Sandbox – 10jul15

July 2015
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Sandbox – 10jul15

10 July 2015

[Hopefully the Donald Trump dust-up will work itself out in 3jul15 sandbox, and this one can expand on the new thread of illegal aliens and states rights. But it's only a hope. gjr]

Posted in Comment Sandbox

206 responses to “Sandbox – 10jul15”

Gregory

11 July 2015

Jon’s 8:12 and 8:18 are so delightfully and unselfconsciously Marxist, or at least Hegelian, bravo. No, California has not turned a corner never to come back to where it’s been. Don’t feel bad, Hitler didn’t get his 1000 year Reich either.
The current Democratic People’s Republic of California will expire normally, when other people’s money runs out. With three trillion evaporating from the Chinese stock market the last few weeks, they may be less likely to buy California paper, and if the SCOTUS finds against public employee unions in the next session, the collapse could be as soon as November 2016.
Hitler had his Gestapo and SS, the Soviets had the KGB, Democrats have global warming to keep people on course. Good luck with that; there’s going to be a real propaganda push into the December Climapalooza but I hear advance ticket sales are weak.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

11 July 2015

Another supplicant snoozefest from the ‘jon’ and co. ccc

LikeLike
Walt

11 July 2015

As for Ca.,, our LIBS fail to comprehend that Ca. is Greece of the West. OPM is running out faster than drinking water flowing out to sea. Unions who saw dues payers as cash cows, now see the money tit running dry.
Speaking of union work, PG&E has been paying a union construction carpetbagger outfit from the valley plenty right here in PV for a month now, doing a “repair” on a gas line.
Hell. Even the traffic control guys come from the bay. The guys I worked for when doing the same work would have had it done in half the time. At any given time, most of the crew is standing around screwing the pooch. Caltrans has nothing on these clowns.
You guys do the math. min. of 48 dollars an hour, times 8, six new company trucks that get charged to the job,( 200 a day?) one brand new Cat backhoe, ( 1000, a day) 30 water barricades, Move in-out of a asphalt grinder to cut the street,( when a saw would have done the same job for 200 bucks). and numerous other T&M charges. ( No way this is a bid job) Now times that by 30 days and counting. Not to mention the special tools and contract “expert” to actually repair what’s broke. And not a PG&E truck to be seen.
They are milking this job so bad it smells like a dairy.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

11 July 2015

Ben Emery | 11 July 2015 at 09:02 PM
I don’t think you have made a case for your fantasy of a “southern Strategy” at all. One guy from the south causes all you libs to concoct some sort of conspiracy by one guy? Jeeze how ridiculous. But the myth becomes the reality when you are on the losing side of the debate. Tell me Ben Emery since the Truckee troll won’t. How did millions of democrats instantly switch to republican in the “south”? Come on now, go find another YOUTUBE.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

11 July 2015

Posted by: Gregory | 11 July 2015 at 08:07 PM
Greg, of course when I think of you I think of another Rahm Emanuel quote and wonder how often you like he says “I wake up some mornings hating me too.”
Todd, you are so thick; no one said it happened overnight, you just made that up, I said it took about 2 decades.

LikeLike
Gregory

12 July 2015

Sorry, Frisch 10:52, that’s a Chicago thing you probably share with Rahm, and thanks for not trying to distance yourself from Rahm’s quintessential statement of majority rule by screwing the minority when you can get away with it… It’s so, well, you. I don’t hate anybody. Not even you. I also don’t hate rattlesnakes or rabid animals.
I realize it makes it easier for you to justify your hate for me by imagining all sorts of character flaws that I must have; I suspect that’s how racists of the North and the South manage to hate their targets, too.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: Gregory | 12 July 2015 at 12:40 AM
Posted by: Gregory | 11 July 2015 at 08:07 PM
Funny Greg I must note, I never referenced you, never responded to anything you said on this thread or addressed an issue that you were commenting on, until you weighed in with you editorial comment: “The Frischian value that speaks the loudest is best typified by that Chicago politician, Rahm Emmanuel, who famously stated, “We have the votes. Fuck ’em” when working in the Obama administration.”
So once again, you show who has a hard on for busting who.
I would be happy to just ignore you Greg if you did not weigh in with attacks like this. As far as I am concerned you are actually invisible.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 July 2015

