Skip to comments.
We Must Fight the Evil Indians
10-3-03
Posted on 10/03/2003 7:16:31 AM PDT by tallhappy
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 141 next last
To: DoughtyOne
No, its' not the use of the word "Indian" - it goes much further than that - there was actually one person who had the nerve to post that "Pretty soon, we will be facing in this nation, the same thing Israel is facing with the palastinians" - basically stating that indians are going to become suicide bombers and terrorists etc, and no one - NOONE thought it out of line...
If that isn't hatred and ignorance, I don't know what is. Is my view of Indians the only valid one? Of course not, but I do know ignorance and hatred when I see it.
61
posted on
10/03/2003 8:46:51 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
("Sir, Evil, Disembodied Voice of Doom on line 1... shall I tell him you are in a meeting?")
To: John Jorsett
My sentiments are with McClintock, but this is off the mark. Schwarzenegger is making a legitimate point that Indian gambling has become too powerful in state politics. Their campaign cash is buying them far too much influence, and I'm disappointed that McClintock took it. I'd much rather that he had pledged to rein them in than accept their money.
What's that comment that Rush used to make...? "If you want to get the money out of politics, get the politicians out of our money." So long as politicians look at every dollar in the private sector as a piggy bank waiting to be broken, folks are going to want to influence elections in self defense. So it goes with the Indian casinos. Schwarzenegger has taken in a lot of money from developers, and has a plan to sell off California's landed assets. Is that not a conflict? I'm actually in favor of getting land out of government hands, but I'd like an open debate about how to best go about it. Should it all go to developers? Should California citizens with some minimum residence requirement get a crack at purchasing designated parcels? I'm rambling. I'm just suspicious of the premise that the influence of Indian casinos, since their operations are legal, is any different ethically than any other interest group.
|
62
posted on
10/03/2003 8:50:20 AM PDT
by
Sabertooth
(No Drivers' Licences for Illegal Aliens. Petition SB60. http://www.saveourlicense.com/n_home.htm)
To: Chad Fairbanks
California was required, by federal law Affirmative action pure and simple. A federal order or mandate is responsible many affirmative action programs.
To: RGSpincich
You still havn't explained exactly how it is 'affirmative action' - As I mentioned before, if you want to run a casino, lobby to get a law passed allowing private casinos in California. It really is that simple.
64
posted on
10/03/2003 8:54:04 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
("Sir, Evil, Disembodied Voice of Doom on line 1... shall I tell him you are in a meeting?")
To: Chad Fairbanks
If dip sticks are making those kind of comments hit the abuse button and get them removed. Look, idiots attack everyone like that. Very few support that kind of logic here.
I voted for Indian gaming because I wanted to see their communities do better financially. I think it has helped. I do get more than a little miffed when I see loads of it spread around helping the likes of Bustamante though.
Strangely enough, Bustamante's buddies do refer to California as a land just like the West Bank though. They compare themselves to the Palestinians. That shouldn't make you feel too comfortable.
This may be the spark that produce the comments you spoke of. I still think they were inappropriate. Somebody probably got worked up and spouted off.
To: Chad Fairbanks
Do you understand this post? What it is about?
It is not about evil Inidans but demagoguery in the Schwarzenegger campiagn that has made Indian gaming a one issue campaign. Their only argument is that the Indians are bad.
They don't address Schwarzenegger's positions any other issues and ignore them, such as prop 54, domestic partner benefits, second amendment, tax money to pay for abortions etc..
Only those evil Indans...
To: Chad Fairbanks
Do you understand this post? What it is about?
It is not about evil Inidans but demagoguery in the Schwarzenegger campiagn that has made Indian gaming a one issue campaign. Their only argument is that the Indians are bad.
They don't address Schwarzenegger's positions any other issues and ignore them, such as prop 54, domestic partner benefits, second amendment, tax money to pay for abortions etc..
Only those evil Indans...
To: Chad Fairbanks
Do you understand this post? What it is about?
It is not about evil Inidans but demagoguery in the Schwarzenegger campiagn that has made Indian gaming a one issue campaign. Their only argument is that the Indians are bad.
They don't address Schwarzenegger's positions any other issues and ignore them, such as prop 54, domestic partner benefits, second amendment, tax money to pay for abortions etc..
Only those evil Indans...
To: DoughtyOne
I'm pretty reasonable about it - I have a pretty good sense of humor. However, that sense of humor ends when my people are compared to middle eastern terrorists - whether it's Bustamante, or FReepers, saying it.
Secondly, my sense of humor ends when I am told I am not a U.S. citizen, and that I should not have a right to participate in any political process.
Anything else, I really have no problem with...
I merely want to clarify that indians DO pay taxes - Federal, FICA, SSI, Payroll Taxes, Sales Taxes, State Income Taxes, etc... and on top of that, they pay licensing fees, regulatory fees, fees for gambling addiction programs, etc... The State gets enough money from the gaming tribes. But, they don't support the candidates that people want them to, so obviously they are not paying enough. :(
69
posted on
10/03/2003 9:01:21 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
("Sir, Evil Disembodied Voice of Doom on line 1... shall I tell him you are in a meeting?")
To: tallhappy
Oh, I understand the post. I can see the satire in it. However, there are many who dont', and honestly believe exactly what you posted ;0) my reply to "you" was directed at those types ;0)
70
posted on
10/03/2003 9:02:38 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
("Sir, Evil Disembodied Voice of Doom on line 1... shall I tell him you are in a meeting?")
To: Chad Fairbanks; tallhappy
therefore I am part of "the fount of all evil"Oh man, do I feel stoopid. I have been scouring my computer trying to find the font of all evil.
. . . BellGothic Black does make me wonder, though.
71
posted on
10/03/2003 9:03:53 AM PDT
by
Flyer
(Visit the Houston Chapter - http://houstonliberty.com/forums/ * (when it works)
To: Chad Fairbanks
You already explained it.
federal law signed by Reagan, to negotiate wit the various tribes in order to allow gaming
Pretty exclusive bunch. Not a mandate to allow gambling for all in California that would give the tribes an opportunity to create a competitive business.
To: Flyer
ROTFL...
73
posted on
10/03/2003 9:04:53 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
("Sir, Evil Disembodied Voice of Doom on line 1... shall I tell him you are in a meeting?")
To: Chad Fairbanks
it's hard for me to imagine people that dumb. I have no idea why my post was posted three times.
To: tallhappy
Hey now . . . those rumors about cannibalism in my tribe have never been substantiated.
75
posted on
10/03/2003 9:05:57 AM PDT
by
Xenalyte
(I may not agree with your bumper sticker, but I'll defend to the death your right to stick it)
To: Chad Fairbanks
Other states collect these same fees from Indian Gaming plus direct payments for healthcare, schools and other items. Businesses in the state pay taxes on top of the other fees you mentioned the state gets. IMO the tribes are making quite a bit of money and should pay at least some direct fees in our state.
To: RGSpincich
Ahh, but I can see where your logic fails. In California, the Indian Tribes are 'regulated' (for lack of a better word) by both the Feds AND the State. (in other states, it's usually only the feds who 'regulate', but I digress) Since the states hava an 'interest' and could be impacted by gaming, the feds felt the fair way to do it was to have the states and tribes negotiate and reach agreements.
However, if you want non-tribal casinos in California, no federal mandate is needed. California can, if it chooses, pass laws allowing non-indian casinos any time they choose.
Do you see the point now? :0)
77
posted on
10/03/2003 9:07:55 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
("Sir, Evil Disembodied Voice of Doom on line 1... shall I tell him you are in a meeting?")
To: DoughtyOne
Actually, Indians appear on the issue of sports mascots, both on the professional level and in colleges and primary education. They appear on threads about Indian Princesses and Braves. I could continue listing them, but you're starting to remember what I'm talking about.
The point is that American Indians make up two percent of the population, and there are more issues than gaming.
78
posted on
10/03/2003 9:07:58 AM PDT
by
kingu
(100 percent of liberals would like to see Free Republic fail.)
To: tallhappy
Well, shoot! I thought this was about Cleveland.
79
posted on
10/03/2003 9:09:56 AM PDT
by
TADSLOS
(Right Wing Infidel since 1954)
To: Chad Fairbanks
I don't know - some most tribal governments tend to have corruption, just like many most "white" governments... ;0)
There, I think that fixes that statement. American Indians taught this form of government.
80
posted on
10/03/2003 9:10:56 AM PDT
by
kingu
(100 percent of liberals would like to see Free Republic fail.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 141 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson