You obviously imply I am a racist (equals demonize) and I believe it is because
that is becoming standard practice against anyone opposed to stopping
the illegal invaders from coming to this country.
Good grief, can you please try reading for context? Damn man. I didn't imply that you're a racist, I asked you a yes or no question that you're still twisting and squirming away from. I'm starting to believe that you live in a world of your own making. Further, who the fuck is talking about "illegal invaders"? I've made it a point numerous times in this thread to point out that I'm talking about legal immigration, and you keep dragging up the illegal argument, over and over again. Evidently the big red letters weren't enough for you, so I'll say it again, my opinions in this thread are regarding legal immigration, and since I haven't addressed illegal immigration you'd be better off sticking to that, rather than taking off on the illegal immigration tangent.
btw.....if millions of lawbreakers sneak in from Russia, China, Africa, ummm
lets see did I cover most PC ethics?...yeah if millions of any of the above
sneak in here as law-breakers and wave Russian Flags, Chinese Flags, ecttt...
and protest US law and try to effect US Policy and they shouldn't even be here
in the first place.....I say the exact same thing to them as the Mexicans!
Again, who the hell is talking about illegal immigrants? The article didn't say a damned thing about illegal immigrants, the statistics I've posted deal exclusively with legal immigrants. Lord have mercy, what the hell are you talking about?
See above answer
I did. Evidently you feel that because I asked you a simple question, you're better off making the victim claim rather than answering the freaking question, when you're not ranting about illegal immigrants in a thread dedicated to legal immigrants. You still haven't made your case.
Uh hello?
Isn't this a site where we post our beliefs?
Yes it is. Most of us here even take the time to dig up and research and document articles and arguments. I haven't seen you do that once yet. So far, all you've done is misconstrue my arguments regarding legal immigration into being some kind of supporter for illegal immigration. I'm getting tired of it. I don't know your beliefs, that's why I ask questions, rather than making blanket and irrelevant remarks. You might try that sometime, you may be surprised on my position regarding illegal immigration.
There you go again.
Trying to demonize and pigeon hole.
With the above statement you pretend I don't think it is ok to celebrate ethnic heritage.
But again you are wrong.
Let's look at the sentence in it's entirety, shall we? Here's what I said: The only personal opinions that I've given prior to this post in this thread are that a. I think that English should be a national language for safety and communication reasons, b. I believe it's okay to celebrate your ethnic heritage, and c. I think that you're wrong. How are you getting that I'm trying to say that you're against celebrating ethnic heritage? I stated my beliefs, and no matter how hard you try to claim otherwise, I've left the stating of your beliefs to you. I haven't tried to demonize or pigeonhole you, I think you're running at the windmill.
There is nothing wrong with celebrating ethnic heritage.
Thank you for finally answering that query. At least you and I have one piece of common ground.
But if you are an illegal alien in this country as a law breaker and then proceeed to
wave a Mexican Flag at a protest of US laws that is a completely different matter.
But you can pretend it's just like a St Patricks Day celebration and live in fantasy land if you wish.
Here you are with the illegal immigrant argument again. Gah! What can I do to make it clearer? I am not addressing illegal immigration in this thread, nor have I addressed it. Everything I've posted pertains to legal immigration. Legal immigrants celebrating their heritage, be it Hispanic, Polish, Swahili, whatever, is certainly relevant to the Irish waving a flag. I certainly did not mention St. Patrick's day. So please, quit putting your words in my mouth, because honestly, they taste funny.
Well I know you're wrong.
Then it's simple. Prove it.
Everything else has been backed up and substantiated by facts, with links to relevant articles.
Oh yeah sure. Type it and someone may believe it.
Did you not read any of the links or statistics? Or do you feel that they're irrelevant? So far I haven't seen you do a bit of research, and your dismissive attitude is rather insulting when I've spent a good portion of the morning digging through facts and web searches to make my argument. Why don't you try doing that?
No if I choose someone to make an argument for me, you would
be one of my last choices.
That's probably a good thing for me.
Frankly I don't care what you do or if you do or don't ever enter this forum again.
Although I might miss kicking your ass.
I hate to break this to you, but so far you haven't been kicking anyone's ass. All you've done is persist in making yourself look bad. I ask a question, I'm labeling you a racist. I post a fact, and link it, and it's not true because anyone could write it and believe it. I consistently point out that I'm not referencing illegal immigration in this thread, and 85% of your posts are concentrated solely illegal immigration. So if you want to think that you're kicking my ass, go right ahead. I think most people reading this know better.
Then why didn't you just say so?
Because my writing is my writing, not yours.
If you don't understand analogy then thats your problem not mine.
Quit trying to play "gotcha games" about pointless matters.
