dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
1022

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Misplaced Priorities?

Somehow I think if this idea ever becomes law, it will be more likely to be enforced than the current law which cuts off federal funding from schools and colleges which do not provide access to military recruiters.
BPLSUCKS9
join:2006-04-26
Grand Ledge, MI

BPLSUCKS9

Member

Schools do provide access...however there is no condition saying they can't limit that access to just brochures or a poster. Thereby they keep funding but keep the recruiters at bay.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

2 recommendations

fiberguy2 to pnh102

Premium Member

to pnh102
I find it to be very ironic that the democraps would rather push legislation that forces schools to become cops of technology but they won't back any legislation that would require that state driver's licenses to place a visa / green card expiration date on them stating that "it's not the job of the "police" to enforce the very sovereignty of our nation.

They also believe it's the job of the schools to be police of knowing if someone has downloaded an episode of South Park on line, but not know if the very student is here, illegally, violating one of most important laws.

The next time there is a presidential election, don't think that voting for a 3rd party is throwing away your vote... the Republicans and Democraps are all the same these days.
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

1 recommendation

rradina

Member

I agree. It's ridiculous but not only because I agree with you regarding priorities. It's ridiculous to single out any type of illegal activity and expect anyone but law enforcement to handle it. I don't care how much lobby money is thrown at you. It's just not right!

If law enforcement isn't equipped to handle it, then let's pass legislation that creates entities capable of handling it.

What's next, universities equipped with their own anti-terrorist and bomb squads. This would never pass because the world of intelligentsia isn't capable of packing a weapon and pulling the trigger when necessary. What makes us believe they will be any more well suited to enforce copyright law?

In my opinion, the same goes for Internet Service Providers. They shouldn't act as police any more than schools. For that matter, don't some believe it's the role of the ISP to handle this. Doesn't the school use an ISP to connect to the Internet? Why then don't these folks expect the school's ISP to handle this issue?

This is hypocrisy on a grand scale.

Aside from creating a law enforcement entity capable of handling these matters, I might also agree with legislation that forced businesses and schools to cooperate with the the MPAA/RIAA to raise awareness of copyright law and the penalties for breaking it. However, I don't think we should expect the school to fund it. That should be at the expense of the RIAA/MPAA.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102 to fiberguy2

Premium Member

to fiberguy2
said by fiberguy2:

I find it to be very ironic that the democraps would rather push legislation that forces schools to become cops of technology but they won't back any legislation that would require that state driver's licenses to place a visa / green card expiration date on them stating that "it's not the job of the "police" to enforce the very sovereignty of our nation.
Why do you find this unusual? The Democrat party backs full amnesty for illegals. They Democrat party wants illegals to be able to vote Democrat in every election. Why do you think that the governor of NY, as well as Mrs. Bill Clinton, want to have licenses for illegals?
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

1 edit

2 recommendations

fiberguy2

Premium Member

I know - and that's my point - and you hit it on the head with Billary and licenses.

My point is that the dems think that it's more important to pick on a college system over illegal file sharing (which I don't stand for anyway) and make them "police" while they turn the cheek and say "we can't have the police actually enforce real laws and have the ability to know if someone is actually breaking a serious law.

My point on this, pnh, is that as I see, sometimes, the dems as the lesser of the two evils, (during this pendulum swing) it is stunts like this where I throw my hands up in the air and say I'm voting for Ron Paul.

I find this move VERY oppressive towards it's citizens and very much a sign of a fascist state when the interest of a corporation is more important than the interests of the nation itself. I personally find open borders a problem worth taking a look at first. Bleeding hearts don't understand that terrorists would like to simply come across the border and set up sleeper cells. (They think it's all about wages and migrate workers) so I'd find that to be more important.

At this point, the democrats, IF THEY BACK THIS AS A GROUP, will end up crashing and burning as a party as the Republicans are now.. and where would that leave us? With a group of people that, hopefully, would finally make a change in government.

The low rating of congress, right now, is NOT owned by the democrats. It's been on a down hill fall for a few years now. The low approval rating isn't necessarily pointed at the dems, it's pointed at congress in a whole.

I just hope people wake up and not just 'disapprove', rather, actually do something. Every election day I vote a 3rd rail.. more people need to do that as well.

(sorry, I know.. a little off topic)
TheMG
Premium Member
join:2007-09-04
Canada
MikroTik RB450G
Cisco DPC3008
Cisco SPA112

1 edit

TheMG to rradina

Premium Member

to rradina
"In my opinion, the same goes for Internet Service Providers. They shouldn't act as police any more than schools. For that matter, don't some believe it's the role of the ISP to handle this. Doesn't the school use an ISP to connect to the Internet? Why then don't these folks expect the school's ISP to handle this issue?"
Depends on which level you think about it. On a certain level you could say that the college is the ISP since they are providing, or in some case even selling, internet access to students. Whoever is providing internet access to the college could be considered as a wholesaler.

