that seem impossible, what with the supposedly huge cache of weapons he was supposed to have had?

 

[smurphy]

6 - Modello Negras

:clap:

now yer talkin! one of the most underrated beers in our time. i know just were to go tonight