Examples of the Hysterical pro-illegal immigration crowd

[sirs]

You're as bad as the fellow who insists that because I don't see racism in almost everything whitey does I'm enabling racism.

*sigh*...wrong, but what else is new, concerning this topic       

[Christians4LessGvt]

.

[Universe Prince]

You're as bad as the fellow who insists that because I don't see racism in almost everything whitey does I'm enabling racism.

*sigh*...wrong, but what else is new, concerning this topic

Your argument is little different.

[sirs]

At least I have the law on my side of that arguement

[Universe Prince]

Sure he is going to claim it is absolutely vital to define every single word.

I never made that claim.

But in my mind to have a basic honest flow of timely give and take sometimes
we must assume at least some "oh i know what you mean"...or we end up in
crazy..time-consuming endless off-topic tangents of questioning every single
word. Define "is"? Define "hysterical"? Who gives a shit?

Words mean something. Misusing a word is bad communication and makes for a weak argument, just like labeling as Nazis people who clearly are not. Who gives a shit? You should. Sirs should. Clearly you give a shit when people who support your position are being called racists and Nazis. Why am I out of bounds to say it matters in both directions?

I noticed Michael Tee commented on the crazy nit-picking a few weeks ago.

Instead of debating immigration...the entire focus becomes the definition of "hysterical".

I am not stopping anyone from debating immigration. And notably, I did not start a thread to try to make a point about some people supposedly be hysterical. Sirs did. Why am I wrong for addressing the point of the thread?

The guy is bright...probably made/makes straight A's in school...hell
sometimes I even miss debating with him because he can be educational,
but jeeez he can be difficult to have a basic conversation with..."define conversation"....lol.

Actually, having a basic conversation with me is quite easy to do. Debating ideas is another matter. And if your argument is weak because you've misapplied a word, that isn't my fault. I have no reason to apologize for pointing it out.

[Universe Prince]

At least I have the law on my side of that arguement

I'm fairly certain the law doesn't say a damn thing about your misuse of the word 'hysterical'.

[sirs]

It says everything about AZ law, to which the hysterical criticisms/condemnations are aimed at.  You want a different adjective, fine, be my guest.  How about acutely moronic?  How about pathologically ignorant?  Many an adjective that can be used.  Hysterical fits just as nicely, given where its being applied.

Lemme guess, you want to simply refer to them as somewhat misguided?  Perhaps "well intentioned"?  Maybe we can come up with some other minimizing adjective to calling law enforcment nazis and racists for daring to enforce the law

[Christians4LessGvt]

.

[Universe Prince]

It says everything about AZ law, to which the hysterical criticisms/condemnations are aimed at.  You want a different adjective, fine, be my guest.  How about acutely moronic?  How about pathologically ignorant?  Many an adjective that can be used.  Hysterical fits just as nicely, given where its being applied.

Lemme guess, you want to simply refer to them as somewhat misguided?  Perhaps "well intentioned"?  Maybe we can come up with some other minimizing adjective to calling law enforcment nazis and racists for daring to enforce the law

No, Sirs. If I wanted to say any of that, I would have. But I did not say any of that or anything like that. Not that it matters. Apparently I'm too stupid to know what I mean by my own words, and you're so goddamn brilliant that whatever I say only means whatever you want to think it means.

But what the frak. Words mean whatever you feel like they should mean, Sirs. If you want to talk like an uneducated dope and use meaningless hyperbolic rhetoric as the structure of your arguments, go right ahead. And if you want to think that sort of farcical frivolity makes a substantive debate, well, clearly no one is going to dissuade you to the contrary. Stick to your water guns, Sirs. Hold fast. Stand your ground. And if anyone tries to correct you, well, you just take CU4LG's lead just show 'em a photo of clothes organized in a drawer and laugh in their faces. That'll show 'em.

Yeah, I'm mocking you. I'm kinda sick of getting chided for trying to elevate the debate because I care about what words mean. You claiming you're not sure how anyone can have a substantive debate with me if I don't first agree with your hyperbolic nonsense, and getting chided by CU4LG who doesn't have the guts to talk to me directly is like watching 13-year-olds discuss how stupid adults are.

Yeah, the meaning of words does matter. If you don't care, fine. Just fraking say so. Don't be telling me you're not sure anyone how anyone can have a substantive debate if I don't agree with you. I watch you and CU4LG complain about my caring about what words mean, and your comments are kinda like watching someone say, "we can't communicate clearly if you're going to bother with trying to be clear about what words mean." Your complaints are so stupid, one might be tempted to call them "acutely moronic" or "pathologically ignorant". I've tried, up to now, to avoid saying something like that, but I'm having a hard time caring about not being rude at the moment.

