USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[billybob2002 0]

A new national trend if upheld....

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tm....ts_dc_1

Quote[/b] ]

State uses trespass law against illegal immigrants

By Svea Herbst-Bayliss

1 hour, 57 minutes ago

BOSTON (Reuters) - Police in two New Hampshire towns are using state law on trespass to crack down on people who enter the United States illegally, a move critics call an abuse of local authority.

The police are using the rare interpretation of the trespass law against illegal immigrants because they say Washington was not doing enough to secure U.S. borders.

Nine people have been charged with trespassing since April -- the most recent during a traffic stop on Thursday -- in the small towns of Hudson and New Ipswich.

A civil rights group criticized the move, saying state officials were overstepping their boundaries and suggested the spate of citations were motivated by ethnic profiling.

Four Mexicans and four Brazilians have been charged with trespassing in Hudson, about an hour northwest of Boston, and another Mexican was arrested for trespassing in nearby New Ipswich.

The illegal immigrants will appear in court and if found guilty, they would face a $1,000 fine but no jail time.

The Mexican consulate, concerned the charges will be upheld in court and set a national precedent, has hired an attorney for the Mexican immigrant arrested in New Ipswich, who faces trial next month, according to the Washington Post.

Police chief Richard Gendron of Hudson said the federal government had failed to protect the borders and he would continue to charge illegal immigrants.

"There is a good possibility we will issue more citations," Gendron told Reuters. "If you come into this state and you are an illegal alien or immigrant, you don't have the right or the privilege to be here."

Gendron said it was New Ipswich police chief Garrett Chamberlain who prompted him to start issuing citations in Hudson when federal agents did not show much interest in taking custody of illegal immigrants caught in New Ipswich.

Chamberlain went to a local prosecutor and they decided to use the trespassing statute, the Washington Post said.

Claire Ebel of the New Hampshire American Civil Liberties Union said the police were overstepping their authority by "misusing a statute to enforce federal law that they have no jurisdiction to enforce."

"They are the Northeastern equivalent of the Minutemen," she said, referring to an armed private militia in Arizona that patrols the border with Mexico.

......

Quote[/b] ]Yeah...Billybob is correct.   The liberalized democratic party is a recent thing...although the US isn't exactly an old country so relatively speaking its not all that recent of a change...

Ditto...I know, Akira, that the Democrats is the party of the minority groups right now but it is ridiculous to say that the Republican party had little history with minority groups within their party.

[denoir 0]

Its all rather disgusting to me how voters ignore facts about candidates and just swallow what the political campaigns spew out rather then doing their own research on the records of the candidates.   But oh well...its the same problem all over the world I guess.

I think it is related to the size of the population.

In Europe, we have in national elections traditionally always had a high voter turnout and fairly relaxed political campaigns that focus on issues. The tone of the political discussion has been respectful and the contents rational.

Because of that Europeans have looked down on American democracy, considering it a joke. Negative campaigns, mud throwing, tasteless shows, low voter turnout and an utterly uninformed population were all things that looked very silly and unappealing.

With the dawn of the EU however, things have changed. On the level of the member states, it's still fairly good, but on EU level it is awful. Low voter turnout - even lower than in the US, completely ignorant voter driven almost exclusively by fear-mongering. You'd be surprised how passionately some people hate the EU and everything it stands for (the British stand out in this area). The polemics reach the same level as for instance Rush Limbaugh's crap in the US. And the politicians have adapted. We saw a remarkable display of tasteless campaigns now in the French and Dutch referendums with both sides trying to outdo each other in scaring the voters. That trend has still not affected the elections for the European Parliament (because people simply don't care), but it's probably only a question of time.

I guess it is true what they say, that politics ends up operating on the level of the least common denominator of the population. The larger population you have you'll have a lower level.

[miles teg 1]

Well, I think that when it comes right down to it, the main problem with the EU is plain and simple nationalism.  Who the hell wants foreigners dictating to THEIR NATION what laws they have to pass.  How is some TURK or some French, Belgium, or German bueracrat going to know whats best for the British???  God Save the Queen and all that crap...

Its just plain and simple nationalism... people don't want to give up their sovreignty.   Not much different from tribalism in the Middle East or Africa.  It can be overcome but it takes incredibly strong leadership and it'll take some SERIOUS hardcore marketing of the idea of a unified Europe.

A powerful EU also scares the hell out of the US who I'm sure has funded tons of the anti-EU campaigns.

