Trash Picking up Trash
A local Sussex County Nazi group has adopted a road near Lewes to clean up.
About three months ago, Lewes resident Edward McBride applied to adopt a highway on behalf of his political party – National Socialist Freedom Movement Nazi Party. McBride’s request was denied by Delaware Department of Transportation.
When asked why, DelDOT officials took an ethical stance against McBride’s request. Geoff Sundstrom, DelDOT director of public relations, said in an email, “The application was denied because the state will not lend its property – in this case its highway signs –or its name to a group whose purpose by the applicant’s own admission is to deny the civil rights of its citizens.”
I guess DelDOT needed some trash to pick up the trash along the road.
Cedar Grove Road in Lewes is now home to a little blue sign that reads “Freedom Party” and represents a local Nazi group. McBride said about 45 members of the party live in Sussex County and hold meetings once or twice each month in Lewes and Rehoboth Beach.
McBride said he is still trying to adopt a highway under the name Nazi Party, and he believes the law is on his side. “This is a Constitutional matter; this goes against my freedom of speech,” he said.
McBride said he wants to advertise the party’s presence in the county. “We’re not afraid to get out there in broad daylight and do something for the community,” he said.
I don’t see this as a First Amendment issue. If McBride and his valkyries want to get their “message” out to the general public, why don’t they take an ad out in the Cape Gazette and advertise their meetings? I’ll tell you why – because they’re chickenshits. They really like to operate in the shadows, much like the night riders of earlier Sussex County history. I wonder if they’ll be cleaning up the road in full uniform.
Tags: Nazi, Sussex County
Gvn tht th Nzs hv ndrsd th ccp mvmnt nd r n ctv prt f yr (llgd) % cltn, wh r y nt mbrcng ths scll rspnsbl ffrt b yr fllw Sclsts?
Listen sock puppet troll from Texas, pick a name and stick with it.
And please provide proof of your claim. Otherwise, STFU.
MJ, I’m not the least bit surprised to learn that there is an active Nazi organization in Sussex County. The proof is just listening to the right wing extremism expressed by a large number of regular callers to our local station down here, especially on the Bill Colley show, and, the control freaks who insist on saying Christian prayers at public meetings, like the Indian River School Board meetings, and the Sussex County Council. Neither are satisfied with a moment of silent prayer. Regarding the Indian River situation, the ACLU came to the rescue, so threatened with a civil suit which they were going to lose, they settled out of court. Three cheers to the ACLU!
Ah, the turds from Texas are back. Whatsa matter, boys, the miracle run out on ya?
The turd from Texas is in purgatory right now.
McBride, the moron Nazi, said he has a job washing dishes at a local restaurant. Can someone help me find out where he works, so that I can know to never eat there again? I’d hate to think that this idiot touched my food.
McBride only touches the food you left on your plate.
It’s takes a big man to do unskilled labor.
Didn’t Hitler start out scrubbing spittoons in a Beer Garden before staging his first “putsche”[?]
Trash endorsing Trash – lawls
http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/17/red-white-and-angry%E2%80%A8-communist-nazi-parties-endorse-occupy-protests/
Takes trash to recognize trash, I suppose. But it does show the only ones too stupid to see the trend are conservatives.
Geezer, Dominique is an asshat, plain and simple. And anyone relying on the Daily Caller, which that turd from Texas was using, is just plain ignorant.
first he out there acting for all whites and sec how many time have yall bitch about something at lest he trying to changes shit insdteand of bitching about it 14/88
good put joe me think you make sense people bitch to much too and at lease he trying.
JOE YOU SMART GUY! me think us sewpereor wite people shood try and change shit too insteaghd of asking obama for muslum bail outs like welfar kween!!!! WHITE POWER!
So not only is white trash picking up garbage along the roads in Sussex, they figured out how to type and send comments to a blog. Evolution.
In Sussex?!? Where’s a sheriff when you need one?
@joe – interesting use of 88 as this is about aryan nation 88 – 8 being the eight letter of the alphabet
therefore 88= HH – Heil Hitler – what – you think no one in here would notice what you did??
as far as a sheriff in Sussex – well hes out illegally enforcing laws he has not right to enforce and driving up the insurance rates
and arresting folks that the warrants do not need to be issued on
way to go – tax dollars at work!
His 14 represents 14 words written by David Lane, “We must secure the existance of our people and a future for white children.”
Joe is an ignorant racist white supremacist.
