Page 34 of 39 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 386

Thread: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

  1. #331
    Student Boomyal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    03-05-11 @ 02:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    161

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    ......Is that a negative trait in your view?...
    Often times, yes. And in your case, most definitely yes! I liken it to a high powered automotive engine that someone forgot to hook the driveshaft to.

  2. #332
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    Quote Originally Posted by Boomyal View Post
    Often times, yes. And in your case, most definitely yes! I liken it to a high powered automotive engine that someone forgot to hook the driveshaft to.
    So essentially, you are telling me that in my case, seeming to be educated and knowledgeable about the subject of which I speak is a negative quality for me to have.

    I would be better served if I didn't seem erudite.

    I have this correct?
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  3. #333
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    LIBTARDISTAN
    Last Seen
    05-01-10 @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,629

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    Quote Originally Posted by Cochise View Post
    Since they didn't go over this in your GED course, I guess it's up to me to educate you, boy. Indians of the Southwest, along with Mexican-Americans and descendants of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans, typically have some among their numbers deported as a result of seeming "too Mexican" (particularly during deportation craze periods, such as that of the Depression), despite the fact that they're entirely unconnected with Mexico and have been ever since the Mexican-American war. See, Indian appearance doesn't die, comrade! Since most Mexicans are Indians (though the upper class is white), and have Spanish names because of the colonization, it can be a bit hard to distinguish these things if you're going by profiling.
    So you are sayiing they all look alike...Gotcha....
    If they would have had proper ID, they wouldn't have been deported 80 years ago..........
    I could not care less if the name on the ID sounds Spanish, as long as they have one.......

  4. #334
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    LIBTARDISTAN
    Last Seen
    05-01-10 @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,629

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Actually, I openly called the thought-terminating clishe "Illegal means illegal" mindless rhetoric. I'm not sure how you confused the two things.

    Presenting an actual argument of some sort, regardless if I agree with it or not =/= mindless rhetoric.

    Presenting mindless rhetoric = mindless rhetoric

    Thought-terminating-cliches such as "Illegal means illegal" are worthless ways to justify invalid logic.

    The drawback of using thought-terminating-cliches (which is essentially all that mindless rhetoric is) is that it makes it seem s as though the position being espoused is not fully thought out and that the person utilizing such a tactic cannot adequately present a rebuttal to the positions espoused by their opponent.

    The benefit is that it can give the opposite appearance to those who have not filly thought out their positions and are themselves incapable of adequately presenting a rebuttal to the positions espoused by the opponent.

    Whether or not to use this tack really depends on the people that one is trying to gain support from. If they are going for people who are content with invalid logical positions, these cliches are a great tool. If they are going for people who prefer to have valid logical positions, then the cliches are a terrible detriment to their goal.




    You do realize that you just said that I seem to have "extensive knowledge and or education" on the subject, right?

    Is that a negative trait in your view?
    He said, 'seeming eruditeness'...............
    Things are not always as they seem.......
    Nice dissertation though, it rivals Clinton's 'if' testimony.....

  5. #335
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    Quote Originally Posted by Partisan View Post
    Things are not always as they seem.......
    And yet another thought-terminating cliche.


    ...it rivals Clinton's 'if' testimony.....
    Is. He said it depended on what the definition of "is" is in his testimony.

    Just like knowing that Bush served in the National Guard would have been helpful for you prior to asking me if I thought the last three presidents hadn't earned the right to be proud.

    It's these little details (that are often called "facts" by those in the know) that are the foundation of having a valid point.

    Without them, one must rely on pure drivel, such as thought-terminating cliches, ellipses, and winking smileys.

    With them, however, one can be seemingly erudite.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  6. #336
    Sage
    The Giant Noodle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Last Seen
    11-03-14 @ 05:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,333

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    launch em out of the country. BUT.... only the ugly ones.

    INFACT ladies and gentlemen...
    Set up a panel of 2000 men and women from all different ages and ethnic origins and sexual preference.

    Perform raids all over the nation arresting every single one of the Illegals.

    NEXT......
    Each and every illegal is rated on a scale of attractiveness.
    20% of the highest rated men can stay.

    For the women, anyone of them getting higher than a 65 percentile may stay in the United States. They also MUST be single with no kids.

    Those that get approved to stay here get AMNESTY!!!!!

    Now Im going to hide under my desk in fear of reading responses from people that dont have a sense of humor
    CORPORATE GREED AND UNION GREED
    DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS
    DESTROYING THE BEST OF AMERICA ONE DAY AT A TIME

    This is the worst kind of discrimination. The kind against ME! ~ Bender

  7. #337
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    LIBTARDISTAN
    Last Seen
    05-01-10 @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,629

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    [quote=Tucker Case;1058640427]And yet another thought-terminating cliche. [quote]

    It is what it is......
    However in this case, I would consider 'seemingly' a qualifier.......

