don't forget to join the one-minute boycott of CBS for their unwillingness to show an ad that talks about the mounting federal deficit; i assume conservatives care about the deficit?check out www.moveon.org

To: FranklinRe: Free Speech (as long as it's what your wanting to hear)You better shudddup or I'll tackle ya to the ground!!! I was a rassler you know......

Not sure about Ozzy in 04 although i guess i'd have to watch more of that reality TV stuff to see what he's really like...Another funny one:http://www.kaicurry.com/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html

Finally! Something we can agree on.... Ozzy in 04!

Thanks a lot there Wilbur. Very funny indeed.

Here it is Buddy Boy.http://farmgolf.com/Howard%20Dean's%20Crazy%20Train.mp3

Speaking of laughing, I just read in today's NYT column by Maureen Dowd that Howard Dean's Iowa rebel yell finale was remixed into Ozzy's "Crazy Train." Any idea of a website where I can find this?

Laughy Boy's bizarre post Tues. night, where he roared about Dubya winning future elections and ended with a final screeching "BWAHAHAHAHHAAAAAA..... " left more than a few readers of this list wondering about the emotional stability of the not so compassionate conservative.Take that Ritalin son.

My favorite part of the State of the Union:BUSH: Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year. DEMOCRATS: (Applause.)BUSH: The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule. REPUBLICANS: (Applause.) This is from the official transcript of the speech.

Hey laughy,So you like Kerry, don't you? Blowback as a band won't endorse anyone although individual members may have their favorite likes and dislikes.Here's some more for you, laughy (see if you can spot the reason): "...terrible regional conflicts that brings so much suffering to innocent Africans--from Congro, to Sudan, to the Ivory Coast." The Resident, 15 January 2003, speaking via video to delegates of the second US-sub Saharan African Trade and Economic Forum.

Howie shows his true extremist leftist colors again:Howard Dean's bizarre concession speech Monday night, where he roared about winning future primaries in Ohio, New York, Arizona, Oklahoma, etc., etc., etc., and ended with a final screeching "Yeeehaahhhh!" left more than a few journalists wondering about the emotional stability of the former Democratic presidential front-runner."[Dean's speech] was a little strange," Newsweek's Jonathan Alter said Tuesday. "He looked like he was off his medication or something.""He was just trying to be feisty for his supporters," Alter told radio host Don Imus. "But he just went way over the top. He was about as presidential as Howard Beale in 'Network,'" the liberal columnist observed.Alter said the press had egg on its face after anointing Dean as all but unstoppable, only to see his personality quirks and questions about his temperament send his campaign into a tailspin in Iowa."I think that the press should learn a thing or two and not get into one of these situations where we proclaim the whole thing over," he told Imus.Iowa Caucus day started off badly for Dean, when he grew testy during an interview on "Fox & Friends" after being asked about his admission that he hyperventilated in 1991 upon learning that Vermont Gov. Richard Snelling's death had left him in charge."If you were to become president of the United States in charge of almost 300 million people, we don't have to worry about you breathing in and out of a paper bag, do we?" asked host Steve Doocy.Dean bristled and accused Fox of hitting him below the belt, even though just last week he acknowledged suffering "anxiety attacks" in the past and talked openly about the hyperventilation episode.In response to Doocy's grilling, the former front-runner pledged that he would release his medical records "at the time when we get them all together."Go Howard!!! I am going to vote for you in my state's primary election. Howard Dean; the best man to ensure George W. Bush will be re-elected to a 2nd term!BWAHAHAHAHHAAAAAA..... Bush in 2004

hey laughy,How about this?"Name calling is the domain of children and childish adults who only supercede such children in that they possess a slightly larger vocabulary - rich in insult and denigrating aspersion, yet absent of rhetorical finesse and/or a developed conclusion.""somehow I think you are not a Harvard graduate with your rapid (and vapid) descent into a facile argumentum ad misericordium segued into a typical whiney liberal ad-hominem aspersion. You did not present any logic in your whiney, rambling post."QED

Franklin:Your expert use of rhetorical logic is compelling, yet somehow I think you are not a Harvard graduate with your rapid (and vapid) descent into a facile argumentum ad misericordium segued into a typical whiney liberal ad-hominem aspersion. You did not present any logic in your whiney, rambling post.Name calling is the domain of children and childish adults who only supercede such children in that they possess a slightly larger vocabulary - rich in insult and denigrating aspersion, yet absent of rhetorical finesse and/or a developed conclusion.Oh, and by the way, Your mother wears army boots.

Yes, Hack. Same old denial of facts, same old denial that the Administration is built on LIES.So the Administration is zealously pursuing O'Neil for the possibility that he may have disclosed a secret document while stalling about the fact that someone in the Administration actually blew the cover of an Agency operative.O'Neil who actually thought that the budget deficit is a problem - along with Alan Greenspan - are poo-pooed by Cheney who tells them that Reagan showed that "deficits don't matter."It continues to demonstrate that the Administration has no principles, only the raw pursuit of power. And Mr. Laughing below, feels vindicated because "they" are in power. Yet it seems like Mr. Laughing doesn't like Mr. Bush's pal, Vicente Fox.No principle, no right or wrong, just arrogance, power, and lies. But like a house of cards, this Administration will crumble under the combined weight of its lies and its inability to tell the truth, as the repeated lying about Air Force One shows time and again.First they ignore, then they ridicule, then they attack.

I see the same old crap is still going on here

OH THE HUMANITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!A disgruntled ex-employee tries to dig up dirt on his former boss (the rightful winner of the 2000 Presidential Election, George W. Bush) and uses classified documents to do it.......OHHHHHHHHHHHHHH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And he sites an official Clinton Administration policy toward regime change in Iraq too……. How dare he!!!! Where is Howie Dean? Where is Ramsey Clark? Where is Vicente Fox? Where is my mommy????You idiots just can’t figure out why you are not in power........ Swirling in your own juices once again! I love it!!!!!!