Steven Frisch | 11 July 2015 at 10:52 PM
Not talking about anything you wrote. It was others but hubris makes one think everyone is talking about them.
Also, you just can’t resist namecalling. “Thick”? Jeeze, what original name call.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 July 2015

Gregory, I think you are really spot on with that analysis about Chicago and the slime it spews opolitically. Who here is from there? Oh yeah.

LikeLike
Ben Emery

12 July 2015

Todd,
Are you saying the Dixicrats are a myth as well?
Please tell me you know who Lee Atwater is?
You claim nobody answers your questions and I do all the time and you ridicule me for it because they are usually accompanied with links and excerpts. I gave the transcripts and audio of a high profile Republican strategist and you brush it off like it was hearsay.
You are a very peculiar person.
Dixicrats
http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/government-politics/dixiecrats
Concluding Paragraph
“Although the Dixiecrats immediately dissolved after the 1948 election, their impact lasted much longer. Many white voters who initially cast Dixiecrat ballots gravitated back toward the Democratic Party only grudgingly, and they remained nominal Democrats at best. Ultimately, the Dixiecrat movement paved the way for the rise of the modern Republican Party in the South. Many former Dixiecrat supporters eventually became Republicans, as was highlighted by Strom Thurmond’s conversion in the 1960s.”

LikeLike
Ben Emery

12 July 2015

To try and cast Emanuel as a model of those on the left is a very far stretch indeed.
Monday, Mar 23, 2015 08:13 AM PDT
Why the left hates this man: Rahm Emanuel’s sins against the progressive movement
http://www.salon.com/2015/03/23/why_the_left_hates_this_man_rahm_emanuels_sins_against_the_progressive_movement/
Rahm Emanuel is a bully piece of shit that hates any form of democracy. He is a Third Way Democrat who bows down to corporate America while telling working class America to go fuck themselves. He is a typical leadership player of either the Democrats or Republicans, the ends justify the means no matter how many people it hurts.
Sorry George for the swearing but Emanuel only speaks in violent terms so it brings out the competitive nature in me.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 July 2015

Ben Emery, I never said a word about Dixiecrats (mostly democrats in the late 40’s). You libs always put words in others mouths. And yes, I am a peculiar guy. Freedom from stupid commenters is always my goal.
Lee Atwater was one man. He is no different than Axlerod who put the Obama coalition together (everyone but white men). He was a consultant. Now we see Hillary trying to redo the Obama coalition and it is not working very good so far.
I find it fascinating the liberals hated Atwater but love Axlerod. You libs need to get better educated about politics.

LikeLike
Russ Steele

12 July 2015

Quote of the Day: Statistics is to science as steroids are to baseball. Addictive poison. But at least baseball has attempted to remedy the problem. Science remains mostly in denial. Especially climate science.

LikeLike
Ben Emery

12 July 2015

Todd,
You are changing the subject. I answered your question by giving an official source of a southern state, Georgia, encyclopedia entry on Dixicrats.
11 July 2015 at 09:02 PM
” How did millions of democrats instantly switch to republican in the “south”? Come on now, go find another YOUTUBE.”

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 July 2015

What do the Dixiecrats have to do with Atwater’s “southern strategy”? You are not understanding what your link is.

LikeLike
George Boardman

12 July 2015

Southerners started the white flight from the Democratic Party to the Republicans after passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
The Democrats finally rejected the hypocrisy of cozing up to Southern racists to cobble together a political majority, but the party of Lincoln had no qualms about welcoming avowed racists like Strom Thurmond into the party. Lyndon Johnson, an astute politician who knew the South well, said signing the civil rights act meant the Democrats “have lost the South for a generation.” Clearly, he was overly optimistic.
But there’s a price to be paid when you make a deal with the Devil, and the bill will become due in the future as the GOP finds it increasingly difficult to win the presidency with just the white vote. They wrote off the black vote decades ago and seem hell-bent on alienating the Latinos, but that’s what happens when you cater to the customs and prejudices of the southern whites who now constitute the base of the party.