    Is. He said it depended on what the definition of "is" is in his testimony.

    Yes, 'is' is what it is......Typo.....

    Just like knowing that Bush served in the National Guard would have been helpful for you prior to asking me if I thought the last three presidents hadn't earned the right to be proud.
    Amend that to two of the last three......

    It's these little details (that are often called "facts" by those in the know) that are the foundation of having a valid point.

    Without them, one must rely on pure drivel, such as thought-terminating cliches, ellipses, and winking smileys.


    One incorrect 'fact' does not dismiss a position, especially if other verifiable proof can be introduced to bolster that position......

    With them, however, one can be seemingly erudite.
    I disagree with that.......

    Hmmmm, guilty of a typo, however not significant enough for you to mistake exactly to what I was referring to, kind of nullifies your point beyond the the fact that you are a superior spellchecker.....
    The attempt to deflect the gist of your statement by pointing out an error in one of my presented 'facts', does not prove your position & you didn't answer the question....
    In lieu of Dubya, I submit John Adams & all of the others with 'none' next to their names on the list provided below...
    That said, hopefully you can clarify some things for me......

    there are only two types of people in this world who have earned the right to be "proud" of being American: Those who served in the military, and those who immigrated here (regardless of whether it was legally or illegally).
    According to your earlier statement, is it your position that both presidents Obama & Clinton can not be 'proud' Americans due to the fact they they were never in the armed forces?..........
    Here is a link to the military service record of the rest of the U.s. presidents:
    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_by_militar y_service]List of Presidents of the United States by military service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
    Is it your position that any individual on this list with 'none' next to their name does not have the right to be a 'proud' American?.......
    Does this position extend to those who are incapable of service through physical disability?.......
    Can I assume this also includes those who were barred from serving because of gender or sexual orientation?.....
    Last edited by Partisan; 03-25-10 at 07:06 AM.

  8. #338
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    Quote Originally Posted by Partisan View Post
    In lieu of Dubya, I submit John Adams & all of the others with 'none' next to their names on the list provided below...
    That said, hopefully you can clarify some things for me......
    Excellent. Discussing the concepts I've presented. I'm all for that.

    I will gladly clarify my points to the best of my abilities. Hopefully it will help illuminate the differences between my actual stance, and what it has been perceived as by others in this thread.



    According to your earlier statement, is it your position that both presidents Obama & Clinton can not be 'proud' Americans due to the fact they they were never in the armed forces?..........
    Actually, this is not accurate. I did NOT say "can not be 'proud' Americans". I said that they did not earn the right to be proud of being an American.

    I can see why this would be confusing, because our culture has become one that does not place a high degree of worth on personal responsibility and accomplishment, while my stance is entirely based on personal responsibility and accomplishment.

    First, being proud of being an American is totally different from being a "proud American". Being a proud American is very general, and can include many things, such as being an American who is proud of their job/family/countrymen, etc.

    Whereas being proud of being an American means being proud of the fact that you are an American, and nothing else. So I'm talking about a very specific type of pride here. Not a type of person who is proud.

    Next, there is a clear difference between not having earned a "right" and actually having a right. Anyone has a right to be proud of being an American, but only two types of people have actually earned that right.

    Those are people for whom their status as an American is either 1. a personal accomplishment that they achieved or 2. Something they put effort into defending in someway, which is in and of itself an achievement.

    While people have a right to be proud about things they did nothing to get, it is an utterly retarded position to have. Pride is only appropriate in situations of achievement.

    For example, if I said I'm proud of the fact that my shoe size in 10 1/2, you'd probably agree that this is a very silly thing to be proud of. This is because I haven't done anything to be proud of in this case.

    The same is true for being an American in most cases. Nothing was actually done by these people in order to warrant being proud of their status as Americans. It was purely passive. They were simply born into it

    Clinton and Obama have earned the right to be proud of the fact that they became Presidents, because this is a tremendous accomplishment. But the fact that they did not actually do anything to become Americans means that they did not earn the right to be proud of being Americans.

    That doesn't mean that they can't be proud of being Americans, it merely means that doing so is retarded.

    Personally, I feel lucky to be an American. I am proud of the people who have accomplished things that made it possible for me to be lucky. But I am humbled by their accomplishments and sacrifices.

    I am humbled to be an American, because I am fully aware that I did not do a goddamn thing to deserve it.


