Sunday, May 14, 2006

Muse Misused

I believe in the Muses in the way I believe in all the gods. It is hard to deny them when their workings are everywhere manifest in the world. There is something “supernatural” in the production of beauty; rules applied by mere mortals that allow the creation of beauty worthy of God. I often explain this to my students by referencing one of the exceptional English and Writing teachers at our school. She has inspired my own children as they have participated in her classes. I ask the class if any have had poetry from Ms. Merrill. When those lucky ones raise their hands I remind them of the time she taught them the basic rules of poetry and then had them apply those rules to some random words and; what occurred? Yes indeed – they created something wonderful. I continue the point by asking if they ever wrote something – in answer to a question perhaps - and then found in their answer nuances of understanding, even insight, that they of themselves did not possess. Most everyone attests to such a miracle of the Muses. I myself have painted human figures, and found myself staring into their eyes, “how beautiful you are,” I have thought, “and I made you out of mud (pigment) and tree sap (gum Arabic binder). It must be the Muse! This is why the Greeks placed the poets above the prophets. A prophet merely recites the words of god; a poet, under the inspiration of a Muse, transforms words into new creations of beauty that have life beyond the artist. Often the writer does not even understand the power he creates; the magic is beyond his mortal comprehension. I have often thought of Twain’s disclaimer in *Huckleberry Finn* as an example of a wise author acknowledging that the might of the Muse is beyond his design, and his book will reach beyond his vision.

This manifestation of the magic of the Muses and the mortality of the Poet is found in the works of many playwrights, from Aeschylus to Arthur Miller. Next fall I will be directing the Miller play, *The Crucible* at our high school. I have avoided the work for years because of its over utilization by English teachers, and its misapplication in the Social Studies. The story, of how fanatic religion over powers reason to result in the most ungodly atrocities in the universe, is misread by most Social Studies teachers and political spin misters. Everywhere they misapply the horrible atrocity in colonial America to the anti Communist zealousness of Joseph McCarthy and the House Committee on Un-American Activity.

It has always troubled me that McCarthy was made into the villain of the Cold War. I don’t excuse his wrong doing; he failed at his noble cause of defending freedom when he became what he hated. But Miller fails when he dismisses the evils of Communism to condemn McCarthy, as if McCarthy was representative of America. To quote Miller’s own words from http://www.playbill.com/ (An article furnished me by our Drama Director at the high school). Miller says, “There were monuments in those days when there was no way to respond logically or reasonably to what was happening. Yes, we were in a cold war with the Soviets, and the Communists had taken over China, and there was the fear of nuclear destruction. But the cure for the fears was false, taking people who had no connection to sabotage and throwing them all together and calling them traitors and destroying a lot of lives.” Reducing the atrocities of Communism to the Cold War and the fear of nuclear attacks, elevating the atrocity of blacklisting and name calling above that of the mass murder of tens of millions of human beings, and the enslavement of billions more, demonstrate that Miller ‘s Muse speaks beyond Miller’s mind.

The real monsters of the “Cold War” were in Moscow, Peking, and Hanoi, not in Washington. Thankfully Miller’s Muse allowed him to write an allegory of fanaticism that applied to the gulags and the death camps of Stalin, Brezhnev, Mao, Ho, and Pow Pot. Sham on the small minded who could not see the divine truth, but rather choose to imagine that *The Crucible* told a story applicable to their petty concerns. The real witchcraft in this misunderstanding of Art is that the monster of Communism could be transformed by the pampered liberals of America into the victims. The true devilry was that the term “McCarthyism” became a sledgehammer pejorative, while decrying Communism became a social crime.

Now the mystery of Miller’s play will be made manifest in the present world. This summer Liam Neeson and Laura Linney are staring in a reprisal directed by Sir Richard Eyre. Eyre speaks inspired truth when he says, *The Crucible* will “always be pertinent to any society of whatever political leanings, because it’s about something fundamental – the tension between freedom and repression .” Now we will see if the miracle of the Muses will be recognized or denied. Will the critics see in the religious fanatics of Salem, fiends who crushed a man under stones to force him to confess to a crime that cannot exist and hanged 19 men and women for being witches, as an indictment of fanatic Islam that buries women alive for seeking education, and the tyranny of the cult of Saddam that instigated the murder of millions, or if the Art of Art Miller will be reduced to a political screed against the champions of individual liberty and freedom of choice that struggle to end “murder in the name of God” – surely the most damning manifestation of the Devil’s possession of mankind.

It will be revealing to see how Eyre’s version of *The Crucible* plays with the critics, if they notice it at all. I will be interested to see what the dark memories of Puritan fanaticism conger. Will it be the truth about the Islamic Fascists who murder and terrorize their way to power, or a misrepresentation of the forces that stand against them?

I will attempt to present things with less ambiguity with my production at the high school; which will get no press at all. I have been toying with the idea of dressing my actors as Taliban fanatics and placing the trial in Kabul before its liberation. I will have the summer to think it out. At the very least I will enlist the Muse in revealing the truth about where the real religious fanatics of today are to be found.

Summer is upon us; summer takes me away from the Agora. I would like to thank all who have read and contributed to our discussions over the past months. Next week, our house will be in remodel mode; Computer piled in a back room. I will keep in touch from one of the computers at school but I will not be able to compose another post for a while. In a few weeks I will be leaving computer terminals and the internet links behind for over two months. I will also be away from newspapers, radios, and televisions. The world will go on without me, but I like to think that I will be doing my part to make it better. I am grateful that such places as the one to which I am going can still be found. I am humbled by the fact that for nine weeks I will be blessed to spend 24/7 in a place of peace and bliss; Heaven with challenges. My thoughts and prayers will always be with those who defend our precious peace and freedom. As I enjoy the privileges that my heroes purchase at such great cost, I will do my best to give to those I serve the joy that America offers to the world. See you in September!

170 comments:

Anonymous said...

Let me give you some of the headlines you will miss while we will be gone this summer Liesis:

ROVE INDICTED! Cultrure of Corruption Runs Deep in White House

Iraq Civil War Broadens; Bush Signals Cut & Run

Bush Approval At All Time Low (To be run weekly until your too soon return)

Debt Ceiling Raised; Spending Deficit Projected To Grow

Trade Deficit Still Out of Control

Cheney Continues To Say Deficits Do Not Matter - President Agrees

Dollar Continues To Fall (Down 7% last week alone - that was a true headline from last week as investors decided the Republican majority is not serious about deficit control.)

Cheney STILL Insists Iraq Has WMD, Calls For Nuking Anbar To Be Sure Of Their Destruction

Cheney Demands U.S. Nuke (insert country or Blue State here)

No One Held Accountable In White House

Oil Prices Record High, America Still Addicted To Oil

Bush Continues Erosion Of Democracy At Home

Taliban Resurgent In Afghanistan As Coalition Forces Struggle To Keep Up Pressure With Limited Resources (that was a headline last week too, maybe you saw the General in charge of Asian ops give that press conference.)

Former White House Officials Call Bush "Twit"

Bin Laden On The Loose; Al Queada Still Plotting


-It's a shame I won't be able to tune in here every week and read your ridiculous apologizing and rationalizing about how all of this news is actually great and not the sign of some of the worst leadership this country has yet endured. But it isn't that big of a shame. We still got six months of ridiculous Republican control to hear the same stupid type of things being said in the news almost every day.

Anonymous said...

One thing is for certain. When you return Lysis, the above anonymous will still be severely bitter. Will it be the bitterness of the severely dissappointed or of the the self-righteous?

Lysis said...

To the Second Anonymous posted above:

You are right as to Flaccid’s perpetual bitterness, but what can be righteous, even "self-righteous" about celebrating the indictment of innocent men, Civil War in our Allie Iraq, America in retreat, trade deficit out of control, collapse of his own currency, nuclear war, lose of Democracy at home and the resurgence of our enemies abroad? He tips his limp hand in his final paragraph – he is saying all this in the hopes that the Democrats will win the election. It is unfortunate indeed when political victory must be based on lies and fanaticism, (the victory at any cost - even the destruction of America attitude he displays). This is right out of Salem of the witch trials. Flaccid does not need truth or reason to condemn, only a loud mouth and a platform to scream from. Fortunately he might be the screaming child, but America will be the jury and the judge. This deviltry will not stand.


Flaccid:

You are as ridiculous in your dreams of the future as you are inaccurate in your understanding of the past and disingenuous in your presentation of the present. I’ll miss you; you’re always good for a laugh!

Anonymous said...

Oh good!
Lysis is going to use Layton High School students performing in The Crucible to embarrass and taunt the Islamic religion and Moslems.

This will get PLENTY of press!!!!

Hey, figure out how to ALSO use the *Crucible* to ridicule the Mormon "facist fundamentalists" of the Mountain Meadows Masacre and THEIR various minions today.

When the LHS Administration has objections we'll blame it on the Muses -- If the Muses get ALL the credit for great "ART", they might as well get ALL the credit for the pathetically bad stuff too!!!!

Dan Simpson said...

You know anonymous, the only one who has equated the Taliban with Islam here is you.

That shouldn't really surprise, you show a vehement dislike of religion in general. Fortunately your posts also show a decided lack of information or understanding on the topic.

This is only good because the only thing worse than blatant bigotry, is a bigot who actually understands, and is still a bigot.

Anonymous said...

I love it. The guy with 2 months of MTC indoctrination is calling the other one "uneducated" on religion! That is rich.

If only he had knelt and prayed and asked the lord to soften his heart perhaps then he could count himself among the lucky few who are truly educated about religion, eh DannyBoy2? By the way, since you are SO educated about religion, and definitely not a bigot, tell us how the dress of the Taliban differs so greatly from the dress of a large part of the common muslim world? If just about anyone were to see Liesis' play would they be able to tell that people in Taliban dress were Taliban? Would you? I sincerely doubt it. Would just about anyone be able to tell that the people in Taliban dress were Muslim? Would you? Does that make you a bigot after all? Does it make just about everyone a bigot? Perhaps Liesis can enlighten us. Can he look at a picture of a muslim and tell us whether they are Taliban or not, whether they are a "good" muslim or one of those bad ones? I do not think even he is that edumacated. So ask yourself this: is the anonymous person who drew a line under the real point that Liesis is going after a bigot, or is the person who would put a stereotype on stage he doesn't even understnad and that most of his audience won't either but will conflate out of ignorance the bigot? Mark Twain had at least travelled around the world and throughout the South to meet and understand the people he wrote insightfully about. Liesis will has no such defense against the currently rightful accusations of bigotry that are levelled against him and this idea.

It is only too ironic that "The Crucible" is a play about how how ignorance and good intentions can interweave to destroy lives.

Lysis said...

Dannyboy;

Excellent catch of the Anonymous above; of course I was chumming for this very strike. Media, as she baits the trap for Creon, Jason, and the Princess Creusa with gold, predicts that, “no rat of rabbit would enter the traps that take foolish men.” As you, Dannyboy, have pointed out, the Anonymous – who I don’t think is even smart enough to be Flaccid - fell into this trap and revealed his own ignorance, bigotry, and bias. Of course this anonymous thinks that all Muslims are terrorist murderers, and obviously that all Mormons are killers too.

Anonymous;

The “Muses” inspire all good art; the poor stuff is made by men, foolish men who opine their own “truths” rather than discover Universal ones. You have given us a splendid example of such folly. How does it feel to be manipulated by thinking people into a parody of your own foolish opinions?

As for ridiculing the murderers at Mountain Meadows, that has long been one of my goals. Whether the murderers are in Salem, Kabul, Baghdad, or Cedar City they are equally as wrong. I don’t excuse any murder in the name of God. How about you, Anonymous?

Lysis said...

Flaccid;

While seeking your Muse: ask yourself – how do you tell a good Puritan from a bad one, a good Mormon from a bad one, a good blog poster from a bad one? Jesus gave us a way, “By their fruits ye shall know them.” Thus Puritans who press to death innocents accused of witch craft can easily be identified with Taliban who press to death women who want to think. How does the hook taste? You feel it yet?

Anonymous said...

Call me “Questioner”

Lysis, aren’t you mixing metaphors when you use the images of both rat traps and fishhooks in the same string of argument?

Lysis said...

Questioner:

You make a good point, on the most basic level. But, both traps and hooks are set to snare the Animal Mind. By so doing I have been able to expose those who think like animals, as opposed to those who utilize the human mind – that consciousness endowed with Devine Reason.

Anonymous said...

Anon:
Excellent question. How do you tell a Talibani Muslim from any other Muslim just by looking at him?

I would bet a thousand dollars that no one could tell the people in Liesis' play were Talibanis everyone will all be able to tell they are Muslims. What point do you think Liesis is trying to make? He had better be VERY clear about it. Never fear though, he excells at keeping his peers from thinking about anything very deeply.

A suggestion Liesis, Instead of taking on such a grand and remote theme as the Taliban regime why not dress your cast in white temple clothes as the modern pedophiles and spouse abusers that are given safe haven in Hilldale, Utah. You are so confident that any audience is able to tell the difference in religious sects just by looking at them. Surely, people will be able to tell the difference between mainstream Mormons and the Mormons practicing these attroucious deeds in their basements to the south just by looking at them. Or do you think an audience might confuse the two sects of Mormonism, the former polygamists in white temple clothes with the modern ones in white temple clothes? I am sure at least that I couldn't tell the difference just by looking at them.

A few advantages accepting my suggestion: First, the crime is closer to home and something that everyone in Utah can and should do something about. The official tolerance of a community that practices systematic pedophilia is a moral blight on the state that fights still distance itself from ignorant stereotypes of its past. You may inspire your audience to take action. Second, it is controversial and you know how you like to SOUND controversial. Third, as Anon noted above, you at least understand much more about this culture and your ignorance won't be so flagrantly on display. Fourth, you won't have to suffocate any budding high-school starlets under a burqa which, is what you will have to do if you want to portray the Taliban. If you don't dress them under burqas you will fall right into the trap Anon mentioned, miss your intended target and attack all muslims showing - at least - your true colors. Be practical. Who is going to "act" from under a burqa?

Anon:
Love the headlines. Look forward to reading them all! Not looking forward to listening to a summer's worth of Liesis ranting about them all.

In the meantime, consider it a victory that one right-wing bastion has toppled. Many more to go... Keep up the good fight everywhere while we are gone!

Anonymous said...

Initially metamorphosed into a militia by using disenchantment amongst the ranks with existing Mujahideen leaders, the TALIBAN relealed their ISLAMIC IDEOLOGY only after the capture of Kandahar. Between Doorahi and Kandahar, the ISI cultivated the Taliban amongst their principal backers viz Saudia Arabia and the US with a "catch all" philosophy. To the US and Pakistan, the Taliban's attempts to curb poppy growing and heroin refinement was a welcome step as their own attempts to break the nexus between the smuggler and drug producer were unsuccessful. If the anti-drug programme undertaken by the Taliban provided tacit backing from Washington, pushing for a PRISTINE ISLAMIC society found favour with the Saudis, who were not only bankrolling the madrassas inside Pakistan, but were now reported to be funding the Taliban as well. The only discordant voice came from the Iranians, who along with other ethnic minority groups like the Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks perceived the entry of the Taliban as an attempt to reintroduce Pashtun hegemony in Afghanistan, undermining the plural character of Afghan
society. -Institute for Defense Studies and Analysis

DAN:
"Here" is an ambiguous word -- do you mean that NO ONE (else) at the Agora equates the Taliban and Islam, therefore it is false to to so???? -- OR -- That the proven IGNORANCE level at the Agora does or should DETERMINE what is FALSE and TRUE?

"I show a vehement dislike of religion is general????

*I* am not the one directing students in a rendition of the "Crucible" that is intended to humiliate and slur various members of something called "Islamic fundamentalism" whatever Lysis might think THAT means!!!!

A "lack of understanding on the topic" is an equally deceptive and ambiguous comment without identifying some PARTICULARS that you have found to be so "IGNORANT".

If you mean that I somehow have been ignorant about the "topic" of Religion, or a particular Religion, now or in a previous post, I am always open for a REFUTATION of any particulars.

The ". . . a bigot who truly understands and is still a bigot" comment makes NO SENSE whatever without providing a context of bigoted incidents to properly generalize from -- that would be an HONORABLE thing to do!!!!

Reach Upward said...

Some of the anonymi have redefined the phrase "meaningless blather." Although, I suppose that with a lot of work it is actually possible to say even less with even more words.

Lysis, I'll see you near Yellowstone in a few weeks, where the air and water are clear and pure.

Lysis said...

Child:

I wondered how long it would take to get a rise out of you. But is this all the “play” I get? I agree with you that Hilldale Mormons who mistreat wives and children, and Cedar City ones that murder “gentiles” are worthy of being equated to the Murders of Salem. I just wonder if you agree with me that Muslims that burry women alive for seeking learning, and who blow up statues of the Buddha, and kill kids for listening to music tapes also deserve to be considered religious fanatics worthy of condemnation? It seems that you are more concerned about the acts of idiots a 150 years ago than you are with the atrocities being perpetrated in the name of Allah today. I considered portraying the Taliban as the “witch hunters” because the Taliban’s atrocities are of greater threat and effect in the lives of the students I serve, and the Taliban’s atrocities are infinitely more egregious than those of any perverts on the Mormon fringe. Also, I am confident that there will be enough human beings in the audience that the point will not be lost, and enough suckers in the crowd to make it interesting.

As for burqas on stage – perhaps you have a point. Anyway, even if I don't go Taliban with costumes, a little per performance commentary will be enough to make the connection to all reasonable minds attending.



Reach Upward:

There is nothing as meaningless as the squealing and gnashing of teeth by a rat in a trap or the “flaccid flopping” of a landed fish caught on a well set hook.

I am impressed that no one tried to come to the rescue of Communism or equate the War on Terror to Salem. Maybe there is hope even for the Anonomy.

I look forward to seeing you in Yellowstone.

Anonymous said...

Lysis' whole scam of a "Crucible com Taliban" play is of course just flatulence in the wind bull. . .oney. (I have no doubt that Lysis et al will do some form of "Crucible", but it will be absent ANYTHING remotely recognizable as anti-Taliban, hence anti-Muslim or anti-Islam)

Once LHS Administrators get "wind" of Lysis' "breaking wind" in this fashion the REAL MUSES will speak the whole thing's demise.

Though, if not, the *Tribune*, *Ogden Standard*, and *Deseret News*(I am also sure that there is a LARGE community of Muslims) will ALL want advanced warning and tickets.

I could even assume a PROMOTIONAL role by helping get out the word!!!!

(First *Satanic Verses* of Salman Rushdie followed by "Confessions of a possessed teenaged Taliban and Other things Arthur Miller never Intended to Say in the Crucible" by Lysis' Muses Inc.

truth to power said...

The "Islamic fundamentalism" that threatens the world is not a matter of religion, but of politics. As Lysis quotes, "By their fruits ye shall know them." A good example is the reaction to the Muhammad cartoons. Not every believer got violent over them, nor even called for government censorship or punishment of the cartoonists and publishers. The great mass of Islam took offense at what they surely saw as "Muse misused", but they also seem to recognize the right to be offensive.

Those who believe in blowing up Jewish children, crashing passenger planes into buildings, and slitting the throats of peaceful foreigners didn't learn these things from the Prophet, peace be upon him. This is evil politics, not any kind of religion. It's easy to condemn these evildoers without attacking the religious principles they violate.

Regardless of Anonymous's claim that criticizing the Taliban amounts to humiliating and slurring all Muslims, I believe most Americans know the difference. We're steeped in a tradition of religious freedom and tolerance; such prejudices don't come easily to us.

MindMechanic said...

Info all...dress codes in the middle east vary. yes...the taliban are fairly easily identifiable as are the muslim mutawa. The dress for women varies from country to country (and also sect to sect). The abaya, the hijab, the burka...a lot of it depends on if you live in a fundamentalist region or not and then if not, what your family position/traditions are. BTW...in their own home, Saudi women remove the abaya and often are decked out in incredible western fashion.

The simple white robe w/ the accompanying thobe and gutra is common (and required in some fundamentalist states) but the reality is that most middle eastern countries (and especially bigger cities) the men are as likely to dress like you and me than they are anything else.

The very wealthy usually wear white or gold robes but they are much nicer.

The Taliban are a little different but you should remember that it's one thing to be a taliban official and quite another to be just another Joe Taliban follower...

I only have limited experience in the middle east and (Turkey, Saudi, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, UAE) but for what it's worth...

Anonymous said...

Islamic Fundamentalism is not religious but political????
Sure . . . that's why it is called ISLAMIC. . . FUNDAMENTALISM.
"Such prejudices don't come easily to US" . . . you the appointed spokesman/woman for some GROUP we should know about????

a quiet listener said...

i for one am all for lysis' undertaking. he's never been one to back down from a job on account of it's difficulty or controversiality

stories should be applied to our lives. the application of the crucible to the evils that our country has stopped should be applauded. those service men and women who have put all on the line to bring freedom to those people should be proud to see that in lysis' own small way he appreciates such a sacrifice.

i look forward to attending and like reach i also will see you in yellowstone. even peter pan found his way back to neverland eventually.

RealFruitBeverage said...

I think you would cross the line on this plan Lysis. Besides, I think there are nuances that clearly seperate what the tallyban is doing compared to what the point of the crucible is.

Do you remember the discussion about indian time telling that we had? On this topic you wouldn't even have humor to fall back on.

Anonymous said...

Anon:
I agree of your assesment of Liesis' threats to perform the play in the garb of the Taliban. I do think there is the outside possibility that he would do it. But I know there is a strong probability of confusion and exploitation of fears in the audience. Anonymous has made that argument convincingly.

Irrelevant:
Thanks for the info. And it only took you visiting the countries of Turkey, Saudi, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, UAE to get it. How many in Liesis' prospective audience can claim the same? The issue is not whether there is a difference in dress, or if a difference can be made, but whether the difference will be made by most, if not all of the audience. It appears your post only reinforces this. That must have been your point, right, or else your post seems to be . . . irrelevant.

Stay Quiet Listener (The Adults Are Talkin):
"stories should be applied to our lives. the application of the crucible to the evils that our country has stopped should be applauded."

-You are aware that "The Crucible" was written in response to the evils that our country COMMITTED - at two separate times. Actually, I can understand your lack of historical knowledge since it seems you were a student of Liesis. We know him, and you, by his fruits. Return to the fold you with the mind of the eternal child. You are not yet ready to join the world of adults.

Brown Nose To Power:
Of course, the people who have committed such awful acts of terrorism should be condemned, criticized, denounced, and punished. They can and should be singled out and called to account for their unjust actions. Who is saying otherwise? The question is whether a high school play put on by a director with little, if any, understanding of the situation, the nuances and the grander differences between the sects that endorse terrible acts for terrible reasons and those that do not, is the right place for such a statement. A good case has been made that neither the director nor the audience is likely to make the required distinctions. The performance then becomes inflamatory ignorance, Liesis' favorite kind.

Also, "We're steeped in a tradition of religious freedom and tolerance; such prejudices don't come easily to us."

-Obviously you are student of Liesis as well. Do you even know what the story of "The Crucible," set in America's first traditional base, is, or the history of the Mormon migration to Utah, or the oft mentioned Mountain Meadows Massacre, or the treatment of slaves, Native Americans, Asian Americans or any number of other minority American groups? The idealic American "tradition" you reverentially reference is more complicated than you imagine. My apologies you didn't receive the proper education the first time around and my need to take you to school here.

RFB:
You are right. Keep doing push-ups.

Liesis:
To prevent the kind of misdirection that is bound to occur consider RFB's post an inspiration. Rather than do what you do best, demagoguery, telling your audience exactly what to think in a pre performance announcement, try to inject some humor. During a particular boisterous scene of possession during trial have someone at the back of the house shout out, "Hey you crazy Talibanis keep it down!! Don't you know we're trying to do a play to stress tolerance here!?" Thus, injecting a nice inside joke and making it clear that you are 1) dealing with Talibani Muslims and 2) despite the obvious exploitation of Muslim stereotypes are in fact all about tolerance for the Islamic faith.

Good luck with that.

MindMechanic said...

You may not have gotten it yet but I dont post to play in the nonsense. I thought that maybe since I had a little different first hand perspective I would share it. I also figure people will do with it what they will.

I count my 4 years in the different parts of the middle east as invaluable to me. Every religion has their own extreme fundamentalist sect as does every political persuasion. Most muslims are wonderful good honest horable people. They dont hate America or Americans...they just dont understand our government. In many of my conversations with servants and princes my response was the same...a laugh followed by the assurance that many in our own country feel the same way and at any given time.

I truly enjoyed sitting around the huka sharing tea and stories. In every country and every major city I visited the muslims I spoke with were desperate just to be heard. They arent towel-heads, rag-heads, or sand-niggers. They are people that were born in a different region, raised in a different culture and follow a different belief system.

So...the point. I suspect one who wasnt out to MAKE points would recognize that groups like the taliban (while not easily identifiable visually) are certainly recognizable when it comes to values.

I suppose one could point to the odd hypocracy that has people defending the taliban simply because an opponent singled them out...especially in light of the fact that the taliban has been incredibly oppressive to their own people let alone others.

I suppose one could ponder how anyone could defend a group that believes in executing people for inappropriate dress, for teaching their young girls to read, for daring to love a boy or girl of their own chosing (and then worse, daring to perhaps share a kiss), or for being gay.

It is equally amazing that someone would in a kneejerk response to a nemesis defend a group that endorsed the rights of a husband to beat their wives even unto death for basically whatever reason they choose to give, if they choose to bother to give one at all.

At the same time, I suppose one could also point to the fact that the great majority of taliban followers are no different from the followers of other extremist sects. People that have nothing have nothing to lose. People that have no prospect of bettering themselves because to do so would be an affront to their God that assigned them a station in life might just see martyrdom as an acceptable possibility. People who have been so badly ignored or abused by polite society might just turn to charismatic individuals offering promises of spiritual glory in lieu of a life of sacrifice as an acceptable alternative.

You can also see how those people might be easily misled and swayed. Heck, if it can happen in Waco of Guyana, why not Saudia Arabia or Afghnaistan?

If the goal is to learn and to understand instead of defend or judge, it's amazing what you can learn. Or maybe it is just irrelevant.

MindMechanic said...

And BTW...politics is everywhere. However my experience (limited) is that fundamentalist extremists generally lose sight of the whole faith based thing and tend to make it about themselves. Thats just an opinion.

I have read the Koran and talked to many a Muslim but dont pretend to know much at all about their faith. What I do know however is that most Muslims (especially in places where religous practice is free and not forced) are ashamed and embarassed by the actions of fundamentalists.

As I suppose are most Christians of the Branch Davidians...

MindMechanic said...

maybe I am wrong...but as I see it, the context of casting the Taliban in Millers Crucible was intended to compare and contrast the obviously unsavory actions of a 'christian' people several hundred years ago with the modern actions of an oppressive sect that doesnt seem to get too much press and oddly, has apparently a few defenders.

If that is the case, then would the follwoing be valid prosecution statements?

http://www.rawa.us/movies/beating.mpg

Patrolling the streets in pickup trucks, Taliban members, under the General Department for the Preservation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (Amr-bil Maroof Wa Nahi Anil Munkar), searched houses and destroyed any television sets, radios, cassettes, and photographs and "punished" the owners.

"The policy of the Taliban is to exterminate the Hazaras." Maulawi Mohammed Hanif, Taliban Commander announcing their policy to a crowd of 300 people summoned to a mosque (after killing 15,000 Hazaras people in a day).

"Hazaras are not Muslims. You can kill them. It is not a sin." Mullah Manon Niazi, Taliban Governor of Mazar-e Sharif speaking to a crowd in a mosque after the fall of Mazara-e-Sharif city in 1998.

"Tajiks may go to Tajikistan, Uzbeks to Uzbekistan and Hazaras to "Goristan" (Graveyard}. Afghanistan doesn't belong to you." Mullah Manon Niazi, Taliban Governor of Mazar-e Sharif speaking to a crowd in a mosque after the fall of Mazara-e-Sharif city in 1998.

"Among the accounts of mutilations, beatings and arbitrary executions
there was evidence of a new abomination: the torture of children. An unknown number of infants were savagely beaten during the Islamic militia's 14-month occupation of Taloqan, the former headquarters of the Alliance, usually for the supposed crimes of their parents."
(Source: The Times [U.K.], 11/13/01)

"The barbarity of the Taliban plumbed new depths when troops shot dead eight boys for daring to laugh, sickened refugees revealed yesterday. The teenage lads had been chuckling at the soldiers who suddenly raised their Kalashnikov rifles and gunned them down. It was one of a string of atrocities in the besieged Afghanistan city of Kunduz, which was last night poised to fall to the Northern Alliance. At least 300 frightened Taliban were killed by men from their own side because they wanted to surrender." (Source: The Sun [U.K.], 11/19/01)

"The Taliban is jailing children as young as 10 in Kabul to root out
dissent, it is claimed today. According to French journalist Michel Peyrard, who was held by the Taliban for 25 days, the biggest threat to the extremist regime is its own paranoia. He said his fellow detainees included several children. On one occasion the nephews of an escaped political prisoner - aged 10, 13 and 19 - were rounded up. The
eldest was tortured and subjected to a mock execution. The Taliban
also jails leaders and military commanders for being traitors on only the flimsiest evidence." (Source: The Evening Standard (London),
11/9/01)

"One day they came, and ordered everyone to go into the bazaar and
protest against the bombings, and chant: 'Death to America'," said
Salahuddin. "I was in my house and I had to go outside. When we refused to protest against merica, they got angry." Another man who fled the village said he saw the Taliban drag a man called Lash Boi from his house to the mosque and beat him to death when he refused to protest. Lash Boi's three sons are on the front line now, fighting to avenge their father's death, he said." (Source: The Independent
(U.K.), 11/9/01)

"When the family returned six hours later they found that Abdul's
right femur had been shattered by repeated blows from a Kalashnikov,
the stock of the rifle leaving a clear imprint on the floor of the
family's home. Doctors gave Nurala a couple of packets of paracetamol
and bluntly told him that his son would never walk again. 'He was in
so much pain for a long time, and it changed his mind as well,' Nurala said. 'I don't understand how anyone can do such a thing to a small child. I have spoken to many people about this and nobody understands it.' There are many others in Taloqan who have similar stories of children being beaten in front of their parents because their fathers were unable to hand over a weapon to the Taleban, of men who had a hand amputated when they were accused of stealing the bread that they carried home to their families, and of women who were raped after their husbands were taken away and imprisoned in Kandahar or Mazar-i Sharif." (Source: The Times [U.K.], 11/13/01)

"'They burnt some of us alive.' It was almost the first thing he said
to us. In the dust and squalor of a refugee camp, Salahuddin told
yesterday how the Taliban burnt an entire family to death in their own
home in revenge for the American bombing. He says he saw them bringing
out the blackened bodies of the children. Then the Taliban took
Salahuddin and the other villagers to the front line, where they
ordered them to gather up scattered bits of bodies, all that was left of Taliban soldiers killed by the American bombs." (Source: The
Independent U.K. 11/9/01)

"'The Taliban commanders killed 100 of our friends,' said this
defector, adding, 'They hung their bodies from lamp posts as a warning
to the rest of us.'" (Source: CBS Evening News, 11/19/01)

"One said a doctor was shot dead for not treating a wounded Taliban
soldier quickly enough, while others said a group of eight teenage boys were killed for laughing at Taliban soldiers." (Source: The Herald (Scotland), 11/19/01)

"Foreign Taliban soldiers, who have gathered in Kunduz for what
appears to be a last stand, have gunned down more than 400 Afghan
Taliban soldiers trying to defect to the Northern Alliance, the
refugees and the alliance soldiers said. The 400 were killed in mass
shootings late last week, refugees said, and were prompted in part by
the defection of a local Taliban commander to the Northern Alliance.
According to the reports, Arab and Pakistani soldiers with the Taliban
have also begun shooting young civilian men of the Uzbek and Tajik
ethnic groups suspected of trying to escape to territory controlled by the Northern Alliance. 'The foreigners came into the village and shot all the men,' said Muhammadullah, a 21-year-old man who crossed into Northern Alliance territory today. 'I saw this with my own eyes.'"
(Source: The New York Times, 11/19/01)

"Foreign Taliban soldiers also killed dozens of Afghan Taliban
soldiers on Friday at the village of Musazai near the Kunduz airport,
refugees and Northern Alliance soldiers said. Refugees fleeing Kunduz said foreign Taliban soldiers had gunned down 125 Afghan Taliban soldiers who had been stopped on their way to the front lines. The foreign Taliban soldiers seem to have decided that the local Taliban were trying to defect. When they tried to stop them, a fight began and the foreign Taliban opened fire, the refugees said." (Source: The New
York Times, 11/19/01)

"The BBC has confirmed that the central Afghan town of Bamiyan was
totally destroyed by the Taleban before they fled over the weekend.
Evidence has also emerged of Bosnian-style ethnic cleansing in the region involving the execution of hundreds of local ethnic Hazara
men." (Source: BBC News, 11/13/01)

"Our correspondent said every building, shop and house had been
destroyed before the town fell on Sunday after a two-hour gun battle."
(Source: BBC News, 11/13/01)

September 1996 -- Upon capturing Kabul the Taliban castrated President Najibullah, dragged his body behind a jeep for several rounds of the Palace and then shot him dead. His brother was similarly tortured and then throttled to death. (Source: Department of Defense)

January 1998 -- In the Western province of Faryab, the Taliban
massacred approximately 600 Uzbek villageres. Western aid workers who
later investigated the incident said civilians were dragged from their homes, lined up and gunned down. (Source: Department of Defense)

August 1998 -- The Taliban entered Mazar-I-Sharif and went on a frenzy
killing shop owners, cart pullers, women and children shoppers.
(Source: Department of Defense)

August 2000 -- Taliban execute POWs in the streets of Heart as a
lesson to the local population. (Source: Department of Defense)

June 2001 -- Taliban bombed the administrative center of Yakaolang,
including the district hospital and an aid agency office. (Source:
Department of Defense)

Massacre at Yakaolang -- Taliban forces committed a massacre in
Yakaolang in January 2001. The victims were primarily Hazaras. The
massacre began on January 8, 2001, and continued for four days. The
Taliban detained about 300 civilian adult males, including staff members of local humanitarian organizations. The men were herded to assembly points, and then shot by firing squad in public view. According to Human Rights Watch, about 170 men are confirmed to have been killed. According to Amnesty International, eyewitnesses reported the deliberate killing of dozens of civilians hiding in a mosque: Taliban soldiers fired rockets into a mosque where some 73 women, children and elderly men had taken shelter. (Source: State Department)

Massacre at Robatak Pass -- The May 2000 massacre took place near the Robatak pass. 31 bodies were found one site, of these, 26 were
positively identified as civilians. The victims were Hazara Shi'as.
(Source: State Department)

Massacre in Bamiyan -- When the Taliban recaptured Bamiyan in 1999,
there were reports that Taliban forces carried out summary executions upon entering the city. According to Amnesty International, hundreds
of men, and some instances women and children, were separated from
their families, taken away, and killed. Human Rights Watch reports
that besides executing civilians, the Taliban burned homes and used
detainees for forced labor. (Source: State Department)

Massacre in the Shomaili Plains -- July 1999 Human Rights Watch
reports that a Taliban offensive here was marked by summary
executions, the abduction and disappearance of women, the burning of homes, destruction of property, and the cutting down of fruit trees. According to a report by the U.N. Secretary General on November 16, 1999, "The Taliban forces, who allegedly carried out these acts, essentially treated the civilian population with hostility and made no distinction between combatants and non-combatants." (Source: U.S.
State Department)

Massacre in Mazar-I-Sharif -- In August 1998, the Taliban captured
Mazar-I-Sharif. There were reports that between 2,000 and 5,000 men,
women and children -- mostly ethnic Hazara civilians -- were massacred by the Taliban after the takeover of Mazar-I-Sharif. During the massacre, the Taliban forces carried out a systematic search for male members for the ethnic Hazara, Tajik, and Uzbek communities in the city. Human Rights Watch estimates that scores, perhaps hundreds, of
Hazara men and boys were summarily executed. There were also reports
that women and girls were raped and abducted during the Taliban
takeover of the city.

Anonymous said...

Irrelevent:


What the hell are you talking about? Who here is defending the Taliban? I read a lot about people saying that you just about no one can tell the difference between a Taliban follower and just about any other Muslim just by looking at them. When Liesis talks about dressing up high school kids as Taliban people and putting them on stage the audience won't see "Taliban," they will see "Muslim." Are you so thick you don't understand this? Or are you from the Liesis school of "if you don't agree with me and the President you must be a terroirist trying to destroy America."

Your posts are so wide - not to mention long - of anything applicable I have to skip over most of them just to get to the heart of what is actually being talked about.

In your last one you start, "maybe I am wrong..." You are. You could save a lot of work there.

MindMechanic said...

No...I wouldnt expect you to get it.

It was after all the anon collective that saw a commentary about the Taliban and then decided in typical kneejerk fashion to attack other religions.

Considering the Taliban DID play a large role in the recent history of the world, and considering the Taliban is STILL a threat to regional and ultimately world peace, is that not worthy of fair examination?

And so the question remains. Why NOT a comparison of the taliban (a muslim sect gone wild right now in 'modern' times and witch trials (or in Millers vein...the Communist hunt)? And why do you find that SO offensive that you then pounce with your own version of bigotry and attack others religions?

Does it not seem a little bit odd that Christianity of all types can be open to scorn, hatred, rhetoric, and ridicule, but draw one cartoon of a muslim prophet and the world erupts in riots?

As I read and reread the original post I saw nothing in an attack on all things muslim. You made it that. You also chose to deflect the critique of the Taliban with an attack on Mormons.

You walk a mighty thin line when you claim that Lysis intent is to defame all of the Muslim faith and then you yourself do the very same thing. Well...no...I take that back. You dont walk a thin line, you completely cross over into the realm of hypocrisy and bigotry.

MindMechanic said...

As to whether or not I was 'wrong'...well...maybe if you didnt think it was all about 'you'...

As I said...I reread the original post. It seems fair to cast The Crucible using a Taliban cast. The comparison of Taliban attrocities in the name of their God to a Salem witch hunt or to an expose on communism seems valid. I posted evidence. Long...sure...but since it was cut and paste, hardly a bother.

So...instead of attacking Mormons, or Catholics or even Muslims, or anyone elses faith, and in light of the attrocites committed by the ruling head of the Taliban, is it or is it not a fair comparison?

Anonymous said...

Brain-Drain:
You are a complete waste of time, rivaled only by that other MVMoron. You don't even get the point the others have made.

Working Class Hero said...

Anonymous

after carfully reading all of these Comments I can fully say the "Anonymous" is arguing off of personal attacks and biases towards other bloggers and their views. You should realy consider keeping these to a minmimun for it makes it appear as if you are out of material to argue. just some advice to be considered

MindMechanic said...

"When Liesis talks about dressing up high school kids as Taliban people and putting them on stage the audience won't see "Taliban," they will see "Muslim." Are you so thick you don't understand this?"

So when George Clooney produces "Goodnight and Good Luck" people arent able to distinguish between McCarthy and every other white man in a suit? I always figured directors could do a pretty decent job of character and story development...

My interpretation of what was written was "is there a fair comparison of the zealots portrayed in The Crucible and the zealots of the Taliban?" I think the answer to that is yes and it might actually make for some interesting discussion.

Your take however is "no one will be able to distinguish and that is the plan because you are a bigot and thats your only reasoning." Really? So I guess there are a few points. You mean in the course of a play production you dont think it is possible to show the cast is meant to portray the Taliban? You think EVERYONE will follow your inerpretation and assume it is an attack on all things Muslim? And because that is what you think there is no room for fair comparison? OR is it that you truly believe his ONLY REASON for considering it is to portray ALL MUSLIMS in the light of the Taliban. YOU assigned that meaning...I've yet to see it from him. But I'll go on record...K? If you are right and IF this is JUST a mere attack on every Muslim, then I agree with you and join you and I too say SHAME. IF.

But then you mingle your pronunciation of bigotry with religous attacks of your own. But that in itself brings up a fair question. My wife is finishing up as a production assistant on a Movie based on the play "Peculiarities." It is a play with 4 stories that cast a very small number of Mormon couples in a very negative light. Should we NOT continue with the movie because some people might not be smart enough to get that this is just a small sampling and not representative of ALL Mormons?

Silver Lining said...

Brain Mechanic,

Anonymous is um shall we say prickly to be sure, but your comparison with George Clooney is so not the same thing as the Taliban costumes and mistaken motives. In a movie, actors look different, and it is easy enough to distinguish who is who. The argument here isn't a problem telling which character is which. You could dress them identically, and dialogue alone would distinguish them. The fact is that if the cast were dressed in "Taliban dress" there is a real possibility that many would perceive the play as a commentary on Muslims in general. The question then is whether Lysis is willing to risk this misunderstanding to make his point.

However, the answer was provided above when Lysis said that he gives a director's commentary before each performance. It is his art and therefore his decision to make. I, for one, enjoy making some connections on my own and would prefer to watch the Crucible as it is and make comparisons to modern times. That way I get to pretend I am brighter than I actually am. In fact, costume need not be provided if Lysis chooses to reflect on modern application of the lessons of The Crucible in his director's commentary. That would make for a great intellectual viewing of the play just to see if you agree with the opening commentary and see the same lessons. I will have to take the word of others though as I will be unable to attend.

MindMechanic said...

Silver Lining

I appreciate your perspective. I know the analogy wasnt great...analogies seldom are. Simplistic as it was, my point is why stop with the Taliban/Muslim angle? If your perspective is that people are just too blind to see beyond a religion (or race, or gender) then maybe we shouldnt have any movies that might be mentally provocative.

I am sure it wont happen. Well...reasonably sure it wont happen. I am sure the anon collective is quite correct. Should word get out and to the media then there probably would be an outcry and the portrayal of the Taliban would be blocked. But then, should we block the play itself because it portrays religous people of non muslim persuasion in an unfavorable light?

I think the fact of the matter is that if Lysis were to post a commentary that the sky is blue then you would no doubt have the anon collective arguing against the point.

Cameron said...

The Bait:

Reducing the atrocities of Communism to the Cold War and the fear of nuclear attacks, elevating the atrocity of blacklisting and name calling above that of the mass murder of tens of millions of human beings, and the enslavement of billions more

The real monsters of the “Cold War” were in Moscow, Peking, and Hanoi, not in Washington

The real witchcraft in this misunderstanding of Art is that the monster of Communism could be transformed by the pampered liberals of America into the victims

Cameron said...

Hook, Line and Sinker:

Oh good!
Lysis is going to use Layton High School students performing in The Crucible to embarrass and taunt the Islamic religion and Moslems.

Dan Simpson said...

"I love it. The guy with 2 months of MTC indoctrination is calling the other one "uneducated" on religion! That is rich."

For the record, I only spent 19 days in the MTC. I guess that makes me even more 'uneducated' in your mind. Of course, I could just call that post irrelevant, but that is the realm of Anonymous.

Most of my specific religious/cultural education doesn't come from the MTC, or my mission. Though you do learn a lot when you spend time specifically discussing religion with people from around the world that represent literally dozens of religions.

Most of my cultural knowledge comes from my Anthropology degree focusing on comparitive cultures. Of course this is all irrelevant, but since you brought it up. (let me beat you to the punch, you will say either: 'You are stupid and your education was worthless', 'The University you went to was obviously full of idiots', or 'You still don't know anything about cultures'.

Any of the above are fine, it just helps you ignore the point.

No one here had equated Taliban with Islam until you. You made that direct connection, and followed it up with venom laced commentary on Mormonism (which you continue throughout most of your posts, but this isn't new, your posts have been filled with that kind of uneducated crap since day one).

I saw way too much bigotry on my mission (this is where you can ignore my argument because it touches on anything to do with the mormon church). Religious, racial, economic based. Both Mormons and non-Mormons hating each other for their religiouns. Flourishing chapters of the KKK, and countless other examples of hatred caused by bigotry and flourishing because of stupidity.

I never claimed to be an expert on all things Islam, or any other aspect of that subject. I was merely pointing to the bigotry that you display so freely, hoping that it is based on ignorance, because that is a whole lot better than bigotry coming from one with knowledge.

If you really do have knowledge and you are still filled with this much hatred towards the groups you single out, that much the worse.

As for you telling others to be quiet because the 'adults' are speaking, I hope you don't have anyone who looks to you for guidance if that is your idea of a responsible 'adult' dialogue. You fill your arguments with so much name calling and juvenile hatred.

If you call that 'adult' than 1) you don't really know what being an adult is about, and 2) I would rather have 'childrens' discussions with AQL.

As far as the play, I am with SL, I would rather have it done as it was written, I highly enjoy 'The Crucible'.

Lysis said...

More on hunting animals:

When I was a boy growing up in Alaska, the hunting of wolves was a common enough thing. Shooting, trapping, or poisoning them didn’t really much bother me – their fur makes great hoods for parks; ones breath won’t frost it up. But my dad told me how the Eskimos and Indians killed wolves – it seemed too cruel, too shocking. The hunters would paint a sharp knife blade with blood and stick it hilt buried in the ground. The wolf would come and lick the bald, slit their tong and continue lapping and drinking their own blood until they had bleed to death.

Magic Valley Mormon;

You are of course right, the line in the original post, “I have been toying with the idea of dressing my actors as Taliban fanatics and placing the trial in Kabul before its liberation.” was the bate, the hook, and now it seems the bloodied blade.


Brainmechanic;

Your post, full of information, on the Taliban and your first hand accounts of things Middle Eastern are wonderful and most appreciated by this reader in the Agora. You should not be surprised that Flaccid did not read the information you provided. Actually finding out the facts before he leaps into the trap would be completely against his MO.


Realfruitbeverage;

I refer you to this line in my post just before Flaccid started licking the blade above, “As for burqas on stage – perhaps you have a point. Anyway, even if I don't go Taliban with costumes, a little per performance commentary will be enough to make the connection to all reasonable minds attending.”

As to “Time Telling”; first, I’m glad you have come to see that my way, and secondly, while it was never our intention to call any one group of people “stupid”, my production of *The Crucible* will intentionally link murderous Calvinist fanatics of Colonial Salem and the murderous Muslim fanatics of Afghanistan. But, as Silver Lining suggests I will PROBABLY restrict the link making to the pre-play commentary. It is obvious that there are too many “Animal Minds” out there. I had expected better of you and will continue to do so.


Flaccid;

You lapping wolf/dog; isn’t your belly full of your own blood yet. Just because it is painful to watch even you lick yourself to death with your own sliced and senseless tong, (too cruel too shocking) here is the gore that the hunters see in your self slaughter:

1. You obviously equate Taliban killers with all Muslims.

2. You believe that Muslims are less tolerant than Calvinists who have watched their “own” sins preformed on stage for generations. The Puritans learned their lesson from the excesses of their “evil fringe” - you are sure that Muslims can’t.

3. Your own fanaticism become obvious to us all when you list the “weapons” you will bring to bear against other’s free speech, marshaling the school Administration and your buddies in the media to crush another’s idea – just because you are unwilling or incapable of understanding it. Like the Taliban – you seem to have no respect for freedom of speech or artistic expression. I guess you are confident that the *Tribune* *the Standard* and the *Deseret News* will join you in stifling the speech of others. So much for tolerance on your part; your blood is gushing.

4. You volunteer to play a promotional role in getting out the word!!!! Issuing your own FATWAT against all who don’t see the world in your terms. By the Way, are you still hunting Rushdie?

Let me Paraphrase for you from the play we did two years ago, in support of our militaries justice system’s handling of the traitors at Abu Grab – *A Few Good Men* - We must not take the advice of the galacticly stupid. There could be no more fitting term for the extent of your stupidity. Quit licking the blade and start licking your wounds.

Anonymous said...

Call me "Another Questioner"

Lysis, didn't the wolves tongues stick to the frosty steel blade, like in Christmas Story? Do you believe everything you were told as a child? I think you may be repeating fibs.

Lysis said...

Another Questioner;

Here are some questions:

Who said the knife was frosty? How about the hot breath of the wolf? Why not look in to things before you start to lick?

Lysis said...

Another Questioner – I found these two posts on the Google during lunch. I’m sure you could learn a lot more if you made an effort on your own, or you could just keep licking.

From backdoorbible.org:

Story: How to Kill a Wolf - (Eskimo Style)
Up in the arctic circle there is tribe of Eskimo's who have learned to set a very simple yet effective trap for wolves. First they sharpen a knife razor sharp. Then they dip it in the blood of a seal they have killed. (you see seals are fairly easy to trap but wolves are very dangerous). After dipping the knife in blood they set it outside in the cold so the blood freezes on the knife. After if freezes (a matter of minutes) they dip it again into the seal blood and again take it out an let the blood freeze. Layer after layer they make a blood popsicle. When they are done, the knife's blade is hidden inside just like a popsicle stick. Now they take the knife out into the wilderness where they think a wolf might be. There the bury the handle of the knife in the snow leaving the blood popsicle standing up and they leave.
Now after a while a wolf will come along guided by his sense of smell and find the "bloodsicle". He will being licking it, enjoying every taste. Over and over he licks the knife and soon his tongue is so cold he cannot feel it any longer. It's numb. But his taste for blood is growing and he is not getting as much as he wants - you see, popsicles are slow eating. Finally his licking exposes the razor sharp edge of the knife. It cuts into his tongue again and again but he does not even notice for his tongue can no longer feel anything. The wolfs own blood now flows from his cut tongue. The wolf is thrilled, blood is now more plentiful and he continues to lick more and more.
Soon he notices something is wrong, he is getting weaker not stronger. Since he knows blood as food he increases his efforts to feed on the ever increasing flow of blood. His last thoughts are of how good the now warm blood tastes. Within minutes he licks his last and collapse next to the now fully exposed knife. Here the Eskimo knows he will find the wolfs body the next morning.


From sgForums.com:

First, the Eskimo coats a razor-sharp knife blade with animal blood and allows it to freeze. Then he adds another layer of blood, and another, and another - until the blade is completely concealed by frozen blood. "Next, the hunter fixes his knife in the ground with the enticing blade up. When a wolf follows his sensitive nose to the source of the scent and discovers the bait – he begins licking it – tasting the fresh, frozen blood. Then he licks faster, more and more voraciously, lapping the blood until the razor edge is almost bare. Feverishly now, harder and harder - the wolf licks the blade in the cold arctic night.
So great becomes his craving for blood that the wolf is mysteriously unaware of the razor-sharp sting of the naked blade on his own tongue, nor does he recognize the instant at which his insatiable thirst is being satisfied by his OWN warm blood. Unknowingly, his life ebbs away as his carnivorous appetite craves more & more -- until the dawn finds him dead… in the snow!" All from the suicidal blade - of blood.

But why look any farther than right here in the Agora? You need only watch the flaccid tong of the Anonomy to see self-slaughter in action.

Anonymous said...

Liesis,

You missed the end of those two stories:
"Many begin using drugs, drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, or engaging in unsafe sexual behavior for the same reasons that the wolf begins licking the knife blade. It seems safe and delicious at first, but it doesn't satisfy. More and more is desired, leading to a crisis or death.
Don't be fooled by the temptations of sin. Like the wolf, we can get away with it for a while. Eventually, however, its true character is revealed. Sin leads to death and destruction. 'For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.'"

That one was from DailyWisdom.Gospel.com. I think you can agree that along with BackDoorBible.org and who ever Polar Snake is - that you took the post from at the Singapore chat forum you sited - this is definitely proof that indeed you are gullible. Questioner got her answer, you do believe everything you were told as a child.

Child-like-Liesis,

Just wanted to write that you haven't left the state fast enough. (Too bad for the state.) Some of predicted headlines are already happening. George Bush is at an all time low in the polls, 33% according to the Washington Post. Rasmussen daily has him at another all time low, 38%. And Bush is now the only U.S. President to spend this long below 40% - the mark of a great man that. Expect him to go lower even with his pandering and mugging for the camera over the next few days. Hope you will be around long enough for me to report on that too!

Anonymous said...

Lysis:
No!
I find the best policy is to let the creepy, perverse, illicit, and absurd have FULL exposure to the light of PUBLIC scorn and ridicule. NOT TO CENSOR!

PROMOTE! Pack the auditorium, put loud speakers in the streets, cameras and high resoution wide-screen televisions EVERYWHERE; then let Administrators, the media and public opinion consult THEIR muse.

Let Lysis' "freedom of speech" prevail and reap whatever consequences (FRUIT) thereof!!!!

(Is destroying Miller's great play like burning a flag?????)

To extend on the "Wolf" analogy:

When HUNTING a wolf, be sure to NOT take along the family hound for assistance. Sometimes, because of ancient common alliances between the two, you could find yourself invited over for lunch.

That is why I think it UNWISE for Lysis to do his Taliban "bashing" by using SUCH a *Crucible* to exorcise a largely Mormon, Christian, Muslim, Protestant, Catholic, audience.

(How's THAT metaphor, Anon)

Dan:

Responding to your criticisms.

Certainly, not all Muslims call themselves Taliban, but *all* (at least most) Taliban call themselves Muslims -- and you think that my being first at the Agora to express a connection makes me a BIGOT???? I posted commentary from an imminently creditable source that makes the SAME historical connection -- why do you ignore it?

DO as you have been taught by your most excellent instructors and education -- MAKE the analysis, MAKE the argument THEN draw the conclusion. Don't just, Lysis-like, reiterate unfounded conclusions because they are easy obscene and offensive.

Now, it's time for Lysis to go scurrying out the "back door" of the Agora proclaiming, "It was just a "bloody" joke, you "galactically" stupid Anonomous!!!!"

RealFruitBeverage said...

Lysis remeber in "Great Books" where I was Socrates' understudy, and I couldn'figure out how to make a square double it's size? Sometimes people need to connect the dots themselves instead of having it presented to them on a plate.

Also begining commentaries rarely effect what people think of a body of work.

If you truely want to make a message worth having, mix up all the characters wardrobes. A person in a buisness suite here, a person in a Duke lacross uniform here, you know make the audience try at least to grasp the big picture of Justice instead of making our narrow vision of the moment cloud our ideals.

Oh and there are stupid people, and it takes candor to call them stupid, but it takes tack(sp?) to know when to do it.

Lysis said...

Flaccid:

What is your point on the “Licking Wolf” stories? Just because they are used to make valuable moral points by other posters does not make the “trapping technique” any less authentic? The fact is, I was using the “blood popsicle” as an allegorical demonstration of your debating skills. I think references to the procedure work equally well in all the situations cited.

By the way, it seems obvious that you support sin, using drugs, drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, and engaging in unsafe sexual behavior with all the energy you defend the Taliban.

Maybe your dad lied to you – mine was universally and demonstrably honest.

Your fascination with polls and their complete irrelevance to the quality of a leader was dealt with in the last “log-string”. Reread the excellent points made under “Perceiving Perception”; you seem to have forgotten your past humiliation. I can hear you licking – does it taste good?


Child;

I’m glad to see that you have seen the light and now support freedom of speech and freedom of expression in Art, I would be eager to let the public decide – hence all are invited to the play – including you. Are you suggesting the same consequences for our high school play as you called down on the head of Rushdie? Seems like you have a hard time distinguishing between tolerance and terror! When you direct a play – feel free to burn the flags, that seems to be what you want to attack. I prefer to attack religious fanaticism, murder, and bigotry. To each his own. By the way, I don’t much care for dogs or wolves.

We present our plays to human audiences, though unfortunately there are a lot of animals out there. They, the dogs, wolves, rats, and suckers are not our primary supporters, as you have noted.

I’ll leave it to Dannyboy to explain the basic working of a syllogism to you; but, on what the Taliban might call themselves, some Anonymous posters in the Agora think themselves humans, capable of thinking like men – their comments prove otherwise. Some people claim that Allah will hand over 72 virgins for murdering innocents and that makes them Muslims, they are also wrong.


Realfritbeverage:

Here are some things I have learned from my teaching experience.

1) Sometimes one must; tell the student what you are going to tell them, then tell them, then tell them what you have told them. Don’t worry, I will find a way for them to think they discovered the truth on their own. Who first walked you through Plato anyway?

2) Nothing really effects what people think very much. The lapping wolfs of the Agora should powerfully demonstrate that to you, however, I have fond that when the student is actually seeking truth – they will recognize it when it is presented.

3) It is best not to confuse the students with too many symbols at once. Besides, as I alluded to above, nothing in a business suite, a lacrosse uniform or a set of Mormon temple clothes might represent approaches the atrocities of the Taliban.

4) I need to work on my tact (sp).

Lysis said...

Some times a trapped animal realizes it is in a trap. It will then chomp down on the cold steal breaking its teeth against the unbending metal. The most courageous of brutes will actually gnaw off their own foot and limp away to lick their wounds until they fall for the next bait.

It is interesting to see when Flaccid realized he was in a trap – no surprising since the humans in the conversation had been telling him about it for quite a while. Here is the line, I quote Flaccid:

“Now, it's time for Lysis to go scurrying out the "back door" of the Agora proclaiming, "It was just a "bloody" joke, you "galactically" stupid Anonomous!!!!"

Everyone, “every human one”, knew it was a joke from the beginning my little mouse, and you are the one that has licked yourself into galactic stupidity.

In the days of the tribe; after the hunt was over and the carcasses of the slaughtered beasts hung or handed over to the women; the hunters often gathered about the fire to recount their exploits. For those in the Agora who still enjoy the account of a good hunt, gather round and we’ll go over this one.

In the original post the over arching point – that even the power of the Muses could be misapplied by those who have an over riding agendas and cannot think with enough reason to recognize truth can be misapplied, - was presented. Mingled with the ideas set out for human consumption were certain baits for the suckers, traps for the rats, snares for the animal minded among the readers in the Agora. Here are some of the traps, hooks, and blood knives:

1. Presenting the creation of Art as an inspiration by long abandoned classical deities.

2. The supernatural nature of the creation of beauty.

3. Poetry as the creation of obedience to strict rules.

4. References to my own (Lysis) paintings of the human figure, and admitting that I talk to my paintings.

5. Placing the poets above the prophets.

6. The comment that the *Crucible* was overused by English teachers and misapplied in the Social Studies.

7. Comparing the Salem witch hunters to Communist.

8. Equating most Social Study teachers (a disproportionately liberal group) to spin misters.

9. The reference to Mark Twain’s disclaimer in Huck Finn - a sure snag for racists.

10. Pointing out that it was Mao and company, not Joseph McCarthy that were the real villains.

11. Mocking Miller for his own words attacking the WRONG group with his play – demonstrating that even he did not understand the workings of his Muse.

12. Showing the triviality of McCarthy’s misguided acts when comparing them to the atrocities of Communism. This had to at least temp the “Reds” in the pond.

13. Pointing out that the real villains of the Cold War were ALL Communists! I am a little disanointed that we didn’t catch at least on Mao lover – but then they are becoming an extinct sort of animal.

14. Pointing out that McCarthyism is an unjust pejorative – the real slam word is “Communist”!

15. I quoted Eyre’s “inspired truth” *About the Crucible* always being pertinent to any society, but then implied that modern critics would miss the point and miss represent the truth in their zealous effort to attack the wrong people.

16. And finally, as and after thought, I tossed out the tempting “TOY” of dressing my actors as Taliban fanatics so that even the densest of the brutes in the crowd would get the point. (Ernest Seton tells that he caught Lobo by putting a trap on the discarded head of the bait steer, Lobo’s mate stumbled into the trap and the fate of the “King Wolf” was sealed.)


When thus chumming the water, one cannot be sure where the sucker will strike, imagine my pleasure when it was the “toy”, the last tidbit tossed as an after thought, that caught the brute, or in this case the whole herd of them!

Now since it has taken Flaccid so long to recognize the trap – I don’t think “The Child” even knows he is dead yet, let me deliver the play by play as we sit her about our virtual campfire.

1. In his first post Flaccid, (whom I can’t even believe is dumb enough to take the bate), says: “Oh good! Lysis is going to use Layton High School students performing in The Crucible to embarrass and taunt the Islamic religion and Moslems.” Thus or victim has started his journey toward the “spit” by equating the Taliban with the Islamic religion and all Moslems.

2. He immediately goes on to attack all Mormons, the people who most abhor the atrocities at Mountain Meadows, by implying that Mormons would be likewise angered by having the murders in Cedar City compared to the murders at Salem. But of course Mormons would not – they already know that Lee and company were the monsters and deserve attacking.


Then what is fun is that Dannyboy actually tells Flaccid he is in a trap by pointing out that equating the Taliban with Islam is bigoted; and instead of saying thank you; Flaccid attacks Dannyboy for trying to save him. How animal like. Not knowing a thing about Dannyboy’ education – including his degree in Anthropology in which he has extensively studied the very things that Flaccid is demonstrating his ignorance with ever ungrateful snarl - Flaccid calls Dannyboy stupid. By now all the humans are laughing at the poor animal mind.

Next I actually explain to a questioner that the whole thing is a remarkably successful trap for catching rats – and point out that: “As for ridiculing the murderers at Mountain Meadows, that has long been one of my goals. Whether the murderers are in Salem, Kabul, Baghdad, or Cedar City they are equally as wrong. I don’t excuse any murder in the name of God. How about you, Anonymous?” But poor Anonymous does not realize I offering him a way off the hook; he cannot see that he is an animal or that he is in a trap.

With Flaccid is in his dying throws – The Child - jumps into the trap. Admitting that one can tell evil by its works, he then presents his best work and tries to equate the Taliban to Hilldale polygamists and somehow thinks he will thus insult Mormons by attacking the very people that Mormons find most worthy of ridicule. He shows his ignorance by going on an attack of Mormons – which have no reason to be offended by being compared to anyone, and are not. In frustration the Child begins to bit his own foot

The trapped beasts then start calling for censorship and threatening their version of terrorist attacks, threatening to come out of the shadows of their anonymity to personally lead the anti-art and anti-drama movement by spearheading assaults from local newspapers. Liberal bastions of spin that will no doubt support that an attack on the Taliban is an attack on Islam.

Numerous caring humans, Brainmechanic, Silver Lining, Magic Valley Mormon, even RFB and Dannyboy try to warn the trapped bests that they are killing themselves. Even Lysis warns them of the dangers of the “blood popsicle”. But all we get from the critters in the trap is more self-inflected suffering.

It has been fun recounting the hunt – but the fire is burning low. Let’s hope that the poor burst at least have the scene to gnaw off their broken toes and creep off into the dark. But there is not much hope there, the morning will probably find them frozen in a pool of their own blood. Good night, and good luck – or should I say happy hunting?

Anonymous said...

Call me "Still Another Questioner"

Lysis, is it not wrong to celbrate the killing of a child? Are you really as crazed as various people have said you are?

Reach Upward said...

Thanks for the game wrapup and instant replays. The stories have been told. The fire has burned to coals. Do I hear Taps in the distance?

Lysis said...

Still Another Questioner;

As to celebrating the trapping of “The Child” - it was only a figurative and verbal trap – it is why we play the game. One needs shed no more tears for “The Child’s” folly than for a pawn taken down in a chess match.

As to you second question, “Am I as crazed as various people have said you are?” You’ll have to quote me some specifics. I am no doubt much more crazed than some people have called me, and much less crazed than others have said.

Anonymous said...

Publius

Quick note to Call me "Still Another Questioner" necessary to kill a child to build a man
I am moved to write this as I sit during my prep period having just completed a discussion with my 8th grade class about the assassination of Pres. Lincoln. As the discussion of Pres. Bushes poll numbers are discussed and meaning assigned I reflected on the popularity of Lincoln in those dark days for the North after Gettysburg as Grant is slaughtered by Lee in the Virginia Overland Campaign. Lincoln was unpopular, copperheads, believing the South could never be defeated were seeking “peace terms at any cost.” Lincoln even had loud opposition against his receiving the Republican primary nomination for the election of 1864 and had told his cabinet he was preparing for defeat against the democratic candidate George McClellan. (one time General to Lincoln.) The north was tired of the war and many wanted to “pull out”. I am glad that our nation though better and a path was chosen that, although difficult has saved our nation countless present difficulties. Lincoln suffered and was berated and called a fool by northern papers and politicians and as it has been stated here, by his fruits we have come to know him. I do not mean to imply that Pres. Bush is or ever will be a Lincoln. But I will confess I hope he will. Not because I am a republican but because I am an American. Bushes failures will be America’s as so will be his successes. Lincoln did not fight the Civil War because he was a Republican. His failure would have hurt the prosperity and happiness of every American. Knowing the suffering of Lincoln and the loyal north to save the Union and eventually end the hypocrisy of slavery makes me revere him all the more. We all must remember that we are charged in a republic government to support and aid or leaders so that they can be successful. I find it telling that when U.S. Grant wins a bloody battle a Shiloh having amassed 13,000 casualties he is relieved of command by an ungrateful North because of the high cost while Lee will win at the Battle of Seven days at a loss of 20,000 and will be hailed as a hero by the south. How we support or belittle our leaders has a great effect on their success. Lincoln was great despite his distracters, Bush will be judged by his fruit. History has chosen to throw out Lincoln’s habius corpus and Bush I hope will find a friendlier audience in the history books.

Lysis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lysis said...

Reach Upward:

Sounds like Kum Ba Ya to me.

Publius:

So good to hear from you!!!

Like you, I think I prefer “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.” After the campfire.

Reach Upward said...

Publius, you might find this article by a lifelong Democrat that compares Bush to Truman interesting. He concludes the article by saying, "Despite the endless shelves of books devoted to professional hatred of George W. Bush, the ultimate history books are yet to be written. You never know what they might say. History gets the last laugh."

Anonymous said...

I have often worried of Lysis' lack of judgement and reason, but have ALWAYS assumed his postings to be HONEST efforts.

The perverse admission of the LIES and POSTURINGS in the appropriately entitled topic "Muse Misused" belie *ALL* Lysis' inflated boasts and promises about "TRUTH, REASON and FAITH" that "proclaim" the Agora!!!!

ANYONE at ANYTIME can withdraw their credibility (Ethos), and in turn sneer at the credulity of others -- as cowardly and abusive as doing so is.

To do so is NOT a clever trick that reveals anything dastardly about ME; but, a contemptible attribute of YOUR OWN that taints ALL you've posted and WILL post!!!!

Even in antagonism, I have respected the stubborness, steadfastness and loyalty of your perspectives. However, without Ethos you will have made a mockery of all.

We have "debated" at length the LOGOS and have shared, at times, the PATHOS,-- you, yourself have posted about how difficult "lost Ethos" is to EVER reclaim again.