Bush Sought to Oust Hussein From Start, Ex-Official SaysBy RICHARD W. STEVENSONPublished: January 12, 2004WASHINGTON, Jan. 11 — President Bush was focused on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq from the start of his administration, more than seven months before the terrorist attacks that he later cited as the trigger for a more aggressive foreign policy, Paul H. O'Neill, Mr. Bush's first Treasury secretary, said in an interview broadcast on Sunday. "From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go," Mr. O'Neill said in an interview with the CBS program "60 Minutes."Mr. O'Neill, who was dismissed by Mr. Bush more than a year ago over differences on economic policy, said Iraq was discussed at the first National Security Council meeting after Mr. Bush's inauguration. The tone at that meeting and others, Mr. O'Neill said, was "all about finding a way to do it," with no real questioning of why Mr. Hussein had to go or why it had to be done then. "For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap," Mr. O'Neill said.Mr. O'Neill gave the interview to "60 Minutes" to promote a new book, "The Price of Loyalty," by Ron Suskind. Mr. O'Neill cooperated extensively on the book, turning over 19,000 documents from his two years as Treasury secretary, including transcripts of National Security Council meetings, Mr. Suskind told "60 Minutes."Mr. O'Neill also gave an interview to Time magazine, which quoted him as casting doubt on the strength of the evidence Mr. Bush cited in making the case for war with Iraq."In the 23 months I was there, I never saw anything that I would characterize as evidence of weapons of mass destruction," Mr. O'Neill told Time, speaking of his tenure in the administration. "There were allegations and assertions by people. But I've been around a hell of a long time, and I know the difference between evidence and assertions and illusions or allusions and conclusions that one could draw from a set of assumptions."To me there is a difference between real evidence and everything else," he continued. "And I never saw anything in the intelligence that I would characterize as real evidence."Mr. O'Neill, a former chairman of Alcoa, served in the Nixon and Ford administrations and was close to Vice President Dick Cheney and Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman. Mr. O'Neill had a rocky tenure as Treasury secretary. His departure came after he made it clear he differed with the White House over the need for more tax cuts. In his typically blunt style, he made no effort at the time to pretend he was not angry and hurt over being forced out.But the account of his service to Mr. Bush, as given to Mr. Suskind, whose book is to be published Tuesday, is the first by a former senior Bush administration official. It is sure to fuel questions from Mr. Bush's political opponents about the administration's rationale for invading Iraq, and to focus new attention on Mr. Bush's management style and the balance in the White House between politics and policy.New York Times

oops, here's the scoop on the book:Mr. O'Neill gave the interview to "60 Minutes" to promote a new book, "The Price of Loyalty," by Ron Suskind. Mr. O'Neill cooperated extensively on the book, turning over 19,000 documents from his two years as Treasury secretary, including transcripts of National Security Council meetings, Mr. Suskind told "60 Minutes."

SO I guess none of you watched 60 Minutes last night.The Administration started planning the ouster of Saddam ten days after the inauguration.Time to read "Inside the White House." Get reading!

Yeah I never remember Bush the first or his little illegitimate Commander in Chimp son compare Saddam to Adolf Hitler. No that never happened kids!!! Cover your ears quick, they're talking about our beloved leader, the leader can do no wrong, we love the leader!!! (LMFOFL!!!!)Supporters of President Bush used TV ads morphing the face of Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA) into that of Osama Bin Laden during the 2002 Senate race. Cover your eyes and bury your head in the sand kids, quickly. Or better yet prove this fact wrong.

NEW VIDEO UNCOVERED: MOVEON.ORG FINALIST IS PRODUCER OF ANOTHER BUSH/HITLER ADWho are the desperate ones, nimrod? CLUE: Who lost the House, Senate, White House, the Senate again and will loose all of the above in 2004???

Dennis Kucinich Shows Pie Chart on Radio Debate DES MOINES, Iowa -- Federal spending was the topic and Democratic presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich came prepared with a pie chart to argue his point about a bloated Pentagon budget. But although many listened to Tuesday's presidential debate, few could see the Ohio congressman's prop.The debate was broadcast only on National Public Radio....But there is no liberal bias in the media. Right?

That is pretty funny. Moveon has a contest, posts the material than blames it on the republicans. They knew exactly what they were doing, they put it out there, it got picked up by the networks and is geeting free play on the news. I have never voted a straight ticket in my life, but in 2004 I will not vote for any democrat considering the vicious attacks going on in this campaign.Here's another article I read on the subject-- A Web site founded by former members of the Clinton administration is defending a presidential campaign ad created for Moveon.org that shows images of President Bush morphing into Adolf Hitler."Once again, the comparison of Bush with Hitler strikes terror in the hearts of Republicans - because they know how close it cuts to the truth," the Web site Democrats.com said in a report posted near the top of its political news roundup on Monday.News that Moveon.org had already yanked the Hitler ad was "one more victory for GOP censorship, bringing us ever closer to a Nazi dictatorship," the Web site complained. Democrats.com cofounder David Lytel was President Clinton's personal webmaster, the Web site boasts, saying he helped to develop and edit the White House Web site. [Lytel has since left Democrats.com and launched the Committee to Re-Defeat President Bush.] Former Clinton pollster Stanley Greenberg sits on Democrats.com's advisory board, along with Bell, formerly the head of the Interactive Media Department at the Democratic National Committee.Jock Gill, another advisory board member, was Director of Special Projects in the Office of Media Affairs in the Clinton White House. He also helped develop the White House's Web site.Democrats.com advisory board member Greg Simon was the chief domestic policy adviser to Vice President Al Gore. Moveon.org was originally founded in 1998 in a failed bid to derail President Clinton's impeachment, and is now closely associated with former Vice President Al Gore.Neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton has commented on Bush-Hitler comparisons by Web sites closely associated with their co-presidency.Yesterday Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie called on Democrats to repudiate the Bush-Hitler ad - but so far the only reaction has been from Jewish groups."It is shocking that a mainstream political group like MoveOn.org not only allowed this vile and outrageous comparison of the American President to Adolf Hitler to be entered into its 'Bush in 30 Seconds' contest in the first place, but that they even went so far as to make it available to the public on the Internet," said Anti-Defamation League President Abraham Foxman.

