Hambone10 Wrote:Even if La Raza DOES believe in returning parts of the US to Mexico (which I don't believe they do), isn't that one of the freedoms we all so greatly cherish?? The right FOR A CITIZEN OF THE US to differ from the mainstream?? I don't agree with that position, but I also don't agree with taxing estates. Does that mean that I'm a terrorist?? McCain is not pandering to illegal immigrants, he is addressing a voting block. Comparing peaceful Americans with violent Terrorists is shameful. When you show me the first attack on Americans by La Raza, or something from La Raza suggesting that people who disagree with them should be killed, I'll back off... until then... you should be ashamed.

I disagree with the idea of McCain "addressing a voting block"... Illegal aliens can't vote. They are NOT citizens.


It isn't La Raza specifically... but the other organizations that I worry about. MEChA for particular.

I respect you and your service to this nation.

However, IMO this is above and beyond "peaceful protest".. when a group is calling for the "liberation" of California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Oregon and their incorporation into a separate nation..its beyond legit political dissent.

And since there is documented evidence of links between Al-Qaeda and terrorist groups such as MS-13.. I see it probable that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" would apply...

And that illegal alien groups including, but not limited to MEChA, and drug runners and coyote smugglers would assist Islamic terrorists across the southern border.

The scenario that has everyone scared shitless is suicide bombers and machine gunners hitting a "soft target" like a shopping mall…

Talk about an immediate and hard hit to the US economy.....

As long as groups can smuggle large loads of coke and weed across the Mexican border, terrorists can get across as well. Hostile organized groups make it that much easier.

My idea is hire a bunch of (former) East Germans to build a REAL fence.. instead of Boeing and their Rube Goldberg POS.

Shame me.. I'll wear that badge with honor. I've been condemned for years by others for my political beliefs.

Let's get a couple things straight here.

1. La Raza doesn't support the liberation of Aztlan. They've said so.

2. The only support they offered to MEChA is a small grant (I think it was $2500) to assist East Coast college students who couldn't afford to travel home for the holidays a means to so.

3. La Raza has also strongly criticized the racial bigotry and anti-Semitism of La Voz de Aztlan, a separatist group.

4. La Raza is not pro-illegal immigration.

Quote:# NCLR helped draft and advocated for bipartisan legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate which included tough enforcement measures against unauthorized migration.

# NCLR’s President and CEO served on and endorsed the recommendations of the Independent Task Force on Immigration and America’s Future, an independent, bipartisan, blue ribbon commission chaired by former Rep. Lee Hamilton and former Senator Spencer Abraham, which recently released a set of recommendations on immigration reform, including more than a dozen new enforcement measures.

# In a major address in San Diego in 2005, NCLR President Janet Murguía stressed that any comprehensive immigration reform needed to include a strong, effective, and humane enforcement component.

# All of NCLR’s policy materials describing its positions and activities on the immigration debate are all available on its website.

How can Ronald Reagan stand on top of the Berlin Wall and say, "Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall," and 25 years later we construct our own? That doesn't seem right. Also, many are against imminent domain, yet imminent domain will have to be enforced to obtain the lands needed to construct such a wall.

It's past time to figure out why Latinos (because it's not just Mexicans) aren't immigrating legally (too long of wait, too complicated, etc.). That being said, we still need to patrol our borders for the threats that you mentioned before.

perunapower Wrote:How can Ronald Reagan stand on top of the Berlin Wall and say, "Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall," and 25 years later we construct our own? That doesn't seem right. Also, many are against imminent domain, yet imminent domain will have to be enforced to obtain the lands needed to construct such a wall.

Quite easily. Reagan was trying to unite a country and allow Germans opportunities that other Germans had. The wall we're talking about is to keep illegal Mexicans out of the United States. ...and last time I checked, illegal Mexicans weren't Americans.

Dumb analogy. I've read your posts. You're a very intelligent guy. This was the dumbest thing you've posted.

RebelKev Wrote:

perunapower Wrote:How can Ronald Reagan stand on top of the Berlin Wall and say, "Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall," and 25 years later we construct our own? That doesn't seem right. Also, many are against imminent domain, yet imminent domain will have to be enforced to obtain the lands needed to construct such a wall.

Quite easily. Reagan was trying to unite a country and allow Germans opportunities that other Germans had. The wall we're talking about is to keep illegal Mexicans out of the United States. ...and last time I checked, illegal Mexicans weren't Americans.

Dumb analogy. I've read your posts. You're a very intelligent guy. This was the dumbest thing you've posted.

Actually it was two different countries until 1990, after Reagan was out of office. The whole intent was to keep East Germans from entering West Germany. In 1987, when Reagan gave his speech, East Germans weren't the same as West Germans. Of course, the wall was built to keep people in, rather than keep people out. Either way, we criticized a wall separating two countries to inhibit the flow of people across a border and now we are advocating another wall separating two countries to inhibit the flow of people across a border.

Now, I'm not advocating the unification of the American Southwest with Mexico at all, but I do want Latinos that want to immigrate to have the same opportunities that Americans have, but I want them to do it legally. Isn't that why most every immigrant came to America, to gain opportunities they didn't have elsewhere?

A physical barrier will require the implementation of imminent domain, will take years to complete, will require large amount of maintenance because I have little doubt that it will be damaged by immigrants trying to scale it, and will be a huge money sink.

I should have hoped you have read my posts; we've had enough debates. Thanks for the intelligent comment.