Honestly, our biggest fear is that Joe might reproduce. Think about it this way, if David Lane wanted to secure a future for white children, would anyone really want to Joe to have them? Evolution being what it is, wouldn’t that be like keeping a third eye? Hopefully Joe will recognize that he is an evolutionary dead end and will do his part by not having any children.
i hope he had lots of children..and they grow to realize what a horrible person he is, abandon him, marry outside their ethnicity/inside their gender, and he dies…. like Hitler, alone and cold, with total knowledge of how hated he is
Didnt really have a thread to plce this on – but was wondering if you all knew about it
seemd the Senate wasnts to do what the Sheriff os doing – so I out it here
and all this screaming about Obama doing this from the Right – seems like the right is where this is coming from
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/11/26/us-senate-to-vote-on-bill-that-will-allow-the-military-to-arrest-americans-on-american-soil-and-hold-them-indefinitely/
http://www.oathkeepers.org
maybe they had the right idea after all
here is the link:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112Xvs1Vc:e462417:
sections 1031 &1032 SB 1867 – interesting – and there is an ACLU oetition out there – BUT the text of the bill and the link to addictinginfo say diferent things – any ideas folks??
senator Coons has an amendment for this bill too..but the text is not available.
b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
You did the right thing in going to the source for information because the language for this bill is pretty ho hum which of course makes for poor headlines for sites like this one, whose stated objective is to “resource to discredit all the lies and propaganda that the right-wing spreads”
As you pointed out the actual text of bill contradicts Addicting Info. That would give me good reason to question them as a source of information because this is a pretty easy thing to confirm prior to publishing.
I did some research and was unable to find any ammendments which would modify the language in this section. Doesn’t mean there are not any, since I did not delve into the Congressional Record.
Thanks Dave – I cant type for crap BUT I do think for myself and do reserch
initially I saw the addicting story then thought – hmmmmm – weird that no one picked up on this – so I thought Id go to the source
and there it is – in black and white – worht watching but I suspect there would be lounder screaming – I also clicked on the petition site and saw the ACLU logo
need to look into that too
Im tired of the headlines and no one reading the small print and disclaimers at the bottom. If we want to bitch that the right-wing is not reliable or factual, then we should be reliable and factual and nothing less.
Yeah, but facts and reliability is boring and it’s hard to rouse the legions with just the facts. It’s sound bite politics. Remember the sound bite “Vote!” It didn’t matter who or what you voted for, as long as you voted. But it does matter and no one said “Study The Issues And The Candidates Positions And Then Vote Intelligently” I mean what kind of a slogan is that? I am sure we could all come up with a list of the top ten “headlines” that purposely incite the population and inhibit critical thinking. My list would include “death panels”, “pro-life”, “pro choice” among others.
my list is “criminal aliens” “illegals” “Obamacare” “anchor babies”
“tax and spend liberals”
sadly, we have generations that do not think for themselves and dont have the mental discpline to do so
“Vote – for your life” or “Vote – your life depends on it” both stirke me and new good mottos….
how about -” Vote intelligently – your life may literally depend on it”
might get some attention
My list:
job creators
free up capital
current retirees won’t be affected
job-killing (______)
tax cuts for everybody who pays taxes
partisan bickering
civility
revenue
tax reform
entitlement reform
class warfare
center
Democratic left
I don’t want to stop using these phrases; I just want to restore them to their rightful meaning.
Yeah, “Obamacare” is an excellent example. Try looking up the “Obamacare” bill on Thomas. No one tells the citizens that it’s the Affordable Health Care for America Act (of 2010). Even if someone were inclined to read the entire act, how would the average person find it? An uninformed electorate make better sheep.
Pucks list also contains some great ones. Another one I’d like to add is “undocumented immigrants.” No one wants to tell it like it is because they want to spin it. Such as any solution that provides a path legitimacy for illegal aliens is “amnesty”
Others: personhood (huh?), socialism, intelligent design (which I don’t disagree with, except that it is employed to contradict evolutionary theory).
any solution that provides a path legitimacy for illegal aliens is “amnesty”
Well, it is. Let’s not perpetuate yet another Orwellian language shift. Whether you are pro-amnesty, anti-amnesty, or somewhere in the middle, let’s call it what it is:
Not snark, honest question: If they must meet a set of requirements first, is it still “amnesty”?
If the requirements are lower than the law that was broken, yes. I think we can agree on the definition whether we agree with amnesty or not.
realistic answer….. yes. in the public view… or rather, the people who get excited and vote on such things…. anything short of immediate deportation is amnesty…. they are MAYBE willing to give a pass to roughing them up while we kick them out.
hey, wasnt this thread initially about throwing our pet-waste on Ceder Grove road?
Thread-wandering is a consequence of not enough new posts. It is even more severe on DP.
Also, a lot of us are simply responding to comments on the “Recent Comment” widget and don’t necessarily research to find out what the original post was about.
I’m not all that excited about aggressive deportations or the illegality of the immigrants themselves. Leave them alone, give them humanitarian services, take care of their kids, help them get back home – just don’t give them our jobs.