LikeLike
George Rebane

12 July 2015

GeorgeB 854am – “…southern whites who now constitute the base of the (Republican) party.” Mr Boardman, could you please give us a substantive expansion of that proposition. Bolstering your argument with references to recognized rightwing pundits would also be appreciated. Thanks.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Seriously, do we really need to do this? We are discussing history with someone who has no interest in real or sourced history. It is like debating a shadow.
Mssrs. Boardman and Emery are entirely correct. Mr. Boardman is correct in his analysis of the future risk for the Republican party as well. The demographics of the country are shifting and if the Republican party gets on the wrong side of that shift they will pay a price for decades. No amount of nominating Latinos as potential candidates and supporting policies the broad range of Latino voters reject will help. California should have been the canary in the coal mine for Republican strategists.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: George Rebane | 12 July 2015 at 09:27 AM
George: re Mr. Boardman’s contention, one could start by looking at the electoral maps from 2000 to present. The Republican and Democratic majorities in each respective election have been split with the Republicans holding most of the south and the great plaines and the Democrats holding the Industrial north east and upper midwest and the west, with the intermountain west states in flux.
Polling data would back that up:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118937/republican-base-heavily-white-conservative-religious.aspx
Analysis has backed that up:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/the-gop-is-dying-off-literally-118035.html#.VaKYCnjDm6A
And conservative columnists have backed that up:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/18/can-a-republican-win-270-electoral-votes-in-2016-or-ever.html

LikeLike
fish

12 July 2015

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 12 July 2015 at 09:28 AM
…and as expected the Emmanuelish, “We have the votes. Fuck ’em” sentiment from Mr. Frisch.
So the upthread denial was what…..?

LikeLike
George Rebane

12 July 2015

StevenF 941am – I thought when one discussed a ‘party’s base’, the reference was to a set of tenets held by party members who would be the last to desert the party in an election, and not to a specific geographical distribution of people who voted for the party. The gallup poll upholds that view. BTW, I’m not contending that some of the Republican base doesn’t live in the South, just Mr Boardman’s contention that I quoted in my 927am. It seems to me that the Republican base is also distributed across the plains and western states.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Well I may not agree with Mr. Emanuel’s (by the way, one M) “We have the votes, Fuck ’em” quote (If he ever did say that instead of Bob Woodward paraphrasing Mr. Emanuel); but I do agree with this, “We have the facts, Fuck ’em.”
There are such things as facts. On the “Southern Strategy” we have the facts, which we could go into ad infinitum, but what is the point when facts are meaningless to the the reader?

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: George Rebane | 12 July 2015 at 10:02 AM
Hmm…I agree, a ‘base’ can be described as both issue based and geographically based, and I would agree with you the Republican party ‘base’ is more heavily distributed in western and plaines states, and I would content rural regions of ‘blue’ states.
But if the point is that the ‘base’ is ‘the last to desert the party in an election”, then the polling (and actual post election data) would indicate, whiter, older, more religious, more male, and more rural, is the ‘base’ of the Republican party.
My contention is that that is a long term recipe for electoral disaster for Republicans.
Even if the Republican approach is that expanded free enterprise, family values, and being tough on immigration, is the more likely path to prosperity (which could be rationally argued) Republicans are failing to deliver that message consistently to potential party adherents who are non-white, younger, secular, female and urban. The party dialogue has been captured by more off putting debate and coded appeals to exclusion, which people are more than smart enough to see through.
To be clear, I want a vigorous two-party (or potentially multi-party) system and look forward to a Republican party that puts its nativism behind it. I think a democratic republic requires a vigorous contest to work best.

