$100 Million to help setup brothels

[dcmdale]

Interestingly one major reason why the shift in party identity especially in the south was that Democrats were dominant in large part because Lincoln was Republican until LBJ cheesed them off with passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act in '64 and '65.

Absolutely.

[keith]

From where I stand, I would say that what is really needed is leadership within the Hispanic community. Nobody is just going to hand over the keys to the party. However, the keys are there to grab and nobody can stop them if they chose to take them.

.... but why would they. Stacking party meetings is certainly possible but it is also very unpleasant and requires powerful motivation - see the Labour party in the UK through most of the eighties. There is also the problem that while you can push those folks out of the GoP, the likely consequence will be the Peoples Liberation Party of Texas. It is also of course not just about getting control of the local party; it's volunteers, donors etc etc.

At the moment the GoP seems to be quite happy dining on comfort food. They may manage to quit the binge and get themselves sorted out, but I suspect they will need some powerful motivation - perhaps the key is what happens to Senator Dodd. Or another 3 of 4 defeats in presidential elections.

[chase]

I completely agree, Migo.

Chase, everyone thinks that their religion is the one "true" religion. I guarantee you'll have a tough time proving your position.

And if you were agreeing with my Catholic church analogy then I think you misunderstood; I wasn't advocating that the church as an institution was at fault, and by analogy neither is ACORN. You seem to be condemning both.

first of all,

* The New Testament is historically reliable.

* The New Testament says Jesus claimed to be God.

* Jesus' claim to be God was miraculously confirmed by:

a. His fulfillment of many prophecies about Himself;
b. His sinless and miraculous life;
c. His prediction and accomplishment of His resurrection.

* Therefore, Jesus is God.

* Whatever Jesus (who is God) teaches is true.

* Jesus taught that the Bible is the Word of God.

* Therefore, it is true that the Bible is the Word of God

(and anything opposed to it is false).

second of all,

catholics and the catholic "church" has acted in ways that would make outsiders wary of joining "Christianity" (the spanish inquisition, child molestation, ted kennedy's sinful life), and this is all because it is a false religion in which they worship mary, who is not God. God even warned against this in The Bible: "I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images." -Isaiah 42:8

third of all,

acorn stole the 2008 election and put a socialist who may not even be a us citizen into the highest office in the land. i used to be proud to be an american, but myself and many others can no longer say that. that hasnt been criticized because the liberal media was really happy because it meant that their guy won. when we are faced with something as objectively evil as smuggling child prositutes into the united states and not making them pay taxes, that should be a wake up call. what else does acorn have to do to prove to you that its an evil group?

[Philistine]

{snip}
when we are faced with something as objectively evil as smuggling child prositutes into the united states and not making them pay taxes, that should be a wake up call. what else does acorn have to do to prove to you that its an evil group?

Exactly! A Republican/(true) Christian group would have made those people smuggling child prostitutes into the US pay taxes!

--Philistine

[I_luv_saber]

You can believe whatever mythology you want as far as I'm concerned, but no religious institution should receive funding from tax dollars (office of faith-based and community initiatives, I'm looking at you).

BWAAAHAHAHAH!

Godammit, I just repped you in another post! I guess it'll have to count as a two-fer!

[keith]

...... and this is all because it is a false religion in which they worship mary, who is not God.

[Ian Paisley] IDOLATERS!!!! [/Ian Paisley]


sorry

[migopod]

first of all,

* The New Testament is historically reliable.

* The New Testament says Jesus claimed to be God.

* Jesus' claim to be God was miraculously confirmed by:

a. His fulfillment of many prophecies about Himself;
b. His sinless and miraculous life;
c. His prediction and accomplishment of His resurrection.

* Therefore, Jesus is God.

* Whatever Jesus (who is God) teaches is true.

* Jesus taught that the Bible is the Word of God.

* Therefore, it is true that the Bible is the Word of God

(and anything opposed to it is false).