Either way, personally I think the job of an ISP should be getting data from point A to point B, unmodified and without regards to the nature or content of the data. In fact, isn't that what the principle of net neutrality is all about?
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

1 edit

jc10098 to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
PNH speaks again...and yet there's not a word of truth in his statement... Surprised? Let's see, and the Republican Party doesn't back full Amnesty? Do you NOT recall Bush's bill to try and give them it? Better yet, WHO uses the labor PNH? Large corporations are the ones who hire these people, and they tend to be spearheaded by Republicans as big business usually is. Your racism comes to the surface again, along with your utter lack of understanding for the issue. Let's face it, if these businesses didn't hire them, there'd be no reason for them to stream over. Yet, Bush wanted to allow 600,000 more in this country as of a few months ago, and that was voted down. Still, until companies are held accountable for hiring illegals (Which they won't. Republicans won't punish big business), nothing will change. Therefore, think before you type as 95 percent of what you say isn't based in any truth or fact. You've come out without any real facts or evidence for the past several arguments. I guess I shouldn't expect any more from you.
jc10098

jc10098 to fiberguy2

Member

to fiberguy2
See my reply to PNH or here it is....Both parties don't seem to interested in fixing, especiall the Republican Party who backed full amnesty and hires them.

Let's see, and the Republican Party doesn't back full Amnesty? Do you NOT recall Bush's bill to try and give them it? Better yet, WHO uses the labor PNH? Large corporations are the ones who hire these people, and they tend to be spearheaded by Republicans as big business usually is. Your racism comes to the surface again, along with your utter lack of understanding for the issue. Let's face it, if these businesses didn't hire them, there'd be no reason for them to stream over. Yet, Bush wanted to allow 600,000 more in this country as of a few months ago, and that was voted down. Still, until companies are held accountable for hiring illegals (Which they won't. Republicans won't punish big business), nothing will change. Therefore, think before you type as 95 percent of what you say isn't based in any truth or fact. You've come out without any real facts or evidence for the past several arguments. I guess I shouldn't expect any more from you.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

said by jc10098:

Let's see, and the Republican Party doesn't back full Amnesty? Do you NOT recall Bush's bill to try and give them it? Better yet, WHO uses the labor PNH?
Yawn. Why do you think Jorge never proposed shamnesty while the Republicans controlled Congress?

Why do you think every Republican presidential candidate is trying to play down support for shamnesty or come out against it?

Last I heard, every major Democrat candidate supports shamnesty. While there are Republicans who also support shamnesty, such as Jorge Bush, any Republican presidential candidate who supports shamnesty isn't going to win the nomination.
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

jc10098

Member

And yet, the Republicans as a whole support it directly or indirectly. Once again, those large corporations seem to hire them in droves, with no recourse. I don't see anyone punishing them, do you? These corporations are usually Republican backed too, as is most big business. I don't see you addressing that point. Seems convenient you forget the biggest issue here. Pretend to whine and cry about them coming to this country, but hire them and given them incentive to enter illegally in the first place. Gee, what an astonishment, the Republican Party has another hypocrisy under it's belt.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

said by jc10098:

And yet, the Republicans as a whole support it directly or indirectly.
Proof please?

If you are correct, why are so many Republican candidates coming out against it?
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

jc10098

Member

So they look like they care? Why do so many corporations hire these illegals? I see on the news quite a lot where INS raids businesses who hire these people in droves. The INS of course, no one ever says what happens to the business. Probably nothing, as they seem to have more illegals in no time. Either the Punishments are light, or they get a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again. However, it is common knowledge that big business usually votes Republican and it's many of these same places that hire these people in the first place. However, when it comes down to it, Republicans want amnesty and their work more than anyone. They don't require health benefits and they get paid under federal minimum wage.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

said by jc10098:

So they look like they care? Why do so many corporations hire these illegals? I see on the news quite a lot where INS raids businesses who hire these people in droves. The INS of course, no one ever says what happens to the business.
And who runs the INS?

Again, you have not answered my question. How is it that all Republicans support shamnesty? Where is your proof?
pnh102

pnh102 to jc10098

Premium Member

to jc10098
You do know that the Republican Party isn't just Bush, right?
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

jc10098 to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
I never said they all did. I am saying this administration and a large number do by their actions. Multi conglomerate corporations utilize their labor. As stated before, these companies (Big Business) tend to be Republican based. By no means am I saying that all republicans support amnesty and by no means do all Democrats. However, the track record for politicians (Republicans)tends to favor it being that they ignore many cases, do not clamp down, and exploit such labor. Name or cite me any laws during a Republican Administration that heavy handedly made an effort to stop the problem? I don't think you'll find much. Hence, to say Democrats are any more for such crap is just another bit of hogwash from you. Both parties are lackluster, but Republicans tend to get the most benefit by using the cheap labor that doesn't require benefits and gets paid a LOT LESS.