LikeLike
George Rebane

12 July 2015

StevenF 1017am – never contended that “whiter, older, more religious, more male, and more rural” voters were in the Republican base. Agree with your characterization of “… if the Republican approach”. I have always maintained that the Republican message is the harder one to deliver – it is more complex and demands much more from the listener both in comprehension and execution. The Democrats have it easy.
If your “nativism” denotes adherence to a predominantly Euro-derived culture, then it seems to me that such a cohort should also be legitimately represented in our political spectrum in order to assure “a vigorous contest to work best”. But such a contest cannot occur unless the several states can specialize in their selected forms of governance as anticipated by the Founders. Today there is little chance of that as we witness the opposition to movements like SoJ.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: George Boardman | 12 July 2015 at 08:54 AM
By the way, looking at Mr. Boardman’s 8:54 I think it is unclear whether he is defining a base as geographic, ideological, or both. I suspect both.

LikeLike
fish

12 July 2015

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 12 July 2015 at 10:04 AM
One “m”….check!
I’m not disputing your demographic projections (facts) as they retain to the Republican party. There hasn’t been any doubt as to the “why” of unrestricted immigration for the past 30 years.

LikeLike
fish

12 July 2015

The United States….always taking their cues from and a quarter century behind the shitstain that is “Cool Britannia”!
Labour has always justified immigration on economic grounds and denied it was using it to foster multiculturalism.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249797/Labour-threw-open-doors-mass-migration-secret-plot-make-multicultural-UK.html

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

“…such a contest cannot occur unless the several states can specialize in their selected forms of governance”
I am not contending the states ability to experiment with different forms of governance or policies, I like that idea. I have consistently contended that the side boards of that experimentation are a compact based on a uniform interpretation of the Constitution for all Americans. Thus, if ‘one-person one-vote’ as interpreted under the 14th amendment prevails New York, it must prevail in Alabama and the State of Jefferson as well.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: fish | 12 July 2015 at 10:32 AM
“There hasn’t been any doubt as to the “why” of unrestricted immigration for the past 30 years.”
To be clear Fish, there has been no plan or strategy on the part of Democrats to be soft on illegal immigration to gain electoral advantage.
Any advantage to be gained by Democratic politicians from loosening immigration laws would be so far down the road that individual Democratic politicians would be unlikely to gain from them….it takes more than a decade before even a legal immigrant begins to vote if they seek citizenship ….and voter participation by Latinos is still amongst the lowest in the nation. In California, the most organized Latino voting bloc, still sees very low participation, with only 28% of REGISTERED Latinos showing up at the polls in 2014.
If one thing is true of all elected officials, both democrats and republicans, it is that in the moment they care most about the next election, not building some mythical and uncertain voting block for the future.
The one notable exception to this was the ‘Southern Strategy’ which is why it was so brilliant. I may not like the outcome but it was amongst the most forward looking strategies in American politics, and it worked for 30 years. Republicans had discipline which is why it worked. Democrats lack such strategic discipline in my humble opinion.
In an election Democrats would be much better off being tough on immigration while the majority of voters are still white and over 40…which is the case. They don’t because the anti-immigrant rhetoric is against core values….

LikeLike
Jon

12 July 2015

Gregory 9:24PM Sat,
With all due respect, you should focus on topics of engineering and college rankings, and leave finance to others. To connect the Chinese stock market with CA fiscal health and its Muni Bond market is downright silly. The Chinese own a miniscule percentage of CA “paper.” Speaking of which- you think a S&P A+ Rating for CA is a problematic, Greek style scenario about to unfold? Not exactly..
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/02/sp-lifts-rating-of-california-debt-signaling-fiscal-health.html

LikeLike
Gregory

12 July 2015

First, Frisch, you’ve made it clear you “hate my guts”, so no trying to project the problem in my direction is a bit disingenuous.
Frisch 11:05, following existing immigration law is against Democratic Party core values? The essential visible DP core value is to be Santa Claus to as many voters and potential voters as possible. And don’t worry about existing law, we’ll just do what is best… for us.
Maybe we can agree on something… is ejecting criminal illegal aliens and putting them in prison for a long time if caught additional times a core value?
What about not conflating legal and illegal immigration? Or not conflating criminal tourists sans visa with a true illegal immigrant, borne of desperation and wanting a new life?
The current Democratic Party coalition will last as long as Other People’s Money does, and that isn’t looking good. Nor is the DP’s reliance on “climate change” as the raison d’etre du jour… the GOP will look smarter to a lot of people when that flames out for good taking the remaining Solyndras with it. And it is flaming out.

LikeLike
Gregory

12 July 2015

“if the Republican approach”. I have always maintained that the Republican message is the harder one to deliver – it is more complex and demands much more from the listener both in comprehension and execution. The Democrats have it easy.” GR
I think PJ O’Rourke did a nice job with that thought, from Parliament of Whores (a must read):
“I have only one firm belief about the American political system, and that is this: God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat.
God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle-aged mate, a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer in rules and regulations. He holds men strictly accountable for their actions. He has little apparent concern for the material well-being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, socially powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world. God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into God’s heavenly country club.
Santa Claus is another matter. He’s cute. He’s nonthreatening. He’s always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but he never does anything about it. He gives everyone everything they want without thought of a quid pro quo. He works hard for charities, and he’s famously generous to the poor. Santa Claus is preferable to God in every way but one: There is no such thing as Santa Claus.”
PJ got the last sentence wrong a couple of ways…. one of them being that one can be Santa Claus as long as the gift bag remains not empty.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: Gregory | 12 July 2015 at 11:30 AM
First Goodnight, your attitude and tone toward me has been one of hatred from the beginning so don’t cop some sort of superior ‘behavior’ position with me……you demonstrate your hard on for busting me with every post you write.
Second, I sad, “ant-immigrant rhetoric” is against their core values, not following existing immigration laws. No one has deported more illegal aliens than President Obama has, so you don’t have a frigging leg to stand on.
By the way the is also a perfect example of how you attempt to twist words to go down a rat hole….we are not that stupid Greg…you can’t ‘strawman’ us.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 12 July 2015 at 04:34 AM
Must also note that on this thread I never referenced Greg until he posted his “Frischian values” post at the time listed above.
Which is I believe a violation of the rules that George laid out 🙂

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 July 2015

Qoq! The historical papers are under attack by the libs here. If I recall in the mid 60’s it was the R’s that put the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act over the top for LBJ to sign. I was th democrats like Byrd, AKA “sheets” that were opposed. Boardman once again shows us all his ignorance and laziness as a “press” person. Then we have the so-called “southern strategy” by Lee Atwater. He personally went on a voter drive to change those millions of democrats into GASP! Republicans! Wow! And Reagan won 49 states with all those “crackers” I guess. Jeeze these libs here are so lazy and uninformed is it any wonder the place is a mess.
The code here from the libs is wink wink, those Tea Party people are all racists. Nothing from the Boardmans and his ilk about the 95% voting rate of blacks for democrats. No, they are not block voting. My goodness, I just have to laugh at these saps from the left. Not a word about their left’s takeover of the west coast. That is why they are not believable. We are and the country is responding by kicking them out like the British voters just did. The best these libs can come up with is a spell check.

LikeLike
Jon

12 July 2015

Steve, I find Greg’s hero – PJ O’Rourke’s characterization of God as the omniscient patriarchal, elderly/middle-aged figure as perfectly telling of that entire political line of thinking. How great that this attitude is so out in the open for our diverse electorate to see!

LikeLike
Jon

12 July 2015

I wonder where in the Bible one can find this description of God’s makeup-
“He has little apparent concern for the material well-being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, socially powerful”

LikeLike
George Rebane

12 July 2015

Just an observation re StevenF’s 1105am. “To be clear Fish, there has been no plan or strategy on the part of Democrats to be soft on illegal immigration to gain electoral advantage.”
There need never be such an overt “plan or strategy”. Given the reality of like likes like, the Dems just waxing emphathetically about our egregious policy toward undocumented immigrants of the preponderantly Hispanic type gains immediate traction at the polls from Hispanic Americans. There is no “far down the road” factor involved, the benefit to the Dems is right now, today. Whatever comes to them far down the road is gravy.