CU4LG won't talk to me directly, but he feels free to make fun of me and pity my family where everyone gets to see it. What the frak?

You, Sirs, you apply whatever meaning to my words suits you and misuse the words 'hysteria' and 'hysterical' in a manner that anyone who has seen actual hysteria would know is completely incorrect, but you want to say you're "not sure how anyone can have a substantive debate with" me because I don't agree with your misuse of the words? Really? Substantive debate? You really want to go there? Your whole "they're being hysterical" argument amounts to saying "they're hysterical because I say so". That is not substantive debate. Your argument is about as substantive as cheap, wet facial tissue.

As I look back on what I've written in this post, I realize none of it matters. I'm wasting my time to say any of this. It won't make a dent and will likely get me accused being unfair or something like it. Well, too damn bad. I could erase it. I could not post it. But I feel like it ought to be said anyway.

So say whatever the frak you like about it. I'll start using your rules, Sirs, and claim you mean things you don't say, accuse you of meaning total nonsense, and see how you like having your tactics used on you. Who knows, maybe I'll say things about how hard life must be for CU4LG's family. I'm sure I can find a photo of a filthy, decrepit room and use it as a metaphor for how horribly he treats his family.

Come on. You want to play in the sandbox? Okay, boys, let's play in the sandbox. But I don't think you'll like it much. I can be a real son of a bitch when I get pissed off, and, Sirs and CU4LG, in case you haven't noticed, you've pissed me off.

[sirs]

So, didn't feel like addressing the question, regarding the appropriate adjective to be applied to ignorant dolts...I mean well intentioned souls, who only have the love of their common earthly brother/sister at heart, yet are strangely compelled to call law enforcment racist and nazi for enforcing existing law?  Just needed to rant a little?...or alot it appears.  That's cool.  Hope you feel better now

 

[Plane]

The simplest solution is to make Mexico wealthy .

Then they would build an enourmous fence to keep the Nortamericanos out.

[Universe Prince]

So, didn't feel like addressing the question, regarding the appropriate adjective to be applied to ignorant dolts...I mean well intentioned souls, who only have the love of their common earthly brother/sister at heart, yet are strangely compelled to call law enforcment racist and nazi for enforcing existing law?  Just needed to rant a little?...or alot it appears.  That's cool.  Hope you feel better now

Let me go look at what you said... "Lemme guess, you want to simply refer to them as somewhat misguided?  Perhaps 'well intentioned'?" Now let me see here, an answer must be buried somewhere in my reply... no wait... not buried. Huh. Right up front and in plain site. But you're so busy rushing to make up asininities and trying to push them off on me, that you missed it. Aw. Too bad. Maybe next time you'll bother to read.

Oh wait. Maybe you meant this part, "You want a different adjective, fine, be my guest.  How about acutely moronic?  How about pathologically ignorant?" Was that a serious question? I thought you were just being churlish and stupid.

[Universe Prince]

The simplest solution is to make Mexico wealthy .

Then they would build an enourmous fence to keep the Nortamericanos out.

Careful, Plane. You're joking, but skirting dangerously close to crazy man territory there. I've tried to explain that one of the solutions to lots of Mexicans and other Latin American folks "flooding" into the U.S. is to stop ag. subsidies that interfere with their farmers, and to open up trade with them so they can experience the economic growth that will raise their standard of living. I get told, basically, that's crazy talk and we need to look out for ourselves first. So you might want to issue a disclaimer, Plane, let people know you're not really saying something should be done that might actually benefit the people in Mexico. Maybe you could throw in a misuse of the word 'hysteria', oh, and put the word 'illegal' in all caps a time or two to make sure people know how serious you are.

[sirs]

So, didn't feel like addressing the question, regarding the appropriate adjective to be applied to ignorant dolts...I mean well intentioned souls, who only have the love of their common earthly brother/sister at heart, yet are strangely compelled to call law enforcment racist and nazi for enforcing existing law?  Just needed to rant a little?...or alot it appears.  That's cool.  Hope you feel better now

Let me go look at what you said... "Lemme guess, you want to simply refer to them as somewhat misguided?  Perhaps 'well intentioned'?" Now let me see here, an answer must be buried somewhere in my reply... no wait... not buried. Huh. Right up front and in plain site. .

Ummm....excuse me, but do you now have a new definition of "plain site", that I'm not aware of?  You may not believe this, but I went thru that entire rant looking for an answer to the "appropriate adjective" inquiry, and saw nothing but more ranting.  Here, I'll repost your response, and you can highlight the section that's in "plain site", that I obviously missed.

"No, Sirs. If I wanted to say any of that, I would have. But I did not say any of that or anything like that. Not that it matters. Apparently I'm too stupid to know what I mean by my own words, and you're so goddamn brilliant that whatever I say only means whatever you want to think it means.

But what the frak. Words mean whatever you feel like they should mean, Sirs. If you want to talk like an uneducated dope and use meaningless hyperbolic rhetoric as the structure of your arguments, go right ahead. And if you want to think that sort of farcical frivolity makes a substantive debate, well, clearly no one is going to dissuade you to the contrary. Stick to your water guns, Sirs. Hold fast. Stand your ground. And if anyone tries to correct you, well, you just take CU4LG's lead just show 'em a photo of clothes organized in a drawer and laugh in their faces. That'll show 'em.

Yeah, I'm mocking you. I'm kinda sick of getting chided for trying to elevate the debate because I care about what words mean. You claiming you're not sure how anyone can have a substantive debate with me if I don't first agree with your hyperbolic nonsense, and getting chided by CU4LG who doesn't have the guts to talk to me directly is like watching 13-year-olds discuss how stupid adults are.

Yeah, the meaning of words does matter. If you don't care, fine. Just fraking say so. Don't be telling me you're not sure anyone how anyone can have a substantive debate if I don't agree with you. I watch you and CU4LG complain about my caring about what words mean, and your comments are kinda like watching someone say, "we can't communicate clearly if you're going to bother with trying to be clear about what words mean." Your complaints are so stupid, one might be tempted to call them "acutely moronic" or "pathologically ignorant". I've tried, up to now, to avoid saying something like that, but I'm having a hard time caring about not being rude at the moment.

CU4LG won't talk to me directly, but he feels free to make fun of me and pity my family where everyone gets to see it. What the frak?

You, Sirs, you apply whatever meaning to my words suits you and misuse the words 'hysteria' and 'hysterical' in a manner that anyone who has seen actual hysteria would know is completely incorrect, but you want to say you're "not sure how anyone can have a substantive debate with" me because I don't agree with your misuse of the words? Really? Substantive debate? You really want to go there? Your whole "they're being hysterical" argument amounts to saying "they're hysterical because I say so". That is not substantive debate. Your argument is about as substantive as cheap, wet facial tissue.

As I look back on what I've written in this post, I realize none of it matters. I'm wasting my time to say any of this. It won't make a dent and will likely get me accused being unfair or something like it. Well, too damn bad. I could erase it. I could not post it. But I feel like it ought to be said anyway.

So say whatever the frak you like about it. I'll start using your rules, Sirs, and claim you mean things you don't say, accuse you of meaning total nonsense, and see how you like having your tactics used on you. Who knows, maybe I'll say things about how hard life must be for CU4LG's family. I'm sure I can find a photo of a filthy, decrepit room and use it as a metaphor for how horribly he treats his family.

Come on. You want to play in the sandbox? Okay, boys, let's play in the sandbox. But I don't think you'll like it much. I can be a real son of a bitch when I get pissed off, and, Sirs and CU4LG, in case you haven't noticed, you've pissed me off."
Posted on: Today at 03:13:19 PMPosted by: ChristiansUnited4LessGvt

I see alot of frak, wasting time, using my rules, etc., rant, etc.  I'll look forward to you clarifying the appropriate Prince-approved adjective that should be applied to folks calling law enforcement and legislators nazis & racists for actually enforcing the law

[Plane]

The simplest solution is to make Mexico wealthy .

Then they would build an enourmous fence to keep the Nortamericanos out.

Careful, Plane. You're joking, but skirting dangerously close to crazy man territory there. I've tried to explain that one of the solutions to lots of Mexicans and other Latin American folks "flooding" into the U.S. is to stop ag. subsidies that interfere with their farmers, and to open up trade with them so they can experience the economic growth that will raise their standard of living. I get told, basically, that's crazy talk and we need to look out for ourselves first. So you might want to issue a disclaimer, Plane, let people know you're not really saying something should be done that might actually benefit the people in Mexico. Maybe you could throw in a misuse of the word 'hysteria', oh, and put the word 'illegal' in all caps a time or two to make sure people know how serious you are.

What is the diffrence between jokeing and thanking outside the box?

  For many of the immagrants the  motive is economic , how much are we able to controll the economic circumstances that cause the problems?

     My favoriate idea is a revamped guest worker program that made it safe and leagal to cross the border , recrossing with a sack of rightfully earned swag a month or two later.

     Not all of the immagrants are working at minimum wage, there are skilled carpenters working seasonally in the US and liveing seasonally in Mexico.

   What could be changed to change the basic situation and give the leagal immagrant  advantage over the illeagal ?


   Do we even owe our own workers any defense against competition?