I am sceptical about the veracity of your source material.
Point one is patently false, and since the rest of your argument rests upon it, there is no particular reason to believe it over any other mythology besides indoctrination or historical tradition.

second of all,

catholics and the catholic "church" has acted in ways that would make outsiders wary of joining "Christianity" (the spanish inquisition, child molestation, ted kennedy's sinful life), and this is all because it is a false religion in which they worship mary, who is not God. God even warned against this in The Bible: "I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images." -Isaiah 42:8

Meh, false gods and graven images. Worshipping anything always seemed a bit silly too me. As far as the historical crimes of Catholicism, those are great reasons to be wary of the Catholic Church, but in the arc of history Protestants don't come out smelling like roses either. Examples include but are not limited to atrocities committed (both sides) during the Reformation, Salem Witch Trials, Ted Haggard, clinic bombings and even recently the assassination of Dr Tiller. Remarkably few religious sects in the world don't have blood on their hands at some point in history.

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

third of all,

acorn stole the 2008 election and put a socialist who may not even be a us citizen into the highest office in the land. i used to be proud to be an american, but myself and many others can no longer say that. that hasnt been criticized because the liberal media was really happy because it meant that their guy won. when we are faced with something as objectively evil as smuggling child prositutes into the united states and not making them pay taxes, that should be a wake up call. what else does acorn have to do to prove to you that its an evil group?

We'll see how this develops. I saw that ACORN has already made steps towards an independent investigation. I wonder if Blackwater will do the same in reaction to recent whistle-blowers who raised concerns about the frequent use of prostitutes by Blackwater employees, many of them children*, in Iraq.


* the prostitutes were children, not the Blackwater employees.

[fencerchica]

and this is all because it is a false religion in which they worship mary, who is not God.

Hahahahahahaha... You seriously need to think twice before opening your mouth and letting everyone know just how abysmally ignorant you are.

[Bayou Bum]

So you think that Acorn should face the same scrutiny and consequences that Halliburton did? Remind me again, what happened to Halliburton? How many people got fired, sent to court/jail, how much were they or the company fined? (I honestly don't remember)

Speaking of hypocrisy, I have tried to find a post of yours where you demonize Halliburton and the supporting administration as you are doing Acorn and the democrats right now. Could you help me by providing the relevant quote/link?
Thanks

For the record, an investigation does seem necessary at this point, and if the wrongdoing goes beyond a "few bad apples", then action does need to be taken.

Did you find a single post of mine where I defended Haliburton? And what exactly have I accused Acorn of doing?

[Bayou Bum]

There is no hypocrisy concerning Haliburton. I work in a related industry.

Okay, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but I was just challenging you to be certain for yourself, because that is not how you appear in reading your posts.

[keith]

Hahahahahahaha... You seriously need to think twice before opening your mouth and letting everyone know just how abysmally ignorant you are.

Well you wouldn't expect them to be silly enough to admit to worshiping Mary

[Fechter1]

<religious stuff>

Remember, when you're talking about the bible, you're dealing with anecdotal 'evidence' that has passed through many stations (i.e. versions) before finally being put to paper. I.e. hearsay many times removed from the actual events. Never mind that you're also likely reading translations.

acorn stole the 2008 election and put a socialist who may not even be a us citizen into the highest office in the land. i used to be proud to be an american, but myself and many others can no longer say that. that hasnt been criticized because the liberal media was really happy because it meant that their guy won. when we are faced with something as objectively evil as smuggling child prositutes into the united states and not making them pay taxes, that should be a wake up call. what else does acorn have to do to prove to you that its an evil group?

Wow, just wow... The only semi-legitimate charge here is the vote-stealing, for which of course you have solid evidence, right? Would you mind sharing?

Obama not a citizen: Disproven with the official birth certificate.

Chlid prostitute import: How did you make the jump from the "sting" operation of a guy PRETENDING to be a pimp to Acorn actually doing the importing? <mind thoroughly boggled>

[Bayou Bum]

Chase, everyone thinks that their religion is the one "true" religion.

This just proves your lack of knowledge of the worlds religions. Please stop making such incorrect blanket statements.

[keith]

This just proves your lack of knowledge of the worlds religions. Please stop making such incorrect blanket statements.

swing and a miss.

[Fechter1]

It's interesting to me that you are willing to give Acorn the benefit of the doubt (multiple times over) with all of the accusations, and even convictions on voter fraud, but you had no hesitancy convicting Haliburton with much less evidence. I wish you would seriously think about your hypocrisy.

Did you find a single post of mine where I defended Haliburton? And what exactly have I accused Acorn of doing?