WMD Owl Wrote:

Hambone10 Wrote:Even if La Raza DOES believe in returning parts of the US to Mexico (which I don't believe they do), isn't that one of the freedoms we all so greatly cherish?? The right FOR A CITIZEN OF THE US to differ from the mainstream?? I don't agree with that position, but I also don't agree with taxing estates. Does that mean that I'm a terrorist?? McCain is not pandering to illegal immigrants, he is addressing a voting block. Comparing peaceful Americans with violent Terrorists is shameful. When you show me the first attack on Americans by La Raza, or something from La Raza suggesting that people who disagree with them should be killed, I'll back off... until then... you should be ashamed.

I disagree with the idea of McCain "addressing a voting block"... Illegal aliens can't vote. They are NOT citizens.


It isn't La Raza specifically... but the other organizations that I worry about. MEChA for particular.

I respect you and your service to this nation.

However, IMO this is above and beyond "peaceful protest".. when a group is calling for the "liberation" of California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Oregon and their incorporation into a separate nation..its beyond legit political dissent.

And since there is documented evidence of links between Al-Qaeda and terrorist groups such as MS-13.. I see it probable that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" would apply...

And that illegal alien groups including, but not limited to MEChA, and drug runners and coyote smugglers would assist Islamic terrorists across the southern border.

The scenario that has everyone scared shitless is suicide bombers and machine gunners hitting a "soft target" like a shopping mall…

Talk about an immediate and hard hit to the US economy.....

As long as groups can smuggle large loads of coke and weed across the Mexican border, terrorists can get across as well. Hostile organized groups make it that much easier.

My idea is hire a bunch of (former) East Germans to build a REAL fence.. instead of Boeing and their Rube Goldberg POS.

Shame me.. I'll wear that badge with honor. I've been condemned for years by others for my political beliefs.

[/quote]

I don't believe I was specifically addressing you WMD, so I hope you didn't take the comments personally... HOWEVER...

La Raza is a group of Hispanic-Americans... not a bunch of illegal aliens. They are a legal and significant voting block in this country, even if one disagrees with their politics.
La Raza specifically and categorically denies being a seperatist organization, or supporting reconquista. http://www.nclr.org/content/viewpoints/detail/42500/

Of course, they may say one thing and do another... they certainly wouldn't be the first... in fact, that might make them just like every OTHER political group...

Maybe I'm missing something where the leadership of LaRaza is a card carrying MS-13 Al-Quaeda operative... in which case, I'll shut up... but I seriously doubt it. Otherwise, how is meeting with La Raza any different than meeting with Lulac, or NAACP, or ALCU or some of those right wing conservative groups (some of whom are okay with killing people who perform abortions... do we call the Christian Church a terrorist group?? Of course not) and why would we criticize a candidate for talking to a legitimate and legally politically active group of citizens??

I don't discount your concerns... I just have a hard time criticizing a politician for something with so many degrees of separation...

La Raza lists the following corporate partners on their site... I guess McCain should avoid speaking to them as well??

The Allstate Corporation
Bank of America
The Coca-Cola Company
Citi
Fannie Mae
Freddie Mac
Ford Motor Company
General Motors Corporation
MBNA Corporation
PepsiCo Foundation
The PMI Group, Inc.
State Farm Insurance Companies
UPS
Univision
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.


Look, I'm not saying they're a bunch of angels, or seek the same goals I do... but they are citizens, and a legally registered political group...

I'm not criticizing your political beliefs, WMD... I'm simply questioning your sources of information that give you concerns about McCain speaking to La Raza.

I'd put money on McCain's people for having vetted La Raza.... this is a 40 year old organization... not some new kid on the block.

Peruna, you are totally screwed up! It's "eminent domain" not "imminent domain."

Otherwise, I couldn't agree with you more.

perunapower Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:

perunapower Wrote:How can Ronald Reagan stand on top of the Berlin Wall and say, "Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall," and 25 years later we construct our own? That doesn't seem right. Also, many are against imminent domain, yet imminent domain will have to be enforced to obtain the lands needed to construct such a wall.

Quite easily. Reagan was trying to unite a country and allow Germans opportunities that other Germans had. The wall we're talking about is to keep illegal Mexicans out of the United States. ...and last time I checked, illegal Mexicans weren't Americans.

Dumb analogy. I've read your posts. You're a very intelligent guy. This was the dumbest thing you've posted.

Actually it was two different countries until 1990, after Reagan was out of office. The whole intent was to keep East Germans from entering West Germany. In 1987, when Reagan gave his speech, East Germans weren't the same as West Germans. Of course, the wall was built to keep people in, rather than keep people out. Either way, we criticized a wall separating two countries to inhibit the flow of people across a border and now we are advocating another wall separating two countries to inhibit the flow of people across a border.

Now, I'm not advocating the unification of the American Southwest with Mexico at all, but I do want Latinos that want to immigrate to have the same opportunities that Americans have, but I want them to do it legally. Isn't that why most every immigrant came to America, to gain opportunities they didn't have elsewhere?

A physical barrier will require the implementation of imminent domain, will take years to complete, will require large amount of maintenance because I have little doubt that it will be damaged by immigrants trying to scale it, and will be a huge money sink.

I should have hoped you have read my posts; we've had enough debates. Thanks for the intelligent comment.

Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:Peruna, you are totally screwed up! It's "eminent domain" not "imminent domain."

Otherwise, I couldn't agree with you more.

Damn. My bad. Thanks for pointing that out. Hopefully I'll remember to spell that right.