SB 1070

[gman]

I only brought up the communism things because I was sparked by the media comments. I don't know that President Obama could be called a communist, but it seems that his father was, as well as a number of people that have been around him. Black liberation theology is also part of his history. Regardless of whether that is good or bad, my point was that I don't think he could have gotten elected if the media had reported any of it. It's doubtful he would have even sniffed the democrat nomination.
My personal belief is that progressives have been working for the last century to move this country more and more progressive, or left, and Obama was the guy that they thought could get elected and finally bring them their progressive utopia. Even if he was more radical than they cared for; even if the communist party supported him, it didn't matter. He was electable for a number of reasons, he wanted to fundamentally transform america, which is what progressives have been working for and was largely undefined in the media, and he had the cahonies to just do it.

[zak89]

I'm very hesitant to call the current President anything; however, I find it telling how when challenged about his more-progressive (ie, socialist) policies that he never denies their 'progressiveness' - his consistent answer is that 'Republicans do it too'. Which misses the point, as many/most Republicans are either admitted progressives or greatly influenced by progressive thought.

[gman]

I'm very hesitant to call the current President anything; however, I find it telling how when challenged about his more-progressive (ie, socialist) policies that he never denies their 'progressiveness' - his consistent answer is that 'Republicans do it too'. Which misses the point, as many/most Republicans are either admitted progressives or greatly influenced by progressive thought.

Yeah, which is it? Do the republicans do it too, or are they responsible for the 'failed policies of the past'? Or are the failed policies of the past and the current policies one and the same.

[separateunion]

Code: Select all

If you're spouting conspiracy theories, you'd get along well with my dad.

I trust that this isn't derogatory in any way of your parents. I don't know your situation, but in my case, my parents have been around longer than the I, have more experience, and are in general wiser and more discerning than I am. And of course, somewhere in the Bible it talks about honoring parents, IIRC.

It's not derogatory. I love my parents very much and Jonathan and I are good friends offline. It was actually a statement of fact, because my dad believes similar things as Jonathan posted.

[Jonathan]

I have never known Jason to bash his parents.

They are a soft target. Ha...

[corolla1]

It's easier to create broadly sweeping labels and apply them to massive amounts of people because there is less thinking involved that way. I can't call myself a Republican or a conservative, EVEN THOUGH I line up with many of their views, because I immediately get other views attributed to me that I don't agree with. It's just one of those faults of mankind that we feel the need to put people in a box so that we can judge them based on a stereotype we've, usually falsely, created.

And not just people, but God too! To suggest God is above both political parties, and that neither have God in the back pocket, is borderline blasphemy around here.

Actually, RJ I agree with you on this point.

[corolla1]

American presidents are chosen, not elected. At least not elected in the sense we are led to believe.

If you're spouting conspiracy theories, you'd get along well with my dad.

I'm actually pretty amazed that this is the first political discussion that involved sane posts that weren't written by myself or RJ.

I've been away for 5 days and just got to this thread, so I had to skim in sections to catch up. Forgive me if this has been discussed, but I think it's important to point out that not only do illegals perform jobs that most Americans would refuse to perform, but they also take jobs that are EXTREMELY dangerous and unsanitary, not to mention illegal by federal standards. These are some of the jobs that seriously drop the price of goods and items that are sold. I find it ironic that people are complaining about those dirty illegals and the "liberal media" that refuses to report anything conservative, yet those same people are willing to turn a blind eye to the unsafe practices that employers have illegals perform. I guess the size of government and legality of actions only matter insomuch as it lines up with your political agenda.

I have to respectfully disagree here. First off illegals do more than just "pick the vegetables". They also do construction, work in business offices even medical offices. They pay them a fraction of what an American would earn. And yes they work in deplorable conditions precisely because they are illegal. Employers can get away with it. They couldn't get away with it with an American worker. Is that right? Should an illegal get paid less than an American? Many liberals want to grant citizenship to illegals. If that happens, would these workers continue to get dirt wages? Of course not, they would have to have the same working conditions and pay as an American which is only right. That being the case, there is no compelling reason to bring them here. You can simply hire an American and pay them a proper wage. Americans will pick vegetables if the price is right. In addition, if you hire an illegal, that means taking a job away from an American. Because of the recession/depression a lot of jobs were lost that won't return and now we have millions of Americans who have little chance of getting another job. That will probably result in the gov't paying out permanent unemployment checks. Unemployment benefits already last 2-2.5 yrs and eventually will be permanent. It doesn't make sense to bring in illegal workers and at the same time pay an American a permanent unemployment check.