I'm also fond of this one, which I think has been around for a while.
Posted on 01/11/2004 5:36:57 PM PST by kellynla
As you've probably heard by now, President Bush has called for a major overhaul of America's immigration system, to grant legal status to millions of illegal-alien workers in the United States.
While Pres. Bush was quoted saying that, "I oppose amnesty, placing undocumented workers on the automatic path to citizenship," many conservative groups like the Federation for American Immigration Reform (fairus.org) insist that his "proposals for a massive new 'guestworker' program" would threaten homeland security, grant amnesty for law-breakers (a step overwhelmingly opposed by the American public), establish a backdoor immigration program, and threaten the jobs and wages of American workers.
In fact, three dozen House Republicans had already sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, "strongly and unequivocally" opposing mass amnesty for illegal immigrants; this letter becomes particularly important now with Pres. Bush's announcement. Today, we're asking you to sign on to that letter to Sec. Ridge, with copies to President Bush, your two Senators and your Congressman.
As proud Americans, we must strongly and unequivocally oppose mass amnesty for people who violate our immigration laws. Mere discussion of the possibility of amnesty encourages illegal immigration. We must enforce the immigration laws currently on our books rather than dangle the prospect of citizenship in front of potential immigration lawbreakers. We must increase immigration law enforcement, not only at borders but in the interior, making it more costly for lawbreakers to disregard our immigration laws.
Since 1986, Congress has passed seven amnesties for illegal aliens. Clearly this is a short-term "fix" to a long-term problem. Rewarding people who violate our immigration laws sends the wrong message, and encourages more illegal aliens to violate our borders and enter the United States illegally. Americans will have to pay increased taxes as a consequence of the burden amnesty would place on our school systems, welfare and social service systems, roads and transportation systems, the sprawl and environmental degradation, the health care system, Medicaid, Social Security, and other programs.
It is unfair to reward people who break our immigrations laws with immigration status, while many potential immigrants outside the United States are waiting to be admitted to the United States lawfully. If we allow the people who break the rules by entering the United States illegally to go to the front of the immigration line, it is a slap in the face to law-abiding immigrants.
And of course, we must be concerned that amnesty by any name, be it earned amnesty or legalization, jeopardizes our national security. Mahmud Abouhalima was granted amnesty in 1986... and was subsequently one of the terrorists that bombed the World Trade Center in 1993.
We MUST stop this now, while we can.
ACTION ITEM: According to Newsmax.com, Pres. Bush said his proposals, IF ENACTED BY CONGRESS, "would provide a more compassionate system for those who now live in the shadows of American society." We need to let Sec. Ridge, Pres. Bush, and our legislators know how we feel on this issue, BEFORE it's too late. Click "Go!" above to send a message to ALL of them at once!
NOTE: Sec. Ridge doesn't have a public email address, and our form isn't integrated with his department's form yet, so if you want to send your comments to him directly, you'll have to go to http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/contactus.
Better pay more attention to propping up your failed arguments than my sign-on date next time. You might come out better in the debate.
Yes, we DO kick them out...
Ever been to farm country??? You know, where the locals schools quit for a few weeks during the harvest season, the kids go out and help their families pick the produce? And maybe earn a little extra money for school-clothes, their first car, or something like that??? You know, working for a farmer for a few weeks...?
Does any of this ring a bell???
Have you ever seen farm country???
Americans have lost their balls!
To paraphrase a line from a popular current 3 part movie, "You may not want the fight, but the fight is upon you."
So we are being offered the radical left, or the left.
Neither for me, thank you.
Hb
I'm also fond of this one, which I think has been around for a while.
ME: What happens if a rumor surfaces of a merger between two large companies...? Say, between GTE and Bell-Atlantic (BA bought GTE)??? People clamor to buy the stocks, because the value of the stock is suddenly worth more.
You: Idiots might clamor to buy said stock, based on speculative information that is at best suspect. Wise investors don't change their portfolios based on wild rumors or because some Internet shill tries to browbeat or scare them into it. You pose a bad example and make my point for me.
Answer: It happens ALL the time. People act on tips on a regular basis. Sometimes analysts get tips that make them start crunching numbers on a particular company. IF the numbers look good, and there's some chance that the rumor is actually true, then there is investment- if only in a small amount. Happens all the time. To pretend otherwise, is to demonstrate that you're a liar. A case in point, is Martha Stewart- acting on a tip, dumping stock... Of course, the only difference between her and others is that the tip was from an insider, not outsider who put two and two together... No real difference.
YOU SAID: The point is, to blame somebody for something bad merely because they discuss it flies in the face of every free speech right we enjoy in the US. Using that logic, a Dean administration could prohibit discussion of anti-abortion activists or techniques by using the rationale that a few idiots bomb abortion clinics or shoot abortionists, "and we don't want to encourage them." And while we're at it, let's shut down the NRA's website and ban publication of gun magazines because a firearm might be used in another Columbine shooting, "and we don't want to encourage them."
This statement is SO poorly written, that you are effectively incoherent. You might as well spout baby-talk, for all the "logic" it exhibits...
ME: Your knee-jerk reaction ignores group psychology... And therefore fails.
YOU: Seriously suggesting the censorship of honest discussion of a topic is the real "knee-jerk" behavior here. And yours are twitching like you're suffering from St. Vitus' Dance.
ANSWER: You have yet to state anything that is both
A.) truthful, and
B.) Coherent.
In other words, you wrote a typical newbie rant... Hence, I was kind to you, last time... You'll not get the same consideration again.
Now, get lost. I have little tolerance of fools.
Yep. Having some expertise in this area, I can tell you that you are exactly correct.
Take for example, Australia. They're a growing producer of wines- very good wines, I might add...
They have a severe manpower shortage, as it is... They rely heavily upon automation, and compete quite nicely, thank you very much. BTW, they are also quite strict on their immigration policies... They don't like- or want- illegal aliens in their country... 8^)
No, I don't think I will. I like shoving the old 50-volt cattle prod into namecallers - the resulting sweet music is just too good to miss.
Because I don't enjoy wasting my time in conversations with vacuous windbags
What does that have to do with the topic of this thread? I'm not having a lot of fun conversing with you either, but I feel that its my duty to show vacuous windbags just how wrong they are.
It happens ALL the time.
People vote for Democrats all the time. People smoke cigarettes all the time. People drive half in the bag all the time. Doesn't make it smart, desirable, or right.
People act on tips on a regular basis.
Sometimes they do. But as I said, the smart ones use tips only as one small part of their analytical process, when there is also valid evidence to back up their assumptions. And to somehow smear the mere discussion of a controversial topic into the encouragement of lawbreaking is ludicrousness on your part.
Sometimes analysts get tips that make them start crunching numbers on a particular company. IF the numbers look good
Thank you for proving my point for me.
A case in point, is Martha Stewart- acting on a tip, dumping stock... Of course, the only difference between her and others is that the tip was from an insider, not outsider who put two and two together... No real difference.
So you've already tried and convicted Stewart of insider trading. (And no, that was not a question). Not only do you seem to have a problem with the concept of free speech, the idea that people are innocent until proven guilty seems to stick equally in your craw. Instructive.
This statement is SO poorly written, that you are effectively incoherent.
Translation: "I have no answer for what you said, so ... YOU'RE A DOODYHEAD!" Well done - this might not take as long as I thought it would.
In other words, you wrote a typical newbie rant...
(yawn)
Hence, I was kind to you, last time... You'll not get the same consideration again. Now, get lost. I have little tolerance of fools.
Many people don't like their own company. I hope you have a dog.
Again, with all due respect, with the exception of about 10% or so, they have lumped themselves together.
Not really. Just another bold, largely unpopular move by the President to do the right thing instead of doing what the polls say. First Iraq, now this.
If the shoe fits, eat it.
I'm not having a lot of fun conversing with you...
Fools rarely do- I tend to stomp on 'em...
My original statement was "What happens if a rumor surfaces of a merger between two large companies...? Say, between GTE and Bell-Atlantic (BA bought GTE)??? People clamor to buy the stocks, because the value of the stock is suddenly worth more."
You fail to understand the reasons of this, because you believe that if a person is not a financial analyst (which, btw, I happen to be), they're not "smart." And, as uneducated as you clearly are, you also fail to understand that macroeconomic analysis is based upon the actions of people who are not educated in macroeconomics... More, you clearly fail to understand why such rumors or tips (or SEC filings to buy large stock holdings of a company) would cause the value of the stock to increase... A small hint: smart analysts will react on such tips, if they want to be successful... But you don't want to believe such realities.
What I MOST enjoy, however, is that after 4-5 posts you finally admit what I've said all along:
the smart ones use tips only as one small part of their analytical process...
In other words, you admit that tips DO influence the behavior of people. Whether that person is considered "smart" by someone as demonstrably ignorant as yourself, is irrelevant. And as any savvy, successful businessman will tell you, success involves a lot of networking and tips- from all kinds of sources...
The bottom line is simple: While it was like pulling teeth for a while, you've finally demonstrated- with your own words- the flaws in your "logic." Clearly, there is no logic in your statements...
In the battle of intellects... You are unarmed, and therefore unworthy of further consideration.
But thanks- it's was fun blasting you out of the water. ;^)
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.