funjumper101

The Bracero system wasn't as good as some people think. http://www.farmworkers.org/benglish.html DAGS on "Bracero Program". Lots of hits.

ShrubCo has done it again. The "base" and the so called "liberal media" is all wound up with dealing with "illegal immigration", instead of figuring out how to solve the Iraq clusterfuck. The way you solve the "illegal immigration" problem is to eliminate the demand. One way to do that is by making any company or individual that hires an illegal immigrant subject to civil and criminal penalties. A $25,000.00 fine for each illegal immigrant hired (first offense) and a $50,000.00 fine and six months in jail for repeat offendors. Officers of corporations should be personally liable for the fines and jail time. Corporate funds could not be used. No weasling out of it. Hire an illegal, pay a bunch of money. Do it twice, go to jail. It will never happen. It would be "bad for business" and "how is a decent law abiding business owner supposed to check prospective employees?", etc etc. We'll just go after the illegals. They don't vote anyway, so who gives a shit? California "tried" to do something along these lines with the agricultural indutry. Farmers (landowners)that hire illegal immigrants are supposed to be subject to civil penalties. Now what happens is that the farmers subcontract the field work to labor contractors. The labor contractors hire the illegals and deliver them via van or old school bus to the fields as needed. No muss, no fuss, no liability. The farmer pays a premium for the labor and avoids the liability. The labor contractors operate as LLCs with minimal assets and any money made is quickly pulled out of the LLC. This is a great system... for the farmers. As usual, the farmworker gets screwed. Any other ideas?

Was this hijack really necessary? Seems all the more tacky given the subject. Start another thread to shovel this stuff out. -- I can't think of a worse situation than to know you're dead, but have to wait an hour or two for it to happen. The videos of the jumpers had a major effect on me. I had been to the WTC several times. I had eaten at Windows on the World three times. A good friend's father lives near the WTC site. My friend was supposed to be visiting his father when the attack happened. He wasn't, but I didn't find this out until days later. I thought he died there. I started contributing to the Democratic party. Local, State, and Federal. Before 9/11/2001 I had some interest in politics, mostly how it affected me and mine. Now I follow with great interest the working of government on a much more macro scale. I write to my congresspeople and the Senators from my state. I show up at anti-war protests. I contribute to local fund that supplies body armor, long distance phone cards and toiletries to the troops in Iraq. When a local kid came back from being blown up by an IED I contributed money towards the construction of the wheelchair ramp and the widening of the doors at his parents house. They had too many volunteers, so I was unable to help with the actual construction. 9/11/2001 got me out of my complacency and made me realize that we, the people, need to hold our leaders accountable for their actions, and more importantly, their inaction, when it comes to our security. Making actual contributions to society is part of our responsibility as productive citizens. When the USA went after OBL and forced the Taliban out of power, I was totally in favor of it, all the way. When ShrubCo decided to blow off capturing OBL and invade Iraq, I started getting pissed. Now that the Taliban is back in power over a fair portion of the country and Iraq is in the midst of civil war, I am outraged. Shrubco fucked up beyond belief and my great grandchildren will be paying for his mistakes. No thread hijack at all. It is a thinking person's reaction to LIVE footage of jumpers from the WTC and those that let it happen. Part of the subject of the thread, as far as I am concerned. YMMV.

Funny how when I Google "Clinton-Gore recession" Sean Hannity's name pops up all over the search results. Got something more original than that? Thanks for that contribution to the thread. I knew that Anvil was getting his information from some kind of reputable source. What part did Rush Scumbag contribute?

Any proof, or is this just another rant? Never heard about the PDB in August 2001? Take a look at http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/ The facts. They don't lie. Did you read Richard Clarke's book "Against all Enemies"? Didn't think so. You should. You might learn something.

I don't think it's the same. What Jane Fonda did was extensively covered by journalists. The evidence of her actions is very well-known. The evidence of any possible violations by Tom DeLay is nowhere near as clear. Walt The evidence of Delay's ongoing ethics issues goes back a LONG way. Censured repeatedly by his colleagues. Try Googling Tom Delay Ethics Violations. You will have HOURS of reading to educate you. And that is just the verified, provable stuff.

Started out good? While on vacation, ignores PDB about plans to fly airplanes into buildings. Ignores Richard Clarke and his team completely. That was a good start? Really?

My wife was watching the east coast CBS channel on DirecTV when the first plane hit the WTC. I turned on the news. I was watching live when the second plane hit. I was glued to the TV all day. I surfed between the channels. Including the spanish language channels. The spanish channel news was showing footage of the jumpers. Much more than the US language news. They showed one jumper leap, track away from the building, flare, and cover their face with their hands, then disappear behind other buildings. I puked into a wastebasket. I just saw a fellow skydiver die and I couldn't believe it. It made the event very personal for me. I don't know who it was and I have never tried to find out. It makes me queasy just thinking about it again. Only a skydiver could fly like that. I will never forget that day. The fact that GWB and his administration knew what was coming, but didn't do anything, is unforgivable. I hope that GWB, Cheney, Rummy, and all of those people rot in hell for all eternity.

I copied this challenge from another thread. These aren't my words. I think GWB has been a disaster for the USA and our great grandchildren will be trying to recover from his legacy. I pray that the November elections toss out enough republicans to take back control of the House and the Senate. According to the righties he has been a great president. Begin quoted text >>> Bush has been a wonderful president, so please list for me the top 10 accomplishments of Bush that have actually helped the country and why. Try not to be vague by writing, "the war." Be more specific by writing something about the elements of the war or some benefit and elaborate, of you think the war was/is a positive thng. Again, this doesn't address the issue of whether the election was legit or not, but I want to see if it was a great turn for the country and why.... 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Come on, Shrub lovers, where are your lists? Can't think of anything, eh? Why am I not surprised. I think I'll copy this challenge and make a new thread. If the righties are truthful, there will be ONE post in the thread. The first one.

In another thread the righties are voicing lots of support for the INDICTED conspirator, Tom Delay. Their reasoning is that he has not been tried and convicted, so we must have a presumption of innocence and ignore the indictment. Other bafflegab is uttered by them, but this is the gist of their argument. In this thread, people are denouncing Jane Fonda as a traitor deserving of death. Did I miss something? When was Jane Fonda indicted for, or charged with, treason? If she wasn't indicted, tried, and convicted, then clearly she wasn't guilty of the the charges, eh? How about some consistency, righties? Do you smell the foul stench of hypocrisy? I do. Just for the record, I think that Jane Fonda's actions in North Vietnam were not in the best interests of the USA and the troops. She should never have gone there and said what she did.

I'm having a really difficult time getting my head around your stance on this issue. I understand you think that DeLay is shady, that he has been for some time, and that the negative attention from simply being charged with another ethics crime is but a punctuation mark on his past. That's all well and good, I get it, "If it walks like a duck..." and the like. But forget DeLay for a moment and pay a little closer attention to what you're arguing in a more general sense. It used to be that opponents, the media, or a combination of the two could throw, "A whiff of this type of behavior" at a candidate and stunt his or her career? It no longer is, and that should be of great concern to me? That's dangerous ground. Anyone who reads throught the details of the ethics violations the Delay has been censured for should be appalled. He is beyond shady. Why do you feel that it is "dangerous ground" to want to hold all politicians to much higher standards than everyday people are held to? If politicians operate in a moral and ethical way there won't be any scandals. When they don't, and they get caught, they should lose their jobs. When they don't lose their jobs, their behavior is rewarded. Texans take great pride in presenting an image of themselves as upstanding, moral, and ethical people. They are very proud of their state and boast about how great it is and how wonderful the people are. How can people of this caliber keep voting for Delay? It doesn't make any sense. Their standards are that low?

[reply That's a far cry above the knee-jerk response: "He's been indicted and therefore he's a crook!" Quote My values indicate that a person with Delay's demonstrated history of questionable ethics and the fact of the current indictment make him unworthy of public service. Your values may differ. It isn't a one off incident. It is a highlight of a long string of ethics violations, capped off with an indicment for conspiracy. Just how bad does a politician have to be before you won't vote for him? If it was an indictment for rape, child molestation, or assault and battery, would you feel the same way? I already proposed this question earlier in the thread. Would still vote for him? By your stated logic, if he hasn't been convicted, you would. That is pretty sad, eh?