To Idiot Kool-Aide drinker:You are actually linking to the official statement from the accused...(LMFAO!!!!)Were you out protesting fur coat wearers during Propaganda 101?From your site, MoveOn.org:************* BUSH IN 30 SECONDS **************All About George BushHere's a short list of the top 7 reasons we're running this ad campaign against President George W. Bush and his administration. We hope this informs your own commercials, and inspires you to look further into the policies of the Bush Administration and their effect on the American public.1. It appears that the Bush Administration has consistently misled the American public about Iraq , most significantly regarding Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction and his ties to al Queda and Osama bin Laden.http://www.fair.org/press-releases/beyond-niger.html2. The Bush Administration's regressive environmental policies have lowered cleanliness standards for our air and water while allowing utility companies (many of whom are Bush campaign contributors) to profit off of the weakened regulations. In 2002, the head of the EPA's Office of Regulatory Enforcement resigned, complaining that the agency was “fighting a White House that seems determined to weaken the rules we are trying to enforce." (CNN, Aug. 22, 2002)The Bush Record on the Environment for 2003:http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/2003.asp3. Bush is underfunding education. The President cut $200 million from his own No Child Left Behind Act, eliminating crucial educational programs for lower income children and cutting professional training for more than 20,000 teachers.Flawed from its very foundation, No Child Left Behind is based on then-Governor Bush's late-‘90s “Texas Miracle,”—a program of standardized testing designed to increase performance and reduce dropout rates--now recognized as a scandalous failure.http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0338/schanberg.php4. The Bush Administration's Patriot Act threatens our constitutional rights and civil liberties. Passed by a post 9/11 Congress, the Patriot act expands the ability of law enforcement to conduct secret searches, and engage various forms of surveillance, including internet monitoring and wiretapping. It gives the FBI access to American citizens' highly personal medical, financial, mental health, and student records without notification or permission, and allows them to investigate individuals without probable cause of a crime. Finally, it permits non-citizens to be jailed based on mere suspicion and held indefinitely in six month increments without meaningful judicial review.http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12126&c=2075. Bush's Tax Cuts only benefit the rich. Bush claimed that his tax cut would “reduce tax rates for everyone who pays income tax.” He failed to mention that this “relief” program would put half of the tax cut's dividends into the hands of our nation's wealthiest 5%, while 8.1 million citizens in the bottom half of the income bracket receive approximately $300 a year.http://www.ctj.org/html/gwbfinal.htm6. 3.3 million jobs (93,000 in August of 2003 alone) have been lost since Bush took office--more than the last 11 Presidents combined. (Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 2001-August 2003) Meanwhile, huge corporations are paying fewer taxes than ever:http://www.cbpp.org/10-16-03tax.htm7. Bush is underfunding homeland security : While energetic in waging war abroad, the Bush administration has been oddly lethargic in fortifying our defenses at home. Domestic security agencies have been neglected. Police and firefighters have been denied essential resources, and muddled public strategy has only spread alarm and confusion.http://www.ppionline.org/More Recommended Reading:The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century, by Paul KrugmanDude, Where’s My Country?, by Michael MooreLies (And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them): A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right, by Al FrankenThe Bush Dyslexicon: Observations on a National Disorder, by Mark Crispin MillerBushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush’s America, by Molly IvinsBush’s Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential, by James MooreThe Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception, by David CornWeapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War on Iraq, by Sheldon Rampton, John C. Stauben(What a diverse group...)***********************************************************SUN JAN 04 2004 14:37:17 ETMOVEON.ORG FEATURES AD COMPARING BUSH TO HITLER...ONLINE CONTEST http://www.bushin30seconds.org/ TO MAKE BEST SPOT TURNS VICIOUS. WEBSITE FEATURED AD, LATER PULLED IT AFTER COMPLAINTS..MOVEON.ORG HITLER/BUSH AD CONTENDER... http://www.rnc.org/moveon2.movMOVEON.ORG SCRIPTGRAPHIC: Pictures Of HitlerHITLER: (Speaking In German)CHYRON: We have taken new measures to protect our homeland,GRAPHIC: Pictures Of HitlerHITLER: (Speaking In German)CHYRON: I believe I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator,GRAPHIC: Pictures Of HitlerHITLER: (Speaking In German)CHYRON: God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them,GRAPHIC: Pictures of President BushHITLER: (Speaking In German)CHYRON: and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did.CHYRON: SOUND FAMILIAR?BACKGROUND: Cheering German Crowd[The MoveOn.org rules they say: Content: We're NOT looking for the same old slick political ads from Washington media consultants. Instead, we're looking for really creative ads that will engage and enlighten viewers and help them understand the truth about George Bush. There are some legal limits on what you can do (see below), and we're not going to post anything that would be inappropriate for television, but other than that what you put in your ads is up to you (live action, animation, personal rant, whatever!)***********************************************************SECOND BUSH/HITLER AD APPEARS AT MOVEON.ORGMON JAN 05 2004 10:27:51 ETA SECOND ADVERT WHICH COMPARES PRESIDENT BUSH TO HITLER STREAMED ON MOVEON.ORG, THE DRUDGE REPORT HAS LEARNED. THE NEW HITLER SPOT FEATURED THE GRAPHIC 'SPONSORED BY MOVEON.ORG.'[CLICK TO VIEW AD]GRAPHIC: Nazi Flags In A Parade GRAPHIC: Hitler HITLER: (Speaking In German) CHYRON: A NATION WARPED BY LIES GRAPHIC: German Troops Marching GRAPHIC: Hitler In Car In Parade GRAPHIC: German Troops Marching CHYRON: LIES FUEL FEAR GRAPHIC: German Tanks CHYRON: FEAR FUELS AGGRESSION GRAPHIC: German Artillery Firing GRAPHIC: German Planes Dropping Bombs GRAPHIC: German Tanks Firing CHYRON: INVASION GRAPHIC: German Tanks Rolling Down Street CHYRON: OCCUPATION GRAPHIC: Hitler With Hand Raised : Sig Heil! Sig Heil! CHYRON: WHAT WERE WAR CRIMES IN 1945 GRAPHIC: President Bush With Hand Raised At Inauguration : Sig Heil! Sig Heil! CHYRON: IS FOREIGN POLICY IN 2003 CHYRON: SPONSORED BY MOVEON.ORG**THE 30-SECOND VIDEO IS THE SECOND AD COMPARING BUSH TO HITLER TO BE STREAMED ON MOVEON.ORG. THE CLIP IS PART OF A CONTEST TO FIND THE BEST BUSH-BASHING AD.A PANEL OF JUDGES, INCLUDING ACTOR-DIRECTOR MICHAEL MOORE, AND DEM CAMPAIGN STRATEGISTS DONNA BRAZILE AND JAMES CARVILLE, WILL SELECT THE WINNER.[EDITOR'S NOTE: Jack Rosen, president of the American Jewish Congress, writes in Monday's WALL STREET JOURNAL: "MoveOn.org informed potential ad makers that 'we're not going to post anything that would be inappropriate for television.' Two of the ads posted on the group's Web site compared Adolf Hitler to George W. Bush. One ad morphed an image of Hitler into President Bush and says that, '1945's war crimes' are '2003's foreign policy.'" Rosen says MoveOn.org is "using the memory of that genocide as a political prop. Their comparison diminishes the reality of what happened, and their actions cheapen the memory of a horrific crime. It also does a terrible disservice to this country at a perilous time, when we need to examine the dangers we face with clarity and purpose." Leadership is "about confronting threats to freedom everywhere. President Bush has shown that leadership in Iraq, and our troops have liberated a people who were oppressed by another murderous dictator. MoveOn.org compares this liberation to the Holocaust. It deploys a picture of Hitler to vilify President Bush. Comparing the commander-in-chief of a democratic nation to the murderous tyrant Hitler is not only historically specious, it is morally outrageous. Comparing an American president, any American president, to Hitler is an outrage. The MoveOn.org ad was inexcusable. Political figures such as Al Gore, who have associated themselves with MoveOn.org, have a special responsibility to condemn these ads; donors to the group such as George Soros have the same responsibility. They owe it not just to the memory of the millions who died in the Holocaust. They owe it also as a simple matter of decency."]You guys are never funnier than when you are NOT in power.I'm looking forward to the next 4 years; the 2nd Bush administration

