Go ahead and hate me now...

johnnyturk! · #1 (**permalink**) 06-01-2006, 10:20 AM

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

I know a lot of you are going to hate me for putting this link up. But this makes a lot of sense to me.

OkhamsRazor · #2 (**permalink**) 06-01-2006, 10:45 AM

no, we don't hate you JT, we hate Ann for what she's done to your mind

johnnyturk! · #3 (**permalink**) 06-01-2006, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor

no, we don't hate you JT, we hate Ann for what she's done to your mind

Hahahahaha! Hilarious. In this instance though can you find fault with her logic?

Sam · #4 (**permalink**) 06-01-2006, 11:49 AM

The totality oof Ann should be offensive to any moral,sane and humane citizen(left, right or somewhere in between). This one small essay on immigration in and of itself is not terrible although I disagree with her. Read her and you will see the woman is not credible, a bigot, everything is her way or its the wrong way. She is a self absorbed loud mouth spewing hate towards humanity, the earth and anyone who doe not agree with her. She is a hypocrite in her own life and is only selling quick penned books to make a buck.

Oh and the other night on Hannity the calamity she confessed she can say all of this hateful rhetoric that others cannot say because she is so beautiful.

She is to be viewed as cheap entertainment(tart) or for the few uneducated who are easily manipulated she might grab a few to listen seriously.. Pull up old threads it is one of the few issues everyone agrees on(right and left) are ann coulter is a clown.

johnnyturk! · #5 (**permalink**) 06-01-2006, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam

The totality oof Ann should be offensive to any moral,sane and humane citizen(left, right or somewhere in between). This one small essay on immigration in and of itself is not terrible although I disagree with her. Read her and you will see the woman is not credible, a bigot, everything is her way or its the wrong way. She is a self absorbed loud mouth spewing hate towards humanity, the earth and anyone who doe not agree with her. She is a hypocrite in her own life and is only selling quick penned books to make a buck.

Oh and the other night on Hannity the calamity she confessed she can say all of this hateful rhetoric that others cannot say because she is so beautiful.

She is to be viewed as cheap entertainment(tart) or for the few uneducated who are easily manipulated she might grab a few to listen seriously.. Pull up old threads it is one of the few issues everyone agrees on(right and left) are ann coulter is a clown.

That is funny. Most of you described I see in those on the left. Again though..what did you disagree with? Why is anyone who disagrees with the left labled as "uneducated"?

OkhamsRazor · #6 (**permalink**) 06-01-2006, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyturk!

Hahahahaha! Hilarious. In this instance though can you find fault with her logic?

Yup, sure can. Ready? here we go...

Ok, for starters, I'm going to point out a favorite little trick of Ann's. Using two unrelated facts to strengthen an otherwise shaky argument. She starts off by talking about the consequences of passing the Bush plan...

Quote:

If Congress adopts the Bush plan and gives amnesty to illegal aliens, Senate Republicans will be asking President Cheney for a pardon.

Suddenly, she's talking about the Senate version and blurs the distinction between the two by using "also" as an inclusive statement, as if they were part of the same bill.

Quote:

The Senate bill also forgives illegal aliens who have committed identity theft by stealing American Social Security numbers to get jobs.

Okay, now which bill is she talking about? Or is it both? Either way it's misleading.

Quote:

So in addition to the Two Years Tax-Free plan for illegals, they get one free felony. Also, illegal immigrants from Mexico qualify for affirmative action, allowing them to get into U.S. colleges with lower grades and scores than Americans.

So right off the bat we see her trying to deceive her audience, which leaves any points she has that might be valid, in serious question.

Now comes direct disagreement with her "logic".

Quote:

Of course illegal immigrants will "work for less." They don't have to pay taxes at all now, and under Bush's plan they will have to pay taxes for only — at most — three of the last five years. Not only that, but illegal aliens don't require their employers to comply with OSHA regulations, overtime and minimum wage laws, unemployment insurance, disability laws, the Family and Medical Leave Act, a slew of oppressive environmental regulations, and 4 million other ways the government has developed to make it extremely expensive to hire legal employees.

The whole point of making them legal guest workers is to bring them into the mainstream of employment, If they are documented, they are more likely to receive better pay, get overtime, will have to conform to OSHA, pay UEI, pay into SSI, etc.

This paragraph makes no sense at all. It's only telling us what the current situation is, not what the situation will be like under the plan. The plan is an attempt to address these very issues, yet she speaks of them as though it will continue after the program is instituted, which is not the case.

Quote:

Instead of creating a separate class of citizens who are immune from oppressive government rules, how about relieving all of us — even us shiftless Americans — from the cost of government?

Both proposals aim to do just the opposite. It seeks to bring these illegals into the fold of mainstream employment. The only class distinction being created by this is between those from other countries who have been here for years waiting for citizenship and greencards. I think this would be a slap in the face to them.

Quote:

I thought all these trade agreements the free-trade fetishists have pushed on us over the years already allowed corporations to take advantage of cheap labor in other countries — countries that don't have the panoply of oppressive government regulations that make it so expensive to hire American workers. Doesn't NAFTA already allow us to buy inexpensive goods made by Mexicans in Mexico?

And finally, this paragraph assumes that the same jobs in Mexico are paying anything near what they would be paid in the states. Her self centered view of the world doesn't allow her to see that for the illegals, the could care less who she buys what from. For them, it's about working in better factories, living in better housing, and not being in Mexico.

So JT, yes, I can find fault with her logic.

johnnyturk! · #7 (**permalink**) 06-02-2006, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor

Yup, sure can. Ready? here we go...