As per the INS, Immigration Naturalization Services, its federally run. However, all they serve to do is send them back, where they return for jobs over and over. As long as big business offers them, these people will not stop their behavior. Can't blame them. In their country, they get paid low wages. Come here, and even if a company shafts them, they will make more than over there. Hence, until companies are held liable, we can never expect illegal immigration to be stemmed.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Click for full size
said by jc10098:

I never said they all did.
Ok.
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

2 edits

jc10098

Member

In respect to companies. Don't pick out a line in my sentence and misquote me. Companies as a whole support it when they hire the illegal labor, directly or indirectly. IE Most of these companies being Republican when it comes to big business. Indirectly being not checking out people to make sure they are legal, and directly being hiring these people themselves. Next time, read the whole statement before you try to B.S. and fit it to meet your distorted context so you can make some falsified point.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2 to jc10098

Premium Member

to jc10098
You are so misguided in your views and incorrect in your facts.

Many FARMERS hire the illegals. Show me some proof that all farmers are Republicans. In fact, you will find that there is no litmus test that says if you are a farmer, you are a Republican. I grew up a farmer's son, worked on the farm, know MANY farmers - and guess what? ... in California where most of this problem is. I can tell you that there are plenty of farmers who are democrats.

Secondly, the hotel industry - another large source of immigrant workers. You do realize that the large "corporate" hotels don't hire illegals. If you want to call something like a Motel 6 a "corporation" you might be able to. However, Motel 6, for example, are individually owned franchises. Maybe that individual hotel IS a corporation which brings me to my next point..

There is a difference, in context, of a "corporation" and "big corporate"... I am one person and I'm a corporation. It's a piece of paper. You're using the word "corporate" as a slanderous word. Big corporations, as you are referring to, are not the ones being raided. The businesses that are raided may be incorporated making them a corporation, but I can tell you that some of these businesses that have been raided have sometimes only 50 to 200 employees.. not hardly the "corporations" you are speaking of.

This isn't an issue of Republicans or Democrats 'benefiting' from any perk of hiring an illegal.. it's about the entity or individual directly that benefits.

You really need to stop watching CNN so much for an education. Everything you are saying comes direct from the news desk at CNN. Just about every point you have I can direct you to a headline from the media. Really, try getting into the facts, and by that I don't mean actually reading the 4 paragraphs that follow the headline either.

I'm just still trying to figure out where this "common knowledge" you speak of about... when I hear someone say "it's common knowledge" it pretty much means ".. the people in my own circle believe..."

So, while we're here, let's put you on the spot. Since it's such a huge problem, name 5 "multi conglomerate corporations" who are utilizing illegal immigrant labor. IF you care to save face and answer the question, be prepared, because I will be happy to check your facts.
fiberguy2

fiberguy2 to jc10098

Premium Member

to jc10098
said by jc10098:

Next time, read the whole statement before you try to B.S. and fit it to meet your distorted context so you can make some falsified point.
.. to be honest, you're the one making a lot of claims here and yet you've not pointed to one thing that backs up your statement.

So far everything you've said is based purely on emotion and largely without any fact. Who's making falsified points here anyway?

Nothing you've said, so far, doesn't apply to anyone void of their political affiliation.

The ONLY thing that either party has in common is that they are only appearing concerned to the general population in order to gain votes.

Immigration is a WEDGE ISSUE... it's designed to drive a wedge between voters and divide them. It makes elections easier.

Abortion
Gay Marriage
Illegal Immigration
Social Security
Health Care

... ever notice that these are the things that politicians tell US what is important to us? I don't need anyone telling me ANYTHING important to me.. *I* will tell them, if they care to listen, what's important to me. I don't need some idiot telling me what I care about.

The only reason they care about the immigration issue is to gain a group of people to vote for them.. and you know what? It's all at the expense of national security.

To be honest, the majority of people that come here are hard working, dedicated, American loving people that would work 4 times harder than those very Americans that want them out of the country. (Ironic) So I could care less about the Mexican worker...

.. what *I'M* more worried about is EITHER party using illegal immigration as a way to gain votes to get into office playing on the emotion of the voter.. EMOTION... meanwhile, it's at the cost of national security. Now, here comes the bleeders that are going to call me names... and that I'm crazy, or a right wing wacko (which I am not repub or democrap)... If EITHER party, ANY party, opens up and laxes the restrictions on people crossing the borders, then those that want to blow up shopping malls, bring in nukes, crash planes into buildings, and other wise cause disruption to the nation, will be able to float right across the border with them.