To all the right-wing liars out there, and your friends at the Rush Limbaugh show here's the real story:RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie stooped to a new low today when he launched a coordinated media campaign against MoveOn.org Voter Fund. RNC press operatives have been pushing a vicious and false smear campaign against MoveOn.org Voter Fund for two ads which are not Voter Fund ads. Click here to read about the desperate conservative smear campaignhttp://moveonvoterfund.org/smear/release.html

To the right winger posting here under multiple names,What we are gradually coming to realize is that Racist America can't be fixed, with any amount of higher learning.I wonder if you and your Republican friends will ever -- even with mountains of empirical evidence -- admit that Capitalsm cannot work for the very reason that it is not human nature to live as a dependent soft-totalitarian slave? As long as the Republican Party exists, you can be sure that the ignorance will continue and the bad posts will keep on coming. I grew up thinking that the Americans were true lovers of liberty. Another illusion dies. I don’t understand why people think disillusionment is a bad thing. Never ascribe ulterior motive to government action where that action can also be explained by simple stupidity and/or incompetence. Socialism is TRUTH!

Deleted by topic administrator 07-29-2006 06:00 AM

Re. Cop-killer Mumia:"Mumia probably killed that guy [Officer Daniel Faulkner]. There, I said it. That does not mean he should be denied a fair trial or that he should be put to death. But because we don't want to see him or anyone executed, the efforts to defend him may have overlooked the fact that he did indeed kill that cop. This takes nothing away from the eloquence of his writings or commentary, or the important place he now holds on the international political stage. But he probably did kill that guy." Michel Moore; "Dude, Where's My Country?"; Page 189