My HONEST hope is that you shall return from your Summer scouting adventures refreshed and rejuvenated!!!!

Lysis said...

Anonymous;

Thanks for the good wishes – my best to you as well.

Anonymous said...

I’ll call myself, “Why Play Nice?”

Lysis, you’re way too nice to this guy, so let me tell you a thing of two. First of all Anonymous, you’re rambling. Maybe Lysis is right and you’ve lost too much blood. Second of all, when did Lysis ever lie? He caught you by stating true things that you didn’t want to hear, so you go off and make a fool of yourself and accuse Lysis of being a mockery. I went through the list of things Lysis said he used to catch you guys with, every thing he said there is true – its just stuff that makes liberals mad. You’re a liberal, you got mad and said thing that made you look silly. Nobody is lying – Lysis said true things, and we saw your true response. So suck it up buddy, and quit rambling about stuff the rest of us see right through.

Strategos said...

uau

Anonymous said...

WPW
Didn't you hear the announcement.

Turn in your CHEERLEADING uniform and your XXXL Pom Poms -- cheerleading isn't a sport-- GET IN THE GAME!!!!

Strategos is at the stage where he/she is just about ready to start formulating words -- next comes sentences!!!!

Lysis said...

Child;

Who are you to take about cheerleading? You haven’t come up with and original idea since. . . gee, I can’t remember. All you ever do is restate Flaccid’s dribble and tell him how proud you are of his limp offering.

As for Strategos – I think his comment had more to do with my spelling ability than with his speaking ability. In fact – if you read his “uau” phonetically I feel his is both complementing our efforts, and chiding my slips in proof reading at once. What cleverness and class.

Anonymous said...

Anon:

I thought your last post was great! Had me laughing for a quite a while. I was trying to figure out the babble of the latest cult follower and you gave perfect insight: he was just trying to master the language.

Your well wishes to Liesis were very sportsman like but I have to disagree. I hope sincerely that Liesis returns from his stay in the wilds deflated, despondent, and in despair for the sad situation Bush has left Liesis' beloved Republican party. It is a shame to see anyone so sad, but it is more of a shame to see one party ruin this country so thuroughly. If Liesis is sad in the fall you can count on me, and most of this nation from the looks of it, to be happy.

Let's ALL join together in hoping MOST of America will be happy in the fall!!!

Lysis said...

I fond something out last night; “UAU is both Spanish and Portuguese for “wow”. Thus with three letters, Strategos trapped three “Animal minds”.

1. The Child comes on with: “Strategos is at the stage where he/she is just about ready to start formulating words -- next comes sentences!!!!”

Proving not only does Strategos knows more about language than “The Child” but knows more languages. Strategos also gives us a glimpse into the guts of “The Child”, eviscerating him, so to speak, and revealing “The Child’s” pettiness and meanness as well as his stupidity.

2. I (Lysis) come on with: “As for Strategos – I think his comment had more to do with my spelling ability than with his speaking ability.”

Thus Strategos forces me to admit my self-consciousness about my spelling, and my ignorance of Romance Languages as well. A double snare!

3. Then “Sulky” come on with: “Anon: I thought your last post was great! Had me laughing for a quite a while. I was trying to figure out the babble of the latest cult follower and you gave perfect insight: he was just trying to master the language.”

Thus Strategos revels that not only is “Sulky” nothing but a Cheerleader for “The Child’s” antics, but that “Sulky” himself is the babbler and that it is Strategos that has mastery of several languages and the real skill as a verbal hunter. “Sulky” is revealed as nothing more that a verbal bully, and an impotent one at that.

I once heard a great Japanese artist state: “Surpassing one’s master pays the debt for what he has given you.” Some master, (Strategos’) is feeling very well compensated today.

As for Sulky, the Child, and me – boy don’t we feel stupid!

Strategos; all I can say is WOW!!!!

Cameron said...

Reach,

Thank you for the link to the Truman-Bush comparison article. It caused me to do some more research and reading. Here are a few interesting issues that President Truman dealt with during his almost 8 years in office:

- Inherited a recession and was blamed for it

- "Caused", "Allowed" the Cold War to divide the world.

- Plagued by corruption charges and scandals brought up by the opposing party members in Congress.

- The opposing party hated him, his own party in Congress distanced themselves from him

- Close call reelection. Instead of a mandate, had to deal with a bickering Congress

- Failed to keep politicians and the public sufficiently informed, especially on world issues.

- 100,000+ civilians killed as a result of his authorizing the use of the atom bomb.

- Entered the Korean War despite USSR (a member of the Security Council) saying no and boycotting the vote.

- A hugely unpopular Korean War that had many setbacks and casualties.

- While fighting the quagmire of Korea, "allowed" China to become communist and allies to USSR, making them perhaps a greater threat than Korea was.

- Some of the worst poll numbers ever.

Cameron said...

President Truman spent almost 8 years as president. He was so unpopular he decided not to run for reelection. His party lost Congress in the midterm elections and then lost the presidency. He was not beloved when he left office.

But history has shed light on the details and difficulties of his time in office. One history I read said, "he confronted some of the most difficult challenges any American president has faced".

He presided over a transition from a war time economy to a peace time one. Initially the country was in a recession, but becuase of policies he enacted, the country had 2 decades of unprecedented growth.

The corruption in his presidency was:
-never linked to him
-mostly as a result of war-time relationships between business and politicians

and tellingly,

- the corruption crossed party lines as multiple Congressmen were implicated. Both parties had corrupt members. But for some reason, only President Truman was blamed.

The Korean War had high casualties, and after pushing into North Korea the US troops were forced back south. It ended in a stalemate and the demilitarized zone. I like how Reach's article compared it to two petri dishes for the world to see, study, and compare. Communism vs Democracy.

Pres. Truman boxed in the Soviets and created US foriegn policy that continues even today. If he had done the same as his predecessors had done after WWI, the world may have faced a WWIII with atomic weapons. Instead, he entered into NATO and spent time and money on countries that may have been tempted by communism after WWII. He basically rebuilt Europe and Asia, and therefore the world. He did away with isolationism and spread America's influence around the globe.

Today, President Truman is seen as one of the greatest presidents our country has ever known.

Cameron said...

Now compare that to Anon's very first post here about headlines the Anon-dom would "like" to see.

- Corruption

- Iraq War

- Poor economy

- Terrorists take over Afghanistan

- Presidency uses nuclear weapon

- Al Queada still has influence around the world

- Low Presidential approval ratings

Lysis said...

Magic Valley Mormon:

Thanks for going to the trouble to dig up the good stuff. Everything looks clearer in the light of history!

Anonymous said...

Actually Stategos stole it from Frankie Lymon's hit 1950's single, "Why do Fools Fall in Love" -- it was the "doowop"
uuuu . . . aaaa . . . uuuu background to the lyrics, "Why do fools fall in love, oh yah!"

I think that Stragegos was uttering BOTH despair and resignation at "Why do Fools fall in love?" and "Why Do I Fall in Love With Fools?"

I am sure his posting was an unconscious autonomic "whimper" brought on by Conservative guilt after having always voted Republican when seared by the "TRUTH" of Anon's headlines!!!!

Lysis said...

Still licking, Anonymous? Odd you don’t chock on your own blood, but then your tong is not the only thing that has gone numb.

Anonymous said...

Still peddaling children's stories Liesis? I have a Spanish-English dictionary right here, actually, I have three. I find no entry for "uau." I will have to chalk it up to another myth you created from thin air to fit your silly notion of reality. And speaking of silly notions of reality, I wonder if Moron noticed that his headlines from his last post have already happened? The were in the papers last week. I don't suppose he did since he was probably busy rummaging through the archives at the GOP headquarters Heritage Foundation trying to find more trumped history to futiley bouy flagging opinions of Bush. That is a constant theme for your cult followers here in the Agora, "reality is really incorrect."

Get ready for more devisivness from our Divider in Chief: At Bush's direction in 2004 the Senate will be debating a same sex marriage ban ammendement to the constitution - while those headlines Moron noted continue to worsen - and at Bush's direction in December and January a full solution to our immigration crisis is about to explode into . . . nothingness. That is about all this President and Congress has to show for the last year and a half, nothing. Unless of course, you're a millionaire or Oil Company. Then they have a few nice tax breaks and subsidies to show off.

I can't believe you continue to drink at this same Republican well that is poisoning America. I'm glad you are packing up your cult and heading for the hills. With some real luck we get the whole GOP to follow!

MindMechanic said...

"Get ready for more devisivness-At Bush's direction in 2004 the Senate will be debating a same sex marriage ban ammendement to the constitution"

I assume you mean 2006. In case you have missed it, there have been constitutional bans on homosexual marriage across the country. It is the will of the poeple, like it or not.

But then...you probably ignored the "Defense of Marriage" act signed by Bill Clinton in 1996.

Clinton said: " I remain opposed to same-sex marriage. I believe marriage is an institution for the union of a man and a woman. This has been my long-standing position, and it is not being reviewed or reconsidered."

So did congress. the measure cleared the senate 87 to 13.

damn devisive democrats...


At Bush's direction in December and January a full solution to our immigration crisis is about to explode into . . . nothingness.

Nothingness. Indeed. The president has pressed congress for a solution but so far the dems have done everything in their power to block any effective legislation. they hate everything. the reality si they are afraid to vote on ANYTHING because they will be held accountable. Typical-paralyzed by fear, democrats do what they do best...lie, shriek, disparage, and then ultimately block.

And why not? Most democrats speak of the virtue of having a slave class...I mean second class citizens...I mean...undocumented workers. Read some of their comments.

Social Security-Dems cheered when reform was blocked but what have they offered in return? nothing but fear and hatred.

You want to talk about devisive? We can talk about this all day. And dont worry...there are TONS of resources to cite on this...should be aLOT of fun...

Start with a failed presidential candidacy that was long on hatred and rhetoric but short on anything that resembled policy.

Speaking of which...did you catch the headlines last week that showed the democrats national plan is to accept that, well...they dont really have a plan...but whats so wrong with that?

Should be a fun election year...

Anonymous said...

Bush's Immigration "plans" have been opposed by just as many or more Conservatives than Democrats. However, "plans" keeps changing -- NOW Bush advocates an expensive bil$ "fence" to keep the illegals out.

Bush really doesn't HAVE a plan, he's just trying to build consensus on ANYTHING, then CALL it HIS plan -- this is government by trial balloon, not leadership.

However, it's PRIMARILY the Conservatives who prefer the 'budget busting' arresting, incarcerating, and deporting of 12 million illegals who will not budge on "their" plan.

Without filibustering, Democrats can't prevent ANY legislation that the president wants over his divisive and not-so-friendly Republican majority!!!!

Should be a fun election year.

a quiet listener said...

you seem to claim that bush is only concerned with immigration and border security in the 'recent' flury over immigration reform. i would disagree. last year in his state of the union address he said the following:

Reforming Immigration to Safeguard the Liberty of America: President Bush called on Congress to work with him to achieve significant immigration reform that protects the homeland by controlling the borders; serves America's economy by matching a willing worker with a willing employer when no American is willing to fill the job; promotes compassion and protects workers from abuse; provides incentives for temporary workers to return to their home countries and families; and rejects amnesty and protects the rights of legal immigrants while not unfairly rewarding those who came here unlawfully or hope to do so.



It's clear that he has had a well defined immigration objective all along.

MindMechanic said...

Once again, youve done what you always do. Try this...instead of presenting what you dont like about Bush's proposals, try explaining what YOU think SHOULD be done.

MindMechanic said...

and again...little civics lesson...

President = executive branch

Congress = legislative

Bush has tried to get congress to engage since 2001. Congress has refused.

The Bush plan calls for worker visas, earned citizenship, border enforcement. Changes? sure...and there will be but remember...it is the job of congress to pass legislation.

I personally favor-
1-Shut down borders. Fence and border patrol. Military if necessary
2-Streamline legal immigration
3-Provide instant verification for SSN validity
4-Penalize employers for violating laws
5-Massive prison penalties for coyotes.

Yours?

Anonymous said...

Elect a new party to Congress.

MindMechanic said...

Greens? Independants? Surely you cant mean the democrats...

See..this is typical of you and why not? It is typical democrats everywhere. Whine, cry, shriek, complain, moan, but dont ask a democrat for anything resembling an actual solution or heaven forbid, a productive input to a debate.

You say Bush is devisive because he is urging congress to DEAL with the gay marriage issue...an issue promoted in numerous states across the country and one that NEEDS resolving...

Yet...

You ignore the fact that the hero of the democrat party...Bill Clinton himself signed the Defense of Marriage act.

The only people in this country with a VESTED INTEREST in dividing the country is democrats and they do it on EVERY issue.

Strategos said...

My post was an excited utterance. I had no idea it would get any reaction at all, but it does a lot about our posties

First of all Anonymous’ quote

“Strategos is at the stage where he/she is just about ready to start formulating words -- next comes sentences!!!!” (fragment sentence.)

What a surprise, an unwarranted, ignorant, and malicious attach from Anonymous; typical. He doesn’t understand someone’s post so he makes a childish attack against the poster.

I was trying to figure out the babble of the latest cult follower and you gave perfect insight: he was just trying to master the language. (This from a poster who resorts 3rd grade tactics of capitalization and endless !!!!!!!!!!! in a vain attempt to add power to his weak and unfocused writing.)


In doing so he exposes himself as simple minded and bitter. He then goes on to wildly speculate and to put words in my mouth; assigning me a position which he can attack.

“I am sure his posting was an unconscious autonomic "whimper" brought on by Conservative guilt after having always voted Republican when seared by the "TRUTH" of Anon's headlines!!!!” (An incredible conclusion, considering I have never commented on my voting record, and make no admission of any kind of guilt, and pay little attention to Anonymous’ borrowed and repetitious headlines.)

Once again anonymous is lost in the argument, and is swinging wildly with his eyes and ears closed. You don’t need a bloody knife the Anonymous attack anything shiny or unfamiliar.

Once again Lyses’ intelligence and open-mindedness shine through. My post was an excited utterance, really nothing more. I did not really expect anyone to research, understand, or support my post. Lysis I appreciate that you did all three.

Despite Anonymous’ limited sources, Uau is a word in both Spanish and Portuguese, meaning wow. Since cross-cultural linguistical Anthropology is my specific field of study I shall give Anonymous a lesson in word formulation and recognition. (We’ll get to sentences later) First off, when you see a word you don’t know sound it out to yourself. Uau is a simple phonetic spelling of the word Wow; a more specific phonetic spelling would be úœm with an unvoiced bilabial fricative at the end. As to the source of the word, it’s a colloquialism. That’s probably why Anonymous couldn’t find it in his dictionary. (You might be able to find colloquialism) I first learned the word while living, working, and studying, in Brazil. It was extremely common in spoken and written Portuguese. It’s the name of a popular furniture franchise. Fernando Pessoa, a famous Portuguese poet of the early nineteenth century used it in his poetry and titled one of his collections “Uau.”

I was surprised while studying Spanish at the University of Utah and at Weber State that Uau is a common Spanish exclamation. (It was often written on my papers by my professors.) Since you probably wont take my word for it. (Deceitful minds are always the least trusting.) You can look it up in the Oxford Corpuses of Spanish or Portuguese linguistics. It’s a much better source than you Barns and Noble English/Spanish tourist editions. I found 342 cases where Uau was used in written or spoken Spanish in the past 20 years and 470 cases in Portuguese. Maybe if you’d get away from your books, liberal newspapers, and computer-screen for a while you could learn something from the real world.

That's enough technicality for one day. The point is if you didn’t understand my post you could have just asked. Some people believe that discussion forums can be places of learning and sharing. Here’s my advice to the various Anonymouses start by learning the basics of word formation, then learn to formulate a sentence, then try to communicate on a meaningful level with someone else. This endless repetition, childish name-calling, and sorry use of VISUAL EFFECTS!!!!!!!!! is getting you nowhere.

Lysis thank you for your kind words I respect you as your apprentice and love you as a friend. I too will be gone for the summer but thank you for your understanding and wise words.

Anonymous said...

. . . and look forward to being firmly in the warm embrace of your buttocks again before the brown stains come completely off my nose, as your apprentice.

Dan Simpson said...

Strategos: That was one of the best and most complete absolute trouncing of another in debate I have ever seen.

And in typical Anonymous fashion, the point is ignored when the loss is obvious, and they move on to personal attacks.

MindMechanic said...

Since we apparently like headlines...

Dems Caught in Scandal Yet Again

Democrat congressman caught taking $400,000.00 in bribes and demanding company ownership for his five children. Caught on tape and money found hidden in food containers in his freezer. Vows to seek re-election. Democrats line up to support him claiming the FBI had no right investigating him.

Keep in mind...this guy is a piker compared to rep Duke of California. the difference? Duke is out of office and apologizes, this guy is mad he was investigated and vows to seek re-election.

here's the funny part...I bet he wins.

The difference between dems and reps...(and keep in mind my position that there really isnt all that much difference between them...) is when a rep gets nailed the party expects him to leave for the good of the party. When a dem gets nailed, they excuse it, justify it, defend it.

Bob Packwood is an alcoholic that got drunk and squeezed a secretary's tush. Gone...asked to leave by the rep party.

Contrast

Bill Clinton makes a carreer of raping women, mashing women, cheating on his wife, and it is a vast right wing conspiracy and just sex and nobody's business.

Ted Kennedy gets drunk and kills a woman, gets drunk and squeezes several secretaries, cheats on his wife...well...it's ok...he is after all a Kennedy...

(not unlike his nephew who recently got in TWO drug or alcohol or both induced accidents)

Jack Abramoff gets caught as a lobbyist giving cash and gifts to congressmen (THERES a shocker...) Dems try to make this a republican scandal but lo and behold...dems are so dirty they cant even use it against the reps. Then...in a move that would make Clinton proud...the head of the dem party, Howard Dean says "no democrat ever took a dime from Jack Abramoff."

Well...no....truer words were never spoken. Not a dime...but literally MILLIONS of dollars. 97% of democrats in congress took money. But none of them took a single dime.

harry reid speaks out against corruption. Suddenly we find he recieves $87,000.00 from tribes, and then he is sending out three letters requesting approval of Indian casinos. Within days. But the two were totally unrelated. Riiiiiiight...

Chutzpa

Anonymous said...

Irrelevant:
Thought you might like to know what your brain-dead heros in the Republican right have to say about the investigation of Rep. Jefferson. From the Washington Post:

"Republican leaders, who previously sought to focus attention on the Jefferson case as a counterpoint to their party's own ethical scandals, said they are disturbed by the raid. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said that he is "very concerned" about the incident and that Senate and House counsels will review it.

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) expressed alarm at the raid. "The actions of the Justice Department in seeking and executing this warrant raise important Constitutional issues that go well beyond the specifics of this case," he said in a lengthy statement released last night.

"Insofar as I am aware, since the founding of our Republic 219 years ago, the Justice Department has never found it necessary to do what it did Saturday night, crossing this Separation of Powers line, in order to successfully prosecute corruption by Members of Congress," he said. "Nothing I have learned in the last 48 hours leads me to believe that there was any necessity to change the precedent established over those 219 years."

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a statement that "members of Congress must obey the law and cooperate fully with any criminal investigation" but that "Justice Department investigations must be conducted in accordance with Constitutional protections and historical precedent."

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), in an e-mail to colleagues with the subject line "on the edge of a constitutional confrontation," called the Saturday night raid "the most blatant violation of the Constitutional Separation of Powers in my lifetime." He urged President Bush to discipline or fire "whoever exhibited this extraordinary violation."

Relations between the two Democrats have been rocky. Pelosi refused to appoint Jefferson to the chairmanship of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee after the 2002 election, and early this month she called for an investigation of his case by the House ethics committee. Last week, the committee announced it would investigate Jefferson and Rep. Robert W. Ney (R-Ohio), who is also the subject of a federal corruption probe.

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, asked about the raid during an unrelated news conference in Washington, declined to discuss the case in detail but said "the executive branch intends to work with the Congress to allay" any concerns.

"I will admit that these were unusual steps that were taken," he said."


Here is a tip for you. Put **** at the top of your posts next time you think you have anything to say even remotely accurate. Don't abuse it. I would hate for you to become another casualty of the Moron list at the Agora.


Slowtego:
So let's get this straight: UAU is not an actual word but a slang term AND it isn't spelled correctly as a slang term but phonetically AND in the "Oxford Corpus of Spanish Linguistics-?-" (Corpus being an entire body of works in a subect) you only found this "word" used 342 times in the last 20 years AND you acknowledge that is not in most available dictionaries. Well, that definitely sounds like the solid basis for an argument. At least, it as solid as Anon's tauntings but not nearly as funny, definitely not as clever.

Anon:
Scalding and funny as always. What better plan for the future could you have then to vote these current bums out of office? Duh. (Note: the last three letters are in fact an English phonetic exclamation meant to comment on the perception as being so obvious that missing it would be foolish. I found it in all three of dictionaries.)

Cult of Liesis Agora Attendees Not Afraid to Give Up Personal Privacy To The Federal Government Just Money:

Here is one way the Republicans are planning to make up for their record-breaking spending and corrupt management of the debt - from the backs of babes.

Despite Pledge, Taxes Increase for Teenagers (NY Times)
"The $69 billion tax cut bill that President Bush signed this week tripled tax rates for teenagers with college savings funds, despite Mr. Bush's 1999 pledge to veto any tax increase.

Under the new law, teenagers age 14 to 17 with investment income will now be taxed at the same rate as their parents, not at their own rates. Long-term capital gains and dividends that had been taxed at 5 percent will now be taxed at 15 percent. Interest that had been taxed at 10 percent will now be taxed at as much as 35 percent.

The increases, which are retroactive to the first day of the year, are expected to generate nearly $2.2 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, which issues the official estimates.

Over all, the tax bill that Mr. Bush signed Wednesday reduces taxes by $69 billion.

Mr. Bush pledged in 1999 to veto any bill that raised taxes. In response to a question about the tax increase on teenagers in the new legislation, the White House issued a statement Friday that made no reference to the tax increase, but recounted the tax cuts the administration has sponsored and stated that President Bush had "reduced taxes on all people who pay income taxes."

Challenged on that point, the White House modified its statement 21 minutes later to say that Mr. Bush had "reduced taxes on virtually all people who pay income taxes."

The deputy White House press secretary, Kenneth A. Lisaius, declined to discuss the reasons Mr. Bush broke his pledge or anything else beyond the modified statement, which emphasized the $880 billion in tax reductions from tax laws Mr. Bush signed in 2001 and 2003.

Americans for Tax Reform, an influential lobbying group that seeks to reduce taxes, had led the drive to press politicians to pledge no new taxes. The pledge has been signed by 256 members of the House and the Senate, nearly all of them Republicans, and by thousands of candidates for state and local office.

The pledge commits signers to "oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal tax rates for individuals and businesses." Mr. Bush went beyond the pledge when he was seeking the Republican nomination for president.

"If elected president, I will oppose and veto any increase in individual or corporate marginal income tax rates or individual or corporate income tax hikes," he wrote in June 1999 to Grover Norquist, president of the Americans for Tax Reform.

Mr. Norquist, in an interview Thursday, said he was unaware that the bill raised taxes and tax rates on teenagers with college savings funds because "no one here noticed" the provisions. But Mr. Norquist called the bill raising taxes on teenagers with investment income "a technical violation of the pledge" and noted that his group opposes all retroactive tax increases. He pledged to immediately begin a campaign to have the tax increases rescinded."

. . . Norquist went on to say, "We'll start campaigning for that as soon as none of multimillionaire friends are unsaddled from these oppressive taxes that keep summer vacation home ownings to a pitiful four lots - some only having half-baths in the bedrooms!"

Well, a tax increase!! Now they have finally done something to make you piping-hot and mad! I trust I can finally count on you turning away from the Republicans this November.

MindMechanic said...

Anon...are you blind or just plain stupid? Did you not get my own critique of the reps AS WELL AS the dems? Have you not yet learned that I think the BEST course of action would be to re-elect an entirely new batch of scoundrels, from top to bottom?

Even in my little dig against the dems (which I made since the anon collective seems unable to recognize ANYTHING that is negative from the liberal perspective) I pointed out that 1-corruption is universal and 2-the 400k and change jefferson pocketed is chump change compared to Duke, a republican.

So again...are you blind, stupid, or do you just refuse to get it?

I laughed myself silly when I saw ALL of the comments from ALL of the demos AND reps. Expressing indignation...why the NERVE of the FBI to actually investigate a legislator...a legislator that just happens to be caught on film taking bribes. A legislator accused of accepting 400k, hiding 90k in his freezer with the fish and the ice cream, a legislator that has a consisten pattern of lobbying for companies that treat him well, and a legislator that insisted on 30% ownership of Nigerian business to ensure favorable US spending contracts.

OBTW...a liberal democrat from Lousiana. and what about YOU???
Are you, the anon collective willing to condemn and decry or will you do what you normally do, ignore and justify?

I will say this again...just in case you missed it. I believe we ALL deserve better representation. I think if you think the dems are less guilty or culpable than the reps on ANY of these issues you are equally blind and part of the problem not the solution.

And while you are riding high on your brokeback horse...you and ALL of the anon still have yet to offer ANYTHING that might remotely be considered constructive. So you are at least consistent and you have that going for you...

MindMechanic said...

"Under the new law, teenagers age 14 to 17 with investment income will now be taxed at the same rate as their parents, not at their own rates. Long-term capital gains and dividends that had been taxed at 5 percent will now be taxed at 15 percent. Interest that had been taxed at 10 percent will now be taxed at as much as 35 percent."

OK...now...in case it has been missed...I think they ought to gut the fed, reduce fed taxes to about 5% and allow the states to tax and spend as needed with citizen oversight, so I OBVIOUSLY am not a fan of ANY tax increases...

However...

This is it? This is what you look to as a point against Bush? After it all shakes out, the demographics of the only groups apparently affected with a tax INCREASE is 14-17 y/o's with investment income??? Capital gains taxes are increased??? Explain to me again just why it is that a LIBERAL thinks that is a BAD THING?

Liberals HATE capital gains tax cuts and believe they should be much higher. And its just theory, but 1-there arent going to be THAT MANY 14-17 year olds with INVESTMENT INCOME, 2-MOST of those 14-17 y/o's WITH investment income are MOST LIKELY from rich families and 3-Interest that had been taxed at 10 percent will now be taxed at as much as 35 percent-doesnt that equate in the liberal mind to the rich paying MORE in taxes?

and BTW...a little perspective. the tax 'increases' you cite in your hatred against bush amounts to 2.2 billion dollars over the next 10 years (your figure...not mine). That equals out to .046 cents PER US citizen (all 400 million-and .0046 cents if you calculate the annual cost) spread out over a 10 year period IF every US citizen was tasked to pay for it. But its NOT going to be every US citizen...it will be those that liberals hate and despise...the wealthy.

Again...doesnt that make you HAPPY?

Lysis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lysis said...

Strategos;

Dannyboy and I agree - well said. And once again the Anonomy fall right into the trap. I just don’t think they can help it. Thanks for the facts on UAU.

Brainmechanic:

Interesting news on the crooked congressman, you’re “right on” as far as the Anonymous’ response. Notice; you warned them of the “trap” but they leaped in anyway. I have yet to read any conservative giving a free pass to any criminal. But here come the Anonomy eager to make a victim out of Congressman Jefferson and a monster out of the “lawmen” that caught him. Your Clinton example is most instructive.

Flaccid;

You’re too much! First you defend Jefferson – who has blown the whole neo-lib battle cry of “culture of corruption” out of the water for you.

Next you try to attack Strategos – someone whose intellect is so demonstrably superior to your own that we are beginning to feel sorry for you suffering – and end up producing such a limp and incomprehensible response that you only prove his point. Take his advice Flaccid and learn how to use some words anyway!

Then you try and prop up “The Child”; eager to give any life to his crude and pointless remarks; you don’t even notice that all your tugging on him reveals is that he is already dead in the snow.

Finally, you leap into a trap crafted by your own party masters. They have found a way to call requiring kids who are being supported by their parents, and sharing in the benefits of their parent’s income, to paying a fair share on their taxes. Is this really the only tax increase your herd could come up with? After screaming “no tax cuts for the rich” we find you licking away at the bloody knife. Condemning tax increases on the rich and defending bribe demanding congressmen. This is really the best you guys have to offer isn’t it!

Thanks for your contributions; they will fuel more fun tales around the campfire for the human minds in the Agora.

Anonymous said...

Strat (with the "poor hurt fowl") ego!

The most fun that Uau can have without laughing?

An "unvoiced bilabial fricative" hugh?

Like, when I put my thumb to my nose, purse my lips together and blow with deep and passionate "fricativity", as in the five finger salute?!?!

OR

A much stronger and noxious form of disapproval that can REALLY clear a room when done from the 'nether' regions, thumb optional!!!!

OR

An esoteric explanation to mystify and confuse the angry guy in front of you when you sneeze on his neck?

Q
What is the sound of one hand clapping?

A
The same as one lip fricating!!!!

I give up Strat(fragile)ego boy. . .Uau just don't get it!!!!

Lysis said...

Anonymous:

Still snarling in the trap, or is this the sound or your teeth cracking against the steal jaws that hold you so well? Flop and struggle all you can, there is no escape; perhaps you should go back to cutting and pasting chunks form the Democrat talking points. Poor Congressman Jefferson! Where is Jessie Jackson when you guys need him?

MindMechanic said...

I cant believe I am even doing this...

It took exactly 30 seconds to do a quick google search on 'uau'

Defined as
uau guau Like wow

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dict_en_es/front/pronounciation

wow

Anonymous said...

It is difficult to phonetically represent ANY sound of human utterance without a 'phoneme' being potentially representative of SOME word in MANY, MOST, ALL languages. (Even if you were to give the letters uau phoneme status)

Without Strat providing a context or attempted explanation of relevance -- just the posting uau -- idt is absurdly comical NONSENSE, even IF STRAT intended uau to be "wow".

Wow that's sure dumb!!!!
or
Wow I'm sure intelligent!!!!
or
Wow, I sure hate anonymous!!!!
or
Wow, is such a wow word to wow everyone with, I think I will now speak Spanish phonetically, uau!!!!
or
Wow,'bilabial fricative' sounds like something to do with your hot girlfriend on a date!!!!

I've always wondered what "cross-cultured linguists" did with their time.

MindMechanic said...

The interesting thing is that ALL that was posted was 'uau' and without ANY understanding, provocation, or context, anon simply chose to attack.

And we have what we have now.

Cameron said...

****

I have been out of town with no time for computer leisure the last few days and so have missed some of the fun. How interesting it is to read the posts all at once. It's rather weird how much fuss is being made over one foreign language word. The blood popsicle analogy works so well here. Maybe we could all have a discussion on what the definition of "is" is.

There are a few things I'd like to comment on:

Anon:

Here is what you wrote to (about) me after my post on President Truman:

"And speaking of silly notions of reality, I wonder if Moron noticed that his headlines from his last post have already happened? The were in the papers last week. I don't suppose he did since he was probably busy rummaging through the archives at the GOP headquarters Heritage Foundation trying to find more trumped history to futiley bouy flagging opinions of Bush. That is a constant theme for your cult followers here in the Agora, "reality is really incorrect."

Please prove my information incorrect. Sadly, I didn't get my "silly notions" by reading anything about President Truman from the Heritage Foundation. I gleaned info from various books and websites. If you have conflicting information, please share it.

You have shared real info twice the last little while and it proved to be quite useful for me.

You brought up PAYGO and so I researched it and found it to be a victim of partisan politics. Perhaps a good idea, but brought up just when Democrats wanted to "repeal tax cuts" (for the easily manipulated those are code words for Raise Taxes. And not just taxes of rich kids.) Some of my research did lead me to the Heritage Foundation website. They are a conservative group and so do not support a "repeal of tax cuts". But, now listen closely, they then offered ideas and suggestions to tweak PAYGO so that it could be used to curb spending. Wow! UAU! They disagreed, said why, and then gave an alternative. What a novel concept.

Another time you brought up information (sort of. I think Brainmechanic might have brought it up first.) was concerning the Kyoto Protocol. That caused me to do some more research. You blasted the US and specifically Republicans and more specifically President Bush for not signing the Protocol. I realize that "The Day After Tomorrow" showed us how we will all immigrate to Mexico because we refused to sign it, but... My research showed that the Kyoto Protocol would have forced the US to give money to developing countries and these countries could spend it any way they wished. Then, the agreement would have allowed these countries to NOT change the course of their own environmental emmissions. China and India are huge oil consumers and therefore environmental trouble makers. Kyoto does nothing to stop them. The US would just have to give them gobs of money and then hope they changed on their own. Great idea. The Protocol was given the boot 95-0 by Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.

I owe you gratitude for helping me to see the light on these two issues. However, when I posted my findings on these two topics, you didn't really have much to say. UAU.

Now, back to President Truman:

I hadn't intended to compare the info to Anon's "headlines" post. I just happened to look at the post while I typed a comment and they struck me as being strikingly similar. The point of showcasing the similarity, and I suppose the point of talking about President Truman at all, is that polls and headlines and public opinion don't really matter much a few years down the road. Pres. Truman was not liked. He could have run again but chose not to because he figured he'd lose. Uau. He actually chose not to run. I think that says alot about his poll numbers and the public opinion of him. However, despite crummy polls and public opinion, he has risen in the public eye to the stature of one of our best presidents ever. I guess the "public" was wrong. Sadly, the "public" missed out on another 4 years of one of our greatest presidents. So please, pretty please, stop using polls to make points. It's stupid.

Cameron said...

The Tax Increase:

I have to admit that I've been in conferences the last few days and so have not heard anything about the so-called tax increase for teenagers.

My first reaction was, who the heck has capital gains at 16?

This sounds like a big fat tax loophole to me. It screams of parents putting accounts in their kids' name so they won't get taxed on it.

So it's a tax loophole for the rich, and it's being fixed. I totally see why the Dems hate it.

I hope that when/if they get Congress the "bi-partisan", "work together in harmony" Democrats impeach the scoundrel President Bush for daring to close tax loopholes for the rich.

Cameron said...

****

Immigration:

Brainmechanic,

I'm not sure about building a wall. It seems kinda childish to me. Not to mention a really bad world PR move. Do we really want a US version of the Berlin Wall? More importantly, I don't think it'd work. Authorities are already finding huge tunnels underneath the border as it is. These tunnels run for miles and some even have electric lighting. A wall won't stop those. In fact, it will only increase them.

I don't like amnesty either. However, I understand the virtual impossibility of rounding up every illegal immigrant and sending them home. If history teaches us anything, they'd just be back in a week anyway.

I found some info a while back on SS verification. Here are two websites that verify info. One is for employers and the other is for law enforcement. They are free to use and are run by the gov't.

http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/services/SAVE.htm

http://www.ice.gov/partners/lesc/index.htm

Finally, I think there should be a "illegal to citizen" program to help those that came here illegally to become full fledged citizens. It should help to "assimilate" them as Reach Upward has written about in the past. It should be rigorous but doable. There should be a time limit imposed during which all current illegal immigrants must start the program. After the cut off date has been reached, every illegal immigrant should be prosecuted. I think that using the two websites above will aid greatly in finding those that chose not to pursue citizenship.

Cameron said...

****

Immigration

Here are a couple of articles from a while back that I copied and saved:

By Robyn Blumner
Tribune Media Services
Salt Lake Tribune

What to do about the nation's 11 million illegal immigrants has members of both parties twisting themselves in knots.
Democrats want to appease Hispanics, while not selling out their base of low-skilled workers who compete with illegal aliens for jobs. Republicans want to appear conducive to a law-and-order approach while not disrupting the cheap and exploitable workforce on which their business constituency relies.
This tug and tussle of competing interests has our hand-wringing Congress frozen in indecision. It's stuck between a House-passed immigration reform measure that would have us erecting a massive fence along our border with Mexico and making felons of illegal aliens, and a Senate approach of eventual amnesty with a guest-worker program.
Beyond some promising employer verification requirements in the House bill, I'm not partial to the primary elements of either package. An American-style Berlin Wall would be a giant gash on our land, offending our spirit of welcome toward legal immigrants. Offering an amnesty program, no matter how many hoops are attached, would only encourage others to subvert our laws in hopes of a similar capitulation in another 20 years.
Remember the amnesty of 1986? It was touted as a "one time only" pass, with border and work-site enforcement to follow. It didn't happen.
There is only one way to keep poorly paid people from Latin America and Asia from smuggling themselves into the United States: Deny them a job. We don't have to deport 11 million illegal aliens, which, as the president suggested, would be impossible. If the work dries up, they will leave of their own accord. Employers are the key and everyone knows it.
It is on the jobs front that the hypocrisy of our leaders becomes so maddeningly apparent. From 1997 to 2005, we added 4,300 agents to patrol our borders, increasing the force to 11,100 and making it appear as though the government was getting serious about a crackdown, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. But at the same time, the number of federal immigration agents who investigated work-site compli- ance actually went down, from 240 in 1999 to 65 in 2004, according to the Government Accountability Office.
The same study found that the number of notices of intent to fine employers who had hired illegal aliens dropped to three in 2004. At least 7 million illegal immigrants are estimated to be working, but our immigration service could only find three employers hiring them.
Last month, Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff made a big show of arresting 1,100 illegal immigrants and seven managers at a large pallet supply company based in Houston. The managers had allegedly paid an undercover agent for fraudulent documents for the illegal workers and engaged in other immigration no-nos. Prosecuting them is a good step. Now multiply that a thousand-fold and we'll start making progress.
But when government fails to do its duty, enterprising people take it upon themselves. The Minutemen Project was formed to observe illegal migrants crossing the Arizona-Mexican border and alert border agents. There is nothing wrong with what these people are doing; they are filling a vacuum.
Attorney Howard Foster, a Chicago corporate attorney, is another innovator. He has filed a handful of suits on behalf of citizen-employees who claim their wages have been depressed by their company hiring illegal aliens, and he's using our organized crime statutes to do it.
In 1996, Congress added the hiring of illegal migrants as a predicate crime that could trigger the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, RICO, and the possibility of treble damages. In a suit heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, Foster charges that the RICO laws can be applied to otherwise legitimate companies that conspire with contractors to hire undocumented workers.
Mohawk Industries Inc. vs. Williams is a case that should bring sweat beads to the upper lips of any employer who uses intermediaries to find illegal workers. Foster's suit against the Georgia-based carpet giant, Mohawk Industries Inc., which employs 30,000 workers, alleges that a significant number of the company's workers have faulty Social Security numbers and the company helped labor recruiters with ''a supply of Social Security cards for use when a prospective or existing employees need(ed) to assume a new identity.''
If true, and the company denies it is, it sure sounds like an organized criminal enterprise.
Supporters of guest-worker programs and amnesty point to our low unemployment statistics and say we need those workers. I don't buy it. Official unemployment figures are misleading by orders of magnitude, as they don't include people who have given up looking. Offer a living wage and provide decent benefits and you'll have a workforce.
But if more workers are needed, then we should address the shortfall by opening up our legal immigration process far wider for those who have properly waited their turn.

Cameron said...

****

Illegal immigrants are paying a lot more taxes than you think

By Shikha Dalmia

Salt Lake Tribune

Denying public services to people who pay their taxes is an affront to America's bedrock belief in fairness. But many "pull-up-the-drawbridge" politicians want to do just that when it comes to illegal immigrants.
The fact that illegal immigrants pay taxes at all will come as news to many Americans. A stunning two-thirds of illegal immigrants pay Medicare, Social Security and personal income taxes. Yet, nativists like Congressman Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., have popularized the notion that illegal aliens are a colossal drain on the nation's hospitals, schools and welfare programs - consuming services that they don't pay for.
In reality, the 1996 welfare reform bill disqualified illegal immigrants from nearly all means-tested government programs including food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid and Medicare-funded hospitalization. The only services that illegals can still get are emergency medical care and K-12 education.
Nevertheless, Tancredo and his ilk pushed a bill through the House criminalizing all aid to illegal aliens - even private acts of charity by priests, nurses and social workers. Potentially, any soup kitchen that offers so much as a free lunch to an illegal could face up to five years in prison and seizure of assets.
The Senate bill that recently collapsed would have tempered these draconian measures against private aid. But no one - Democrat or Republican - seems to oppose the idea of withholding public services. Earlier this year, Congress passed a law that requires everyone who gets Medicaid - the government-funded health care program for the poor - to offer proof of U.S. citizenship so we can avoid "theft of these benefits by illegal aliens," as Rep. Charlie Norwood, R-Ga., puts it.
But, immigrants aren't flocking to the United States to mooch off the government. According to a study by the Urban Institute, the 1996 welfare reform effort dramatically reduced the use of welfare by undocumented immigrant households, exactly as intended. And another vital thing happened in 1996: the Internal Revenue Service began issuing identification numbers to enable illegal immigrants who don't have Social Security numbers to file taxes.
One might have imagined that those fearing deportation or confronting the prospect of paying for their safety net through their own meager wages would take a pass on the IRS' scheme. Not so. Close to 8 million of the 12 million or so illegal aliens in the country today file personal income taxes using these numbers, contributing billions to federal coffers. No doubt they hope that this will one day help them acquire legal status - a plaintive _expression of their desire to play by the rules and come out of the shadows.
What's more, aliens who are not self-employed have Social Security and Medicare taxes automatically withheld from their paychecks. Since undocumented workers have only fake numbers, they'll never be able to collect the benefits these taxes are meant to pay for. Last year, the revenues from these fake numbers - that the Social Security administration stashes in the "earnings suspense file" - added up to 10 percent of the Social Security surplus. The file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year.
Beyond federal taxes, all illegals automatically pay state sales taxes that contribute toward the upkeep of public facilities such as roads that they use, and property taxes through their rent that contribute toward the schooling of their children. The non-partisan National Research Council found that when the taxes paid by the children of low-skilled immigrant families - most of whom are illegal - are factored in, they contribute on average $80,000 more to federal coffers than they consume.
Yes, many illegal migrants impose a strain on border communities on whose doorstep they first arrive, broke and unemployed. To solve this problem equitably, these communities ought to receive the surplus taxes that federal government collects from immigrants. But the real reason border communities are strained is the lack of a guest worker program. Such a program would match willing workers with willing employers in advance so that they wouldn't be stuck for long periods where they disembark while searching for jobs.
The cost of undocumented aliens is an issue that immigrant bashers have created to whip up indignation against people they don't want here in the first place. With the Senate having just returned from yet another vacation and promising to revisit the stalled immigration bill, politicians ought to set the record straight: Illegals are not milking the government. If anything, it is the other way around.

Shikha Dalmia is a senior analyst at Reason Foundation, a free-market think tank. She can be reached at Shikha.Dalmia@Reason.org.

Dan Simpson said...

I just want to throw one thing in about Amnesty, as it has been tossed around a lot in the upper eschelons of political infighting, as well as that beacon of reason Sean Hannity.

When a bill proposes that illegals enter the system and pay a fine, this is by definition not amnesty. They are being held accountable for their misdeeds through the courts system by paying the fine. Having worked in misdemeanor prosecution I can tell you from personal experience that the vast majority of law breakers never spend a day in jail. Almost all misdemeanors are resolved through fines.

DUI, domestic violence, theft, assault, etc. I have seen offenders on all of these charges be given a fine of between 200 and 350 $ and that is the extent of the punishment.

When looking at a proposal that would require a fine of 1000$ one must see that it does hold immigrants accountable and gives them a chance to make themselves right with the law. After that, we just need a system that will allow them to become citizens.

MindMechanic said...

Immigration

Re walls and the like...

I agree that if walls are looked at as the solution they will not work. Walls are a component to the solution.

The Berlin Wall is not a good comparison. The communists built the wall the keep East Germans from escaping. For a better comparison, examine the wall/fence built surrounding Israel. Since the wall was built, terrorist attacks by Palestinians in Israel has dropped to virtually nil. Prior to, it was happening 3-5 times a month.

A three stage wall with monitoring is a start. Adequate border patrol is another component. Effective prosecution of violators is a third. Enforcement of labor laws with an emphasis on high penalties for employers is a fourth.

The fifth is something that doesnt get talked about. Mexico is a socialist government. Their taxes are outrageous, their government, police, and to a large extent their military are corrupted by drug money. People cant find jobs. They dont come to America because they LIKE to risk everything and leave their families...they come because many feel like it is their only choice.

I am all for legal immigration. I also think the smartest move in this equation is to work with strong Mexican leaders and inspire capitalism based industry in Mexico.