Sit here and play this game with the dems how it's all the republican's fault and who supports what.. believe what the talking point memos say all you want... or, open your eyes and see beyond the smoke screen of the false reality that you are being given.

Maybe one day when you've actually put your life on the line, as some of us have, to defend this nation from those that would want to harm us, maybe then I'll take your dribble seriously.
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

jc10098 to fiberguy2

Member

to fiberguy2
Actually, large chains do hire them. I've been to many and guess what? That's their staff. I can say the same, PROVE TO ME they DON'T. If you bothered to read anything I wrote, I said neither party seems to concerned about the issue of immigration but Republican Large Corporations benefit from them the most. Yes, I know there are lots of migrant workers, but most are illegal too. However, a large portion of workers here illegally are NOT migrant. They work in a variety of industries and for large corporations, too. However, when it comes down to it, I frankly don't care if they are here or not. I just think that if corporations hire them, they should be forced to give them normal wages and the same benefits. That won't happen, and hence, these same companies exploit their labor and disparity. If they had to pay them the same, they wouldn't use illegals. Anyhow, It's not that I think they take our jobs for one minute. They do a lot of work, Americans won't do. Still, there is a problem in this country. I'm not jaded to think we don't got too many people freeloading off the system. However, it's from all sides. Whites make up 30 percent of Welfare. Blacks make up 38 percent (only 39 million blacks in the country). I am not sure what Mexicans encompass. I never looked that up on the government statistics. Still, the point said, we got a whole host of problems in this country and no one seems keen on solving them. As to the issues of Gay Marriage, Abortion, etc, they are important. Would you rather we write bigotry and hatred into law? I'd prefer not...I don't see Democrats wanting to outlaw these. Only the religious right. It's why I favor Democrats. It's not that I agree with everything they do. Far from it. It's that in the end, I think we get a little less raped when it comes down to it. Since we got a 2 party system, Democrats are the ones who usually represent the middle class the best and mostly not want hatred into law. This is not to say all, but most. My 2 cents.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102 to jc10098

Premium Member

to jc10098
said by jc10098:

In respect to companies. Don't pick out a line in my sentence and misquote me.
How am I misquoting you? I put an image of exactly what you said.
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

jc10098

Member

Which circled the FIRST sentence, but failed to put it in context of the rest of the statement.... Which you so wonderfully did. If you put what I said as a whole, with the entire statement, it meant something completely different. You'd make a great politicians, misquoting and misconstruing what one person says, into single line B.S. that you can twist around.

james16
join:2001-02-26

james16 to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
You do know that the Bill Shatner isn't the only Kirk, right?

jubangy
Premium Member
join:2005-03-26
Corry, PA

jubangy to TheMG

Premium Member

to TheMG
"Either way, personally I think the job of an ISP should be getting data from point A to point B, unmodified and without regards to the nature or content of the data. In fact, isn't that what the principle of net neutrality is all about?"

Agreed.
I think if ISP's would jut be responsible for providing the pipe and not have to worry about all this other crap maybe they could put more of their time and money into the networks. I know that may just be a pipe dream but hey it's a good one lol.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102 to jc10098

Premium Member

to jc10098
said by jc10098:

Which circled the FIRST sentence, but failed to put it in context of the rest of the statement....
So what? I certainly did not misquote you.
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

jc10098

Member

It's called taking something out of context. It's the same as misquoting since it doesn't mean what I intended when isolated as a single sentence. So yes, learn grammar and reading, and you'll find pulling out one sentence without looking at the rest is still MISINTERPRETING / MISQUOTING.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

said by jc10098:

It's called taking something out of context. It's the same as misquoting since it doesn't mean what I intended when isolated as a single sentence.
How is it my fault if you make it so easy for me to do that?
said by jc10098:

So yes, learn grammar and reading, and you'll find pulling out one sentence without looking at the rest is still MISINTERPRETING / MISQUOTING.
Uh no... here is an example of misquoting. Say I said that you said:

It's ok to take something out of context.

See, that is misquoting, because you actually said:

It's called taking something out of context.

See the difference?
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

jc10098 to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
Yes, but his party is backing him through any hoop he tosses and did so for the 6 yrs they ran congress...
jc10098

jc10098 to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
You're just pulling for straws. Quite pathetic to say the least. PNH, you're seriously not even worth talking to in a debate. You simply come to the table with no evidence and a bagful of bigotry. Once again, you seem to have no answers when tough questions are brought up. Still want to know how Christianities history is ANY LESS WORSE than those so called terrorists...