But seriously....if you throw enough money at high quality marketing of ideas, you can make people believe that shit is gold.

To Billybob:  that trespassing law will never hold up in court.  I've never heard of a trespassing law that prohibits a non-citizen from being in a country.  If it is successful, it could be used to kick out legal foreign residents or to continously prosecute anyone with a criminal record until they leave if that is the justification used.  It also would totally change the rules of what is public property and what is private.  

But according to the latest rulings of the constitution, despite historic protections of non-citizens, since I believe 1998 (I could be wrong about the year), the Supreme Court has ruled that non-citizens are not protected by the constitution.  So basically they have no rights.  So far the ruling hasn't been abused except in the case of extremely unjust immigration cases in which thousands of Middle Easterners were expelled from the US on minor immigration technicalities (and which the US media barely reported on).

But if these trespassing cases are upheld at the federal level, then I believe this will give some politicians a powerful anti-immigration tool in their political campaigns and policies towards immigrants.

Personally I think the Border Patrol just needs to be strengthened.   If only a small number make it in, then they'll continue to help fuel the economy (as immigration is good for the economy).   Europe also faces this same problem of figuring out how to balance immigration with economic growth and preserving the national culture.

Its hard... but cultures change...immigrations and migrations have happened thruout history (most often thru invasions).  But people adapted and changed and got on with their lives.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[SFWanabe 0]

Quote[/b] ] Not much different from tribalism in the Middle East or Africa.

LOL!!!! I never thought of it like that. Good one dude and I agree with that statement also.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ] I know, Akira, that the Democrats is the party of the minority groups right now but it is ridiculous to say that the Republican party had little history with minority groups within their party.

And how many GOP from the 1940s and before are still around and still politiking?

As I said before, I am unconcerned with the history of the parties, and who did what for civil rights or not. The last 60 odd years the Dems have been their party, and that is what I am talking about. The "modern" time. When I say "The GOP has little history with minorities like the Democrats do, and that is the main reason" I am talking about the policy and personalities of the party, especially in the modern time. What happened after the Civil War to the Great Depression has little do to with the experience of GOP leadership now, but many Dem leaders from the days of the civil rights era are still around.

The last election is one of two things. Either an anamoly of minority voting, or a trend of minority voting. With the war and scare propoganda of the GOP during the last election, many minorities voted Republican, black, hispanic, and asians, particularly swing voters like hispanics and asians. Coupled with the religious rollout, it gave the GOP an ever so slight presidential win, but was more felt in the legislative branchs of the government. If the Dems are indeed losing the black vote, then the last election could be representative of a swing in minority votes, in which case the Dems need to get off their fannies.

I hope that clears it up.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ] that trespassing law will never hold up in court.  I've never heard of a trespassing law that prohibits a non-citizen from being in a country.  If it is successful, it could be used to kick out legal foreign residents or to continously prosecute anyone with a criminal record until they leave if that is the justification used.  It also would totally change the rules of what is public property and what is private.  

I think they are arguing that since those people were illegally here, they are trespassing. If they were here, legally, then they are not trespassing. If upheld, it would be a powerful anti-illegal immigration tool not anti-immigration or non-citizen tool.

Quote[/b] ]As I said before, I am unconcerned with the history of the parties, and who did what for civil rights or not. The last 60 odd years the Dems have been their party, and that is what I am talking about. The "modern" time. When I say "The GOP has little history with minorities like the Democrats do, and that is the main reason" I am talking about the policy and personalities of the party, especially in the modern time. What happened after the Civil War to the Great Depression has little do to with the experience of GOP leadership now, but many Dem leaders from the days of the civil rights era are still around.

Jeez, next time say "modern" times and not just say history. History is larger than "modern" times.

:/

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]Jeez, next time say "modern" times and not just say history. History is larger than "modern" times.

Guess I should have said "recent history"...course I didn't expect anyone to bring up superfluous Civil War history.

[sputnik monroe 102]

Quote[/b] ]as immigration is good for the economy

Legal Immigration, and illegal immigration are two different things. Sadly these days there is no reason to legally immigrate. If you legally immigrate you'll have to pay taxes, register with the selective service and other responsibilities that legal citizens are required.

Some times I wish I was an illegal immigrant

[Akira 0]

More Republican goodness...

Quote[/b] ]THE NATION

House Judiciary Chairman Walks Out of Heated Hearing

# Rep. Sensenbrenner, a Republican, cuts off a meeting on the Patriot Act's constitutionality.

From Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The Republican House Judiciary Committee chairman walked off with the gavel Friday, leaving Democrats shouting into turned-off microphones at a raucous hearing on the Patriot Act.