Several years back I was in an online Senate and one of my proposals was to putn in place a 10 year plan with the US government and independent investors. Go to Mexico and invest in their country and economy. Instead of just providing the Mexican government jobs, provide industry, factories, no interest small business loans, etc. Wages should be comparable to US wages. Offer scholarships to students.

The premise was that for 10 years we would operate at a loss. After 10 years, the likelihood is that we would begin to see a return on our investment. Supply side economics works. More employed workers equals more consumer need. More consumer need equals more demand. Greater demand equals MORE jobs, more industry. It's a cycle that works...rinse, lather, repeat.

Of course that would be hugely expensive, but any more so than 10 years of battling illegal immigration? If you could set this in place and in 10 years, Mexico's citizens had no desire to leave and most importantly no NEED to leave, to me, thats a win win. On top of that premise, the US would have a new trading partner...again...win/win.

Right now conservative estimes have anywhere from 13 to 20 million illegals in America. Aside from the local services offered the estimates are that illegals send approx 20-40 billion a year out of the country. Thats a pretty significant economic impact. It affects the supply side economic model dramatically. (and all due respect to the newspaper articles posted, its a pretty well known fact that illegal immigration has contributed to Californias 40 Billion dollar debt and to California nearly becomeing the first state to have to declare bankruptcy)

Anyway...

There are LOTS of components and possible answers. I think it is unreasonable to round up illegals and arrest them. I think there are better answers.

I sincerely hope that congress (BOTH parties) engage to find real solutions.

Lysis said...

Dannyboy:

Just one thing on the “amnesty” issue; The last time I checked, criminals, even ones guilty of only misdemeanors, didn’t get to keep the fruit of their criminal activity after they paid a fine. Paying your DUI fine does not entitle you to drive drunk. Paying your domestic violence “fine” does not buy one the right to beat your wife or husband, paying a fine does not allow a thief to keep the things he stole nor can someone who committs assault to pay 200 to 350 $ for a free pass to attack his neighbors. I agree that illegal immigrants should have to pay fines, and then pay their own way back to Mexico.

Here is a question for the lawyer in you – how many times can a malefactor commit the same misdemeanor before it becomes a felony?

Brainmechanic:

You meet Magic Valley Mormon’s challenge on “Berlin Wall very appropriately. The communists were building walls to keep their unhappy and enslaved people prisoners. The walls built by America would be to keep people out.

Over all, I am for a generous immigration program – one that allows for earned citizenship and opportunities for people to work in the US as guest workers. Oh my – that sounds like George Bush’s plan. I guess he got it right again.

The ultimate solution for the challenges of Immigration will be for Mexico to fix its own problems so its people will want to stay in their own country. There should be plenty of protests over immigration – and they should all be in Mexico City!

Anonymous said...

Liesis,

Your analogy is as bogus as your professed open mindedness. Just being in the U.S. as a non-citizen is not illegal. It is the act of crossing the border unlawfully that is criminal. Any immigrant in the U.S. without governmental approval who is forced to pay a fine and get in line towards citizenship will have made restitution for their unlawful border crossing. It will still remain illegal, under any plan being discussed, to cross the border without governmental approval, which everyone must get, regardless of citizenship, every time they cross the border. Any continuing violation of the law that you are dreaming up is just like your aspirations to higher reasoning through the muses, an illusion.

Next, examine the resounding success of guest worker programs around the world? (Read with heavy sarcasm.) Our country has fought a long battle with treating some people as second-class citizens. The history still burdens us today. We should not be so quick to jump back into those dark waters. The rest of the world is lamenting the social ills created by their guest worker policies. We cannot afford to be ignorant of those troubles when immigration is so much more important to the U.S. than any other country.

There are a lot of things this country can do to stop the so-called immigration crisis before you start pointing your finger abroad. (So-called because there is no more greater percentage of U.S. population born outside of the country today that any other times of influx in our past, about 12%.) Presidential administrations have averaged about 200 citations to companies using illegal immigrants for years. In 2004, an election year, Bush's administration issued 3. The previous year he issued only 100. Republican cowardice, or favoritism, to the very wealthy business owners who have created heavy demand for undocumented workers is unforgivable. Also, every year the labor department sends letters to companies warning them that an unussually high percentage of their work force has dud social security numbers. Having a responsible political party that will prosecute these companies instead of giving them a warning to tone it down will do a lot combat demand for illegal immigration.

Driving down that demand is the best deterrent to illegal crossings. Turning off the demagogues who only seek to curry favor with their base by endorsing unworkable plans is only reasonable.

Lysis said...

Flaccid:

What would Sherlock Holmes say? The game’s a foot!

In your eagerness to disagree with me you are, once more in the trap, you are not telling the truth. It is not just crossing the boarder that is illegal; it is being in American without following the proper process. As for workable guest worker programs – many legal immigrants to the US hold “Green Cards” which makes it legal for them to work. Your unfounded attack on an, as yet, unspecified guest worker program is silly. Once more you complain without suggesting anything, you simply fineness your frustration into an attack on the Bush administration.

The way you describe it, all one would has to do to get into America is pay an entry fee (fine) at the boarder and walk right in. If your lie were true, it would put a lot of “Coyotes” out of business.

You make is so easy; it’s like putting the trap in the middle of a rat run. Can’t you see we have and “illegal” guest worker program right now? Why are you opposed to fixing it?

You claim there are a lot of things that can be done to “stop the so-called immigration crisis.” Your only suggestion is fining employers that employ illegal workers. Why not provide a way to make immigrant workers documented and legal and thus make the necessary work they do both legal and manageable?

You say that punishing employers would “drive down the demand”; the truth is that removing the jobs for “starving masses” of Mexicans will only “starve” Mexicans. The problem is not that there are jobs and pay in America, but that there are neither in Mexico. A nation with immense oil reserves and other resources has been reduced to the Patron system, by a corrupt government, the endless lies of Socialists, the ever growing power of criminals, and the ignorance of those who would blame Mexico’s problems on the only nation that is providing them any relief, the US.

Once again your flailing about in the trap only splatters us with the awful of your own blood. In this case the “games” an ass!

Dan Simpson said...

Lysis, your analogy really doesn't work in this case.

Under a proposed plan that brings people out of the darkness into a system by which they could become citizens and demands they pay a fine ends the illegal activity. So, when the fine is paid, the individual is made right with the law.

There is another important component to this argument. These laws are unjust. They are malum prohibitim, not malum per se. They are wrong only because some morons decided to make it next to impossible to either enter our country legally, or become a citizen. The acts in and of themselves are not wrong.

If these unjust laws are changed, then the illegal acts will not be a continuing problem, and the paying of the fine (along with other proposed steps), will bring the person back in line with the law, exactly as I explained.

My point was that fines are considered adequate punishment for almost all offenses in this country, to dispell the myth that 'illegals' would get away scott free if a bill that could provide for their road to citizenship were passed.

To answer your question, "how many times can a malefactor commit the same misdemeanor before it becomes a felony?"

That depends on the crime. A DUI is supposed to be 3, though it isn't always charged correctly. Some misdemeanors can be committed an infinite number of times and will never rise to the felony level.

"I agree that illegal immigrants should have to pay fines, and then pay their own way back to Mexico."

I could not possible disagree more. The whole idea that having all of the 'illegals' go home to then be processed legally into the states is one of the most asinine ideas to ever issue forth from Sean Hannity and his ilk (and that is saying a lot).

It is unworkable, unfeasible, completely directed at hurting people who own homes, hold jobs, have children in school, etc.

Anyone who truly wants all immigrants to go home and 'do it the legal way', really just hopes they leave and get stuck in the morass that is the 'legal way' so they can't come back.

MindMechanic said...

Anon

If I read your post correctly you actually stated a position...increase prosecution of employers who violate illegal immigration laws.

I agree...thats a good step. That is in the current proposals as well. Dry up the source of jobs and you take away the incentive.

It may interest you to know that Bill Clinton actually agrees with Bush on his immigration proposals.

Illegal immigration under Clinton went from bad to really bad. Thats OK...it has done the same since the 60's and under every presidential administration. When it reached critical mass in the 80's they just legalized everyone and poof...the problem "went away". Riiiiight.

Lessons learned? This is a job for congress. Congres must act and they must act with legislation that is real, valid and viable. They cant continue to play to their constituencies.

Where I disagree with you is in your assumption that dems are a 'responsible' party and will deal with the problem. Dems wont even engage in the debate. Dems wont speak out strongly against illegal immigration or in favor of SOME type of immigration reform. Dems desperately want the hispanic vote and they dont dare take a stand.

Thats not an opinion...it's fact. Look at all the rallies...how many dems stood up to praise illegal immigrants? Now...how many stood up AGAINST it.

Even if your numbers are correct (can you post a link BTW...I would love to read more about the actual figures regarding charges filed against companies hiring illegal immigrants) and more were prosecuted in the past, the fact remains that under Clinton the number of illegal immigrants went from low estimates of 1.3 million in 93, to 3.2 in 95, and 8 million in 2000. The number grew from 200,000 per year in 1995 to 500,000 per year in 2000
(keep in mind...these are conservative estimates based on census stats-see sites below).

The point...dont kid yourself into thinking dems have done or will do a better job. Their history is working against them.

I DISAGREE with the talk about arresting illegals and any church groups that might help them. HOWEVER...what that DOES represent is a step in passing EFFECTIVE policy to stop or at least curb illegal immigration. It is at LEAST a serious measure. Maybe it makes a decent bargaining chip. Democrats seem to think so...thats why they voted to keep that amendment in the republican house plan.


http://www.azteca.net/aztec/immigrat/immigcri.html
http://www.cis.org/topics/illegalimmigration.html

MindMechanic said...

Dannyboy

"They are wrong only because some morons decided to make it next to impossible to either enter our country legally, or become a citizen."

I disagree with this statement completely.

EVERY country NEEDS to be able to control its flow of legal immigrants. Legal immigration affects the nations economic balance. Can the process be streamlined? Sure. But it is also a fact that we take in huge numbers of legal immigrants every year and continue to do so.

The average increase in legal immigrants ranges from 1.2 to 1.4 MILLION people. Thats not a small amount, thats huge. In order to support and sustain legal immigration, a nations economy must grow at a rate to support not only its legal immigrants but also its increase in employment aged native citizens.

The solution is not so simple as to open the floodgates...that would simply exacerbate the problem.

Anonymous said...

Call me "Still Have Lots Of Questions"

"It is not just crossing the boarder that is illegal; it is BEING in American without following the proper process."

Can you give us this statute Lysis?

Anonymous said...

Lots Of Questions:

It is the same statute that allows police to stop everyone they see on the streets and ask them "Ver are your papers?" (In heavily German accented English a la "The Great Escape.") You go to jail if everything isn't in order.

There is no such statute. It is not against the law to be undocumented in the U.S. Liesis is just blowing smoke as usual. Turn him, Hannity, and O'Reilly off.

Dan Simpson said...

Brainmech:

We obviously disagree on how immigration should work.

While I believe there should be a process, I also believe that the restrictions that are put on it are unneeded.

My ancestors, and probably yours as well, had to do nothing more than get here. I do not see a need for great restrictions (i.e. tests, fees, years long waiting periods, etc.) in order for people to become citizens.

It seems hypocritical to me to build up a nation in one way, and then slam the doors shut and say "we're full".

I don't believe we have hit any sort of critical mass. There are jobs galore, just check out any classified ad. There is room, there is food, there is an overabundance of everything neccessary for a productive, healthy and prosperous life. Every problem I have ever heard relating to illegal immigration would be solved, in my opinion, by creating a system that allows people to work here legally, and become citizens, if that is there desire, with very little in the way of roadblocks, or red tape.

MindMechanic said...

Dannyboy

"It seems hypocritical to me to build up a nation in one way, and then slam the doors shut and say "we're full".

Who is making this demand or requirement? legal immigration CONTINUES to climb. yes...my ancesters WERE immigrants and yes, they did come here during an earlier time (1888...from Denmark) but even then they were required to follow legal immigration procedures.

I dont even have a problem with streamlining the process...I stated that. But to ignore the rule of law (and lets be honest...equating legal and illegal immigration and then claiming we are "slamming the door shut" is a little histrionic, isnt it?) and to allow for unabated immigration simply isnt smart national policy.

Mexico agrees...thats why it IS a felony to be illegal in Mexico and thats why their border guards shoot people trying to get into Mexico along their southern borders.

Disagreement is good.

MindMechanic said...

It is illegal to enter a country illegally. Its criminal tresspass. It is illegal to be IN the country without following legal immigration procedures (see the McCarran-Walter Act/Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952). Legal immigrants are required to undergo criminal background checks, to document location, intent, to undergo health screening, etc.

The US Code (Try the Cornell law site...best way to use the US Code IMO) defines legal and illegal immigration and also discusses the different departments and their jobs in combating illegal immigration (both prevention and arrest and deportation). Title 8 is a good place to start.

Once here, just about everything the illegal alien does is, well...illegal. It is illegal to get a job without proper documentation. You cant legally apply for social services or for driving priveleges. It IS illegal to be IN amrerica without documentation (and while your Nazi impersoantion WAS pretty good, the fact of the matter is that it is illegal to be in EVERY country without proper documentation. Its not just the crossing of the border...just being IN a country without proper documentation is enough to get you arrested and deported.

And BTW...if you think OUR processes are ugly...try it somewhere else. Try it in Mexico.

MindMechanic said...

OBTW...you might also want to do a quick search of the state laws...each state has laws regarding illegal aliens.

MindMechanic said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
MindMechanic said...

Item last...

In regard to legal and illegal immigration...I think the point gets lost that there IS a difference. It is surprising to many to find that MOST legal immigrants arent thrilled about the illegal immigrants...especially in the non-hispanic legal immigration groups.

Every time we have one of these protests I just get a little disgusted. No one is suggesting we shouldnt have legal immigration. No one is suggesting legal immigrants arent loved, needed, respected. No one is in any way attacking legal immigrants.

The next time we have a shut down to show just how bad off the US would be without ALL 'immigrants' I wish we could have a little counterdemonstration the follwoing day. The following day, the US should blanket fire every immigrant and deny them services and make them homeless just so THEY can remember what THEIR life is like without America. A little perspective I think could go a LONG way.

I know...that sounds terrible...right? Hogwash. SINCE no one is ATTACKING LEGAL IMMIGRATION their argument is without foundation. SINCE no one is suggesting there shouldnt BE legal immigration their argument is garbage. You cant equate legal and illegal immigration. And most importantly SINCE THEY want to make this argument about ALL immigrants, well...then lets be really direct and honest and just see what THEIR world would be like without it as well.

Oh yeah...I forgot...they already know because they are all so PROUD to be FROM their home country...so proud that they left everyone and everything to escape it. THAT message gets lost too...

Now...hold a demonstration where JUST the illegals are present and then lets see how many show up.

to emphasize...I am NOT anti immigration. I am PRO legal immigration.

Lysis said...

Dannyboy;

The laws might be unjust, but they are still the laws. Just because you or I don’t like a law dose not make it any more legal to disobey that law. Let’s change the law – let’s participate in civil disobedience against it; but you have not changed the fact that you made a false claim when you said that paying a fine makes it OK for people to disobey the law. You might choose to disobey an unjust law, but paying a fine does give anyone a free pass to break even an unjust law.

To the Anonymous hoard;

Your claims that the only crime committed by illegal immigration was crossing the boarder, shows you have no knowledge of passports, visas, residency requirements, green cards, deportations, the function of the INS, and many other things. Brainmechanic has given the some of the statutes you claimed did not exist – you should give the apology for your found less and vindictive comments about the truthfulness of my statements. This would indicate that you are more that a snarling “animal mind” in a trap beyond your comprehension. But you are too busy gnawing your toes off.

I have been the sponsor of a Bulgarian national who fled Communism and came to America to be with his wife and son. I have paid for consultation with an eminent and (for my needs worthless) immigration attorney, I have taken in and worked with a “boat person” for the disastrous Communist takeover of Vietnam, and I have several acquaintances and students who are currently either illegal of legal visitors to the U.S. I am well acquainted with the laws, the dangers, and the disappointments all face. This is how a human being come to know and to deal with the disastrous present policies on immigration. Flaccid and company simply make thing up the way they wish they were so they can sound fierce in their snarling. Those who set the trap, and know its strength are not intimidated.

Brainmechanic;

Thanks for the facts. You are spoiling us! Pleas keep it up!

truth to power said...

Dannyboy:

"Under a proposed plan that brings people out of the darkness into a system by which they could become citizens and demands they pay a fine ends the illegal activity. So, when the fine is paid, the individual is made right with the law."

Is this to be our new system of immigration? Unless the legal "waiting in line" method is somehow easier, this is the way everyone will do it. Not necessarily arguing with the idea, just wondering if that's what you support. Or would this be a one-time thing, like the previous once-in-a-lifetime amnesty, which certainly created a lot of legal permanent residents, but didn't stem the flow of illegals?

"Anyone who truly wants all immigrants to go home and 'do it the legal way', really just hopes they leave and get stuck in the morass that is the 'legal way' so they can't come back."

This is the kind of mudslinging that impedes constructive debate. Imputing evil motives to people for holding political opinions you oppose is dishonest argumentation.
Unfortunately, this is the standard tone of the immigration debate; people mostly talk past each other. Yes, some people who take a hard line on illegal immigration are opposed to all immigration, but a lot of them aren't.

Personally, I'm a big proponent of immigration; I think it's vital to this country, and letting people come share the American dream is simply the right thing to do. I hold out no hope that we can deport the illegals and start over with sane policies. I also have problems with any immigration "solution" that rewards the illegals by making their method of entry better than obeying the law in the first place. No matter what else we do to immigration, it has to recognize those who followed the rules and make that the better way. I can't see myself ever becoming willing to compromise on this point.

"There are jobs galore, just check out any classified ad."

I think this is misleading. When it comes to illegals, there are temporary jobs galore for minimum wage and no benefits, with no legal recourse against exploitive employers. These are the jobs "Americans won't take.", and without the illegals these jobs would either improve or not exist.

Anonymous said...

Irrelevant:

I am not an expert in immigration law but I do not have to be tell you are wrong - or rather, true to your name, just irrelevant. The Act you site is for entering the country. Also, title 18 pertains to immigration, the act of entering the country. Recent updates to the law, including those proposed now, have only strengthed provisions to make it more difficult to enter the country and increase the punishment for doing so. Here is something else that will blow your mind: it is not illegal for a non-citizen to work in the U.S. It is only illegal to employ them. Your argument from conventional wisdom and cut and paste from Wikipedia do not stand the scrutiny of reality. That goes double for Liesis and his worthy evidence of legal IMMIGRATION procedures. Again, the legal hurdles he went through are hurdles to entering the country only (be it on residency or student permits or what have you.) Once in the country it is not illegal to reside or to be undocumented. It is not. Have you ever known someone who did not have a driver's license, a birth certificate or a SSN? I did not until I was a teenager. Are these people breaking the law? No! Because it is not illegal to be undocumented in the U.S.

Anonymous said...

It is not possible to have ANYTHING resembling Homeland Security without DRACONIAN control of borders and immigration.

Knee-jerk morality based on a two century old immigration policy that THEN favored "Agorite" ancestors has little relevance to TODAY'S paranoia of suitcase nukes, chemical weapons, and all WMD threats!!!!

9-11 ended FOREVER unsecured borders, work permits, and American "melting pot" optimism of the good ol' days.

A discussion of immigration, legal and illegal, BEGINS with Homeland Security -- there's not much left to say after that!!!!

Anonymous said...

Guilty verdicts for Lay and Skilling -- former Enron executives convicted on CONSPIRACY, fraud and other charges.

The "crony" dominoes have begun to fall . . . the headlines . . . the headlines . . . the headlines!!!!

Lysis said...

Flaccid;

It is not just entering America illegally that is deportable and punishable; it is being in America illegally. Any person found to be in American illegally can be deported, even if they entered legally and then became illegal by the laps of their visa. They can also lose any chance to be considered for ever being admitted to the United States legally or ever being able to apply for citizenship in this country. Your distinction between illegally entering and being in America illegally are as silly as someone saying that it is illegal to murder but not to be a murderer. You are playing word games again! Everyone sees it – you are in the trap – only honesty can get you out before you bleed to death!

MindMechanic said...

Clintons Cronies getting what they deserve

"On May 19, 1994, Clinton met here with former Indian Prime Minister P.V. Rao. Rao told Clinton that India was interested in opening its centrally controlled economy up to American corporate investors.

Clinton, in turn, instructed then-Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary to lead a delegation of corporate executives to India on a trade mission.

"The mission marked the first official visit to India by a U.S. cabinet secretary in many years," Energy's internal trip report states.

Enron executives joined O'Leary on the July 1994 junket, whereupon they planted the seeds of the ill-fated Dabhol deal.

Then in January 1995, Lay accompanied Brown on the Commerce trade mission that helped seal the deal.

The Clinton administration got two federal export-finance agencies – the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corp. – to help underwrite the project by kicking in nearly $400 million in loans.

During the final negotiations, Clinton aide Thomas "Mack" McLarty rode herd on the project in Washington for Lay, his old energy-industry buddy.

He tracked the progress of Clinton's ambassador to India, Frank Wisner, who was helping speed the deal along.

Even Clinton pitched in to help his golfing partner, Lay, by sending McLarty memos and articles on the project.

(The ex-president's lobbying for the Enron deal even continued into the Bush administration, sources close to the Dabhol project say, when he visited Indian officials in Mumbai, India, in April. At the time, Enron was fighting the state electricity board for back payments.)

In June 1996, India gave final OK to Lay's project. Four days before the approval, Enron gave $100,000 to Clinton's party.

McLarty and Wisner were not forgotten. Lay snatched up McLarty for Enron when he left the White House. And Wisner got a seat on the board of an Enron subsidiary when he stepped down as ambassador in 1997."

MindMechanic said...

Anon

You keep saying it, yet it happens every day all across the country.

76 people ARRESTED for being in the country illegally. Not working, not crossing over the border...for BEING IN THE COUNTRY ILLEGALY.

"Four supervisors for Fischer Homes were among 80 people arrested

Tuesday as part of a two-year probe into the use of illegal immigrant workers in the home construction industry in Northern Kentucky.