I’m more concerned about the illegal employers and the damage done to the economy by having whole sectors of our economy built on illegal labor – distorting labor markets, distorting prices, depressing wages, lowering working conditions, busting unions, and reducing job opportunity across the board.
no Geezer its not Amnesty if they have to meet requirements first: usually a person is sentanced and the sentance may be communted –
amnesty is a grant or pardon to people that have done a “wrong: whether it be criminal (legal) or administrative
DREAM Act (for example) does not give amnesty – under our laws, chuldren under certain ages are incapable of committing crimes
coming as a child means there was no crime committed
in order to sommit a crime the two elements must be present
the actus reus – the act it self AnD the mens rea – the intent
a two year old would have a difficult time with formulating intent therefore no crime was committed
Amensty had several broad definitions – and is used wrongly towards immigrants who have committed no crime with the exception of crossing the border EWI (entry without Inspection) and were not leaglly admitted into the country – the other arer Visa over stays
the legally entered just didnt go home
this is condidered a deninimus violation hardly a parking ticket.
Amnesty for a parking ticket – really
CIR or DREAM does NOT in any way magically bestow citizenship on these folks, in most cenarios, they must register, learn english, pay a fine and ensure they taxes are psid up, then and only then would yhey have the opportunity to get in line and wait for the opportuity to get permenamt residency leading toward citizenship
no handouts there – which the world anmesty inplies
like “anhor baby: implies the parents can stay here is the children are us born – nope – tell that canard to the over 5,ooo kids in foster care in the US coz bothe parents were deported.
the ARC recently did a report and they estimate 15,000 will be in the same boat in a few years at the current deportation rate
and all those deported parents that took their children home with them…well, guess what – they are comming back at their majority age
and they aint happy. we have already seen the trends climbing, the are citizens and voting and they remember.
am·nes·ty
[am-nuh-stee] Show IPA noun, plural -ties, verb, -tied, -ty·ing.
noun
1.
a general pardon for offenses, especially political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.
2.
Law . an act of forgiveness for past offenses, especially to a class of persons as a whole.
3.
a forgetting or overlooking of any past offense.
verb (used with object)
4.
to grant amnesty to; pardon.
nothing in the definition says requirements are met first – therefore amnesty is NOT what DREAM ACT or Comprehensive Immigration reform is
they can all it amnesty all day – that doesnt make it truer
so we dont get confused here – this is the definition of AMNESTY as it relates to immigration:
As it relates to immigration, amnesty is the term used for granting automatic citizenship to resident aliens, who are in the United States illegally. Amnesty for illegals is the subject of tremendous controversy, since it essentially bypasses the citizenship and assimilation process essential to all legal immigration into the United States.
CIR nor DREAM give AMNESTY – there are requirements that these folks MUST do – and they are granted NOTHING, especially not citizenship – they only have the ability to wait in line and do what is required of them until literally their number comes up and they can obtain a green card, the wait to citizenship
the naysayer on both sides have done a pretty good job of covering up the truth on theis issues usung the word amnesty AMNESTY is not what the proposals are about – not even close
this argument makes no sense to me. the people who are against the Dream Act, or “amnesty” arent against it because of lack of understanding of the legislation….
they are against it because they are xenophobic racists. They fear their “proud american culture” is under attack. and no amount of reasonable pragmatism will change their minds…. those people have made themselves irrelevant to the discussion because their position excludes the ability to bend or compromise.
It doesn’t matter that the “illegals” have to do a whole bunch of meaculpas in order to be able to start the process of citizenship. If the people who opposed all this and constantly rail on about “leprosy riddled mexican rouges flooding across the Rio” had their way, there would be NO immigration at all.
“puck said – “take care of their kids, help them get back home ”
ok – what if their kids are born here – who takes care of the kids of the parents are deported>
if we help them get back home, they take their US Born citizen children with them
of if deported, the kids stay here is the foster system, neither of those options looks good to me – or the taxpayer.
what do you suggest we do with the children and there are LOTS of them
@Ben, I absolutely agree with you
Gov Brownbeck of Kansas wants a high school girl to write an apology regarding him because of a tweet she sent out
but Sam brownbeck was OK with one of this R reps saying :lets empty the clip{ regarding illegal immigration)
and the other R rep said ” lets shoot them from the air like we do feral hogs” at an AG industires hearing
But Gov Brownbeck picks on a high school senior over a tweet
Priorities poeple, Priorities…
There has to be an anchor baby exception on humanitarian grounds. I’m not in favor of splitting up families.
I’m all for humanitarian exceptions, as long as the same law that lets them stay also requires that we go after the employers and shut off the jobs magnet. Why keep creating humanitarian disasters that need even more exceptions?
If they are to be granted legal status, one of the requirements has to be that they rat out all their employers and turn over all evidence (i.e., paystubs, work records). Actually I think that is already in some of the proposals.
And the employers must then be aggressively prosecuted and/or placed on a “three strikes” watch list for extra enforcement attention.
BTW, the high school girl is now refusing to apologize to Brownback, and her mother backs her up. Good for her.
before we dehumanize the debate – please read this article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deedee-garcia-blase/undocumented-teen-commits_b_1115172.html
thanks
I read the article before. I didn’t comment because these early articles don’t have enough information, other than the tragic fact of the suicide. But the early news reports don’t have enough detail to have any bearing on policy.