    There is only one way to earn the right to be proud of yourself for something, and that is by taking an active role in accomplishing that thing. Being born is a passive thing. And that's how most people become Americans. Some of those people then feel the need to earn that status, so they make the choice to earn it through military service. Those people, who are willing to fight for their status, earn their status after they have received it.

    I have tremendous respect for those who have earned that which I only received through luck.



    Here is a link to the military service record of the rest of the U.s. presidents:
    List of Presidents of the United States by military service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Is it your position that any individual on this list with 'none' next to their name does not have the right to be a 'proud' American?.......
    It is my position that they have not earned that right.

    They are still free to take what they have not earned if they so choose, but my personal stance is that taking that which one has not earned is immoral, so it is not something I myself would do.



    Does this position extend to those who are incapable of service through physical disability?.......
    Of course, unless they are immigrants who took an active role in becoming Americans.


    Can I assume this also includes those who were barred from serving because of gender or sexual orientation?.....
    Of course, unless they are immigrants who took an active role in becoming Americans.



    My stance regarding being proud of being an American is simply based on logic.

    I look at my being an American as a gift. It was not something I achieved or earned in any way. Most Americans are like me. They did not achieve or earn being an American.

    Those who joined the military have earned their status through their actions, and those who came here from elsewhere achieved that status. I am grateful to those people, for they are the people who have given me this gift.

    Taking personal pride in their accomplishments and sacrifices that have granted me this wonderful gift is a disservice to their accomplishments. I can be proud of them, but to take that pride and apply it to myself, simply because I got lucky to be the benefactor of their accomplishments, would be a form of theft.

    That is what I meant by earning the right to be proud.


    Let me use different natural traits to explain this further. Let's look at innate intelligence versus being erudite (since I loved that whole exchange, and my point here will relate to the "seemingly" qualifier you referenced).

    Intelligence is very heavily associated with genetics (but does have an environmental factor). It is not really something an individual has an ability to affect directly. Knowledge, however is something that is always acquired by an individual in some way.

    In my way of viewing things, being intelligent is nothing to be proud of since ti is not an accomplishment. Someone who is intelligent is merely lucky.

    While being erudite is something one can be proud of because it is always an accomplishment. It takes some degree of effort to become erudite.

    Taking this further, though, if someone isn't intelligent, yet they can manage to appear or seem intelligent, the fact that they seem intelligent despite the fact that they are not, is definitely an accomplishment. It would absolutely require effort on their part to give this appearance.

    The same is true of someone who seems erudite even though they are not actually erudite. In order to give this appearance, they must put forth some effort. Their ignorance of the subject provides a nearly insurmountable obstacle to giving the appearance that they are indeed erudite. In order to overcome this obstacle, a tremendous amount of effort would absolutely be required.

    Perhaps even more effort than actually becoming erudite would.

    Thus, even being seemingly erudite is an accomplishment in and of itself, and is therefore it is something a person can take pride it. It does not matter if the person who is seemingly erudite is actually erudite or actually ignorant. Either possibility means that effort and accomplishment is always required in order to give off the appearance.

    Being an idiot who comes across as intelligent is also something to be proud of. But being naturally intelligent is not something to be proud of.

    This is why I loved that phasing from Boomyal. It doesn't matter if the "seemingly" was put there as a qualifier to imply I am actually ignorant. I have earned the right to be proud of that label regardless of whether or not I am ignorant. In fact, I might have done more to earn that right to be proud if I am actually ignorant.

    Here's the ironic part. If he had said I was "seemingly intelligent" instead of erudite, in an effort to imply I was actually an idiot and that "things are not always what they seem" (as you so eloquently put it), I could only be proud of that if I actually was an idiot.

    If I really was intelligent, and I give the appearance of that, I haven't accomplished anything since that should be easy for an intelligent person to do, so I would have nothing to be proud of.

    But if I was an idiot, and I somehow managed to give the appearance that I was intelligent, well that would be one hell of an accomplishment, and something I could take pride in.

    I hope this helps clarify my stance on being proud to be an American to some degree.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  9. #339
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    The illegal immigrants are nothing but red herring or pawns of the american greedy capitalists who exploit them. I have never seen one of them jailed and thrown in a horrible hot tent for breaking laws forbidding the hiring of illegal aliens.

  10. #340
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Arizona sheriff launches immigration sweep

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post
    The illegal immigrants are nothing but red herring or pawns of the american greedy capitalists who exploit them. I have never seen one of them jailed and thrown in a horrible hot tent for breaking laws forbidding the hiring of illegal aliens.
    And that is the problem. People are focused soo much on the illegal immigrants that come to this country, they don't even bat an eye to the illegal hiring done by American companies. Heaven forbid we actually crack down on the companies that do the illegal hiring.

Page 34 of 39 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •