Page 27 of 28 FirstFirst ... 17232425262728 LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 278

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #261

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    westcoast
    Posts
    465
    Quote Originally Posted by anniealone
    Quote Originally Posted by cassie
    supporting the troops is different than supporting the war.
    You can support the troops, but it doesn't mean you should suppport Bush' war policy. If you support Bush war, then.... wel just read my signature.
    Honestly, I really don't understand what your signature means. Bush is no doubt a hypocrite to say the least. He preaches and defends many of his actions by saying it is necessary for our safety and security against terrorism. I have no problem with that. But he can hardly mean that when he leaves our borders wide open. He is talking out both sides of his mouth IMHO.
    My signature means that I'm:

    1 - against nations invading other nations based on lies
    2 - against illegal aliens invading our country
    3 - burglars invading or entering my house

    What do these 3 have in common ??Right !
    If you support number 1, yet you have to support 2 + 3 otherwise you're a hypocrite that's using double standards.
    This is how I see it, it's just my opinion
    mkfarnam, thank you so much for ya help. My laptop & windows are working again as it used to be. Thanks to you !!!

  2. #262
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,663
    Quote Originally Posted by cassie
    Quote Originally Posted by anniealone
    Quote Originally Posted by cassie
    supporting the troops is different than supporting the war.
    You can support the troops, but it doesn't mean you should suppport Bush' war policy. If you support Bush war, then.... wel just read my signature.
    Honestly, I really don't understand what your signature means. Bush is no doubt a hypocrite to say the least. He preaches and defends many of his actions by saying it is necessary for our safety and security against terrorism. I have no problem with that. But he can hardly mean that when he leaves our borders wide open. He is talking out both sides of his mouth IMHO.
    My signature means that I'm:

    1 - against nations invading other nations based on lies
    2 - against illegal aliens invading our country
    3 - burglars invading or entering my house

    What do these 3 have in common ??Right !
    If you support number 1, yet you have to support 2 + 3 otherwise you're a hypocrite that's using double standards.
    This is how I see it, it's just my opinion
    As a logical exercise, that comment makes no sense whatsoever. In order to do so, you would have to specify the nature of the "lies" in question. Furthermore, the use of this rationale presumes that "lies" were the reason that the US invaded Iraq, rather than acknowledging that the only "lies" that predicated the invasion were those told by the Iraqi regime as it violated one after another of the terms of the 1991 cease fire.

  3. #263

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    westcoast
    Posts
    465
    Anniealone,

    One more thing, look at Crocket's message posted at:

    Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:56 pm ( pst, my time is set in pst )

    his post had to be edited twice by a moderator.
    He said some very offensive and accusing words to me.
    Do you now understand why I'm not replying to him anymore ?
    It's not fair how he treats me and calls me names.
    He's turned my thread into a personal Cassie attack thread

    That a moderator had to jump in to erase his rants against me, says enough, don't you think ?
    mkfarnam, thank you so much for ya help. My laptop & windows are working again as it used to be. Thanks to you !!!

  4. #264
    Senior Member Neese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sanctuary City
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by cassie
    Anniealone,

    One more thing, look at Crocket's message posted at:

    Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:56 pm ( pst, my time is set in pst )

    his post had to be edited twice by a moderator.
    He said some very offensive and accusing words to me.
    Do you now understand why I'm not replying to him anymore ?
    It's not fair how he treats me and calls me names.
    He's turned my thread into a personal Cassie attack thread

    That a moderator had to jump in to erase his rants against me, says enough, don't you think ?
    Cassie, I believe that your intentions are to annoy. Why spend so much time on an anti-illegal immigration website, vigorously promoting your amnesty loving politicians? Your intentions are quite obvious to me.

  5. #265

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    westcoast
    Posts
    465
    Quote Originally Posted by Neese

    Cassie, I believe that your intentions are to annoy. Why spend so much time on an anti-illegal immigration website, vigorously promoting your amnesty loving politicians? Your intentions are quite obvious to me.
    1- it were CG's comments that were mod edited, not mine

    2 - I have been talking about how we can stop illegal aliens from coming into the country, and I have been talking how we can get rid of about 99% of all illegals already here. That some people fall over the 1% is not my problem. I'm just realistic. If people get annoyed by that, well, what can I do about it ?

    3 - I have never denied that my main concern in order of importance is:

    a ) the war in Iraq
    b ) illegal immigration

    If you've a problem that I think the war is more important to me, and that's the reason that I vote Democrat, it's still your problem.
    And I vote Al Gore, and he's stronger on immigration than Boosh.
    With gore we have a president that is stronger on illegals than our current president and he will stop the war. It's a win - win situation.
    mkfarnam, thank you so much for ya help. My laptop & windows are working again as it used to be. Thanks to you !!!

  6. #266

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    400
    Cassie,
    The ONLY reason I jumped back into this madness is because you won't let this thread die and the illogic just keeps popping back up again and again. You keep saying that I don't read your posts. I have a quote from your original post to prove that I do.

    I only restate the argument because of YOUR post
    This will result that probably even 70 % of illegal aliens will start to self deport. The other 30% remain inthis country and we can decide later what to do with them, deportation or amnesty. That’s why I keep myself neutral on this issue because even deportation is Carrying coals to Newcastle when we leave the border open, don’t fine employers, and allow benefits for illegals. First things first.
    The issue is that you sound EXACTLY (EXACTLY) like your hero (hilarious) hilary and the rest of the dems you support and as such you are part of the problem, NOT the solution.

    Getting away with crimes (in someone else's country) does not excuse the crime or deserve reward. (ALL of the dems are infavor of rewarding ALL illegals) and I have news for you, 70% of the illegals will not self deport because our traitors will not deport them which means that 100% of the illegal criminals will be given rewards by yourself and hilarious clinton (if she makes it) and the dems (bush and traitor repubs) simply because they got away with it and are 'already here' (
    can decide later what to do with them, deportation or amnesty.
    )

    You say you don't support Amnesty (just like hilarious and the rest of the pols say) yet it is an option for all the illegals who can commit crimes and get away with it until an amnesty is granted?

    Your position keeps popping up and smacking me in the face and therefore I must keep reiterating. These are YOUR words, NOT mine???
    If you chg'd your mind just say so and end the duplicity.

    You can't NOT support amnesty for criminals AND support the dems that will surely grant amnesty? Amnesty before or after means that normal citizens like us are forced to live in filth and mexican squalor while the businesses get their cheap labor and lower wages for Americans.

    Repubs are supposed to be PRO-big business? If the dems want the exact same thing for America then why support the dems? They're doing the EXACT same thing as the repubs? The repubs (most) are against amnesty, the dems are FOR amnesty(ALL).
    "There's no such thing as ILLEGALalien-able rights!" REGRESO E MEXICO !

  7. #267
    Senior Member Neese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sanctuary City
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by cassie
    Quote Originally Posted by Neese

    Cassie, I believe that your intentions are to annoy. Why spend so much time on an anti-illegal immigration website, vigorously promoting your amnesty loving politicians? Your intentions are quite obvious to me.
    Cassie[quote]1- it were CG's comments that were mod edited, not mine
    Crocket is a decent, well respected person here. I have seen you post things here that weren't exactly nice either, so at worst, it is a wash. I have also seen you self edit your own comments, as you have done once again on this post.

    2 - I have been talking about how we can stop illegal aliens from coming into the country, and I have been talking how we can get rid of about 99% of all illegals already here. That some people fall over the 1% is not my problem. I'm just realistic. If people get annoyed by that, well, what can I do about it ?
    Realistic? Realistic is that your team of Democrats want to give amnesty to criminals...that is reality.


    3 - I have never denied that my main concern in order of importance is:

    a ) the war in Iraq
    b ) illegal immigration
    We are all concerned about the war in Iraq. The difference, however is that most of us aren't willing to sell out our country.


    If you've a problem that I think the war is more important to me, and that's the reason that I vote Democrat, it's still your problem.
    And I vote Al Gore, and he's stronger on immigration than Boosh.
    With gore we have a president that is stronger on illegals than our current president and he will stop the war. It's a win - win situation.
    I don't have any problem with you being a Democrat or voting that way. What I have a problem with is you contradicting yourself. Stronger? That is like saying a three year old is stronger than a two year old. Stronger perhaps... but weak is weak.

  8. #268

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    westcoast
    Posts
    465
    Neese

    Crocket is a decent, well respected person here. I have seen you post things here that weren't exactly nice either, so at worst, it is a wash. I have also seen you self edit your own comments, as you have done once again on this post.
    I never said CG isn't decent, I just don't like his personal attacks. I do edit or modify my posts so now and then. So what ? At least you can't catch me for saying something offensive. Most of the times I just want to add something to my post or erase spelling errors.

    Realistic? Realistic is that your team of Democrats want to give amnesty to criminals...that is reality.
    the reality is that my plans will get rid of most illegals already here. The reality is that the Democrats address my concern number 1, the war in Iraq. That's reality !