Don't want to talk about ethics anymore, eh? Here is post # 36 for you again - Begin quoted text >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That isn't all clinton lied about -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Examples, please. Please cite the source of your information. The web site, news article, etc

Both issues have been litigated. Men have financial responsibility for children they did not want to conceive. It happens all the time. It is commonly referred to as "child support". Men do not have the right to force a woman into an abortion for unwanted children. This was decided some time ago. I don't recall all of the details. Women have the right to make the decision on their own. A husband can't stop a wife from having an abortion. This is not even close to "equal rights". That is why I support the concept of "financial abortion" for men.

Did you register with your local draft board when you turned 18? If the USA reinstates the draft due to military neccessity, would it still be slavery? Are you familiar with the recent history known as "The Vietnam War" and the social and political turmoil of those times?

And where was the Clinton "lie" in the story? It look more like a case of business as usual for both political parties when it comes to campaign fundraising.

Agreed.

No, snipped, remove a segment, tie it off, AND cauterize. x 2. And check to see if the patient doesn't have backup tubing as well - it's not that uncommon. half an hour, in and out, next day back in action If you do it, make sure the doctor is THOROUGH. And do your research as to the potential complications. When a vasectomy goes bad, it can be very, very bad. The statisics are decent, but the odds weren't good enough for me to take the risk. YMMV

"liberal media" = extreme sarcasm Not too quick on the uptake, are you? A smart guy like you should be fully aware that there is no such thing as the "liberal media". It is fictional bogeyman created by your heros.

The link to the proposal is http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/opinion/14051078.htm Do you think that this is a good idea? Should the rich and well connected be able to get out of it or should this requirement apply to everyone, with no excuses?

Are the Republicans the party for smaller government?

Is the Republican Party the party of fiscal responsibility? What makes you think so?

Examples, please. Please cite the source of your information. The web site, news article, etc

You asked where else a suspected felon would be voted into office. The obvious answer (except apparently to you) is Massachusetts. I would also point out to you that at a very minumum negligent homocide is a far greater crime than a few illegal joyrides. No. I'm trying to say negligent homocide is worse. Nobody died due to Delays alleged crimes. If you would bother to read (I know, I'm asking too much), the link I provided, you would have known the homocide isn't the only violation of the law Teddy has been "suspected" of. It doesn't and I didn't say it did. Not surprising you recognize this. Or this. Heck, you probably think the only thing Clinton did wrong was get a BJ too. I've never heard of someone losing their law licence over a BJ, have you? You are mixing up who posted what. I never asked "where else a suspected felon would be voted into office." Wrong poster. I am fully aware that suspected and convicted felons have been voted into office. That doesn't make it right. I do believe that there is a difference between "suspected felon" and "indicted conspirator". Ted Kennedy was charged with and convicted of leaving the scene. Did he get a pass on more serious charges due to family connections? Absolutely. The rich and well connected experience a different kind of "justice" than us common folk. You may not like it, but that is how it is and will continue to be. I spent a fair bit of time on Martha's Vineyard. I have been to Chappy many times (the surf fishing was AWESOME) and walked the entire route he drove. I have walked across the bridge. Ted Kennedy absolutely lied his way out of more serious charges. I have read all about it and actually talked to some of the Vineyarders who were around then. The people of Massachusetts have the same info available as the rest of us. They keep voting him into office. Not right, but that is how the system works. Mary Jo Kopechne went partying with the big boys voluntarily. By all accounts it was a rocking party. Everyone was having a blast. She got into a car with a drunk driver and died when the driver crashed into the water. The drunk was too hammered to save her. That is a far cry from murder. Back in those times drunk drivers were thought of much differently than they are now. Times change. You think no one has died in the Saipan sweatshops? You would be wrong. Delay bears some responsiblity for the deaths. He squashed the investigation and was rather proud of himself for doing so. So his actions have resulted in innocent deaths. Clinton lied under oath about the blow job. For a Rhodes Scholar he can be rather stupid. He never should have been in that position. Once he was forced into it by the rabid assholes, he should have been more like "Hell, yeah. Great blow job. So good she couldn't swallow it all. It went all over her dress. It was awesome. I didn't fuck her though. So, according to the established legal definition of sex, I didn't have sex with her. Piss off." I'll bet the results would have been better than what happened.