My apologies, I actually read a bit too much into your post. It was mainly that I read your posts as supporting those who are making the charges and demanding consequenses.

As for Halliburton, I was not able to find a post from you supporting similar treatment of that organization. I made the assumption of silent approval (again drawing on the misinterpretation of your posts), which may require another apology.

[Bayou Bum]

I think that you correctly identify that immigration and associated racism is the big barrier between the Hispanic community and the GOP. What I personally find ironic is that the Hispanic community in the southwest is much, much larger than the anti-immigrant element within the GOP throughout the southwest. It is easily within the ability of the Hispanic community to simply walk in and take over the GOP in the southwest and completely co-opt the anti-immigrant voices within the GOP. They could do this any election cycle that they chose.

Now, party leadership is not particularly interested in this for the simple reason that they are unlikely to remain party leaders under that scenario. If the Hispanic community moved en mass into the GOP, it would be as large and influential a block as the Evangelical Right likely is--and there are many synergies between those groups.

From where I stand, I would say that what is really needed is leadership within the Hispanic community. Nobody is just going to hand over the keys to the party. However, the keys are there to grab and nobody can stop them if they chose to take them.

Are your assumptions based on grouping all Hispanics as illegal? There are many Hispanics in the GOP because they share the same values, of which one is legal immigration. You make a false assumption that Hispanics should and do support illegal immigration. Those in the GOP are those that came here legally and also oppose illegal immigration. Those that are here illegally shouldn't be voting anyway.

Don't you think you show some prejudice by assuming that all legal Hispanics would support illegal immigration?

[jessicasimpson]

The Church of the Subgenius has I believe made that claim about its self, as has the POEE (Discordians).


edit:
oh, additionally there are some religions that believe that they are only A true religion, and not necessarily the one and only. Some forms of neopaganism I suppose.

yes, I deleted my post after I re-read the orriginal, I missed the point at first

[dcmdale]

.... but why would they. Stacking party meetings is certainly possible but it is also very unpleasant and requires powerful motivation - see the Labour party in the UK through most of the eighties. There is also the problem that while you can push those folks out of the GoP, the likely consequence will be the Peoples Liberation Party of Texas. It is also of course not just about getting control of the local party; it's volunteers, donors etc etc.

Different style of government. Candidates in most elections come through the primaries not through "the party." In CA, you go down to the country clerk's office, you get a form. You fill out the form, including some signatures (getting more decreases the filing fee). You take it to back to the county clerk on the day of the filing deadline. The clerk administers the oath of office and gives you information on posting of signs. The "official party candidate" comes in to file his papers. He says, "Hi... what office are you running for?" You tell him, "Yours." He swears. The next day you get a call from the Chairman of the County Central Committee asking you to drop out. You say, "Sorry, No."

It is illegal in CA for the party to favor any candidate in the primary. They can't back any candidate. They can't give any money to a candidate. They can't exclude any candidate from running.

To take over the party, you don't pack party meetings. You run slates of candidates. You coordinate financial resources. You run community forums. You will elections in the primaries because most people will vote for the party candidate, whoever that is, in the general election.

At the moment the GoP seems to be quite happy dining on comfort food. They may manage to quit the binge and get themselves sorted out, but I suspect they will need some powerful motivation - perhaps the key is what happens to Senator Dodd. Or another 3 of 4 defeats in presidential elections.

The GOP might be happy, although I don't think so. I wasn't suggesting that anyone wait to ask whether they thought they needed help.

Why would enough of the Hispanic community want to do this? The Democratic Party is an abusive boyfriend. They know that the Latin vote is theirs because "where else are they going to go?" They utilize the voting power of the Hispanic block to push causes that the community doesn't really seem to approve of (outsider's perspective). The come up with excuses why Hispanics are grossly underrepresented among office holders and candidates relative to the voting power that community brings.

And perhaps most importantly, the Democratic party allows the discussion of single most important issue to the Hispanic community, immigration, to be framed in a way that promotes racial hatred and a racially based class structure.

Switching the Hispanic block from the Democrats to the GOP under these circumstances would give them control of the party in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, at least. That would give them the leverage to put a Hispanic friendly immigration plank into the GOP national platform and a bunch more votes in Congress and state houses while marginalizing the anti-immigrant movement.