LikeLike
Jon

12 July 2015

“The code here from the libs is wink wink, those Tea Party people are all racists. Nothing from the Boardmans and his ilk about the 95% voting rate of blacks for democrats”.
What code- many of us are pretty clear about how we feel. As always no need to exaggerate however, no one has ever said they are ALL racists- we are saying that its philosophy tends to attract a disproportionate share of racists and people of shared heritage. And yes, blacks vote overwhelmingly for Democrats- anywhere from 85-95%, yes. For the right reasons. Who is denying this? LOL.

LikeLike
fish

12 July 2015

To be clear Fish, there has been no plan or strategy on the part of Democrats to be soft on illegal immigration to gain electoral advantage.
To be clear Steve, you are either a liar or complete nitwit.
You’re not a nitwit……
On the other hand you may not be privy to machinations at a higher level…..outer party members certainly don’t need to know much more than they need to know.

LikeLike
Gregory

12 July 2015

Jon, PJ is funny enough to be on NPR on a regular basis, and you’re not.
Frisch 11:44 It ain’t hate, it’s about you being wrong on a regular basis (I’d say always except for the stopped clock scenario), and not having a great track record about being open. Like when I had to keep the pressure on to get you to admit you wanted all RESIDENTIAL wells in California metered with fees paid to the state for every gallon used. It was a logical conclusion to one of your pieces but you apparently had a sense that it wouldn’t be popular to admit. Like the NH2020 town hall meetings ‘facilitated’ by the SBC to preordained conclusions.
Frisch, 11:44 you’re making stuff up again. The rules aren’t “make nice”. rather “no mudballs”. If you want to not be a target, stop being such a DP mouthpiece.

LikeLike
George Boardman

12 July 2015

My 8:58 AM post should have read “southern whites who constitute the majority of the base of the party.” (Another example of why there are editors.)
The dynamic I described can bee seen in the current dust-up over Trump’s comments on illegal aliens. While border security is a legitimate topic for discussion, there’s not reason to insult a country to make your point.
Yet none of the other Republican candidates will challenge Trump on this point. Nobody wants to upset the base. How do you think Latin-Americans are going to react the next time they vote for president?

LikeLike
fish

12 July 2015

Second, I sad, “ant-immigrant rhetoric” is against their core values, not following existing immigration laws. No one has deported more illegal aliens than President Obama has, so you don’t have a frigging leg to stand on.
No…..maybe you do play fast and loose with the truth.

LikeLike
Gregory

12 July 2015

Regarding Jon’s trust in California’s bond rating (11:22), according to Pew, it’s the 49th worst bond rating among the 50 states. Only Illinois is worse.
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2014/06/09/sp-ratings-2014
Also, there’s a difference between having a non-junk bond rating and actually finding a buyer for a bond issue. China has been a big buyer. Don’t count on them financing California’s debt in the future.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

12 July 2015

GeorgeB at 12:03 PM. You should stick to what you know best, misinforming readers. Politics is not your forte’
The only person running that has not dissed Trump is Cruz. You must not do much reading for goodness sakes. I suggest you read Ann Coulter’s latest book, Adios America. Maybe then you can jump into his discussion.
Hispanics like La Raza (the race) are not a target for votes by the Republicans. They are the Latino version of the KKK and guess who is going to go speak to these racists? Hillary! Now if GeorgeB wants to opine about that I am all ears. All the reading I do says many of the things Trump says about illegal criminal aliens is true. The “coyotes” rape and sometimes murder most of the little girls and women they sneak across the border. The Mexican government turns its head away so they are complicit. Most of the polling I have seen about “Hispanics” views on immigration mirror the white crackers. Blacks are not real happy about all these illegals coming and taking their jobs and working for less. Mostly white liberals paying these illegals chump change to mow their lawn and clean the pool.
All in all, I would say all this Trump talk will create a great discussion on these ills we are experiencing. He doesn’t seem to be a PC chump like most democrats and some republicans. But right now, I am a Scott Walker guy.
I say the more we talk the more we learn and what the hell is wrong with that?
Lastly, I just laugh when liberals tell us how we need to be to win elections. Why would they do that?