MYTHS AND HALF-TRUTHS ABOUT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATIONMYTH: America has lots of room to double the population (The U.S. Census Bureau says that the U.S. population will double this century).TRUTH: The open spaces one sees from an airplane are not where the 260 million new immigrants and their families will settle. They will settle in the already overcrowded urban areas of the country just like they always have. Much of America's open spaces are occupied by food production for our own people and to sustain tens of millions of people in other countries. Open spaces are also part of our national heritage of parks and wilderness. A U.S. Census spokesman recently said we shouldn't be very crowded even at twice the population because we still will have only about a fourth the density of England. This irresponsible "trick" statement averages our open spaces, much of which is farmland, parks, and otherwise uninhabitable land, into the equation. In the sections of the country where most Americans live, we are already very much as crowded as are Europeans. And do we want to live like Europeans who centuries ago destroyed most of their wild areas.MYTH: Americans won't do the work that illegals do.TRUTH: Prior to 1965 when the disastrous Immigration Bill was passed, there was very little immigration. In fact, between 1925 and 1965, there was even a period of net emigration out of the United States. During this time, our grass was getting cut, our meat was being packed, our children were being watched and our houses were being cleaned. The idea that somehow we suddenly can't run a country without an unlimited supply of foreigners is absurd.Those in favor of foreign labor are corporations who are addicted to cheap labor. They are the ones who are benefiting. But their benefit comes at the American tax payer's expense when you consider that the American tax payer is virtually subsidizing the labor costs of the greedy corporations by supplying the illegal foreign workers and their families with welfare, free education, free medical, WICs, housing assistance, etc. -- something the corporations won't do.Americans won't allow themselves to be exploited like illegals do, but they WILL do the work that illegals do for fair compensation and benefits. If Americans did the work that illegals do at higher pay, would that benefit the consumer? You bet it would in the long run. But many Americans who do not care about America's future are consumers who favor the idea of exploiting illegal workers because it keeps commodity and service prices down in the short term.HALF TRUTH: illegals eventually become assimilated Americans.TRUTH: Many do. But Most third world illegals come to the U.S. for personal economic reasons. Most do not come to cherish our democratic system. Many so called "immigration rights" groups "fan the fire" with their rhetoric which encourages immigrants to preserve their culture and language at tax payers expense. Among some of these groups, the word "assimilation" is considered xenophobic. When ultimately illegal immigrants and/or their children do become voting citizens, many vote in blocks (Mexican-American, El Salvadoran-American, Guatemalan-American, etc.), not for the good of America, but for personal economic gain usually at the expense of another group.MYTH: Illegal aliens are better off in the U.S. doing lousy menial jobs than they are in their own country.TRUTH: That may be true for the Illegal aliens in the short run (and businesses that hire them), but for many "undocumented immigrants" (Mexicans make up the majority), the "American legacy of exploitation of immigrants" remains in the minds of their children for many generations to come creating resentment of America and hinders assimilation of even their American born offspring. Resentment of America has created anti-American organizations such as MECHA whose nationwide college and high school members must pledge their support to forcefully take back what they call "Aztlan," the U.S. Southwest ceded in 1846 to the U.S. in the Mexican War. (Don't believe it? Read some of the BlowBack Anti-American Lyrics on the link to the left)HALF TRUTH: Illegal aliens pay taxes that benefit the economy.TRUTH: Most illegal aliens do not receive a typical paycheck with tax deductions -- they are paid in cash and do not pay taxes. Even when they do pay taxes (only possible if they use fraudulent social security numbers or government assigned ID tax numbers), their meager income is not enough to pay for medical expenses and all the expenses for all the children they give birth to. You don't have to look at statistics -- just visit the maternal ward at the L.A. county hospital. There, illegal immigrant women are having thousands of children per year free of charge and can't afford them once they give birth, and that doesn't stop them from having even more children -- most learn how to work the system so that they receive cash assistance and food stamps.A basic principle in economics is this: The more people that assimilate into the system the better -- if it creates a larger tax base. But here in California it hasn't. For example, the feds had to bail out the L.A. County hospital system several years ago and the county hospitals are now again headed for another crisis. The evidence shows that the net results are that illegal immigrants cost the taxpayer significantly more than they pay in taxes.HALF TRUTH: Illegal aliens have a good work ethics.TRUTH: It depends on what one means by "work ethic." If it means that illegals will allow themselves to be exploited, then they have a good work ethic. If it means that a group of day laborers would be consciences in the assembly of precision built automobiles, it might get an argument. But it is irrelevant if an illegal alien has a good work ethic -- they are working illegally!MYTH: Illegal aliens don't affect politics because they can't vote.TRUTH: Just by being counted in the census, illegals give political power to special groups. Many illegals fraudulently vote anyway and there is strong evidence that some key elections have been upset by illegal voters. Politicians represent the "people" even if those people are illegal aliens. Since the number of representatives in congress is fixed, any increase in population in California, for example, due to illegal immigration will require more representation for that group while taking away representation from people in other states. Most politicians that represent areas of large illegal population, vote in the interest of illegal aliens since they are the ones they represent. On the state level, it is clear that politicians like Governor Davis, California Speaker of the House Antonio Villaraigosa, California Senator Hilda Solis, California Assemblyman Gilbert A. Cedillo, etc., all want laws changed in the interest of illegal aliens.MYTH: illegals go to illegal unlicensed medical clinics run by unlicensed quacks because they have no other alternative and because they are afraid of being deported.TRUTH: Illegals know that they won't be deported simply for seeking medical help -- thousands go for free medical help every day. Obviously, the thousands of illegals who give birth in our county hospitals do not seem to be worried about deportation after their free delivery. The real reason many unsophisticated Hispanic illegals don't go to "free" medical facilities is because they actually trust "curanderos" ( type of witch doctors popular in Mexico) over licensed medical doctors.HALF TRUTH: Illegals come to the U.S. for jobs to support their families, and wives and kids in there homeland.TRUTH: Many do. But record numbers of those wives and kids are sneaking over the border to join their breadwinner in the U.S. But most alarming, is the record numbers of dead-beat dads that find an easy escape from their responsibilities in their homeland and in fact abandon their families. There is also strong empirical evidence that even illegal aliens who had good jobs in their homeland still want to be in the U.S. -- most of the world's people want to come to the U.S. because it is a very good place to be for many more reasons than just for a job.MYTH: Pete Wilson's attitude towards illegal aliens stifled trade with Mexico. Governor Davis will change that.TRUTH: Trade from California to Mexico increased 84.5 percent between 1992 and 1997 and did more trading with Mexico than any other state including Texas - all during the central years of the Wilson administration.MYTH: Proposition 187 is unconstitutional because governor Davis says so.TRUTH: Maybe 187 is unconstitutional. But it is not for the governor of California to decide that. That decision must come from the U.S. supreme court. Davis has preempted the supreme court and snubbed his nose at the voters of California by deciding on his own that 187 is unconstitutional -- contradicting a statement he made to the voters "I'm a governor, not a judge."MYTH: The cost of not educating undocumented children is higher than the cost of educating them.TRUTH: This kind of statement is absurd. It assumes that disallowing illegal alien children into our schools and/or deporting them is not an option. The idea that undocumented children are being punished for the bad deeds of their parents is ludicrous. Undocumented children already have citizenship in another country that is responsible for their education. California schools have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding who gets to go to school. This policy is a powerful magnet that attracts illegals to California. The costs are enormous. Undocumented children are being rewarded, not punished.Few disagrees that if the current rate of illegal immigration continues, a school a day will have to be built to accommodate the undocumented children and citizen children of undocumented parents.MYTH: Record public school enrollment on a national level of 17.5 percent from 1983 to 1997, is a result of Baby Boomers.TRUTH: Current Population Surveys (such as reported in the January 1999 Backgrounder) shows that 15.9 percent of the school-age population growth in 1997 had immigrant mothers. In California, officials say a new school each day -- or a new classroom an hour -- is needed to keep up with the growth (Since immigrants are just as likely (even more likely) than natives to go to public school, it's clear that nearly all the increase in public school enrollment over the past 15 years is due to federal immigration policy, not the Baby Boom generation.MYTH: Issuing California driver's licenses to illegal aliens will make our roads safer because they would be trained to drive safely and would have insurance.TRUTH: Giving illegal aliens driver's licenses will only make enforcement of our immigrant laws more difficult -- it would make it harder to detect them. It also "throws in the towel" and sends the wrong message to illegal aliens that they can change the law by breaking the law. Society must assume that anyone who would break the law and drive without a license, would continue to break driving and other laws even if they were licensed and most would not be any safer drivers. Moreover, it is laughable to think that these illegal aliens are going to run out and buy car insurance (one of more profitable documents now being sold to illegals, are fraudulent "proof of insurance" documents).MYTH: Lack of academic achievement and high school dropout rates are caused by the poor economic conditions of immigrants.TRUTH: This belief is another one of those "just accept this as truth" cliches." Poverty in itself does not cause school dropouts. This was proven in a report in Scientific American magazine (Indochinese Refugee Families and Academic Achievement, February, 1992). The article showed that many refugees from Southeast Asia with large families arrived in the U.S. with little more than the clothes on their backs and with no exposure to Western culture or knowledge of the English language. Yet their children display stunning scholastic achievement in American schools. In the U.S., the effect of poverty on education has been focused mainly on two ethnic groups, Black and Hispanics. Ironically, these groups have the most representation by their "leaders" who's livings depend on bringing high visibility to the children's penurious conditions -- instead of emphasis on the hard work it takes to succeed in academics.But for the sake of argument, if poverty of immigrants is the cause of their lack of academic acheivement, why would the U.S. want to import poverty.MYTH: Since illegal alien farm workers come to the U.S. for "jobs Americans won't take," they would not present a problem if they were given temporary visas to allow them to work the fields and then return to Mexico (or other country).TRUTH: Millions of illegal alien workers who could be doing all the farm work that "Americans won't do" are already in the U.S. Almost all illegals who come to work the fields do not make a career of low paying, hard working farm jobs. The belief that only pitiful third world laborers can be content in doing menial farm work is obviated when it is seen that almost all of these workers sooner or later "head for the city" for the better jobs.HALF TRUTH: Illegals are enjoying the fruit of the recent great American robust economy.TRUTH: While many Americans are benefiting from a robust economy, government data shows that record numbers of Americans are falling into poverty in spite of overall good economic conditions -- and in spite of 35 years of record government spending on social programs. This down slide can be directly linked to illegals flooding the low scale job market -- virtually importing poverty faster than it can be irradiated. Had there not been any massive illegal immigration in the past 20 years, poverty in much of America may well have been reduced significantly.MYTH: Employers are solely responsible for illegal immigration because they attract illegals by providing low paying jobs.TRUTH: Illegals are directly responsible for their illegal presence. Blaming the entire problem on employers for illegal immigration is like blaming a women for her own rape because she dressed to sexy and the rapist couldn't resist her.HALF TRUTH: Hispanic immigrants are family oriented and very religious catholics.TRUTH: The vast majority of illegal entries from across our southern border are unsophisticated, poor, and uneducated, who do not necessarily hold to strong family values or the Catholic faith. This is evident by U.S. statistics showing that while unwed teenage pregnancy in the U.S. is decreasing as a whole, Latina unwed teenage pregnancy is on the rise. The illegal immigrants of today are not all the honest, hard working, American dream seekers. This is evident by record numbers of dead-beat dads who walk away from their responsibilities to their children by leaving their homeland and simply crossing the border.MYTH: If the U.S. pumps money into Mexico and other third world countries for the purpose of improving their economies, it will create jobs thus eliminating the need to illegally immigrate to the U.S.TRUTH: The only way that the improvement of other countries' economies would appreciably stop illegal immigration to the U.S., is if those countries' economies were to become as strong as that of the U.S. Thousands of visa over stayers from non-third world countries like Canada, France, Israel, are also part of the illegal immigration problem and those countries have good economies. The U.S. is not the only country to which illegal immigrants seek to immigrate. Countries all over the world are experiencing illegal immigration driven by "wanting a better life." As soon as Third World countries become even only a little bit more prosperous than their neighbors, they rush to keep strangers out. Mexico, for example, does not tolerate its border violations by Guatemalans. Malaysia recently announced that in the case of repeat offenders, it will flog illegal aliens, their employers, and anyone who smuggles them into the country. In early January, 2000, over 35,000 illegal Zimbabwean workers were tossed out Of South Africa. So forget it! The U.S. should be concerned with improving its own economy and strictly enforcing its immigration laws.HALF TRUTH: Immigrants make good entrepreneurs.TRUTH: The common belief that immigrants are natural entrepreneurs may have its roots in the observation of the thousands of illegal alien third world style illegal street venders now found in most large U.S. cities. This belief has been obviated by a wall street article in which recent data shows that native born Americans are more likely to be successful entrepreneurs. (Immigrant Entrepreneurs Slide From Their Top Spot, The Wall Street Journal, January 12, 1999).In Cochise County, Arizona, 37 cents on every tax dollar is wasted to pay for services for and because of illegal aliens.

2nd Gen, it's been my understanding that these so called "brown skins" usually end up doing the kind of work that most americans wouldn't want to do in the first place. And your jealous of what?I've found , in my experiences, that my fellow workers from South America are generally a hard working people. And they take pride in it! Most of the american born workers I've worked with have been lazy. Not all, but most of 'em.I think you should worry more about the Bush Administration attacking your right to overtime pay. That's an issue that affects us and all of our fellow workers, regardless of national orgins.White House - AP Cabinet & State AP: U.S. Offers Tips on Avoiding OT Pay Mon Jan 5, 8:14 PM ET Add White House - AP Cabinet & State to My Yahoo! By LEIGH STROPE, AP Labor Writer WASHINGTON - A proposed Labor Department (news - web sites) rule suggests ways employers can avoid paying overtime to some of the 1.3 million low-income workers who would become eligible this year. The department's advice comes even as it touts the $895 million in increased wages that it says those workers would be guaranteed from the reforms. Among the options for employers: cut workers' hourly wages and add the overtime to equal the original salary, or raise salaries to the new $22,100 annual threshold, making them ineligible. The department says it is merely listing well-known choices available to employers, even under current law. "We're not saying anybody should do any of this," said Labor Department spokesman Ed Frank.http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040106/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/overtime_pay_4http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/voteforovertime