The hearing, with the two sides accusing each other of being irresponsible and undemocratic, came as President Bush was urging Congress to renew the sections of the post-Sept. 11 counter-terrorism law set to expire in September.

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), chairman of the panel, abruptly gaveled the meeting to an end and walked out, followed by other Republicans. Sensenbrenner said that much of the testimony, which veered into debate over the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was irrelevant.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) protested, raising his voice as his microphone went off, came back on, and went off again.

"We are not besmirching the honor of the United States; we are trying to uphold it," he said.

Democrats had asked for the hearing, the 11th the committee has held on the act since April, saying past hearings had been too slanted toward witnesses who supported the law. The four witnesses were from groups, including Amnesty International USA and the American Immigration Lawyers Assn., that had questioned the constitutionality of some aspects of the act, which allows law enforcement greater authority to investigate suspected terrorists.

Nadler said Sensenbrenner, an author of the Patriot Act, was "rather rude, cutting everybody off in midsentence with an attitude of total hostility."

Tempers flared when Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) accused Amnesty International of endangering the lives of Americans in uniform by calling the prison at Guantanamo Bay a "gulag." Sensenbrenner didn't allow the Amnesty representative, Chip Pitts, to respond until Nadler raised a "point of decency."

Sensenbrenner's spokesman, Jeff Lungren, said the hearing had lasted two hours and that "the chairman was very accommodating, giving members extra time."

James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, speaking after Sensenbrenner left, voiced dismay over the proceedings. "I'm troubled about what kind of lesson this gives" to the rest of the world, he told Democrats remaining in the room.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco said in a statement that the hearing was an example of Republican abuse of power and that she would ask House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) to order an apology from Sensenbrenner.

[harley 3 1185 0]

Well, I think that when it comes right down to it, the main problem with the EU is plain and simple nationalism.  Who the hell wants foreigners dictating to THEIR NATION what laws they have to pass.  How is some TURK or some French, Belgium, or German bueracrat going to know whats best for the British???  God Save the Queen and all that crap...

Its just plain and simple nationalism... people don't want to give up their sovreignty.   Not much different from tribalism in the Middle East or Africa.  It can be overcome but it takes incredibly strong leadership and it'll take some SERIOUS hardcore marketing of the idea of a unified Europe.

A powerful EU also scares the hell out of the US who I'm sure has funded tons of the anti-EU campaigns.

But seriously....if you throw enough money at high quality marketing of ideas, you can make people believe that shit is gold.

Now before you said this I was agreeing with quite alot of your posts, but where the hell did this come from?

The European Union as it exists now, as we Europeans have co-existed with for the past decade, has been a basic free-market forum with levels of bureaucracy to deal with internal trade and legal disputes.

Basically, the 'European Common Market Scheme' would have been a better name for it, not 'European Union' which seems to symbolise a Europe growing closer and closer until it becomes one state.

The idea of a European super-state is foolish; you can not over come 'plain and simple nationalism' and 'all that crap' due to the simple fact that we are all proud of our various histories, cultures and the way we speak.

The last two states which were as ethnically diverse as what certain people would like the EU to be were;

The Austro-Hungarian Empire; we all know what happened to that, and what its splintering helped cause.

The Soviet Union.

The only way that a closer European Union could be achieved would be for the governments of each member nation to ratify such a move without a plebiscite; ie without consulting the people and thus constituting the greatest undemocratic act in modern history. And for what?

I like the way I'm governed now, well-I'd rather there weren't a bloody parliament in Edinburgh and an Assembly in Cardiff-that's about as democratic as the Chinese Government.

Reform of Europe's economy has to come from within the member states-by working it out individually, not by foisting their woes onto the economies of other countries-the Euro-case in point.

[Sophion-Black 0]

A powerful EU also scares the hell out of the US who I'm sure has funded tons of the anti-EU campaigns.

psst...

Quote[/b] ]

CIA Publication

Domestically, the European Union attempts to lower trade barriers, adopt a common currency, and move toward convergence of living standards. Internationally, the EU aims to bolster Europe's trade position and its political and economic power. Because of the great differences in per capita income (from $10,000 to $28,000) and historic national animosities, the European Community faces difficulties in devising and enforcing common policies. For example, both Germany and France since 2003 have flouted the member states' treaty obligation to prevent their national budgets from running more than a 3% deficit. In 2004, the EU admitted 10 central and eastern European countries that are, in general, less advanced technologically and economically than the existing 15. Twelve EU member states introduced the euro as their common currency on 1 January 1999. The UK, Sweden, and Denmark do not now participate; the 10 new member states may choose to adopt the euro when they meet the EU's fiscal and monetary criteria and the member states so agree.