I did notice that the reports studiously avoid identifying the parents’ employers, and the date and conditions under which the parents entered the country. I don’t know if it matters or not; it depends on what the facts are.
@puck – that sounds reasonable
and I did read her moom backs her up on this – GOOD!
how trite on behalf of the Gov – what a dork – free speech is still just that
He needs to move on and get over it
This idiot began spamming the Occupy DE FB page last weekend. We took it to the GA and decided, as a leaderless group, we could individually report his messages as hate speech. He’s gone now.
Puck – we spoke to the family last night – the facts are that he was despondant over his lack of a future here in the US with no hope of attaining any kind of legal status and left letters and notes stating that fact – autopsy to be done today.
The boy is undocumented as are his parents – why difference does it make where his parents work?
if you would like the story first hand – here,call, we did and we have help and support lined up for them and a fund as well
The contact for the family is Marie Mendoza, she’s Luna’s cousin – 956-862-2407 – the services are tentatively scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday. On Tuesday they will hold services at Rick Brown Family Funeral Home in Mission, TX
http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=690993#.TtHWcJT_p9m
any questions??
I have a lot more to say but it is clearly too soon. By the same token, it is also too soon to use this tragedy for political purposes on either side of the debate. Best wishes and sympathies to the family.
@puck – I also deeply resent ur use of the term “anchor baby” children born here of undocumented parents are not anchor babies, they anchor nothing, and it dehumanizes them
just like the rhetoric from the RWNJ
if you dont believ me here is a report you should read about “anchor babies” and what they supposedly “anchor” and you will realize it is just another canard spoken by the right to fool folks ike you who know little to nothing about immigration law.
http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/11/thousands_of_kids_lost_in_foster_homes_after_parents_deportation.html
happy reading about your anchor babies
thanks you for your condolences puck – they will be passed on
but a question remains – if a gay teenager is bullied and tragically tales their own life, it is blasted all over the media and the net
and the protect out kids from nullying – and its ok to be gay etc is immediate
all of which I support
but this happens, and…..nothing…low key, early articles dont have enought information, etc
DeeDee Blase Garcia the author of the HuffPo piece spoke with the family several times as well as representative of the org there in Texas did as well.
It appears to be well-vetted
so what information do you have that you are not willing to share yet?
Point taken, but until I get more data points I have no reason to assume it is a broadly offensive term. It is a useful term with no ready substitute. In two words it sums up the emotional blackmail that causes us to consider nullifying our legal immigration policy for children born to illegal immigrants.
Which is a position that I actually favor. I am not for forced deportation of otherwise law-abiding illegal immigrants. If illegals give birth to a US citizen, they at least need to be given legal residency, but not necessarily citizenship.
But like I said before, the same new law that would let them stay, needs to also crack down mercilessly against the illegal employers who keep drawing in and maintaining new illegal immigrants. That to me is real immigration reform.
Otherwise there is no end in sight of the misery for the immigrants, or for unemployed and under-employed Americans. Lather, rinse, repeat every decade.
OK – I would suggest using the term “children of undocumented”
it explains the circumstances without making it sound that their birth confers status that does not exist.
in the Latinio commumity it IS a broadly offensive term – no group likes their children demeaned this way.
here is a data point for you on the term and its offensiveness:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201106200005
“consider nullifying our legal immigration policy for children born to illegal immigrants. Which is a position that I actually favor”
So you SUPPORT overturning the 14th amendment? really? WOW
LETS GO AFTER THE EMPLOYERS – ok with that tho
wow – I cannot believe that you would not realize a term that dehumanizes children or people would be offensive – what world do you live in?
Your own conscience should have dictated that to you immediately.
I would suggest using the term “children of undocumented”
But you would lose a lot of the meaning. You are trying to take out exactly the connotations that make the term so useful. To replace the connotations, you would have to say:
“US-born children of undocumented immigrants, used as an emotional argument to persuade the public to allow the parents to legally remain and work in the US.”
So I’ll stick with “anchor babies” for now.
So you SUPPORT overturning the 14th amendment? really? WOW
No, sorry, what I meant was that I favor allowing the parents to stay. I think I mis-spoke and got the meaning exactly backward though.
Look you are just going to have to get used to the idea that I am anti-amnesty but am not a racist. Most of the usual counter-arguments and accusations aren’t going to work on me. I’m all for a cosmopolitan society and a legal melting pot. Lord knows I’m sick of our redneck white folks. I just want the jobs back for our economy.
taking a non-side here….
Aoine, do you believe that NO ONE comes to this country with the knowledge that if they have a child here, that child i a citizen, and it will be hard for them to get kicked out? SOME, not a lot…. people do that.
Puck, do you believe every baby born to illegal immigrants in this country is a result of the parents want to “anchor” themselves here? where they are treated so well and respected as humans….
But that IS the point. They cannot be used as emotional argument to stay. Their existence is irrelevant nor has any standing in immigration law.
That’s why the term is misleading as well as pejorative.