Dear 2nd Gen.What should be inferred from: " It is also a well known fact that most Islamo-Fascists and Mexicans have brown skin."?It is also a well-known fact that Tim McVeigh was not brown-skinned.How do you define this "nation's culture"? What's your worry?Chill my man, chill.

Franklin,Your responses are sadly predictable. At what point did anybody say “brown-skins” are going to take over? Your condescending and dismissive remarks appear to me to be accusing me of racism. Is that what you are doing? Are you one of those “progressive” fellows who thinks (I mean who knows) he is smarter than anyone else in the room? Do you think our nation’s borders, language and culture are trivial issues?

Something to add to Bush Senior's list of credits for helping the Iraqi people. http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/01/07/sprj.nirq.main/index.htmlRemains likely from '91 uprisingA new mass grave site in Iraq has been discovered recently about 30 miles (48 kilometers) south of Baghdad, U.S. officials said Wednesday. About 800 victims from the Shiite Muslims' 1991 failed uprising against Saddam are believed to be buried at the southern Iraq site. Without the support of coalition forces that had driven Saddam out of Kuwait in the Persian Gulf War, the uprising was crushed and thousands killed.

WOW! Those brown-skins are about to take over!!!EEEEK!! HELP!!! And now furnrs want to influence the elections here just like we have been for decades!!EEEEEEKK!!! HELP HELP!!

More proof of desperation in the ranks:Funding for American presidential elections is beginning to go global. From Sweden to Canada to Portugal, on international Web sites, solicitations are popping up urging the citizens of the world to contribute to advertising campaigns intended to influence our November presidential election. Of course they are not trying to re-elect George Bush. The candidacies of Howard Dean and Wesley Clark seem to be the inspiration for such efforts. There is no evidence, yet, that either of those campaigns is directly running these operations. But the Clark campaign has inched dangerously close. Perceptive reporting by The Talon News and the Drudge Report over the last three weeks has begun to reveal this unprecedented fund-raising tactic. According to Drudge, the official Web site for Wesley Clark is linked to "CanadaForClark, which advises its readers that: Non-Americans can't, by law, give money to any particular candidate's campaign. But we can support pro-democracy, progressive American organizations like MoveOn.Org, which do their best to spread the ugly truth about Bush and publicize the Democratic message. Wink, wink ... nudge, nudge. The Drudge Report goes on to report that the CanadaForClark.com Web site links to MoveOn.Org for the purpose of making contributions, and that the top referrer to that Web site is the Official Clark for President Web site. It should be noted that the CanadaForClark Web site asserts that: "This site is not affiliated in any way with the official Clark campaign." But, of course, the official campaign Web site links to the "not affiliated" Web site. Until this moment I am not aware of any major presidential campaign that has ever actually publicly assisted in raising foreign money to influence an American election. Of course, former President Clinton tried to raise illegal Chinese campaign money in his 1996 re-election campaign. But he had the practical political good sense to do it in secret, and to deny it when it was made public. But retired four-star General Wesley Clark, the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO (and first in his class at West Point), apparently is blithe to be seen trying to taint an American presidential election with foreign money. Whatever the legality of these methods turns out to be, it is stunning that a major candidate for president would think nothing of being seen to raise foreign money. This lack of judgment is only compounded by the fact that we are at war, and the money is being solicited by the foreigners expressly to try to stop President Bush from carrying out our war on terrorism. Americans, of course, have the right to contribute to an election effort to defeat an American president during wartime. But if it is not yet against the law, then it should be made soon to bar even a single foreign dollar from influencing an American presidential election -- whether directly or indirectly. Should Osama bin Laden be permitted to buy television advertising intended to defeat President Bush in the election? Just last month, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Congress's authority to limit political contributions from American corporations on the grounds that there are "important governmental interests in preventing both the actual corruption threatened by large financial contributions and the eroding of public confidence in the electoral process through the appearance of corruption." If Congress can limit or bar Americans from contributing to presidential election campaigns, surely it has the authority to bar foreigners -- particularly supporters of the enemy in time of war. Keep in mind, last year's campaign finance law also barred issue advertising by Americans 60 days before an election. What would be an appropriate cut-off date for permitting terrorism supporting Saudi Princes or multi-billionaire international currency manipulators from buying advertising intended to manipulate American public opinion and bring down a president? In an increasingly globalized world, with American influence (economic, military and cultural) inevitably affecting the rest of the world, it is predictable that the rest of the world will try to "have a vote" in our elections. Obviously much of the world (particularly Europe) no longer believes in its own sovereignty. Why should they respect ours? The good citizens of France have a voice in Paris and a voice in Brussels. Why not a voice in Washington, D.C? It is inevitable that, unstopped, foreigners will try to influence our elections by buying political advertising here. So, too, it is inevitable that ambitious American politicians will -- one way or the other -- decide to ally themselves with those foreigners and their money against the formerly sovereign American political system. Wesley Clark is only the first of the type.

No Amnesty for Illegals!What the hell is this President doing???? Doesn’t he consider that we are a nation at war when he makes this kind of foolish decision? It is a well known fact that Islamo-Fascists are entering into Mexico and assimilating into Mexican society. It is also a well known fact that most Islamo-Fascists and Mexicans have brown skin. Do you see the possibility here to exploit our borders?????? NO AMNESITY FOR ILLEGALS!!!!!!!!!!!! We, as American citizens, need to protect our American Borders, Language and Culture!

