Sad day for America

[shamshon]

Shamshon,
It wasn't a sad day for anybody that understand freedom (113 million of them). Maybe it was disapointing one for Kerry and most Democrats but not a sad day.
Post after post you trash republicans and represent democrats as the party of everything good that happens in this country well man I hate to break the news to you but you're WRONG. Both sides have good and bad but let see the republicans.
-You say they are anti immigration but was Pres Regan (republican) to grant the amnesty for millions of immigrants in the 80's. It was Pres Clinton (democrat) that did nothing for 8 years. It was a republican senator to try to pass an amendment cancelling the cap and yes it was the other republican members that tried to add to that amendment increasing the burden of proof on the asylum cases but one can argue that one of reasons for increased backlog is the number of fake cases (many people from my country and neighboring countries that I know at least) that makes people with real fear of prosecution wait for years. But the lawyers were against increasing the burden of proof becouse is not in their financial interest and desided not to go forward at all. So instead of having No cap limit and No fake cases we are left waiting.
-You call them racist but it was 80% of republican senators and only 60% of democrat senators that gave the blacks the right to vote in this country. The last time I checked a senior democrat senator was high ranking ex KKK member and a republican president to nominate the first black supreme court judge and this republican administration has the highest number of minorities that any previous admin and promesing to reduce immigration Backlog ()
As for your claim that thay are anti women LOL I don't know anybody that doesn't like women unless they're gay and even then it's a higher chance of them being democrats.
So my friend next post before you go out of controll I suggest that you use your eyes and read some history (not the media) and then use your brains. Also I hope that you rethink your statement about this country becoming like your country that you're afraid of.

Exactly: history is the key word here. Yes republicans were progressive at one time of history and Abraham Lincoln was indeed a republican. Yes Reagan gave immigrants an amnesty but that was almost 20 years ago. Most republicans at the time hated him for that and he did it in the last month of his presidency to avoid their backlash. Things have changed my friend and republicans are the neo fascists in this country. We are talking about the new republican party, a party of ideologues who hate women, minorities, and the poor. Bush nominated a black Supreme Court judge (Clarence Thomas) who is anything but black and who is hated by black people. He is a sex monster who sexually harassed a 20 year old woman who worked for him. Of course there are exceptions to the rules and some republicans are more humanistic but we are talking about a certain trend here. Republicans are ideologues and nationalists and they hate change. Immigrants represent change and threaten their unearned privileges. When you say that this administration has the highest number of minorities, i need to remind you with a survey of African Americans who were asked about 3 black figures in the Bush administration: Rice, Powell, and Brown. They got approval rates that ranged between 12 % and 15 %. Many blacks think that these 3 are political prostitutes. Do not assume that you know it all because this is my area of expertise. You need to have an educated opinion and do not just repeat words you heard. Your comments about how the republicans do not hate women show your superficiality. You always think in terms of their sexuality and you use them as sex objects. I was talking about their hate for women who ask for their rights such as the right to choose and the right to have equal access to education and jobs. Woman still makes 70 cents of every dollar men make. One last thing: use your brain and learn how to spell “control” and “promising.”

 

[TortFeasor]

What have you done for me lately?

I believe that party affiliations should not be our primary concern.

As an independent civil libertarian, I despise anyone who mongers fear to score short term political gains at the expense of constitutional rights. That is what Bush, Carl Rove and Ashcroft have been doing and will unfortunately continue to do.

Kerry and his troops have also done their share of immigrant and foreigner bashing by depicting an unrealistic picture about their promise to stop outsourcing and the "taking" of American jobs.

Furthermore, looking at history, both parties have mixed records in as much as immigrant rights are concerned. The Reagan amnesty is a positive for the GOP (hopefully Bush may follow up since he does not have to sucker to the rednecks in all the red states any more). The Clinton cop out in signing the 1996 legislation is a negative on the side of the Democrats, while Lyndon Johnson's massive expansion of where immigrants may come from (not just Europe) is a positive on their side.

The moral of the story and quoting a former foreign-born Secretary of State:-"we have no permanent friends or permanent foes, only permanent interests." Therefore, our question should be "what have you done for me lately?"

This said, if being an immigrant was not my only focus and having all the information we have about the screw up in Iraq, the economy and the deficit, the manner how the Middle East crisis is being handled, I am left pondering: what were they thinking on Tuesday?

A factual correction: the first black justice on the U.S. Supreme Court was Thurgood Marshall, appointed to the bench by President Johnson, a Democrat in 1967. This may come in handy for that dreaded citizenship test, which I heard 95% of the natives will have failed.

Cheerio

 

[shamshon]

I believe that party affiliations should not be our primary concern.

As an independent civil libertarian, I despise anyone who mongers fear to score short term political gains at the expense of constitutional rights. That is what Bush, Carl Rove and Ashcroft have been doing and will unfortunately continue to do.

Kerry and his troops have also done their share of immigrant and foreigner bashing by depicting an unrealistic picture about their promise to stop outsourcing and the "taking" of American jobs.