And I don’t understand someone using a term when it is widely known that it is pejorative….I doubt get that at all…but they r ur shoes….u alone walk in them.
But…if u read the colorline report u will see I am right.
Ok on the 14th…and. Also support living wages for AG workers.
Some common ground but I would definately NOT wade into the 4th and hilltop neighbourhood and throw that term around.
No more than u would use the n word or other terms….
Good luck
“I don’t understand someone using a term when it is widely known that it is pejorative….I doubt get that at all…but they r ur shoes….u alone walk in them.”
Uh-oh. The PC police are here.
“I would definately NOT wade into the 4th and hilltop neighbourhood and throw that term around.”
Yeah, right. Because that’s the most dangerous term in Hilltop. Get real. It’s not the N-word, and never will be. It’s an inaccurate, misleading term akin to “death tax” instead of inheritance tax. Hyperbole is wrong even in a good cause.
“I just want the jobs back for our economy.”
Uh, Puck — American jobs are part of our economy no matter who performs them. You can want them back for unemployed Americans, but giving those poverty-level wages to Americans instead of immigrants won’t change the nation’s level of economic activity.
this debate assumes either NO one comes here for the purpose of having children, and thus being able to stick around in a nice legal limbo. or that EVERYONE who comes heres and has children does so for that purpose.
I would say it is probably similar to the percentage of women who use abortions as contraception. It’s a convenient example for those with sinister motives, but it is such a small amount, the term doesn’t make much sense…. some people come here…. have sex (WHAT?!!?!?!?!?!?!) and have babies.
“They cannot be used as emotional argument to stay. Their existence is irrelevant nor has any standing in immigration law.”
An emotional argument is different from a legal one. Newt Gingrich, for example, tried to distinguish such cases from “recent” illegal immigrants just last week. Indeed, the foster home situation you linked to works as an emotional argument in favor of amnesty or other accommodations for the parents. So I would say that they can indeed be used as an emotional argument. As for the law, isn’t changing it what everybody wants?
actually, if we “give the immigrant jobs” … or, as i just now decided to call them, after watching an Always Sunny marathon…. “Charlie work”, to Americans, those wages and hours will be subject to labor laws… THE HORROR! Just like the South’s economy collapsed after they lost their slaves, you will see a lot of industries suddenly hurt because they got used to hand outs. The trough feeders (bosses…. i LOVE using that term for “them”) will have to learn fiscal responsibility and how to play by the rules. It will actually be quite interesting to see what companies rely on near-slave labor… or “Charlie work”
also, does anyone still want to talk about rounding up porta-potties and up-ending them on Ceder Grove rd?
giving those poverty-level wages to Americans instead of immigrants
Geezer, many of those jobs were traditionally done by Americans – roofing, housekeeping, landscaping, child care, whatever, even in living memory. You know – back when times were better. Why can’t we do those jobs once more?
Who’s to say the wages won’t go up and the jobs become a little better, once you take the illegality and exploitation out of the job? I say they will.
won’t change the nation’s level of economic activity.
Well, sure. If you blow half your paychecks in the slot machines, that won’t change your family’s level of economic activity either. Your income and outgo won’t change. Not right away, at least.
I say reducing illegal employment will make a dent in the US unemployment rate. And that is a good thing for individual Americans and for the economy.
The fact is, pressure at the low end of wages creates pressure all up the scale as well. And pressure on wages has been non-existent for a long time for many reasons; one of which is our increasing tolerance for filling low-wage jobs with illegals.
If unions are a good thing for workers, then an army of illegal workers functions like an anti-union.
Inflation would actually be good for consumers in this economy if it was accompanied by wage inflation as well. But wage inflation has been suppressed by cheap-labor policies, including tolerance of illegal employment. Massive illegal employment is part of the cheap-labor strategy by the 1% that allows commodity prices to increase while wages stay flat or decline. This is the very definition of the hollowing-out of the middle class.
Assuming Puck is right about the downward pressure on wages that flows from illegal employment (and it makes sense on its face), then the question is who is acting illegally? The employee or the employer?
Lock up the pecan farm executive and we’d see a steep decline in illegal employment and a corresponding rise in farm wages.
Puck makes a good point that reducing illegal employment may have a positive affect on the economy. However, it remains that illegals do work that no one else will do (at least at the price businesses are willing to pay). Additionally, if conservative estimates that of 12M illegal immigrants are anywhere close, the we must accept that many of them are here to stay, especially when their children are citizens. Therefore we have to have some rational policy for dealing with these human beings. I am not an advocate of a citizenship (unless it was a reward for public/military service). However, there should be a policy that results in a legal presence, such as a green card. The debate would be different if we were discussing those who want to come. But we are talking about those who are already here and will not be leaving (at least voluntarily). By the way, one of the biggest obstacles to immigration reform is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. I wonder why?
They are both illegal, but I don’t have the stomach to go after individual illegal immigrants who are being exploited and are at the bottom of the economic and social ladder. I am a Democrat, after all. I’d much rather beat up on the American business owners who should know better.
I’ll acknowledge seasonal farm labor may be a special case.
And keep an eye on Alabama unemployment rates. Don’t bother telling me it’s too soon to tell – I already get that.
Really?? REALLY – has the unemployement rate in ARIZONA?? gone down – they have had sB1070 for a while now
how about GA? AL? SC? – maybe to soon to tell there – but not in ARIZONA…
you really believe that this comment “I say reducing illegal employment will make a dent in the US unemployment rate. And that is a good thing for individual Americans and for the economy”
is true
well the data does not hold up…. those states that have enacted those laws are WORSE off then before – AZ alone has lost over a billion
so much for that
@Geezer – the N word was just fine 40 years ago – kinda sanctamonious to spout that it will never be a pejorative term dontcha think??
Of course when its not YOUR family and friends being insulted why would you care?
Back to puck – the Alabama Farmers are screaming! and you did hear about the Mercedes Benz manager tht go arrested – for not having the right papers on him
Imagine being the Gov of Alabama and trying to attract foreign business to your state after this debacle happens LOL
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/mercedes-benz-manager-from-germany-arrested-under-alabamas-strict-new-immigration-law/2011/11/18/gIQADDmYZN_story.html
and it ends up going international – ROTFLMAO – talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face…
“Imagine being the Gov of Alabama and trying to attract foreign business to your state after this debacle happens LOL”
the only foreign business Frau Brewer wants is from white people countries…. and they know the Papers Please law doesnt apply to them.
@Ben – this incident happened in Alabama – not Arizona
and the gov is Bentley – a guy
and this incident happened to a white German man
The Alabama farmers had it coming. How dare they think they could get away with building their business on illegal labor, and then whining like stuck pigs when they got called out on it. Shame on them. How selfish.
If they have a gripe, it is with the surrounding governments that still force AL farmers to compete with illegal businesses.
I’m more an “employer sanctions” guy, though. In other words, I’m not in favor of sB1070, but I am in favor of AZ’s employer sanctions law, which was just upheld by the US Supreme Court this May.
I’m just saying though, states that do manage to reduce their burden of jobs filled by undocumented workers might serve as laboratories to get an idea of what life would be like with fewer illegal jobs.
Tracking unemployment month by month is a mug’s game, but if you really want to play – AZ gained 2300 construction jobs in October alone, which is as many as they had gained in the previous 9 months combined – while the nation overall lost 20,000 construction jobs in October.
but im curious – who got those construction jobs
white, blacks, asians or latinos?
therein lies the crux of the issue – find out thoxe facts coz the devil is in the detailes…….
I don’t care what color they are, as long as they are legal.
I am not claiming the AZ construction job spike or the AL employment uptick is meaningful yet or even real. Just saying it bears watching.
I f what you care about is American jobs and American labor
then puck I would advise you get no lawnscaping done,no work done one your home and eat not eat out in restruants nor go to most if not all coveninece stores
and make sure all labels on your clothes are marked made in america on them
oh and make sure the vegetables and the meat you eat were neither picked by illegal immigrants labor nor the meat was processed or packaged by illegal immigrant labor – even if its marked Kosher.
let me know how that diet works out for you – sounds interesting really
“I say reducing illegal employment will make a dent in the US unemployment rate. And that is a good thing for individual Americans and for the economy.”
First things first: It will be good for individual Americans. It’s a wash for the economy.
Now to the theory: With unemployment at 9% on what now appears to be a permanent basis, you might be able to reduce unemployment a bit by driving out all illegals. But you won’t do much to raise pay. Most of the unemployed aren’t going to take those jobs you mention — do you think laid-off bankers are going to become roofers? Unskilled labor is a job category that has always had high unemployment and always will, because there will always be more workers than jobs in those fields.
The giveaway to your magical thinking is the phrase “back when things were good.” You say it as if there were no illegals in the country “back when things were good.” There is very little causal effect involved.
Unlike you, I’m thinking of the individual human beings affected by these policies. Frankly, I don’t give a damn about whether they’re “American” or not. I don’t have any special warm and fuzzy feelings about Americans, so I don’t really care who gets the jobs.
“the N word was just fine 40 years ago – kinda sanctamonious to spout that it will never be a pejorative term dontcha think??”
No, not at all. I work with language for a living (which is why I find it so ironic that you, of all people, would accuse someone of sanctimony). The N-word was not “just fine” 40 years ago. “Anchor baby” simply doesn’t have the same effect, because it’s not a term like “wetback.” It doesn’t describe everyone in the group being insulted.
“Of course when its not YOUR family and friends being insulted why would you care?”
Get off your high horse. You don’t know a damn thing about me or what kind of ethnic insults I”m privileged to have been called. You have long since won the title of most sensitive commenter. I don’t care much for your thin-skinned sanctimony. That attitude is a major reason why liberalism has a bad name.
maybe someone could explain how this thread went off the rails.
you’re RIGHT. i should read closer before i respond. BUt the Kraut had it commin 🙂 and um… er… .. Jan Brewer is a Nazi.