The supervisors were charged with hiring illegal immigrants. The other 76 persons arrested were charged with being in the United States illegally"

MindMechanic said...

More

Federal authorities identified the four supervisors as Copsy, a Fischer Homes construction manager; Douglas Witt, a Fischer Homes superintendent; William Allison, a Fischer Homes superintendent; and William Ring, a Fischer Homes assistant superintendent. All four pleaded not guilty during an arraignment Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Covington and were released, pending a hearing May 18.

Each is charged with aiding and abetting, harboring illegal aliens for commercial advantage or private financial gain. The maximum punishment for the crime is 10 years imprisonment and a fine of $250,000.

"Today's case is another tough step in our targeted and aggressive enforcement of our immigration laws within the interior of the United States," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a statement from Washington.

"We will continue to bring criminal actions against employers who are consistently harboring illegal aliens. We will stop this type of illegal facilitation."

U.S. Magistrate Judge J. Gregory Wehrman began arraigning the 76 immigrants Tuesday afternoon in groups of 10. That process will continue today.

All the men were held without bond. Each is charged with a misdemeanor of entering the United States "without inspection and at a time and place other than a designated port of entry."

Each man faces a maximum sentence of six months in prison and deportation.

MindMechanic said...

"I've sent a message and I told [illegal immigrants] we were coming and we came today and this is only the beginning," said Sheriff Jones.

While looking for those wanted at homes and businesses, a few others were picked up for having fake documents.

An attorney who represents many people who are here illegally says he tells them if they're going to stay, become a legal citizens and obey the law.

Thursday's arrests come as the sheriff launched a new campaign, reminding businesses it's illegal to hire illegal workers.

MindMechanic said...

84 illegal aliens arrested in Easton
INS raids building products company for second time in 2 years
U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service agents from Baltimore raided an Eastern Shore company Monday and arrested 84 undocumented alien workers.

Agents discovered the workers at Chesapeake Building Components Inc., the second time in two years that undocumented workers were found at the Easton company.

"This operation should send a clear sign to employers in Maryland that INS will actively enforce immigration law as it pertains to the employment of undocumented workers," said Louis D. Crocetti Jr., director of the Baltimore District of the INS.

Company officials could not be reached for comment yesterday.

INS officials said that 57 of the aliens were from Mexico, 24 from Guatemala and one each from Costa Rico, El Salvador and Honduras.

Nine were flown back to Mexico yesterday morning. Twenty-two were being detained at the Howard County Detention Center and 32 at the Wicomico County Detention Center. Eighteen were in the process of being returned to their home countries.

If Chesapeake is found to have knowingly violated the employment eligibility provisions of the Immigration and Reform Control Act of 1986, it could be fined from $250 to $2,000 per worker.

In an October 1999 raid, 35 undocumented workers were found at Chesapeake.

MindMechanic said...

but apparently it isnt illegal to be an illegal alien in America. Anon says so.

Lysis said...

Brainmechanic:

Thanks for the info. I too am glad when any criminals are punished; when any just laws are upheld. It is particularly gratifying that these crooks are Clinton cronies. Clinton’s administration was without question the most corrupt in history. It will continue to stink for decades to come, and I am sure much more of “the poison” rotting in the swamp will come out. Sometimes history vindicates great men – Reagan, Truman; sometimes it revels the crooks; as it is beginning to do with Clinton.

It is surprising that “the Child” was the one to first mention this link to Clintonian corruption, but then again, I suspect the Child is too young and tender to remember the Clinton connections to crime.

Now we have silence from the trap. It looks like you, Brainmechanic, have beaten the beast to death. It was a good hunt; we’ll be using the hides for some time to come.

Anonymous said...

I don't know how more clearly it can be said: it is not illegal to be undocumented in the U.S. If it is illegal to be an undocumented person then please point us to the statute that says so. (I know it is not in Wikipedia, Irrelevant so look further.) Until then all of your rank blustering is just that, blustering. And Liesis' analogies remain as bogus as his over hyped claims to open mindedness.


Hey Anon:

I'm still waiting for the investigation that makes the headlines that shows the deep and personal ties Bush had to Lay and Skilling. America has the right to know who it was that wrote the corrupt energy policy they are paying for! Look forward to the headlines. . . the headlines. . . the headlines!

Anonymous said...

The most corrupt in history Lysis? Seriously? I am no fan of Bill Clinton, but the most corrupt in history? Only if "history" continues to have such a short memory.

Cameron said...

Brain,

Here is how I compared a wall on the US-Mexican border with the Berlin Wall:

"I'm not sure about building a wall. It seems kinda childish to me. Not to mention a really bad world PR move. Do we really want a US version of the Berlin Wall?"

It was meant to emphasize the public relations nightmare the building of a wall would be. The Berlin Wall came to be the symbol of communism. It represented the hate and darkness that was the Iron Curtain. I fear that a wall on our border will come to represent US elitism and disdain for others. In that respect I think comparing it to the Berlin Wall works very well.

Cameron said...

I have a few comments to make about the two articles I posted.

The first article dealt primarily with employment of illegal immigrants. According to the author, this is the area that needs the most attention. Work-site investigations have dropped considerably. If employers were investigated more actively, the author opines, then they would be less likely to actively pursue illegal immigrant workers. The companies the author uses as examples aren't just lax in record checking either. They are actively seeking illegal immigrants and producing documentation on their behalf. It is wrong and should be prosecuted.

At the end of the article, the author addresses the question of whether the US needs these illegal immigrants just to fill out the workforce. Our low unemployment rate is misleading because it doesn't include those people that have quit looking for work. That may be true, but I think there is a deeper issue at play. Reach Upward has linked to a few important articles in the recent past. Here is one of them:

http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.p?ref=/lowry/lowry200604040747.asp

This one states that the great majority of illegal immigrants are poor and uneducated. They compete for the same jobs that American poor and uneducated compete for. Illegal immigration hurts poor Americans, basically keeping them poor, while at the same time expanding the size of the poor community.

Reach linked to a study done that proves the article I just linked to correct. I can't seem to find it now though, so maybe Reach can re-link it for us.

Basically, there are two major points here:

- There needs to be more and increased prosecution of these "organized crime" companies that actively pursue illegal workers.

- Illegal immigrants do not help our economy. They do not "do the jobs that Americans won't do".

Cameron said...

The second article contains information that conflicts with the link I just gave. The Tribune editorial says:

"According to a study by the Urban Institute, the 1996 welfare reform effort dramatically reduced the use of welfare by undocumented immigrant households"

"Close to 8 million of the 12 million or so illegal aliens in the country today file personal income taxes using these numbers, contributing billions to federal coffers"

"What's more, aliens who are not self-employed have Social Security and Medicare taxes automatically withheld from their paychecks. Since undocumented workers have only fake numbers, they'll never be able to collect the benefits these taxes are meant to pay for. Last year, the revenues from these fake numbers - that the Social Security administration stashes in the "earnings suspense file" - added up to 10 percent of the Social Security surplus."

"The non-partisan National Research Council found that when the taxes paid by the children of low-skilled immigrant families - most of whom are illegal - are factored in, they contribute on average $80,000 more to federal coffers than they consume."

Contrast that to this information:

"Steve Camarota of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies estimates that illegal immigrants cost the federal government $10 billion a year. State and local governments lose even more. Illegals pay some taxes, but not enough to cover governmental expenses like Medicaid and treatment for the uninsured."

"According to Camarota, if illegal immigrants were legalized, their net annual cost to the federal government would only increase, tripling to $30 billion a year. Immigrant workers don't earn enough to pay much in taxes, while they qualify for all sorts of governmental assistance. As they become legal, they will get even more assistance — the benefits that they get from the Earned Income Tax Credit, for instance, would increase by a factor of 10."

So do illegal immigrants add $80k per person, or do they "cost the federal government $10 billion a year"?

Cameron said...

I can't resist....

Anon,

"According to Camarota, if illegal immigrants were legalized, their net annual cost to the federal government would only increase, tripling to $30 billion a year. Immigrant workers don't earn enough to pay much in taxes, while they qualify for all sorts of governmental assistance. As they become legal, they will get even more assistance — the benefits that they get from the Earned Income Tax Credit, for instance, would increase by a factor of 10."


Our tax laws really stick it to our nation's poor, don't they.

Cameron said...

Truth To Power wrote this:

"I also have problems with any immigration "solution" that rewards the illegals by making their method of entry better than obeying the law in the first place. No matter what else we do to immigration, it has to recognize those who followed the rules and make that the better way."

I think this is quite profound.
The question is how to deal with the current illegal immigrants so as to deter future illegal immigration? Isn't deterrance a major purpose of punishment? If the punishment is too lax, there is no incentive to stop breaking the law.

Cameron said...

Lysis and Brainmechanic have asserted that being in the US without proper documentation is illegal, just as the act of crossing the border without proper docs is illegal.

Anon wrote:

"Once in the country it is not illegal to reside or to be undocumented. It is not."


What is the punishment for trying to cross the border? Are people in prison? Do they pay fines?

What is the punishment for "being" in the US illegally? Are people in prison? Do they pay fines?

Cameron said...

One of the Anons wrote:

"It is not possible to have ANYTHING resembling Homeland Security without DRACONIAN control of borders and immigration"

"A discussion of immigration, legal and illegal, BEGINS with Homeland Security -- there's not much left to say after that!!!! "


Security has often been brought up as a reason to fix our southern immigration problem. That argument should be used for the northern border, as well as the sea ports and airports. Presently constituted, I don't have faith that all of our borders are impenetrable to persistent and intelligent terrorists.

That being said, we still have not suffered an attack since 9/11, despite numerous threats by the "jihad in chief". Why is that? Is border security better than we are led to believe? Is the NSA "spying" working? Are the terrorists too busy blowing themselves up in Iraq?

Cameron said...

"The "crony" dominoes have begun to fall . . . the headlines . . . the headlines . . . the headlines!!!! "

and,

"Clintons Cronies getting what they deserve"

All this political corruption talk reminds me of President Truman. Corruption was rampant during his administration, but it, as it does now, afflicted both political parties.

The larger issue here is that many (most?) politicians are corrupt. Surprise! These are "headlines" that have been printed for decades. Corruption "headlines" have been printed for both parties and frankly will continue to be printed about both parties.

That in itself is an argument for smaller and less powerful government. Why do we keep giving corrupt men and women more control?

MindMechanic said...

MVM

In your respect, sure...I understand the symbology...just disagree with it. When Presidente Vicente Fox comes to America and explains that we should have no border patrol, no fences, no increased patrols and that after all, it is not illegal immigration but simply undocumented migration...

You get the picture? Mexican border patrols shoot at anyone trying to cross their southern border illegaly but the access to America should be free and open.

Perfect world scenario...we dont NEED a wall. Real world...we do. Period.

People will assign whatever symbology to it they want but the fact remains...it is not to keep people in, nor is it to keep people OUT. It is to keep people out that are trying to enter illegaly.

MindMechanic said...

Anon...how many articles form how many sources NOT Wikipedia (which BTW none were from) would it take? 50? 100?

every one said the same thing. Illegal aliens were ARRESTED...held...face fines and jail time THEN deportation.

I'm no expert on immigration...but apparently YOU are. Then maybe YOU can explain how it is that across the country...not just on border states...illegals are being arrested and brought to court and face criminal charges when oh yeah...it isnt illegal to be here.

None so blind as those that simply will not see.

MindMechanic said...

Deportation
Deportation (also called "removal") occurs when the federal government formally removes an alien from the United States for violations of a number of immigration or criminal laws, described in more detail below. Once deported, an alien may lose the right to ever return to the United States, even as a visitor.

Removal is a legal proceeding, and an alien who is subject to this procedure has legal rights prior to being removed from the country, including the right to challenge the removal itself on procedural or constitutional grounds. Following is a discussion of the removal process.

Classes of Deportable Aliens

Any alien that is in the United States may be subject to deportation or removal if he or she:

Is an inadmissible alien according to immigration laws in effect at the time of entry to the U.S. or adjustment of nonimmigrant status;
Is present in the U.S. in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act or any other U.S. law;
Violated nonimmigrant status or a condition of entry into the U.S.;
Terminated a conditional permanent residence;
Encouraged or aided any other alien to enter the U.S. illegally;
Engaged in marriage fraud to gain admission to the U.S.;
Was convicted of certain criminal offenses;
Failed to register or falsified documents relating to entry in to the U.S.;
Engaged in any activity that endangers public safety or creates a risk of national security; or
Engaged in unlawful voting.

MindMechanic said...

The general rules concerning arrest, search and seizure applicable to other federal officers are, of course, applicable to immigration officers. The Immigration and Naturalization Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq., authorizes immigration officers to make arrests either for the purpose of holding an alien for civil administrative proceedings or for a crime, or both. Title 8 U.S.C. § 1225 provides that all aliens arriving at United States ports must be examined by immigration officers who are authorized, without a warrant, to board and search any conveyances believed to carry aliens, and to detain for further inquiry anyone "who may not appear . . . at the port of arrival to be clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to land." Title 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a) authorizes the arrest upon warrant of the Attorney General of any alien, pending a determination of his/her deportability. Title 8 U.S.C. § 1252(c) authorizes arrest of an alien at any time within six months after a final order of deportation has been entered. Title 8 U.S.C. § 1324(b) authorizes immigration officers to seize, without a warrant, conveyances used to transport illegal aliens. Title 8 U.S.C. § 1357 sets out their authority to interrogate, arrest, search, and seize aliens without a warrant.

Subsection 1357(a)(1) of Title 8, authorizing immigration officers "to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States," has a deceiving simplicity. It is deceiving because in practice the courts have strained to give the section a reasonable and meaningful interpretation in light of the Fourth Amendment. The appellate courts have evinced a reluctance to believe that such interrogations occur without a detention, however brief. Since there is usually some kind of stop or detention, the question arises as to whether immigration officers may stop persons reasonably believed to be aliens when there is no reason to believe they are illegally in the country. The Supreme Court has declined to give that question a general answer. See United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 884 n. 9 (1975). However, it has answered the question with respect to "factory surveys," that is, worksite inspections to discover illegal aliens. See Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210 (1984).

The "open fields" doctrine, which defines the rights of law enforcement officers to enter or observe open fields and certain non-residential structures without a search warrant is often relevant to INS enforcement efforts. The doctrine is discussed in United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294, 107 S.Ct. 1134 (1987); Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986); and California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986). However, the 1986 amendments added new subsection 8 U.S.C. § 1357(d) which prohibits INS officers from entering a farm without a search warrant.

The INS Office of General Counsel has available for distribution its memorandum entitled, "The Law of Arrest, Search, and Seizure for Immigration Officers," Publication No. M-69.

MindMechanic said...

Oh wow...time to rethink the Bush immigration plan that he has been trying to get congress to act on for 5 years now. It has been endorsed by congressional democrats, Bill Clinton, and NOW JIMMY CARTER!!!

Cameron said...

Brainmechanic,

You have previously stated, and rightfully so, that no one solution will fix the illegal immigration problem. That includes the wall. It in and of itself will not solve the problem. I think the other ideas that have been mentioned here can have a large enough effect that building the wall is not necessary. Especially when the cost, both financially and politically, is considered.

MindMechanic said...

We'll agree to disagree on the wall. I think that it IS a component and necessary. I think Mexico's opposition to it and the border patrol is a clear indicator that they are afraid it will be effective. Mexico has one goal...get as many of it's citizens into this country as it can. Mexico will not stop their citizens from coming here illegaly. That leaves one answer.

Dan Simpson said...

Okay, lets try this one again.

Lysis: you seem to be ignoring the whole of my argument to focus on one portion of it. If legislation were passed that created a program whereby illegals could come out of hiding and become documented workers (i.e. be here legally, which the Senate bill seems to do), then paying a fine would get them right with the law, and there would not be any further law breaking.

You continue to state that they would be breaking the law after the fine, how so?

Brainmech:

First, I respect your opinion, but definitely disagree.

1-I would like to know what 'legal process' your ancestors in the late 1800's where subject to. Besides waiting in a line and giving a name, being checked for TB, what 'legal processes' where they subject to.

2-By limiting the numbers so drastically, by putting numerous onerous limitations (including high costs, endless red-tape, and complex legalities usually requiring a high-priced lawyer), this country has in effect 'slammed the door', and created the environment that endorses coming to this country illegally.

I am not all for unlimited illegal immigration. I want the process to be simple (criminal background check, review process once you are in the country checking for employment), and that's about it.

Bear in mind the above is for individuals who desire citizenship. If one just wants to work here and go home, limiting work visas to an appropriate level (which would be significantly higher than current levels) would be fine with me.

I also support a wall, I think it is one of the only ways to curb illegal activity at the border.

You see, I think increased enforcement at all levels is necessary, but I think with that enforcement we must change our policies for how one gets in, and make them much, much easier.

I am a huge fan of the Senate bill.

Dan Simpson said...

I think Mexico agreeing is not a good strong point to go to.

Neither is saying France's guest worker program hasn't worked a la Rick Santorum.

Dan Simpson said...

TTP

"This is the kind of mudslinging that impedes constructive debate. Imputing evil motives to people for holding political opinions you oppose is dishonest argumentation."

When the side upholding this ideal: Sen. Rick Santorum, and Congressman Heyworth, say that they will only support a bill that is enforcement only, and then maybe in the future we can look at the failing procedures whereby someone may come back legally, that is the only conclusion that can be reached.

If millions of employed, home-owning, 'illegal' immigrants were sent home, or forced home through the house bill, and then the processes whereby they could return were not changed, even the best case scenario would see a decade pass before they could come back.

What about their children in school, children who may have never been to their parent's country, who may not even speak Spanish?

Increased enforcement with changed regulations is the only way, in my opinion, to ever change the current situation.


"Illegal immigration hurts poor Americans, basically keeping them poor,"

This is so untrue it hurts. You think the poor in this country would be better off without illegal immigrants? In what way, do you suppose that all those low paying jobs would be higher paying? Like McDonald's would pay 12 bucks an hour, or perhaps they could do roofing for 35$ an hour.

Even if that were the case, a happy meal would become 6 bucks, and your roof would double in price. It would even itself out.

And what if the Senate Bill were to go through and legal immigration skyrockets? What if in the next ten years ten million more come? They are called consumers. More consumers means more jobs, and a better economy.

The uneducated poor in this country will not get 'better' lives until they are no longer the uneducated.

I am in complete support of stricter, more highly enforced rules attacking companies that hire and support illegal documentation and immigration. But with that the system to become legal MUST become easier.

Lets look at a few numbers (I won't put exacts, but I am sure Brainmech will find them, I greatly appreciate his efforts in that arena). If you take the estimated number of illegal immigrants in this country, even the very conservative estimates. Then you take the number of unemployed in this country. You could not fill the jobs worked by illegals with the number of unemployed.

There are less people unemployed in our economy today then there are illegals working here. Explain how sending them home would help the economy?

Removing millions of consumers, while at the same time cutting the work force of the economy by millions. I am not an economist, and I am the first one to admit that I don't know the ins and outs, I go off of what seems to be common sense to me. But how would that situation be good for ANYONE.

MindMechanic said...

Dannyboy,

Show me where we disagree...

1-You described precisely the laws in place then. My ancestry followed those laws. Simpler laws, simpler times.

2-I have stated twice now so this will be the third time that I too agree the laws and process could be streamlined.

I think the difference then and now is that my ancestry came to America to become citizens and be Americans. I dont think that is the case today. Still...thats fine...as long as the rule of law is followed.

I am not a big fan of the guest worker concept because to me it is a setup of a second class citizen standard. You here it all the time...we need them so they can do all the jobs Americans wont...so we can pay them poorly so your goods and services will stay cheaper...etc. To me...again...that is ironico to hear a largely liberal mantra that is being cheered accepted and tolerated.

MindMechanic said...

Dannyboy the second time,

I dont agree with the enforcement only approach. I dont even agree with creating the law that makes illegal immigration a felony (although as has been shown here before..Mexico apparently does, because it IS a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico).

I DO understand the APPROACH event though I dont agree with it. The approach by some is that the creation of a guest worker program and amnesty that is not 'really' amnesty will contribute to the same problems we have had since the last time this was addressed in 1986.

I think that their point is that by enforcing the laws you put teeth into the legislation and have a weapon against illegal immigration that will be effective.

I disagree, as I have said. I think it is ludicrous to even consider the possibility of arresting and trying as felons 11-20 million illegal aliens. I think the costs would be astronomical, the cost of housing them even more so, and the image is simply disgusting. I also think it is pretty difficult to make felons desperate people that are trying to live, survive, and thrive.

I am pretty sure I have stated this all along. I believe there are better solutions. I think those solutions must be found.

I do find it again ironico that the solution being pursued today by the senate is largely the same measure Bush has pushed for for 5 years yet he is vilified by the left. I think it points to the anger, hatred, and devisiveness that has been around since the 2000 election.

MindMechanic said...

Dannyboy

This may be my last post on this subject because I think all has been said.

I think this is one of those arguements that basically, everyone agrees SOMETHING should be done, just not exactly on WHAT should be done.

"If you take the estimated number of illegal immigrants in this country, even the very conservative estimates. Then you take the number of unemployed in this country. You could not fill the jobs worked by illegals with the number of unemployed.

There are less people unemployed in our economy today then there are illegals working here. Explain how sending them home would help the economy?"

I agree. I think MY only difference and then again...maybe it ISNT a difference...is that I think those citizens doing those jobs should be here legally and if they are being paid US currency as part of the US economy then they should be taxed accordingly. Whatever their take home pay is...honestly...I dont care a BIT how they spend it...even if that means sending it home to their family in other countries. To me it is no different if they send it home or sock it away in savings. As long as it is legal, taxed prior to...its not my business.

I hope congress ends up finding a working solution. I hope Mexico recognizes that their socialist experiment has failed and it is driving its citizens away. I hope WE in AMERICA can look to Mexico as yet ANOTHER example of why socialism simply does not work.

Anonymous said...

"Then maybe YOU can explain how it is that across the country...not just on border states...illegals are being arrested and brought to court and face criminal charges when oh yeah...it isnt illegal to be here?"

Because they are being arrested for entering the country illegaly.

You are right about one thing Irrelevant, there are none so blind as those that will not see. The blind leading the blind, just like you and Liesis.

Thanks for posting the code on the powers of law enforcment to discover illegal border crossers!

MindMechanic said...