LikeLike
fish

12 July 2015

Posted by: Gregory | 12 July 2015 at 12:15 PM
Rated 44th in the latest Cato/Mercatus study…….but that’s all just TeaThuggliKKKan propaganda so we can just dismiss it!
http://mercatus.org/statefiscalrankings

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 12 July 2015 at 11:50 AM
1) The pre-New Deal Democratic Party was a party captured by racism (not to say that the pre-1930’s Republican Party did not also represent racism)
2) The New Deal, followed by the rise of northern industrial state liberals like Hubert Humphrey, split the Democratic Party in 1948 after the Dem’s adopted a civil rights plank at their 1948 national convention.
3) The pro-Segregation Dixiecrats temporarily bolted the Democratic Party to run a third party candidate (Strom Thurmond) in 1948.
4) The Dixiecrats rejoined the Democratic Party in 1948 after the election to fight their segregation battle in the Congress where they held seniority.
5) The Democratic Party remained split between pro-segregation and anti-segregation elements through the 1950’s (as did the Republican but more under the radar since Democrats controlled the Senate and Southern Democrats controlled most of the key committee chairmanships)
6) The Civil Rights movement and the Presidency of Lyndon Johnson brought the issue to a head and anti-segregation elements of the Democratic Party won the internal fight with the gradual passage of voting rights and civil right acts.
7) Republican political operatives, starting with the Barry Goldwater campaign, saw the opportunity to finally break the Democratic lock on Congress by splitting southern voters off from Democratic party leadership, and Goldwater ran a campaign specially designed to do so, winning 5 deep south states and Arizona.
8) Nixon picked up on the trend, and other social movements of the day that threatened to change the political dynamic like the anti-war movement and fear of urban rioting, and organized his 1968 campaign around splitting the south using the law and order theme to overcome the historic Dem lock–Wallace and Nixon split the south.
9) Later Lee Atwater picked up the ball and used the Southern Strategy and was famously interviewed about its existence, which many people found revelatory, but authors close to the campaigns of 1964 through 1984 have talked quit openly abut the strategy and its deployment.
So Atwater did not create the Southern Strategy Todd, he merely deployed it and is associated with it.
And to answer your specific charge that it was Republicans who supported civil rights and Democrats who opposed it, here are the actual votes. 46-20 in the Senate and 155-95 in the House FOR the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 48-17 in the Senate and 224-65 in the House FOR the Voting Rights Act of 1965. You will note that in all cases Democrats voted in majorities for both the civil rights act of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/89-1965/h87

LikeLike
fish

12 July 2015

6) The Civil Rights movement and the Presidency of Lyndon Johnson brought the issue to a head and anti-segregation elements of the Democratic Party won the internal fight with the gradual passage of voting rights and civil right acts.

Johnsons motivations in this are not in question. We know why the democrats adopted the Black community.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

Posted by: Gregory | 12 July 2015 at 12:03 PM
You misunderstood Greg, what i said was that all wells should be metered, and you did not have to ‘press’ me for that I offered it. What you got when you pressed was that if I had my way your well would be metered and charged for every gallon you used…actually if I had my way you would be charged double :)…….besides, the origin of that conversation was where you went wrong when you claimed that you owned the water in your well….under the state constitution you do not own the water in your well, you own the right to use the water in your well for a ‘beneficial purpose’, which is determined by the state.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

12 July 2015

“No…..maybe you do play fast and loose with the truth.”
Posted by: fish | 12 July 2015 at 12:14 PM
Seriously Fish, I don’t just make stuff up…here are the numbers:
http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/images/2014/02/blogs/graphic-detail/20140208_gdc296.png

LikeLike