Here's a clip and quote from a related AP news story:Brazil's Foreign Ministry has requested that Brazilians be removed from the U.S. list, and police started fingerprinting and photographing Americans arriving at Sao Paulo's airport last week in response to the new U.S. regulations. "At first, most of the Americans were angered at having to go through all this, but they were usually more understanding once they learned that Brazilians are subjected to the same treatment in the U.S.," Brazilian police spokesman Wagner Castilho said last week. The whole article from AP:U.S. Fingerprinting Foreign Air Travelers By MARK NIESSE, Associated Press Writer ATLANTA - Authorities began scanning fingerprints and taking photographs of arriving foreigners Monday as part of a new program that Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said will make borders "open to travelers but closed to terrorists." The program, aimed at letting Customs officials instantly check an immigrant or visitor's criminal background, targets foreigners entering the 115 U.S. airports that handle international flights, as well as 14 major seaports. The only exceptions will be visitors from 27 countries — mostly European nations — whose citizens are allowed to come to the United States for up to 90 days without visas. Ridge was at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport to meet with some of the first foreign passengers to go through the new system. He described the move as "part of a comprehensive program to make sure our borders remain open to travelers but closed to terrorists." "It's easy for travelers to use but hard for terrorists to avoid," Ridge said Monday. In a pilot program at Hartsfield-Jackson that preceded Monday's nationwide implementation, authorities turned up 21 people on the FBI (news - web sites)'s criminal watch list for such crimes as drug offenses, rape and visa fraud, Ridge said. Foreigners also will be checked as they leave the country as an extra security measure and to ensure they complied with visa limitations. Most passengers breezed through the fingerprinting and picture-taking Monday, spending only a few seconds more than they normally would at the Customs station where they're asked about their visits. But one traveler doubted the program would deter terrorists because they could come from the 27 countries that are exempt from visa checking. "It's easy, but I don't think it's going to be effective," said Carlos Thome, who flew in Monday from Sao Paulo, Brazil. "You can also have terrorists in Europe." Some passengers said they supported the extra scrutiny. "I don't have any real ethical problems with it, just the inconvenience of having to wait a little bit longer. But it's not a big deal," said Bradley Oakley-Brown, who was changing planes at Atlanta en route from South Africa to Wisconsin. Called US-VISIT, or U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology, the program will check up to estimated 24 million foreigners each year, though some will be repeat visitors. Inkless fingerprints will be taken and checked instantly against the national digital database for criminal backgrounds and any terrorist lists. Homeland Security spokesman Bill Strassberger said that once screeners become proficient, the extra security will take only 10 to 15 seconds per person. Foreign travelers also will continue to pass through regular Customs points and answer questions. Photographs will be used to help create a database for law enforcement. The travel data is supposed to be securely stored and made available only to authorized officials on a need-to-know basis. A similar program is to be installed at 50 land border crossings by the end of next year, Strassberger said. Brazil's Foreign Ministry has requested that Brazilians be removed from the U.S. list, and police started fingerprinting and photographing Americans arriving at Sao Paulo's airport last week in response to the new U.S. regulations. "At first, most of the Americans were angered at having to go through all this, but they were usually more understanding once they learned that Brazilians are subjected to the same treatment in the U.S.," Brazilian (news - web sites) police spokesman Wagner Castilho said last week. The U.S. system consists of a small box that digitally scans fingerprints and a spherical computer camera. It will gradually replace a paper-based system that Congress ordered to be modernized following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. A person whose fingerprints or photos raise questions would not be turned away automatically. The visa holder would be sent to secondary inspection for further questions and checks. Officials have said false hits on the system have been less than 0.1 percent in trial runs. The system was scheduled to begin operation New Year's Day but was delayed to avoid the busy holiday travel period.

My dear Mr. Fvck,The numbers of immigrants or visitors are irrelevant when it comes to the principle of "reciprocity." There's little room to complain about the fact that the Brazilian government is treating US visitors the same way the US treats Brazilian visitors.As for an "eye for an eye", seems like from what you have said that it applies quite well to "reciprocity."BTW, speaking of distortion, in your opinion did the Bush Administration "distort facts to suit [their] agenda"?

Yo Bruh:Cause there are sooooo many "immigrants" going from the US to Brazil now aren’t there. As for “an eye for an eye”, In biblical terms, this simply means that a society can’t impose a punishment greater than the crime committed. You lefties just love to distort facts to suit your agendas.

Yo bro, In international immigration circles, that's what's called "reciprocity" -- I do to you what you do to me. You treat them nicely, they'll treat you nicely. You fuck with them, they fuck with you back.Of course, an eye for an eye leaves the world blind. But unfortunately, the Administration has no leg to stand on if it wants others to behave differently.Do you?

Brazil Begins Fingerprinting U.S. Travelers BRASILIA, Brazil (Reuters) - Brazil on Thursday began fingerprinting and photographing U.S. visitors on orders of a judge who compared planned U.S. security controls on travelers from Brazil and other nations to Nazi horrors. Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva, furious at U.S. plans to fingerprint and photograph millions of visitors on entering the United States, ordered Brazil's authorities do the same to U.S. citizens starting on Thursday. "We've begun doing this," said a Federal Police spokeswoman at Brazil's Guarulhos International Airport in Sao Paulo. The judge's order came after a Brazilian (news - web sites) government citizen rights agency filed a complaint in federal court over the U.S. measure. The US-VISIT system is meant to identify people who have violated immigration controls, have a criminal record or belong to groups the U.S. government lists as terrorist organizations. Starting on Monday, people who need visas to enter the United States will be fingerprinted and photographed when they pass through immigration at major U.S. airports and seaports. The measure does not apply to citizens of 27, mainly European, nations who do not need a visa to enter the United States. "I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," said Sebastiao da Silva in the court order released on Tuesday. Officials at the U.S. Embassy in Brazil were not immediately available to comment on Brazil's decision. Brazil requires U.S. citizens to have a visa when entering the country.