I agree with puck on this one. I think the bigger issue is that Immigrants are being exploited and wealthy (probably white) people are getting even richer off of cheap labor. It’s not so much a “i dont want them dang-gum mexicans pickin mah ‘maters” more a…
“we need to change things so those people dont come to America looking for a better life and end up slaves.” He’s said quite a dew times we need to fight it on the employer end…. harder.. and more severely. I also dont see it is relevant WHO gets the jobs vacated by Not-Yet-Legal-Pilgrims-and-future-modle-American-citizens…. or NYLPAFMACs (Pronounced Nill-Paaf-Macks) (Illegals and Aliens is too dehumanizing.
Easy, MJ. Someone brought up illegal immigration.
I dont however think that it’ll do much for employment. if anything, the automated tomato picking machine industry will undergo a spike just long enough for the factory farmers to make it so they dont have to ever pay a human a livable wage ever again… while living off of tax dollars.
Already explained.
The original topic lost steam on its own, then and nobody posted open threads all weekend. You can actually follow the comments and trace how they followed one after another to this point, and answer your own question.
Don’t worry, having a lively discussion is something other blogs only aspire to. Congratulations.
to make it really fun, someone should look into the mirror and say “Israel” 3 times.
@Geezer – thin-skinned – lets take a page out of your book – shall we?
“Get off your high horse. You don’t know a damn thing about me or what kind of ethnic insults I”m privileged to have been called.”
how does that fit? you dont like it much when I call you out on your insensitivity and narrowminded-ness
you do remember the one about – “now that we have determined what you are, its only a matter of cost”
Im not always going to agree with you because you feel so intellectually superior – you dont live in my world and that fact is screamingly obvious – I dont live in your and dont try to define it.
I respond to your comments – not your life – I could give a shit less
you seem to think you know what my life is about – and that drives you
you lose. so Tar-baby is fine then? – like anchor baby, its does not define everyone in the ethnic group?? what is your potification on that one – its current, as it was used recently and deemend pejorative.
I have breaking news for you sunshine – the N word is alive and well and used daily in Sussex county by whites, in good jobs, in local government, when they feel they are around like-minded folks
so the N word is STILL in the colloquial language – happy now?
and just for clarity Geezer seeing language is your field:
““Anchor baby” simply doesn’t have the same effect, because it’s not a term like “wetback.” It doesn’t describe everyone in the group being insulted.”
an “anchor baby” was born in the US
a wetback crossed the Rio Grande – hence the term “wet back”
NEITHER term describes everyone in the group being insulted
as an “anchor baby” anchors nothing to the US
and not all latinos are “wetbacks” who crossed the Rio Grande = most were born here
is that technically clear enough for you?
not being critical, just was wondering. You see, I’ve spent the last week in the sun and warmth of Ft. Lauderdale working on my tan and really didn’t pay attention to DL while I was down there.
That’s the problem with Slurs…. think about “Jew” that one is all in how it is used. It can be a term to describe me, or MJ, or other Members of the tribe…. but it can also be used as an insult… like “Gay”.
I think if the people to whom you are referring tell you it is offensive… you should stop using it.. unless you are a republican, then you will want to use it all the time. (see what i did there?)
ZZZzzz….. what!.. oh… I must have dozed off. Anyway, this thread sucks ass. This thread makes mens ice skating look macho.
If this thread was a breakfast cereal, it would be acorns and pine-cones. This thread makes me feel all Kovach inside.
You know who loves this thread? …. Hitler.
Jason: It’s grape nuts. INedible, but a good substitute for buckshot.
Aoine: My point about “anchor baby” is that it’s not an insult you can aim at adults.
“Tar baby” is a perfectly acceptable term for any sticky situation that gets worse the harder you fight it. It’s development as a slur is due more to the ignorance of those looking to find offense, just as the word “niggardly” is mistakenly thought to be a racial insult.
If you would just make your points I wouldn’t say a word. You’re never content to just make the point, though — you always have to act the neighborhood scold. Don’t blame me you’re unpopular. The neighborhood scold always is.
The fact is that very few liberals think twice about calling someone a “redneck” or its myriad synonyms. WASPs are ridiculed constantly in popular culture, as are Italians. Try to imagine Nintendo coming out with a game called “Super Hymie Brothers” or “Super Sambo Brothers,” with properly stereotypical cartoon characters. Not likely, is it?
“you dont like it much when I call you out on your insensitivity and narrowminded-ness”
Yeah, I’m all broken up about it (sniff, sniff). We get it — you’re the fount of all sensitivity and broadmindedness. Next time I have a need for a thin-skinned moralizer, I’ll give you a call.
I was going to say Grape Nuts, but thought Puck would claim to love them.
re Geezer…. in the most Tevya-esq voice i can muster… “he right”
the neighborhood scold?? LOL cute -who besides you and puck do I scold?