Just my opinion, of course. I am not Hispanic and I am not a Democrat. But I do have a pretty good sense of how weak the GOP is (in CA at least) and a fair level of understanding about the level of corruption and king making in the CA Democratic party.

[dcmdale]

Are your assumptions based on grouping all Hispanics as illegal?

No. It is based on my experience that the immigration issue has a disproportionate negative impact on most Hispanics, not just those those here illegally. I have had conversations with people whose land titles originate from the King of Spain who have had issues.

There are many Hispanics in the GOP because they share the same values, of which one is legal immigration. You make a false assumption that Hispanics should and do support illegal immigration. Those in the GOP are those that came here legally and also oppose illegal immigration. Those that are here illegally shouldn't be voting anyway.

Don't you think you show some prejudice by assuming that all legal Hispanics would support illegal immigration?

There are Hispanics within the GOP. Relatively few.

The Hispanic immigration debate is largely framed by Anti-immigration advocates and by Democrats pandering the Hispanic vote. Neither side wants a real solution. Illegal immigrants, by definition, are not supposed to be here. Got it. And the reason they are illegal is because we have immigration policies are arbitrarily restrictive relative to our own American interests. Rationalization of our immigration laws would go a long way to solving the illegal immigration issue.

[keith]

To take over the party, you don't pack party meetings. You run slates of candidates. You coordinate financial resources. You run community forums. You will elections in the primaries because most people will vote for the party candidate, whoever that is, in the general election.

Well I wasn't drawing the direct analogy so much as the indirect one; it is, in consequence, a tactic likely to engender a great deal of bad blood between those who perceive themselves as real Republicans (or whomever) vs the Usurpers.

The tactic may be legal, but would certainly be well publicised, to the degree that getting in on the blind party vote come the election would probably be unlikely. After all if the issue was simply getting a Hispanic on the ticket as a candidate I doubt that would be a problem. The catch is the purity tests that seem to obsess the GOP at the moment.

The GOP might be happy, although I don't think so. I wasn't suggesting that anyone wait to ask whether they thought they needed help.

Oh but I think they are happy, just look at our locals. They haven't had this much fun for years. Never underestimate the attraction of being in the minority that was wrong for so long, but then one far of day in the future gets to say 'told you so'. There is of course a drawback to this strategy.

Why would enough of the Hispanic community want to do this? The Democratic Party is an abusive boyfriend. They know that the Latin vote is theirs because "where else are they going to go?" They utilize the voting power of the Hispanic block to push causes that the community doesn't really seem to approve of (outsider's perspective). The come up with excuses why Hispanics are grossly underrepresented among office holders and candidates relative to the voting power that community brings.

That may all be true, but it assumes that there is somewhere else for them to go. Which brings us to this;

And perhaps most importantly, the Democratic party allows the discussion of single most important issue to the Hispanic community, immigration, to be framed in a way that promotes racial hatred and a racially based class structure.

Well I'd suggest, from an outsiders perspective, that racially based class structures are something of a US specialty .

The democrats may not be aggressively pushing immigration reform (or education reform). Of course given the favours the GOP did them last time immigration reform came up they have little political need to. As to education reform there are, let us be honest, probably not a great many natural Republican votes in driving up education standards since that is never a revenue neutral proposition.

Switching the Hispanic block from the Democrats to the GOP under these circumstances would give them control of the party in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, at least. That would give them the leverage to put a Hispanic friendly immigration plank into the GOP national platform and a bunch more votes in Congress and state houses while marginalizing the anti-immigrant movement.

I suppose that's were I'd disagree, there may be common themes, but you would still need a big tent attitude. After all the GOP would have to keep it's current voters and it doesn't give the impression of being a party tolerant of differences at the moment.

Just my opinion, of course. I am not Hispanic and I am not a Democrat. But I do have a pretty good sense of how weak the GOP is (in CA at least) and a fair level of understanding about the level of corruption and king making in the CA Democratic party.

One party political systems are never healthy, and I'd suspect you are right that there is ground for the GOP to steal. GWB as I recall did well with Hispanic voters, unfortunately at the end of the day he left an easy target for the Democrats to point to as a warning of what happens if you fall for the sweet talk.