Comments Posted By RJC
Displaying 1 To 5 Of 5 Comments
One more thought. Your implication, Michael, that by not supporting illegal immigration the Republican Party loses the Cubans in Miami is a case in point of how completely lost people in this country are: to assume that Republicans should be in favor of something so wrong just to keep those votes. Pardon me while I gag. (And, anyway, not all Cubans are in favor of illegal immigration.)
I realize that sites like this, and almost all politically-oriented sites are not about the issues, but about how they affect political races, kind of like discussing a chess game. And there is nothing wrong with that. So let me say, in that light, that there are also many Democrats, and I am guessing quite a large number, who are against illegal immigration. And I believe it is only a matter of time before they become more vocal over it. There's no telling how that would affect the "chess game".
Comment Posted By rjc On 16.05.2009 @ 07:17
Michael:
"Litmus test" is not an issue with me. I am a church-going Catholic and would be willing to give even on a number of issues considered "Catholic" issues because I don't believe they are dangerous to the country. Yes, I am a one-issue person: because I deeply believe that illegal immigration will ruin this country in a few decades if not reined in. I need not go into it. There are no good reasons - none - for the kind of immigration we have had in the past few decades, and the only arguments people use in favor of it are to call people rationally opposed to it names.
It boggles my mind why the Republican party, or any party, would want to go out of its way to create a huge voting bloc just so it could pander to this voting bloc, and continue to grow it and pander to it. It's like creating a situation of your own making where you can be practiced extortion on, so you can go on and on continually being extorted, until you have nothing left.
I am not concerned any more with the Republican Party in Florida. With Rubio's rise in popularity, the Party has shown they are nothing but Democrat wannabe's. Doesn't it bother anyone anymore that our "leaders" and those in control of party politics are no longer responsive to the people's wishes? Are you saying, Michael, that we should go out and vote for people who are going to make us into another California? Great. Just what we need.
I would rather go down not voting for these snakes. And hope against hope that something will happen (and do what I can to make it happen) to turn the tide. It wouldn't be the first time a party was considered dead and rose again a few years later. I seem to remember not too long ago it was considered the Democratic Party was also considered dead. Time will tell.
Oh, I have also contributed over a period of years to a "migrant worker" reach-out program, and would visit with them. This was under the guise of helping the poor. I of course learned that I definitely was not helping the poor, but was aiding a favored group of people illegally here take jobs away from Americans. I am not saying these are bad people; most are not. But just wanting a better life is not enough to support the kind of law breaking and general chaos that illegal immigration brings. Not to mention that at the bottom, it is a political power grab by La Raza. If you think it is just an unimportant side issue, I feel sorry for you.
Comment Posted By rjc On 16.05.2009 @ 05:58
I am constantly amazed at how someone can be considered conservative when he is rabidly pro-illegal immigration. Two years ago, when Mel Martinez carried water for Bush and sponsored the amnesty bill, there were "Dump Martinez" movements all around Florida, and I do believe it was over the amnesty issue.
Last year Rubio, as Speaker of the Florida House, bottled up illegal immigration enforcement bills, carefully prepared by Florida citizen organizations (about 75% to 80% want illegal immigration controlled in this state, whose costs for illegal aliens are through the roof). Rubio even told those people he would allow the bills to be heard. In the end, he and his fellow Miami area Hispanic henchmen would not allow the bills to come up for a vote.
He did a similar thing this year, although not as Speaker, to a bill concerned only with violent illegal alien criminals, nothing more. The only difference between him and Martinez is that Martinez said he was against amnesty in the beginning then later changed his mind, whereas Rubio lies about how his stand on illegal immigration at the very same time he is stabbing Floridians in the back over it.
To me Rubio is no conservative, and I would not vote for him. Just because Crist is a RINO, and unacceptable to conservatives, does not mean they should accept just anyone. And from what I read in blogs and comments, most people are ignorant of Rubio's actions. It's amazing in these days of the internet and public disclosure of everything, how people can get still away with lying.
Comment Posted By rjc On 15.05.2009 @ 15:17
Since many people have adequately explained the "hate" in Terry Moran's blog (and Rick certainly has not refuted them by his non-answer), and no one seems to have answered the "racist" speech I accused him of, let me add:
To refer to these boys, without knowing, that they are rich and have a large cushion under them simply because they are white and go to Duke IS racist. For all Terry Moran knows, these boys' families may be mortgaged to the teeth trying to pay these legal bills. (How many people, even those well off, have enough money to send their kids to Duke and then still have a cool million lying around to be used to defend them from a prosecutor gone mad.)
Then this is followed by an inane comparison to the Rutgers women's basketball team, which, he assures us, is differently situated. How does he know? Oh, because they are black. Racist remark.
The Civil Rights Act was passed over 40 years ago, and race relations are still a mess -- just because of these racial stereotypes which get repeatedly and ignorantly passed on by people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, to keep blacks feeling like victims, and by people like Terry Moran, who should know better.
And, as pointed out by some commenters at Terry Moran's blog, Imus' comments were said on the spur of the moment, and by a shock jock commentator who normally does that. Terry, on the other hand, who is supposed to be a respected journalist, wrote these things thoughtfully, no doubt proofread them, must have thought they sounded pretty good, and then sent them out over the internet.
Racist.
Comment Posted By RJC On 15.04.2007 @ 13:27
I don't see the difference between Terry Moran's racist/hate speech in his blog and that which Don Imus was just canned for; therefore, I don't see why it is illogical to call for Terry Moran's firing. (For the record, I can't stand Imus, but he had the right to say what he said and wait for the marketplace to sort it out instead of being ousted immediately at the request of the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.)
And I do, certainly and most loudly, proclaim that you are severely undercounting when you say only about 50 people responded in a reasonable manner. There were probably thousands - I read many of them - not 50 reasonable, well written, and sane protests to this outrageous article. I was surprised there was not more vitriol. You are just prejudiced and sticking up for your brother. Well, at least that's one thing in your favor.
Comment Posted By RJC On 15.04.2007 @ 08:32