But you on the other hand scold EVERYONE at some point in time not only everyone in here on this blog…..
but everyone over at DP as well and there are probably a few blogs I dont even know about.
Talk about being unpopular – why would either of us care about popularity –
I have NEVER spoken to any other blogger in here about you, it flatters me to know you must be speaking to them about me if you know about my popularity or lack there of – or else you are blowing smoke out your pontificating ass- that gives me power and importance in your life knowing you talk to others about me- while you are not even a blip on my radar screen – like I said – I dont give a shit about you or your life.
wow – take the plank of your shoulder before you take the splinter of mine.
you hold yourself up as the great pontificator of all things, oh great wise mighty all seeing one – nary a subject is brought up that you do not have an opinion on, nary a one.
if opinions are truly like assholes and everyone has one – then honey, you are riddled with them.(the assholes I mean)
@Ben – “I think if the people to whom you are referring tell you it is offensive… you should stop using it”
thanks, thats the wisest comment in here – and the point I was trying to make – bottom line
and Geezer – “: My point about “anchor baby” is that it’s not an insult you can aim at adults.”
so you point is about insults you can aim only at children? nice
talk about making ones self unpopular
I don’t scold them about their moral choices. I argue about politics.
You flatter yourself. Where would I talk to others about you? You’re just a moralizing asshole who’s so sensitive she feels the pain of the people she imagines being called “anchor babies.”
I’m judging your popularity by the fact that nobody here seems to like you. Hell, I agree with your positions and I don’t like you. And if you’ll check, you’ll see there are lots of subjects on which I don’t pontificate.
Every time you come here to gush out your pious bullshit, I’ll be here to point it out. If you have a disagreement with Puck over immigration, as I do, fine — but make it about immigration. Instead you try, on almost every thread, to establish your moral superiority on the issue. Fuck off, honey.
“thanks, thats the wisest comment in here – and the point I was trying to make – bottom line”
In other words, you have nothing intelligent to say about immigration. You just wanted to scold Puck for using the term. I don’t use that term, by the way. I’m just defending his free speech right to use it.
And I will continue to defend anyone’s right to use any of the words you find so offensive. Those words have power specifically people like you have made them taboo. My evidence: Nobody calls them “queers” anymore, because the gay community embraced the word. Yet every few years we come up with a new word to describe the mentally challenged, because within a few years people are using the new term to denigrate their opponents as not very bright. Hence moron, idiot and imbecile gave way to retarded, which gave way to special, and so on.
The ugly words have power because you imbue them with power. Think about it.
“so you point is about insults you can aim only at children? nice”
You’re not really this dense, are you? You can call any Hispanic a “wetback” because, whether true or not, it can slung at anyone. Are you going to go around insulting people by calling them “anchor baby”? Really? Because I’d love to take that tour of Hilltop with you to check out your absurd claim.
“I dont give a shit about you or your life.”
Really? What if I were an anchor baby? Would you then? Or are you one of those oh-so-sensitive liberals who doesn’t like actual people unless they agree with you?
“the N word is alive and well and used daily in Sussex county by whites, in good jobs, in local government, when they feel they are around like-minded folks”
I was kind of surprised to discover that when I moved here. In N.VA it is just so homogenized and PC, no one would even consider using that and a host of other terms!
I try to not use any term that would be considered offensive (at least outside of my home). It’s not that I care all that much how others may perceive me. It is just that I think of myself as considerate of others (kinda like moving over to the slow lane when I am going slower than others). Just bein’ courteous.
I think your philosophy is shared by most people, Dave. That’s why I resent being lumped in with the bigots for simply defending free speech.
I guess too often there is tendency to legislate common courtesy, which I believe is where political correctness had it’s origins. I suppose the excuse is that politics isn’t polite company and Emily Post is not needed. I miss those days when we all had to watch what we say. Of course the anonymity of the web is a large contributor to the way we communicate now.
Anyway, if I ever piss anyone off, I apoligize in advance. It honestly is not personal and I am really only disagreeing with ideas.
Hey im guiltier than ANYONE at jumping down people’s throats for saying N!gger, F@g, K!ke, Sp!c, etc…. while Teabagger, Redneck and Republican are regular parts….. gleeful parts, of my vocabulary.
In defense of myself however, the people to whom im slurring with Hick, Conservative, Glen Beck listener….. have never known the oppression…. at least in THIS country, that was experienced by people (many still living) in the other groups.
I hate black an white, right or wrong rules. It CAN be wrongER to use one slur than another because some of them have long histories attached to them. ” Anchor Baby” for example is now being used by Tehadis to make hispanics less american. I know ANY nationality can have an anchor baby, but the brown people are the only ones the repukes care about.
To be honest, im not even sure what this thread is about anymore.
but i AM willing to talk about making Ceder Grove Rd, make Cherry Island landfill look like a nature preserve. Because those beady-eyed sister-bangin redneck nazis deserve nothing more than the filthiest most horrible surroundings to fester in. (any THAT last sentence felt great to type and i dont care what anyone thinks about that)