Posted on 06/24/2007 5:14:54 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Sunday, June 24th, 2007
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sens. Trent Lott, R-Miss., and Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.; Cal Ripken Jr., former Baltimore Orioles shortstop.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan; Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Former New York Mayor Ed Koch; political consultant Ed Rollins; actor Sam Waterston.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.; actor David Hyde Pierce.
LATE EDITION (CNN) : Vietnamese President Nguyen Minh Triet; Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, and Ron Wyden, D-Ore.; Dennis Ross, former U.S. Mideast envoy; Egyptian Ambassador Nabil Fahmy; Israeli Ambassador Sallai Meridor.
Let’s ask an expert: bray....?
Pray for bray and his coyotes!
Anita
if you have a blog where you post your nuggets, can you give me a link? I’d like to add it to my blog.
If you don’t post this anywhere else, can I repost all or part of them to my blog (with attribution)?
Either way, thanks for your work. Your nuggets are always one of my weekly highlights.
also, where are you traveling? After my last month I can certainly sympathize with any issues you may be having ;^>
It is much more than wall since about 40% of our illegals come from visa overstays. We need to revise our legal immigration laws to get get rid of chain migration beyond the nuclear family and anchor babies. The numbers are also excessive. We need a merit system based on our needs. We should decide who can immigrate here.
Are you against all repatriation [deportation]? The so-called vilification of business is deserved in many cases. Employers are knowingly hiring and attracting illegals. They are more interested in the bottom line than the long term future of our country.
Huge difference between Johnson giving preferential access to those reporters deemed “Friendly,” and the direct coordination of “News” coverage between the DNC and the current “News” media. Cronkite reported what he saw, he did not ask the DNC what he should be saying.
NO President prior to 2004 ever had one of the 3 major new networks, in addition to one of the major new magazines, acting as campaign outlets for his foe. None of them ever let a campaign operative plant a phony “news” story based on obviously fraudulent documents that the “News” organization was warned against using.
A Presidential speech use to be a news event. NOW days the only place you can get the text of a President’s speech, other then the State of the Union, is the White House Website.
Use to be a Presidential speech drove the new cycle for days. NOW it last about 6-12 hours.
It use to be the person quoted was quoted. With the statement put in context. Now days they paraphrase people or only selectively quote partial sentences. I have Even see examples, where reporter simply attributed statements to the govt source that the source never actually said. They simply used the press release or statement and put their own personal spin on the topic.
So looking back in hind site, fallible memory can imagine that the Vietnam era media was just like this one, it in fact was nothing like this one.
Okay. So you acknowledge that the Free Market can pertain to something in addition to labor? Going back to my original question - which you didn't answer - are you advocating an absolutely unrestricted Free Market or just a Free Market when it comes to labor regulation?
See #372.
Pray for bray and his coyotes!
I just want to repeat one of your statements to see if you can see the fallacies of your own words. They stand out to me and others like stars in a dark sky.
Don't you get it you are admitting a huge group from another country is breaking U.S. law and then saying it's O.K. that we let this group do whatever they want simply because they want to dream about a better life!!Duhh HUhhh
What about the rest of the world, what about US law,do you not think they have dreams a well, how racists can you get to allow only one certain group that has the ability to break US law the benefits of this country!!
That is racism pure and simple and condoning breaking the law, that's a very slippery slope, once you go there which laws should be obeyed and which one is it O.K. to ignore?
I don’t think he’s gonna see the light.
Be prepared to be amazed. Had Peter not gone to the Appellate Court, the discovery and the trial would have already started.
All he sees are pesos, much pesos!
Pray for bray and his coyotes!
This is the money phrase. It's OUR country - by THE people, FOR the people.
Employers are knowingly hiring and attracting illegals. They are more interested in the bottom line than the long term future of our country.
Businesses cannot be expected to objectively operate in any manner other than to maximize profits. It is neither their orientation nor obligation to be "interested" in the welfare of our country.
That's what laws are for; we merely need to incentivize legal enforcement rather than reward violations of the law. It's that simple.
People & sharks are attracted to blood. If enforcement became the next "big" business opportunity, our economy would quickly become dependent on rooting out illegals. In fact, we'd need to import more illegals just to ship them back out to keep the game going. LOL
Pray for bray and his coyotes!
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it." - Patrick Henry
As someone who served in Vietnam, it was worse. We had no alternative media.
Cronkite reported what he saw, he did not ask the DNC what he should be saying.
Listen to what Cronkite says now. He has always been a Dem and a Lefty. He didn't have to ask the DNC since he agreed with everything they said. Do you think that Dan Rather's reporting from Vietnam was unbiased?
NO President prior to 2004 ever had one of the 3 major new networks, in addition to one of the major new magazines, acting as campaign outlets for his foe. None of them ever let a campaign operative plant a phony “news” story based on obviously fraudulent documents that the “News” organization was warned against using..
How do you know that? If the bloggers had not jumped on Rathergate, we would have never found out the truth. Do you think Nixon was treated fairly by the MSM when he was running for office? I don't know how old you are, but I remember those times very well and have a basis of comparison. The MSM has lost its credibility because we now have different sources of information. They no longer have a monopoly. Conditions today are much better than before in the 60s or 70s.
It use to be the person quoted was quoted. With the statement put in context. Now days they paraphrase people or only selectively quote partial sentences. I have Even see examples, where reporter simply attributed statements to the govt source that the source never actually said. They simply used the press release or statement and put their own personal spin on the topic
Now we can go to primary sources. We didn't have C-SPAN, YouTube, MySpace, the Internet with transcripts, etc. readily available to the public. Search engines like Google and Lexis-Nexis make it much easier to retrieve information. We are living in the Information Age and literally have access to the world's media. My God, don't you understand what is happening is truly revolutionary?
So looking back in hind site, fallible memory can imagine that the Vietnam era media was just like this one, it in fact was nothing like this one.
I am not senile and yes the Vietnam era was not like this one. Today is far better and more open. No longer can the political and media elite dominate and control our access to information. Wake up and smell the coffee.
I would guess the vast majority of them are looking for work. My own two children, now grown up, have worked full or part time since they turned age 16. I had my first full time summer job when I was between 8th and 9th grade in school, granted that was a long time ago (1954).
I would also point out that the vast majority of aliens, legal and illegal, are making above minimum wage in California, currently set at $7.50 per hour (due to increase to $8.00 per hour on 1 Jan. 2008). Local municipalities may look the other way as far as firms hiring illegals, but they frown on anyone paying less than minimum wage. It is estimated that landscapers in Calif. get 99% of their workers from legal and illegal alien groups, mainly those of hispanic or latino origin. Those workers average about $8-10 per hour.
The poverty line in California is estimated at about $25,000 per year based on a family of four. This amount does not include non-cash benefits such as food stamps, school lunches, and public subsidized housing and education.
Rewarding illegality just fosters further law breaking.
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.