I still don't understand what your problem is. I am quite adept at picking up subtleties, one of my hobbies is Russian literature, which full of analogies and allegories. I don't see how I'm supposed to realize that your thread title is an analogy, especially when you defended that the suit was about Mexican (vs. other Hispanic) immigrants. I'm not a mind reader, don't expect me or anyone else on this forum to be. Don't post something, defend it, then try and pretend that it's supposed to be an analogy. And hey, a thread title is not a pointless matter. It sums up the heart of the thread, or why would there be such a hubbub about Lanya posting a thread title claiming that Republicans want women to die of cancer? Don't pretend that you don't know and realize this, we both know that you're smarter than that.
Again, I don't want the US turned in to Mexico!
(and if you don't get it....that means I also don't want
the US turned into Haiti, Guatemala, or Costa Rica)
Societies and cultures change throughout history as they're exposed to other societies and cultures. You might not want it, but it's inevitable. The Celts probably didn't want Roman culture imposed either. But I'm not going to go into this with you, that's a topic for another day.
what a bunch of baloney
of course mexico has a pretty beach
but the country is a mass failure
look at the standard of living
it's a shit hole
people are fleeing any way they can
And that's different from Ireland in the potato famine how? Countries change, adapt, and evolve. Currently, the world's richest man lives in Mexico. That's not to say that most of Mexico isn't impoverished, but you seem to want to broad brush it and say that this is the case for the whole country "but the country is a mass failure ". It isn't. As for the standard of living thing, should the Scandinavian nations exclude Americans from emigrating there because their standard of living is higher than ours? Where do you draw that line?
go tell the millions and millions fleeing...."GO BACK THERE ARE PARTS BEAUTIFUL & UNIQUE!" - LOL
A totally irrelevant misconstruction of my argument. Are you advocating that we, as a nation, should have said the same thing to Irish potato farmers?
Your analogy does not work
it's a fantasy
sure there are poor parts in the US
But not anywhere close to Mexico vast poverty
Are you saying that the richer parts of Mexico are poorer than the poor parts of the US? I was using your argument in a hypothetical, but you chose to change tack rather than rebut it.
Mexico is a disaster over the last century
What does this have to do with anything? The thread is about legal immigration, not Mexican history.
While the US is a top echelon leader of advancements in almost every area of inventions and modernization of mankind
Almost all of those areas of inventions and modernizations included, and were aided by, the contributions of foreign born scientists that immigrated to the US. Einstein, Fermi, the list could get very long.
yes thats what I said. it will affect the whole country.
repeating what I said does not help you out of your implication that this does not involve Mexicans
Let's stick with what I said, and not what I supposedly implied. You stated that the majority of those affected by the suit were Mexicans, I said that they weren't, and went on to link to a couple of pages of demographics supporting my claim. You haven't linked to or added any research to support your claim. Why is that?
Quit changing the subject.
What does that matter.
the fact remains it is a Federal Case.
I'm changing the subject? I'm not the one obfuscating the debate by adding irrelevant articles (illegal immigration), supposed implications of whatever form you want to believe, or claiming that someone is calling me a racist. You would do well to stick to your argument and not run off on wild goose chases. And yes, it is a Federal Case, for the reasons that I previously mentioned.
Any and all amnesty proposals of the past and futue involve huge amounts of Mexicans.
And what exactly does this have to do with naturalized citizens bringing suit to force the govt to move faster in approving or denying citizenship applications? Do you not want any immigration at all?
When one dicusses legal & illegal immigration, and the various aspects of them they
are many times inter-related.
How? One is legal and one isn't. While some aspects may be related, I haven't addressed those in my posts. You're tending to assume that I'm covering both subjects, which despite my many labored efforts to prove to you otherwise, I'm not.
You haven't? Umm implying that I am a racist seems pretty personal to me.
More high horse fantasy land?
I've asked you a question, which you eventually answered, and somehow I'm supposed to be trying to paint you as a racist. If I thought that you were a racist, or if I wanted to call you one, I would. I tend to be rather direct in confrontation. Have you found that post of mine yet where I've ever called someone in this forum a racist? If you're reading things into what I'm saying that I am not, in fact, saying, that's an issue that you need to address, because it's going to lead to a lot of false impressions.
Yes with mostly irrelevant information.
"Oh I can post tons of stuff and pretend that settles it"
Irrelevant as to what? Perhaps you'd like to try and post some "relevant" information?
Yes lets do!
No more implying I am racist.
Then quit reading that implication into my statements.
Yes one and there could be many many more.
Quit implying he is the only one.
And there could be only the one. We don't know, so let's act on that. You're tilting at windmills again with the implication thing.
Does that make the majority of the plaintiffs Mexican?
You asked a question. I answered. I did not say the majority was anything.
Quit lying and misleading.
Where did I supposedly lie and mislead? I do note however, that you didn't deem it necessary to answer the question in your answering post.
Judging by the demographics of NYC, which again the suit represents, I'd bet against it. Using your argument, I could safely assume that since I met a Chinese immigrant in Chinatown, all immigrants are Chinese. That dog don't hunt either.
See above:
Hey, I'm using your argument. Defend it or lose it.