Furthermore, looking at history, both parties have mixed records in as much as immigrant rights are concerned. The Reagan amnesty is a positive for the GOP (hopefully Bush may follow up since he does not have to sucker to the rednecks in all the red states any more). The Clinton cop out in signing the 1996 legislation is a negative on the side of the Democrats, while Lyndon Johnson's massive expansion of where immigrants may come from (not just Europe) is a positive on their side.

The moral of the story and quoting a former foreign-born Secretary of State:-"we have no permanent friends or permanent foes, only permanent interests." Therefore, our question should be "what have you done for me lately?"

This said, if being an immigrant was not my only focus and having all the information we have about the screw up in Iraq, the economy and the deficit, the manner how the Middle East crisis is being handled, I am left pondering: what were they thinking on Tuesday?

A factual correction: the first black justice on the U.S. Supreme Court was Thurgood Marshall, appointed to the bench by President Johnson, a Democrat in 1967. This may come in handy for that dreaded citizenship test, which I heard 95% of the natives will have failed.

Cheerio

Thanks for the balanced analysis but again, let us not focus on history. Currently the democrats represent a more moderate approach to the problem of immigrants. Representative Jackson Lee and Andrews are working hard on this issue and they are being combated by red neck republicans. Kerry was not against immigrants; he was against companies getting tax breaks and shipping jobs overseas. As for your question about what were they thinking, I need to tell you that 70 % of Americans do not have a college degree and 50 % do not have a high school degrees. Despite our progress, we have a lot of tobacco chewing unintelligent religious peasents.

 

[samoel]

Well I think there is no hope for you Shamshon You won't dispute the facts but you spin them around, trash and call names the people than don't view thinks like you do. It is going to be fun the next four years watching you loosers

 

[anotheryear]

Well I think there is no hope for you Shamshon You won't dispute the facts but you spin them around, trash and call names the people than don't view thinks like you do. It is going to be fun the next four years watching you loosers

Moreover, President Bush’s popularity helped defeat the Senate Democratic leader who had been widely perceived as the main obstructionist to Mr. Bush’s agenda. It was the first time in more than ½ century that a Senate leader was not reelected. It was very impressive. It is also important to remember that this week’s Republican victories came two years after an extraordinary successful midterm election. Democrats simply have to wake up to the fact that Americans are a conservative people. Nominating a Massachusetts liberal as their candidate was insane in this political environment. They needed a hawkish candidate against Bush, not someone who served four short months in Vietnam and came back to accuse American soldiers of war crimes. Not someone who in 20+ years in the Senate opposed much of the Reagan military build-up that was to so crucial to winning to Cold War. Not someone bounded by a ridiculous “global test.” Who cares about what Chirac thinks?

A little story will help. One of my best friends from college is very idealistic, a natural supporter of the Democratic Party. She gave up a six digit Wall Street salary to teach at an inner city middle school to help disadvantaged children. She confided to me a couple weeks before the election that she was supporting Bush (despite her agreement with Democratic positions on domestic issues). I knew right then that Kerry had zero chance.

A liberal is simply the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time to lead America as we engage in a ferocious fight with terrorists. It is imperative for the Democrats to get rid of the Michael Moore crowd and blame America first impulses. If they do not pass the security test with the American people, they will be out of power for a long time.

 

[asluser]

You are all right. But do you have right to vote? If you have no right to vote, How important is your voice?

For our asylees, it is important to get GC and citizenship. If someone delay your way to GC and citizenship, you still vote for him assume you have right. I am doubt. So it is very clear how to make your decision.

Do not waste time and energy, think about how to get GC fast.

 

[TortFeasor]

I did not know that Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity or a trifecta incarnation of the three has joined our forum!

You are regurgitating from Karl Rove's talking verbatim.

I am sure you will be a good addition to one of the red states!

Cheerio

Moreover, President Bush’s popularity helped defeat the Senate Democratic leader who had been widely perceived as the main obstructionist to Mr. Bush’s agenda. It was the first time in more than ½ century that a Senate leader was not reelected. It was very impressive. It is also important to remember that this week’s Republican victories came two years after an extraordinary successful midterm election. Democrats simply have to wake up to the fact that Americans are a conservative people. Nominating a Massachusetts liberal as their candidate was insane in this political environment. They needed a hawkish candidate against Bush, not someone who served four short months in Vietnam and came back to accuse American soldiers of war crimes. Not someone who in 20+ years in the Senate opposed much of the Reagan military build-up that was to so crucial to winning to Cold War. Not someone bounded by a ridiculous “global test.” Who cares about what Chirac thinks?

A little story will help. One of my best friends from college is very idealistic, a natural supporter of the Democratic Party. She gave up a six digit Wall Street salary to teach at an inner city middle school to help disadvantaged children. She confided to me a couple weeks before the election that she was supporting Bush (despite her agreement with Democratic positions on domestic issues). I knew right then that Kerry had zero chance.

A liberal is simply the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time to lead America as we engage in a ferocious fight with terrorists. It is imperative for the Democrats to get rid of the Michael Moore crowd and blame America first impulses. If they do not pass the security test with the American people, they will be out of power for a long time.

 

[RAsylee]

Time to move on ....

We are all entitled to our opinions... I will humbly request that we dedicate our energies in this forum on asylum/asylee related issues.

Regards,

 

[canterbury2]

Well I think there is no hope for you Shamshon You won't dispute the facts but you spin them around, trash and call names the people than don't view thinks like you do. It is going to be fun the next four years watching you loosers

You have to take into account who Shamshon is. He is not just an average person with political opinions. Send me an email and I will send you all information I have on him, courtesy of the CIA.

Hint: He is currently in Falluja, Iraq.

He had stated that if Bush won he would kill himself. It looks like he will eat his own words.

 

[shamshon]

You have to take into account who Shamshon is. He is not just an average person with political opinions. Send me an email and I will send you all information I have on him, courtesy of the CIA.

Hint: He is currently in Falluja, Iraq.

He had stated that if Bush won he would kill himself. It looks like he will eat his own words.

Why do not you go fF yourself you corn eater red neck wanna be. You f'en bastard.

 

[shamshon]

Well I think there is no hope for you Shamshon You won't dispute the facts but you spin them around, trash and call names the people than don't view thinks like you do. It is going to be fun the next four years watching you loosers

Again, learn how to spell. It is losers not loosers. I have yet to meet a Bush supporter who is educated enough to learn how to spell.

 

[shamshon]

Moreover, President Bush’s popularity helped defeat the Senate Democratic leader who had been widely perceived as the main obstructionist to Mr. Bush’s agenda. It was the first time in more than ½ century that a Senate leader was not reelected. It was very impressive. It is also important to remember that this week’s Republican victories came two years after an extraordinary successful midterm election. Democrats simply have to wake up to the fact that Americans are a conservative people. Nominating a Massachusetts liberal as their candidate was insane in this political environment. They needed a hawkish candidate against Bush, not someone who served four short months in Vietnam and came back to accuse American soldiers of war crimes. Not someone who in 20+ years in the Senate opposed much of the Reagan military build-up that was to so crucial to winning to Cold War. Not someone bounded by a ridiculous “global test.” Who cares about what Chirac thinks?

A little story will help. One of my best friends from college is very idealistic, a natural supporter of the Democratic Party. She gave up a six digit Wall Street salary to teach at an inner city middle school to help disadvantaged children. She confided to me a couple weeks before the election that she was supporting Bush (despite her agreement with Democratic positions on domestic issues). I knew right then that Kerry had zero chance.

A liberal is simply the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time to lead America as we engage in a ferocious fight with terrorists. It is imperative for the Democrats to get rid of the Michael Moore crowd and blame America first impulses. If they do not pass the security test with the American people, they will be out of power for a long time.

Terrorists are racists but to fight them you do not need racists to do the job for you. Bush and Osama are racists and miscreants. Both killed thousands for no reasons

 

[anotheryear]

Let me add this.
If you want to lead the world and work with the allies to fight povrety, AIDS, and economic issues and you are only loved by 51% of Americans only and no one else in the whole planet (except Berlusconi and polish president) then something is wrong and defenitly US will be isolated.
Let's hope W understand that and change his way of viewing things.

Peace

We the American people frankly do not give a damn about what self-proclaimed intellectuals in Europe think. Remember appeasement??

 

[shamshon]

We the American people frankly do not give a damn about what self-proclaimed intellectuals in Europe think. Remember appeasement??

America was part of the appeasement too.We only acted after Pearl Harbor was attacked. Fascist Christians in this country inhibited Jews from landing to America during the peak of their genocide by the Nazi. I think Europe learned its lesson and they are attacking fundamentalist Muslims in a more effective way. They are supporting moderate Middle Eastern countries that combat these miscreants. Bush, on the other hand, is increasing their hate by his racist ideology.

 

[lusiks]

closing the topic

To hampton and Ziri: supporting Bush doesn't entitle you to be "somebody who knows politics better than others".

New Mexico was just an example of vote disctribution by party affiliation, I never said it was a deciding state, so don't jump into wrong conclusions, hampton.

The fact that 911 was planned before Bush was elected to be a president doesn't change anything - it doesn't make him a good president.

It is no secret that the American electorate is let's say not very informed and intelligent compared to other countries, so yes, I can say that most of those millions did not use their brain when they were electing a president. They used their emotions about 911. Their choice was motivated by FEAR. Again, good job on election campaign by republicans.

To those who say it was not a sad day - I say you should have been in San Francisco on Nov 3rd. It was just DARK. No smiles, no joy. Just conversations about leaving the country for the next 4 years.

People like you thinking that "we need to destroy everybody who hates us" without even asking a logical question "why do they hate us?" - well you are all equally responsible for 911 and any other terrorist attacks that will happen to US. I am not justifying the terrorists, but thinking like you do will only motivate them more and more. Without realizing it, you are recruiting new terrorists into Al Qaeda and other groups. And with all due respect, you cannot "crush" the whole world, right? In case every other country starts hating you?

Switch your Fox News to other channels like HBO and watch other programs like Bill Maher's show. Listen to people who REALLY know politics better than you and me. Read Noam Chomsky.

No more comments on this topic, not from me. I have no illusions about people supporting Bush - there could be no civilized conversation with logical conclusions. Not with them.

Chao,
L.