...EU is less than one-half the size of the US

...EU Gross Domestic Product is $ 11,650,000,000,000 growing at 2.40% compared to the U.S. $ 11,750,000,000,000 growing at 4.40%

...the unemployment rate of the EU is 9.50% compared to the US rate of 5.50%

I'd say you were a little off on saying that the EU could scare the US. We have yet to find a country to fill in the USSR's shoes to scare us into conflict. I'm not sure if theres been any anti-EU campaigns but I'll keep my eyes open. As harley 3 1185 said, its more of an economy scheme. its not going to pull military threat behind it. If it ever goes that way, look out for another cold war. This time, we hold the majority of the nukes.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]More Republican goodness...

Somebody was having an crappy day and bought it to the office (:/ ). Anyway, 10 out 11 meetings without any major problems isn't that bad considering the subject. Also, I don't think Republicans mix with Amnesty International anymore.

[SFWanabe 0]

Quote[/b] ]I don't think Republicans mix with Amnesty International anymore

Who does now days? LMAO

[turms 0]

Quote[/b] ]I don't think Republicans mix with Amnesty International anymore

Who does now days? LMAO

Most of the civilized world.

[Donnervogel 0]

A powerful EU also scares the hell out of the US who I'm sure has funded tons of the anti-EU campaigns.

psst...

Quote[/b] ]

CIA Publication

Domestically, the European Union attempts to lower trade barriers, adopt a common currency, and move toward convergence of living standards. Internationally, the EU aims to bolster Europe's trade position and its political and economic power. Because of the great differences in per capita income (from $10,000 to $28,000) and historic national animosities, the European Community faces difficulties in devising and enforcing common policies. For example, both Germany and France since 2003 have flouted the member states' treaty obligation to prevent their national budgets from running more than a 3% deficit. In 2004, the EU admitted 10 central and eastern European countries that are, in general, less advanced technologically and economically than the existing 15. Twelve EU member states introduced the euro as their common currency on 1 January 1999. The UK, Sweden, and Denmark do not now participate; the 10 new member states may choose to adopt the euro when they meet the EU's fiscal and monetary criteria and the member states so agree.

...EU is less than one-half the size of the US

...EU Gross Domestic Product is $ 11,650,000,000,000 growing at 2.40% compared to the U.S. $ 11,750,000,000,000 growing at 4.40%

...the unemployment rate of the EU is 9.50% compared to the US rate of 5.50%

I'd say you were a little off on saying that the EU could scare the US. We have yet to find a country to fill in the USSR's shoes to scare us into conflict. I'm not sure if theres been any anti-EU campaigns but I'll keep my eyes open. As harley 3 1185 said, its more of an economy scheme. its not going to pull military threat behind it. If it ever goes that way, look out for another cold war. This time, we hold the majority of the nukes.

Well well there is some problem about the calculation methods between the US and the EU... I didn't find the original source on the net yet. But I found an article quoting from it. so:

Europe's No Basket Case

Quote[/b] ]

[...]

US statistical methods distort the comparison in America's favour, notably by accounting differently for firms' spending on information technology. As The Economist, hardly a cheerleader for social democracy, notes in its latest survey of the world economy, studies suggest that Europe's annual GDP growth would be almost half a percentage point higher if it were measured in the same way as America's. Presto -

[...]

Also remmeber that the EU has high costs from having to support countries that got their economy totally destroyed by the soviets. But those countries have high growth rates now. I don't know for how long but it could easily be that in some years those countries have catched up to something like east german standarts (which are significantly lower than the west german ones). But then the EU GDP would be significantly higher.

Also read this: A productivity primer

Quote[/b] ]

[...]

Economic commentators toss around the term “productivity growth†as if there were one widely agreed definition. There isn't. America's favourite measure is output per man-hour in the non-farm business sector.

[...]

The best comparable figures are published by the OECD. By this gauge America's productivity gains in recent years look somewhat less miraculous: average annual growth in multi-factor productivity has increased only to 1.2% since 1996, from an average of 0.8% in the first half of the 1990s. Indeed, multi-factor productivity growth has been faster in France since 1996, at 1.4% a year (see chart). Britain's growth has been identical to America's. Even Germany's (0.9%) has not lagged by much. America's gains in multi-factor productivity are less impressive than those in labour productivity in large part because of “capital deepeningâ€â€”increases in the amount of capital, in particular IT equipment, per worker. This has accounted for a large chunk of its labour productivity growth in recent years.

[...]

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Most of the civilized world.

There are good republicans..:/ Damn the Media!!! So, you equate Bush has representing the whole Republican party?

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]Most of the civilized world.

There are good republicans..:/ Damn the Media!!! So, you equate Bush has representing the whole Republican party?

you don't seem to be afraid of labeling the whole left as extremists either.

Quote[/b] ]Byrd is influential person within the Democratic Party. Can't people have difference in their beliefs. The Republicans are trying to reach out to blacks but the Democrats have basically instilled in to many black minds that they are racists and only Democrats can help them (nice job, dems). Granted, the Republicans did that with white voters (nice job, reps).

and how come I dont' hear Byrd on news as much as Helms? Helms's influence was really giant during his senate stay, while as Byrd was mentioned a few times IMO.

and sure, blame the disinformation. can't believe some people will still blame 'liberals' for instilling fear, while their own action is the cause of that fear.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]you don't seem to be afraid of labeling the whole left as extremists either.

When did I label the whole left as extremists? However, I have called a terrorist, a terrorist. :/

Quote[/b] ]

and how come I dont' hear Byrd on news as much as Helms? Helms's influence was really giant during his senate stay, while as Byrd was mentioned a few times IMO.

Democratic whip (1971-1977)

Majority leader (1977-1980 and 1987-1988)

Minority leader (1981-1986)

President pro tempore (1989-1995; January 3, 2001-January 20, 2001; and June 6, 2001-2003)

:/

Quote[/b] ]and sure, blame the disinformation. can't believe some people will still blame 'liberals' for instilling fear, while their own action is the cause of that fear.

Yeah, I know those Republicans are taking back voting rights of blacks (perfect example). What about the whole blacks/minorities in war disinformation during Vietnam and how it's trying to pop it head back up again to be used against the

Republicans and Bush. Or, there is systematic disenfranchisement of black voters during presidential elections by Republicans. etc. etc.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]you don't seem to be afraid of labeling the whole left as extremists either.

When did I label the whole left as extremists? However, I have called a terrorist, a terrorist. :/

but you don't apply same "logic" to GOP and their attitude towards minorities.

Quote[/b] ]Democratic whip (1971-1977)

Majority leader (1977-1980 and 1987-1988)

Minority leader (1981-1986)

President pro tempore (1989-1995; January 3, 2001-January 20, 2001; and June 6, 2001-2003)

Helms

Quote[/b] ]

1960-1972; elected as a Republican to the United States Senate in 1972 and reelected in 1978, 1984, 1990 and again in 1996 and served from January 3, 1973, to January 3, 2003; not a candidate for reelection in 2002; chair, Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry (Ninety-seventh to Ninety-ninth Congresses), Committee on Foreign Relations (One Hundred Fourth to One Hundred Sixth Congresses; One Hundred Seventh Congress [January 3, 2001; January 20, 2001-June 6, 2001]).

now here is an interesting food for thought. if a Dem holds office a long time wielding same influence, would you give him respect that you give to GOP person of similar record? Apparently not. When Byrd's record is in contrast with Helms's you seem to turn an blind eye to the fact that Helms has much for biased view. again, re-read the reported news about his biography.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]and sure, blame the disinformation. can't believe some people will still blame 'liberals' for instilling fear, while their own action is the cause of that fear.

Yeah, I know those Republicans are taking back voting rights of blacks (perfect example). What about the whole blacks/minorities in war disinformation during Vietnam and how it's trying to pop it head back up again to be used against the

Republicans and Bush. Or, there is systematic disenfranchisement of black voters during presidential elections by Republicans. etc. etc.

oh yeah. it was Dems attacking Affirmitive action, Pat Buchanan writing a very questionable writings. And GOPs are red-blooded americans who defends freedom at young man's blood while their sons are busy taking classes at good universities.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]but you don't apply same "logic" to GOP and their attitude towards minorities.

Quote[/b] ]now here is an interesting food for thought. if a Dem holds office a long time wielding same influence, would you give him respect that you give to GOP person of similar record? Apparently not. When Byrd's record is in contrast with Helms's you seem to turn an blind eye to the fact that Helms has much for biased view. again, re-read the reported news about his biography.

When did I turn an blind eye to Helms views? However, I did said both parties, including the Republicans....:wink, have their trash after you posted that article.

Quote[/b] ]

oh yeah. it was Dems attacking Affirmitive action, Pat Buchanan writing a very questionable writings. And GOPs are red-blooded americans who defends freedom at young man's blood while their sons are busy taking classes at good universities.

Being against AA does not mean you are an racist but

some "people" have made it that the case. Pat Buchanan is the uncle you don't talk about. Isn't the military more republican (id) than democratic and Ashcroft's son is in the Navy. bah bah

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ] So, you equate Bush has representing the whole Republican party?

He's listed on the RNC page as the leader, and being the President in an era where the GOP control the Legislature...doesn't that make him the representative of the whole Republican party, no less so than a captain represents his ship?

Quote[/b] ]Isn't the military more republican (id) than democratic and Ashcroft's son is in the Navy. bah bah

Can't say. Are there statistics. And having a son in the Navy is a lot different than having a son patroling the streets of Baghdad.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]He's listed on the RNC page as the leader, and being the President in an era where the GOP control the Legislature...doesn't that make him the representative of the whole Republican party, no less so than a captain represents his ship?

There are fractions within the GOP who do not agree with all Bush says and does. Just like Howard Dean views do not represent the whole Democratic Party.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]but you don't apply same "logic" to GOP and their attitude towards minorities.

Quote[/b] ]now here is an interesting food for thought. if a Dem holds office a long time wielding same influence, would you give him respect that you give to GOP person of similar record? Apparently not. When Byrd's record is in contrast with Helms's you seem to turn an blind eye to the fact that Helms has much for biased view. again, re-read the reported news about his biography.

When did I turn an blind eye to Helms views? However, I did said both parties, including the Republicans....:wink, have their trash after you posted that article.

let's see. when i brought article about supposed uncorrected Helms's book,

me:

Quote[/b] ]for those of you who claim that GOP is not biased you might wanna reconsider a few things if this article is true.

you:

Quote[/b] ]

Do I have to bring out Robert "white niggers" Byrd or Corrine Brown "white man" comments. Every party has its trash. Anyway, "white flight" crosses all party lines. I'm sure plenty of democrats pulled "white flight" because it's true and I have seen it. :/

and in every response there after, you try to dilute the situation by saying "everyone is not clean". In that case, you would be admitting that GOP has problems. however, while you try to prove that point with zeal, you do not say that "What Helms said is wrong". In other words, you are more interested in defeding Helms, while simultaneously depict Dems as trash. turning a blind eye this is.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]

oh yeah. it was Dems attacking Affirmitive action, Pat Buchanan writing a very questionable writings. And GOPs are red-blooded americans who defends freedom at young man's blood while their sons are busy taking classes at good universities.

Being against AA does not mean you are an racist but

some "people" have made it that the case. Pat Buchanan is the uncle you don't talk about. Isn't the military more republican (id) than democratic and Ashcroft's son is in the Navy. bah bah

Pat Buchanan was not born an incubator with GOP gene. What he is is an individual joining a party. If he had wrong view, it would have been a lot better if he was asked to calm down or stand on the side. but he was a fierce speaker for conservative cause.

AA was only a part of events that GOP took their stance where they showed that they are party of reluctants. String of anti-immigration comments which still resonates today show that they are more interested in status quo of this country.

and although military might have more GOP-ers, I don't see Bush daughters sighning up for the service(need I mention that military failed to meet the recruitment goal last month?).

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]He's listed on the RNC page as the leader, and being the President in an era where the GOP control the Legislature...doesn't that make him the representative of the whole Republican party, no less so than a captain represents his ship?

There are fractions within the GOP who do not agree with all Bush says and does. Just like Howard Dean views do not represent the whole Democratic Party.

and what happens to them? McCain has been called a RINO(Republican IN Outfit), and those who speak against others are heavily frowned upon. moderates have less voice than the extremists.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Bush and his government surprised me with his stupidnes again... The pope announced to the african countries that are troubled with AIDS, that they should stop using condoms and just dont have sex..

Like the puppet on strings which the whole us government is, they announced to the african countires that they shall stop all their pro-condoms campaigns or else their donations and help to these countries will be cut...

Man, is the US really that old-fashioned? I mean, im not bullying any1, but this just seems so... well, 3rd country-like, ey?