    We are all concerned about the war in Iraq. The difference, however is that most of us aren't willing to sell out our country.
    me too, and that's why I can't vote Republican. I can vote for Buchanan, if he runs, but that's splitting my vote

    I don't have any problem with you being a Democrat or voting that way. What I have a problem with is you contradicting yourself. Stronger? That is like saying a three year old is stronger than a two year old. Stronger perhaps... but weak is weak.
    weak is still stronger than weaker
    I don't contradict myself. War is number 1 = > Democrat
    mkfarnam, thank you so much for ya help. My laptop & windows are working again as it used to be. Thanks to you !!!

  9. #269

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    12

    Re: I OPPOSE illegals from coming – NEUTRAL on the ones here

    Quote Originally Posted by cassie
    Please allow me to explain my point of view to all of you. I’ve been posting for a few days now, and it’s obvious that some posters don’t understand why I can contradict myself on this issue. Let me explain:

    You’re in a hurry and have to rush to your work, you grab the gallon of milk from the fridge, drop it all on the floor but have no time to clean it. You’re running to your car and forgot to close the front door. After a day of hard work you come home, notice you left the door open and hope nothing has been stolen. Everything seems to be ok until you see 10 cats in your kitchen drinking from the gallon milk you spilled, and eating the beef from your dish you didn’t clean up yesterday because you were too tired.

    What do you do ??

    1 ) deport all those cats, but leave the door open, and don’t clean up the milk & beef

    Or

    2 ) first you close the door to prevent more cats from coming, then clean the milk & beef and after that start deporting all those cats. Or decide to keep a few cats when you know they're homeless.

    What’s gonna be your choice ?? You see my point ??

    We can deport illegal aliens but when we leave the border ( door ) open, don’t make sure that employers get fined ( beef for the cats ) or benefits for illegals stopped ( milk for the cats ), we can keep deporting but it’s not going to change or solve anything. The British have a nice proverb for this situation: “ Carrying coals to Newcastle “

    My solution to this problem is:

    Start building the fence ,and put the national guard on the border to prevent illegals from rushing in since they will try to break in while we’re building the fence.
    Meanwhile arrest, and fine all employers that hire illegals, this will take away one reason for illegals to come ( the milk for the cats ). Then exclude any illegal alien from getting any form of benefits, no free education, no free healthcare, etc ( beef for the cats ). This take down another reason why illegals come.

    This will result that probably even 70 % of illegal aliens will start to self deport. The other 30% remain inthis country and we can decide later what to do with them, deportation or amnesty. That’s why I keep myself neutral on this issue because even deportation is Carrying coals to Newcastle when we leave the border open, don’t fine employers, and allow benefits for illegals. First things first.

    Thank you for listening and have a great day

    Cassie
    I think we should put the National Guard and the Military on the border, bring the troops home. Put a full financial effort into building the fence and Complete The Fence First. Then empty the prisons in the U.S. of illegal aliens and deport those illegal aliens.

    Start penalizing Employers with the existing laws that are already on the books. Start to enforce the existing laws on the books pertaining to illegal aliens to fullest extent of the law.

    Then we can start filling the prison again with new illegal aliens waiting deportation and then deport them and so on until they are all deported.

    Once we run out of illegal aliens to fill the prisons waiting deportation we should be getting close to Victory.

    The border fence will be fully built and guarded, so illegal aliens can’t get back in the U.S. The rest of the illegal aliens in hiding should be sought out like Nazi War Criminals and deported. Anyone harboring illegal aliens should be punished to the fullest extent of the law and put in jail and fined.

  10. #270
    Senior Member Dixie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Texas - Occupied State - The Front Line
    Posts
    35,070
    Quote Originally Posted by cassie
    Anniealone,

    One more thing, look at Crocket's message posted at:

    Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:56 pm ( pst, my time is set in pst )

    his post had to be edited twice by a moderator.
    He said some very offensive and accusing words to me.
    Do you now understand why I'm not replying to him anymore ?
    It's not fair how he treats me and calls me names.
    He's turned my thread into a personal Cassie attack thread

    That a moderator had to jump in to erase his rants against me, says enough, don't you think ?
    cassie,

    This is little more than taunting and has nothing to do with illegal immigration nor the topic of this thread. Secondly, your complaints were addressed and delt with by a moderator.

    If you don't want to engage CrocketsGhost then don't. At the same time, don't tease by saying I don't see you, talk to the hand or posting a laundry list. Why are you wearing red in front of a bull?

    What you are doing is no different than calling a guy up every night and yelling "I never want to see you again" and hanging up on him. Why do you keep calling? Your sending the wrong message if you really don't care.

    Secondly, just like anyone else on this forum, CG can post on any thread he pleases. You can only control your own actions and not the actions of others.

    Dixie
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •