Posted on 05/06/2005 7:47:06 AM PDT by .cnI redruM
See reply #58
You are a cheap labor PR shill. Truth does not matter to you in the least. Just throwing mud.
BTW, when are you going to start your "Anyone who thinks employers should be expected to obey the law and penalized if they don't is for Karl Marx", routine ?
It's not personal. Its professional. Or more accurately, amateurish.
Actually I'm a fair labor shill. I'm against those such as you and hillary control freaks who wish to put their nose into micromanaging of good honest peoples businesses.
BTW, when are you going to start your "Anyone who thinks employers should be expected to obey the law and penalized if they don't is for Karl Marx", routine ?
I don't have to, you sam, promote marxism with each and one of your posts.
"Huh and tancredo's remarks saying Tom Delay should step aside are not irrational."
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by the above because of the lack of punctuation, but I assume you're saying that Tancredo's statement was irrational. That is an opinion. It's not a fact. I disagree with his statement but in my opinion it was not irrational, it was simply incorrect. It does not mean that he is incorrect about everything.
I've seen you pop up on every thread where Tancredo is mentioned and divert attention away from the discussion of the policy, with your relentless mantra of "backstabber." Why? Is it that important to you that Tancredo be torn down? Or is it simply that you're trying to, by association, discredit his ideas. Again, why not debate the ideas? I have to assume that it's because you want no discussion of the ideas.
Whew the above is clinton semantics in action.
Yunz guys in hillary's basement must be sweating bullets about this thread.
The party need sto move to Tancredo's position not the other way around.
Good honest people don't break the law by hiring illegals. Good honest people obey the law and tell the truth. Good honest people don't expect the taxpayer to pay their employee benefits.
Thank you for exhibiting so clearly the moral and intellectual level of the illegal immigration, open borders lobby.
Huh, then why are you not denigrating the democrat party, which expects productive people to take care of those whose wish not to work.
Oh I forgot, you work for hillary, nevermind.
Thank you for exhibiting so clearly the moral and intellectual level of the illegal immigration, open borders lobby
And thank you for showing your true clintonian rhetoric.
Nice debating skills. You stick to the issue, avoid ad hominem attacks and make your points clearly and concisely. If you think we should open the borders to illegals so employers have a cheap labor source, why not just argue that opinion. It has merits, and some people might be persuaded.
Yunz guys in hillary's basement must be sweating bullets about this thread.
Won't change anybody's mind, particularly because it is incoherent.
Me: If not for the undocumented workers in this country, I'd say we'd have about $ 4B or $ 5B of money annually NOT leaving this country for Mexico, we'd have many more hospitals open [that did not have to close] in the southwest, we'd have a lot less crime and a lot less filled prison cells [INSERT YOUR FACT HERE]..."
Cannon said only a small minority of people "truly believe we should kick out" all illegal immigrants ...
Me: Well, count ME in on that small minority!
"Whew the above is clinton semantics in action."
I just want to make sure I understand. If I make a simple declarative statement, with a few words longer than two syllables, it is "Clintonian Semantics?" What part was Clintonian? I simply offered my opinion on the difference between irrational and incorrect. What makes you say "whew?" I mean, it wasn't that challenging to comprehend.
"Yunz guys in hillary's basement must be sweating bullets about this thread."
One of the most absurd statements I've ever read. First, I don't know what "yunz" means. Second, (and I'll probably regret this), why would you possibly think I was in Hillary's basement? Third, why would you possibly think that anyone would be "sweating bullets" over your postings?
Finally, why do you keep avoiding the question about the ideas?
I never have stated that the borders should be open. I am for a documented guest worker program, and also I am against the rhetoric of tancredo supporters, who think they should be the mirror image of jesse jackson and al sharpton(i.e affirmative action) of telling who honest business people should hire while they pursue their American dream.
Add to the fact of tancredo's backstabbing towards Tom Delay, one plus one equals two, and tom tancredo is appealing to the worst of America and not the best, IMO.
Seriously, what is it with Dane? I assume you have engaged in "discussion" with him before. Is a serious question ever answered in any intelligent fashion or is an ad hominem non sequiter always the response? I guess it might be fun for a couple of rounds but after that, why bother?
I see your natural knee jerkedness kicked in, see reply #73.
"natural knee jerkedness"
You don't know anything about me and whether I have a natural knee-jerkedness. You've already mischaracterized me as engaging in "Clintonian Semantics" so I can tell you're not particularly perceptive.
I grant that you offered a response in #73 with some substance, after I posted my other comment, although you never have responded to me with any thoughtfulness. So now my question is, after you stated your position, why do you go right to the name-calling, associating people with my point of view with Al Sharpton? You must know that is ludicrous and makes you look silly? Why do you do it?
Dane is a regular who always materializes in support of a cheap labor agenda. He never does anything but call names, twist what people say, and throw around "marxist" the way Al Sharpton throws around "racist".
Don't expect coherence or truth from him. He has an agenda.
Dane is kinda like "The Argument Clinic" at times. But he has an agenda of promoting rampant lawbreaking so he strives to create the illusion of GOP grass roots support for illegal immigration.
71% of Hispanic voters disapprove. Are all the Hispanic voters all teachers?
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.