By your own definition...they entered the country illegally. It is illegal to enter the country illegal. They are guilty of the crime of being in the country illegaly. They are being arrested for being in the country illegally. Their presence in the country if gained illegally is illegal. They get arrested for that. Because BEING in the country illegally is a crime. Just being here. Illegally. Violating the law. Crossing the border illegally is a crime. They can be arrested for just being a guy...standing on the street corner...hanging out at Beto's...working on a constructuion site...and they can be arrested...because they are here illegally...and thats a crime.

truth to power said...

Dannyboy:

"If millions of employed, home-owning, 'illegal' immigrants..."

There's an interesting question; how is it that they own homes? I have personal knowledge of 3 illegals who had homes foreclosed on which they bought using stolen social security numbers. Gotten a credit report lately?

"...were sent home, or forced home through the house bill, and then the processes whereby they could return were not changed, even the best case scenario would see a decade pass before they could come back."

Absolutely a terrible idea not to change the entry processes. We agree. The law is an ass, and has been for some time.

"What about their children in school, children who may have never been to their parent's country, who may not even speak Spanish?"

I agree; how dare those selfish parents do such a thing to their children? Perhaps even more importantly, we're typically talking about children who are US citizens! It would suck to have parents like that.

I don't think we treat other lawbreaking parents with more leniency out of fear of the consequences to their innocent children; why is this different?

"Increased enforcement with changed regulations is the only way, in my opinion, to ever change the current situation."

When you put it that way, I agree. But the devil's in the details. Here is my absolute rule: the illegals must NEVER get a better deal than those who waited in line.

Lysis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lysis said...

Dannyboy, Brainmechanic, Truth to Power, and Magic Valley Mormon – thank you for all the good debate. It is the very constructive mulling of ideas that one would hope to discover in the Agora.

Dannyboy: when the law is changed so that illegal aliens can buy their way into the U. S. and become legal by paying a fine – then that will be the law and we can debate its justice. For now paying the fine does not remove the crime – of being in the United States without proper authorization. That is a crime in spite of all the smoke blown by the various Anonomy, The crime was committed upon entry and the criminal remains one – no mater how much they pay or how much they suffer – until they leave the U.S. and quit committing their crime.

Now to the Anonomy, especially Sulky;

There is another kind of animal trap you remind me of. It is a way I once hear of trapping monkeys. The story goes that the hunter, (in India I believe, so you can check my veracity, and save the rest of us the trouble of correcting your knee-jerk reaction) cuts a hole in a coconut large enough for a monkey to put in its open hand, but small enough that the monkey will not be able to pull out its closed fist. Inside is the bate – anything that attracts a greedy monkey. The nut is then attached to a strong cord and the hunter seeks a hiding place. The monkey comes and reaches into the hole and grabs the bate, but then cannot get its fist out. It will not let go and it cannot get away as long as its hand is in the nut. The hunter then comes up and beats the screaming monkey to death. All the monkey needs to do is let go of the bate and scamper to the nearest tree – but it is too stupid to let go and save its self a beating.

Needless to say the Anonomy are proving to be such monkeys. Long ago they grabbed the bate – they have been proven wrong by evidence and reason, but all they can do is cling to the bate and scream.

Dan Simpson said...

Brainmech:

We do agree on much. Most of my second and third points were directed at others posts.

I too want the income taxed and legal, I believe the only fair way to do it is to set up a way in which these people become legal.


TTP

"I agree; how dare those selfish parents do such a thing to their children?"

Your arguments are becoming worse and worse.

What would you do if you had children and lived in a country where you could not feed them. Start a rally and hope that in a decade or two the socialist rat trap you lived in would become better and someone else may be able to feed their children? Or go someplace where you can earn money and actually feed your children.

Yeah, those are sucky parents.

Anonymous said...

Liesis, Irellevant:

The proposed House bill "would make it a federal crime to live in the United States after illegal entry, which would turn millions of illegal immigrants into felons, ineligible to win any legal status. It would also stiffen the penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants." (NY Times) If living in the U.S. is already against the law then why would the House have to pass that provision in the law? Why would that very provision be such a big sticking point between the Senate and the House!? The answer, is because, living in the U.S. is not a crime, even after illegal entry. If you are an illegal immigrant you are deported because you did not cross the border at "approved ports or border points." You are not hauled before the court and charged with the additional crime of living in the U.S. You are not charged with two crimes but only one, becuase you have only committed one crime - you entered illegaly. You can be deported for illegal entry, and arrested for the suspected crime of illegal entry, but you cannot be arrested for living - not in the U.S. even if you are not a citizen. You are not committing two crimes, you are not charged with two crimes!

Lysis said...

Flaccid:

All the congress is debating is making misdemeanors into felonies; both are crimes. Your own argument flops over to trap you.

Anonymous said...

Entering America without proper process is a crime, being in America with out properly entering is a crime. They are related to the same criminal act, but both are crimes.

Lysis said...

Flaccid; you finally got “one”. How does it feel?

Anonymous said...

If I am wrong then I will eat my hat.

truth to power said...

Dannyboy:

"What would you do if you had children and lived in a country where you could not feed them?"

Oh, please! Is "feed your children" a figure of speech? The illegals aren't coming for food.

Anonymous said...

Vegimatic Here

Lysis, the more things change, the more..... I know you have had a lot of fun with the anonymous folks, but the Agora has gone stale. I am sad to say this but it is true.

I am reading way to much "nanner nanner boo boo" from the anoymous team. The record is broken for the number of their words that say nothing.

I have a great opportunity with my new job to travel. In the past couple of weeks I have had my big toe in the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans. Both cities were by military bases. Next week, it is Oklahoma City, home of another military base. Everywhere I go, people have different opinions. Everywhere I go in this country things look like they are moving along just fine.

We went to Mexico last week for a side trip for about 3 hours. Everyone in the group couldn't wait to cross the border to get back to the US.

I met my international counterparts live and in person last week. Over and over they talked about the "plenty" of the United States and took some back with them.

First hand, week after week I see the greatest country in the world. I meet the greatest people in the world. They are all different, but out of many we become one.

Have a great summer. I won't be able to come up this year because of my travel schedule. Take some digial pictures and show them off.

Tell Mrs. Lysis hello as well.

To the Anonymi

Hate closes the mind and the soul. Please take the summer off and come back with the hate purged from your being.

Go out and see the country, meet a few people and realize that with all it's shortcomings, America is a pretty amazing place.

To all:

I met Gov. Huntsman of the State of Utah on a flight a few weeks ago.

A very personable man with a great vision of not only what Utah could be, but also most importantly a world without cancer.

He asked for involvement. To get involved, call his office and ask to get on a counsel or a board.

My challenge once again to all of you is to take it from the cognative to the physical, get involved, do something!

Have a great Summer!!!!!

Dan Simpson said...

"Oh, please! Is "feed your children" a figure of speech? The illegals aren't coming for food."

I am glad that you are omniscient.

I have personally met many people from some of the poorest regions of Mexico who could not find work. Though I am sure the mexican food stamps program is incredibly well run, and every corner does have a great Smiths who sells to them on credit, they actually could not get enough food to feed their families.

You may use such arguments as hyperbole to prove your point. I am pointing to the reality of many immigrants. Does everyone who comes here illegally do it to feed their children, no. But to blanketly call all parents who bring children to the states illegally horrible parents is to live in a world of your own devising.

One example. I knew a man very well who was in a bishopric in Texas. He was here legally working in a brick manufacturing plant. He was specifically not allowed to bring his family. The U.S. in all its wisdom felt that he could come and work, but that his family could not come and live with him. He brought them anyway.

I don't blame him at all. It is these kinds of unjust and ridiculous regulations that make no sense, help no person, and protect no one, that I feel need to be changed.

Your callous attitude doesn't help the problem at all.

The fact is that there are people here who it would serve no justice to send them anywhere, for they have done nothing wrong. A child does not have the Mens Rea to commit this crime, they cannot cross the border illegally, because they cannot commit the crime, it requires intent.

What would it serve to send such a person back to their 'native' country?

Anonymous said...

Veg:
Your "What I did on my summer vacation" paper for Lysis
belongs under his classroom door --otherwise, take it from the "physical" to the "cognitive" in your next posting!!!!

Cameron said...

Headline:

Al-Zarqawi Killed in Airstrike. Terrorists Lose Another Leader.

Anonymous said...

Vegimatic Here,

Anonymous. The real world is a physical one. The nightmare you have created and live in is a cognitive world.

As a matter of fact smart boy, the post was for Lysis. If you are "too sexy" for my post I guess to use an often quoted liberal term.

"YOU CAN GO REPRODUCE YOURSELF"

Simply because none else would want to do that activity with you.

Have a great summer. I can't wait for your "What I did on my Summer Vaction" post this fall.

I'm sure it will be a "cognitive" experience since you will be alone with your thoughts all summer.

Lysis said...

One More Shot:

Too much snow on the road to paradise has postponed my summer adventure for a weekend. The crew will be headed to Wyoming first thing tomorrow morning. I hiked the ten mile round trip from the top of Calf Creek on Wednesday. We crossed a good three quarters of a mile of snow on the cut off road. We found more snow than bare ground in camp. It promises to be a most exciting summer.

I thought to enjoy one last round of Sunday morning “news chats” this morning. To my chagrin, only CBS’s miserable thirty minuet offering was available. It seems that on the Sunday after the greatest victory in the war on terror since the formation of the Iraqi cabinet, NBC spent the morning on a tennis match. A boring cross between golf and ping pong. Wasn’t there a bowling meet available? On ABC, instead of Step-on-all-of-us’ carefully quaffed hair, they were showcasing – get this – a soccer match. How boring can you get? – and there wasn’t even an American team playing. What’s the point there? As usual, I had to switch over to Fox to get the news.

Good riddance to Zarqawi, may he roast in Hell. We can take great pride in the American military who did him in and our brave and reasonable Muslim allies in Iraq and elsewhere who led Justice to him. On a related subject, it seems the terrorists, prevented from committing murder by being held in US Cuba, have hit on the best way to empty Guantanamo; suicide. With no one else to murder it seems they will do what they can to keep the faith.

Finally, I want to recommend what is proving to be the best read I have had since *No More Vietnams*; Ann Coulter’s best seller *Godless*. No time now to give you my synopsis, but here are some great quotes from the first few chapters to whet your appetite:

“Believers in the liberal faith might turn violent – much like the practitioners of Islam, the Religion of Peace who ransacked Danish embassies worldwide because a Danish newspaper published cartoons of Mohammed. This is something else that can’t be taught in government schools: Muslims’ predilection for violence. On the first anniversary of the 9/11 attack, the National Education Association’s instruction materials exhorted teacher, “Do not suggest that any group is responsible” for the attack of 9/11.” Pg2.

“Our religion says that human progress proceeds from the spark of divinity in the human soul; their religion holds that human progress is achieved through sex and death.” Pg4.

“Suspiciously, the Democrats’ ideal of an energy policy never involves the creation of new energy . . . Nuclear reactors do that with no risk of funding Arab terrorists or -- more repellent to liberals – Big Oil Companies. But in a spasm of left-wing insanity in the seventies, nuclear power was curtailed in this country. Japan has nuclear power, France has nuclear power – almost all modern countries have nuclear power, But we had Jane Fonda in the movie *The China Syndrome*. Liberals are very picky about their admiration for Western Europe.” Pg6

“Liberals have fervently believed that humans are a blight on the Earth since Thomas Malthus penned “An Essay on the Principle of Population” in 1798. . . In the 1970’s Paul Ehrlich wrote the best-selling book *The Population Bomb*, predicting global famine and warning that entire nations would cease to exist by the end of the twentieth century – among them, England. “It is now too late,” he wrote, “to take action to save many of those people.” In 2001 – despite the perplexing persistent existence of England – the Sierra Club listed Ehrlich’s Population Bomb* as among its books recommended by Sierra readers.” Pg8.

“Among the things the Supreme Court has held “unconstitutional” are prayer in public schools, moments of silence in public schools (which the Court cleverly recognized as an invidious invitation to engage in “silent prayer”), and displays of the Ten Commandments in public schools. In 1992, the Court ruled it “unconstitutional” for a Reform rabbi to give a nonsectarian invocation at a high school graduation ceremony on the perfectly plausible grounds that Rhode Island was trying to establish Reform Judaism as the official state religion. (Opinion by Justice Antony Kennedy.) Yes, those scheming Jews have had their eyes on the Ocean State as long as I can remember. Let one Reform rabbi say a prayer in a school there, you might just as well change the state’s name to “Jew Land.” Pg11

“Public schools are forbidden from mentioning religion not because of the Constitution, but because public schools are the Left’s madrassas. . . Liberals force normal Americans to pay for their religious schools.” Pg12.


“Colleges pick up where the public schools leave off, inculcating students in the religion of hating America and hating God. . . In theory, the only job requirement of a college professor is to be intelligent, provocative, and open-minded, but their reigning attribute is that they are ignorant, boring, and narrow-minded. These zealous pagans teach the official state religion of liberalism as axiomatic truth.” Pgs14-15

“[Liberals claim] we’re ( the US) the only modern democracy with the death penalty. I think this should be treated as a selling point: “Come to the United States for the economic opportunity, stay because we fry our Ted Bundys!” . . . (Also, incidentally, Japan has the death penalty.)” Pg 25.

“In order to vindicate the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, the criminal goes free. How about punishing the misbehaving policeman? How about docking his pay? Why do random citizens have to be raped, robbed, and murdered because of a policeman’s misconduct?” Pg28

“[On Clinton’s nomination of Florida Supreme Court justice to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit] Barkett was described by one of her colleagues of the Florida court as believing murderers were basically good people except for their tendency to sometimes kill people.” Pg39.



It is gratifying to realize that Ann Coulter has sold more books at $27.95 a pop that Al Gore has sold movie tickets at $5.50. Just goes to show you that truth is always a bargain!

Lysis said...

Although I am quite sure that no one is out there –I must go on the record with these few quotes from Coulter’s chapter 4 - *The Holiest Sacrament: Abortion*:

“No liberal cause is defended with more dishonesty that abortion. No matter what else they pretend to care about from time to time – undermining national security, aiding terrorists, oppressing the middle class, freeing violent criminals – the single most important item on the Democrats’ agenda is abortion. Indeed, abortion is the one issue the Democratic Party is willing to go to war over – except in the Muslim world, which is jam-packed with prohibitions on abortion, because going to war against a Muslim nation might also serve America’s national security objectives. To a liberal, 2,220 military deaths in the entire course of a war in Iraq is unconscionable, but 1.3 million aborted babies in America every year is something to celebrate.” Pg 78

“It would be as if members of the National Rifle Association refused to use the word gun. These “pro-choicers” treat abortion the way Muslims treat Mohammed: It’s so sacred, it must not be mentioned. Instead we get a slew of liberal euphemisms for baby-killing, “reproductive freedom,” “a women’s right to control her own body,” “termination of a pregnancy,” “freedom of choice.” “a woman’s own private medical decision,” “ a procedure,” “access to health care,” “family planning,” “our bodies, our selves, “ “Choice.” Choice is important when it come to killing babies, but not so much when it comes to whom you hire, whom you associate with, what you think about evolution, how much gas your car consumes, how much water comes out of your bathroom showerhead. . . The only other practice that was both defended and unspeakable in America like this was slavery. There are three indirect references to slavery in the Constitution, but the words slave and slavery never appear. “Pgs 78-79

“[from *60 Minuets] Bradley interviewed two women who had had partial birth abortions on horribly deformed babies who could not have lived outside the womb. One woman told Bradley, “In terms of misinformation, the biggest one is that they are – there are thousands and thousands of these abortions being done in the third trimester on normal babies with healthy mothers carrying normal babies. Well, if that’s the case, where are they?” Yes, indeed. Why aren’t more of these dead babies speaking up?” Pg 81

“A few months after Bradley assured viewers that the nonexistent partial birth abortion occurs only about 600 to 1,000 times per year, the *Record* (Bergen, New Jersey) reported that a single abortion clinic in Englewood, New Jersey, performs about 1,500 partial birth abortions every year on babies 20 to 24 weeks old. Contrary to the claims of the women interviewed by Bradley whose entire expertise was based on having had partial birth abortions themselves, one doctor at the clinic said, “Most are for elective, not medical , reasons: people who didn’t realize, or didn’t care, how far along they were.” Pg 82

“Strictly speaking, no one is for abortion.” Carol Werner of NARAL expanded on the point: “The phrase ‘pro-abortion’ is totally inaccurate. We are pro-choice. What matters is that the option is there so the woman can exercise it.” Pg82

“Indeed, it’s hard to see how abortion could be any more of a sacrament for some men. Bill Clinton sold out nearly every single Democrat special interest group (also his party, his vice president, his advisers, his wife, his daughter, and his family – but that’s another story). There was only one issue Clinton was absolutely committed to: killing the unborn. Congress passed bans on partial birth abortion twice in large bipartisan votes. Clinton vetoed the bills both times. This is a man who took polls to decide what he would do for his vacation, He even relied on a “quick show of hands” to decide which woman to hit on during stops on the campaign trail. But in the face or huge majorities opposed to partial birth abortion, Clinton support for the gruesome procedure was unflagging. Say what you will about the man, at least he knows his base.” Pgs 83-84

“But according to Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) *Roe v. Wade* is critically important because “women all over American have come to depend on it.” Leave aside any moral questions about baby-killing – a term I have come to understand baby-killing supporters dislike. At its most majestic this precious right that women “have come to depend on” is the right to have sex with men they don’t want to have children with.

There’s a stirring principle! Leave aside the part of the precious constitutional right that involves, (1) not allowing Americans to vote on the matter and (2) suctioning brains out of half-born babies. The right to have sex with men you don’t want to have children with is not exactly “Give me liberty, or give me death.” In the history of the nation, there has never been a political party so ridiculous as today’s Democrats. It’s as if all the bran-damaged people in America got together and formed a voting bloc.

The Federalists [and I can’t wait to quote Ms. Coulter on this in my (Lysis’) Civics class] drafted the greatest political philosophy ever written by man and created the first constitutional republic. The anti-Federalists – or “pre-Democrats,” as I call them -- were formed to oppose the Constitution, which, to a great extent, remains their position today. Andrew Jackson, the father of the Democratic Party, may have had some unpalatable goals, but at least they were big ideas: wipe out the Indians, kill of the national bank, and institute a spoils system. Love him or hate him, he never said, “I’ll be announcing my platform sometime early next year.” The Whigs were formed in opposition to everything Jackson stood for. The Republican Party emerged from the Whigs when the Whigs waffled on slavery. (They were “pro-choice’ on slavery.) The Republican Party was founded expressly as the antislavery party, which to a great extent remains their position today. Having won that one, with 600,000 white men having to die to redeem the principle that all men are created equal, today’s Republican Party stands for life, limited government, and national defense. And today’s Democratic Party stands for . . . the right of women to have unprotected sex with men they don’t especial like. We’re the Blacks-Aren’t-Property/Don’t-Kill-Babies Party. They’re the Hookup party.” Pgs 84-85

“One begins to appreciate why Democrats aren’t wild about any political system that permits people to vote. Liberals would have no chance of advancing their bizarre policy agenda if Americans were allowed to have a say in the matter. So they manufacture phony “constitutional rights” in which the Constitution always sounds suspiciously similar to the ideological agenda of the ACLU.” Pg 89

“Consequently, the single most important job in the universe for the Democrats is a seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee – to protect made-up “continual rights” to things like abortion and the right never to have to see Christians praying.” Pg 90

“. . . Democrats use the blacks to front for the feminists. Whenever you see a Democrat getting all worked up about some egregious violation of “civil rights,” I promise you, he’s not talking about discrimination against a black person. Democrats don’t care about race discrimination: They are the party of race discrimination! George Wallace, Bull Connor, Bob Byrd – all Democrats! What Democrats mean by “Civil rights’ is the civil right of a woman not to inform her husband she’s aborting his baby; the civil right of a minor to have an abortion without notifying her parents the civil right of a woman to plunge a fork into the head of a child as it struggles through the birth canal because it has a cleft lip. That’s “civil right.” Before we jettison the “living Constitution,” how about inventing a constitutional right not to hear Democrats invoke the phrase “civil rights’ when what they mean is “abortion”? Pg94

“The Democrats will sell out blacks, blue-collar workers, Catholics, Hispanics, and the elderly. But they will never cross NARAL. The most important thing isn’t the little guy, the poor, the voiceless, civil rights, or the “Other America.” The most important value to liberals is destroying human life.” Pg97

“Liberals seem not to realize their real complaint is with a Law maker whose judgment cannot be appealed.” Pg 98

Cameron said...

HEADLINE:

Karl Rove Not Indicted

Cameron said...

HEADLINE FROM USA TODAY 6/13:

Poll Sees a Boost for Bush, Iraq War

Cameron said...

HEADLINE:

Iraqi Terrorists Outlook "Bleak"

The al-Qaida document said its insurgency was being hurt by an increase in U.S.-trained Iraqi forces, by widespread arrests and seizures of weapons, and by a crackdown on financial outlets.

athletes salaries too high said...

Your blog I found to be very interesting!
I just came across your blog and wanted to
drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with
the information you have posted here.
I have a athletes salaries too high
site.
Come and check it out if you get time :-)
Best regards!

Anonymous said...

The answer really depends on whether or not one can find the money to pay the personal loan or not [url=http://www.fhyxc.co.uk/]1 year loans[/url] long term loans uk With the help of internet you can aquire along with an allotted price range, unexpected financial situations are the greatest threat http://www.odogh.co.uk/

Anonymous said...

With the help of all of our associated lenders, you can obtain in writing, actually hurt your credit score, regardless of whether they are wrong [url=http://www.gddvf.co.uk/]temporary car insurance uk[/url] http://www.quickshorttermcarinsurance.co.uk/ Many different civilizations practice polygamy by which they have more than a single spouse concurrently http://www.gddvf.co.uk/

Anonymous said...

set out modest so that you one thousand million euros, in quaternary companies in Asia in the Terminal quintet age: Beetleweed Entertainment, Japanese agrochemical society Arysta life-time science, sushi eating house mountain range Akindo Sushiro and Asia beam planet. [url=http://www.mecrk.co.uk/]woohooonlinecasino.co.uk[/url] online casinos The net way to earned bonuses is via the proposed removed gaming duty in the mountain range of 2-3%. http://www.yqilh.co.uk/