Ok, for starters, I'm going to point out a favorite little trick of Ann's. Using two unrelated facts to strengthen an otherwise shaky argument. She starts off by talking about the consequences of passing the Bush plan...

Suddenly, she's talking about the Senate version and blurs the distinction between the two by using "also" as an inclusive statement, as if they were part of the same bill.

Okay, now which bill is she talking about? Or is it both? Either way it's misleading.

So right off the bat we see her trying to deceive her audience, which leaves any points she has that might be valid, in serious question.

Now comes direct disagreement with her "logic".

The whole point of making them legal guest workers is to bring them into the mainstream of employment, If they are documented, they are more likely to receive better pay, get overtime, will have to conform to OSHA, pay UEI, pay into SSI, etc.

This paragraph makes no sense at all. It's only telling us what the current situation is, not what the situation will be like under the plan. The plan is an attempt to address these very issues, yet she speaks of them as though it will continue after the program is instituted, which is not the case.

Both proposals aim to do just the opposite. It seeks to bring these illegals into the fold of mainstream employment. The only class distinction being created by this is between those from other countries who have been here for years waiting for citizenship and greencards. I think this would be a slap in the face to them.

And finally, this paragraph assumes that the same jobs in Mexico are paying anything near what they would be paid in the states. Her self centered view of the world doesn't allow her to see that for the illegals, the could care less who she buys what from. For them, it's about working in better factories, living in better housing, and not being in Mexico.

So JT, yes, I can find fault with her logic.

Holy crap you responded in a revelent way! Amazing! I had not idea you were that liberal though. Can't reply to everything at the moment because of a thing called work though.

johnnyturk! · #8 (**permalink**) 06-02-2006, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor
Yup, sure can. Ready? here we go...

Ok, for starters, I'm going to point out a favorite little trick of Ann's. Using two unrelated facts to strengthen an otherwise shaky argument. She starts off by talking about the consequences of passing the Bush plan...

Suddenly, she's talking about the Senate version and blurs the distinction between the two by using "also" as an inclusive statement, as if they were part of the same bill.

The point that was being made here is that both plans call for amnesty which is wrong. Oh and the President doesn't make bills so I don't know what you are talking about here.

Okay, now which bill is she talking about? Or is it both? Either way it's misleading.

So right off the bat we see her trying to deceive her audience, which leaves any points she has that might be valid, in serious question.

I don't see how comparing two similar plans is deceptive but okay...

Now comes direct disagreement with her "logic".

The whole point of making them legal guest workers is to bring them into the mainstream of employment, If they are documented, they are more likely to receive better pay, get overtime, will have to conform to OSHA, pay UEI, pay into SSI, etc.

This paragraph makes no sense at all. It's only telling us what the current situation is, not what the situation will be like under the plan. The plan is an attempt to address these very issues, yet she speaks of them as though it will continue after the program is instituted, which is not the case.

Because it will continue after plan is instituted. If give amnesty then more will come and make the situation far worse.

Both proposals aim to do just the opposite. It seeks to bring these illegals into the fold of mainstream employment. The only class distinction being created by this is between those from other countries who have been here for years waiting for citizenship and greencards. I think this would be a slap in the face to them.

I don't care how long they have been here waiting for free crap. They shouldn't be here in the first place. Illegal Immigrants. What part of that don't you get?

And finally, this paragraph assumes that the same jobs in Mexico are paying anything near what they would be paid in the states. Her self centered view of the world doesn't allow her to see that for the illegals, the could care less who she buys what from. For them, it's about working in better factories, living in better housing, and not being in Mexico.

I don't care what they want and most Americans don't care. We don't want them here. By being here they are slapping this country in the face.

OkhamsRazor · #9 (**permalink**) 06-02-2006, 01:52 PM

JT, get real. The only reason they are here is because US companies are supplying them with jobs. If you wanna blame someone, blame them, and yourself for buying the crap the produce. They are lured here.

Besides, maybe you need a little slap in the face to wake your ass up.

gdfather02 · #10 (**permalink**) 06-02-2006, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor

JT, get real. The only reason they are here is because US companies are supplying them with jobs. If you wanna blame someone, blame them, and yourself for buying the crap the produce. They are lured here.

Besides, maybe you need a little slap in the face to wake your ass up.

Yep. Here is what you do....

1) Secure the border first....

2) Since there is no way in hell that we could possibly round up what is estimated to be 11 million illegals (hell, I believe the number is MUCH higher) without looking like Nazi Germany, we need to realize that our system, as of right now, is broken unfortunately. We let it get this way, so now we need to pay the piper.
Perhaps the president is correct; provide a means for these people to become citizens, if they are serious. Those NOT serious, deport.

3) Punish those companies that continue to skirt domestic law as it pertains to immigration. Huge fines are the name of the game; take away the incentive, and the flood of illegal immigration should slow.

4) We need to remove or at least curtail the tax-payer subsidized health care and education for these individuals.
Overburdened hospitals, especially in the West, are either closing or curtailing most care because of this. This hurts the LEGAL citizens of this nation, as does the school overcrowding.

5) Get tough with the Mexican government.
One thing I believe everyone can agree on is that the incentive for Mexico to allow the flood of illegal immigration to continue is the money factor, the money that flows back across the border into Mexico. That is something that allows the defacto Mexican economy to flourish.
Why change your strips when you have a good thing going??

The Mexican government needs to begin programs that allow for sustained private sector growth, which will allow for the growth of income for its citizens. That way, they won't have to come across the border seaching for the dream; it will be realized right there in their home nation!!

What we also need to remember is that illegal immigration is not just a Mexican issue; there are illegal Asians, Europeans, etc....