Pelosi Tells Illegal Immigrants That Work Site Raids are Un-American

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Find it then, if you are so clear that this is what it's all about. As I said before, it's a pissing contest. Neither you, nor BY give a damn what I actually think on the subject, although I have been as clear about it as anyone.

true. about any subject.

So knowing that, why on earth would I bother to explain my actual views to someone who persists in misinterpreting anything I say? Surely, an intelligent person would just play the game as I do?

so why do you keep responding?

Well why do you?

What is it exactly that you are you trying to do here - discuss a topical subject that you have an interest in or use that topic to engage in a slanging match?

[Peikko 1,575]

Find it then, if you are so clear that this is what it's all about. As I said before, it's a pissing contest. Neither you, nor BY give a damn what I actually think on the subject, although I have been as clear about it as anyone.

true. about any subject.

So knowing that, why on earth would I bother to explain my actual views to someone who persists in misinterpreting anything I say? Surely, an intelligent person would just play the game as I do?

so why do you keep responding?

If you were paying attention, you would already know the answer to that, but as usual, you were not, so you do not.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Sure Smoke. And based on an observation of your posts over the last 2 years - I'm going to ask you why it is that you idolise child sex offenders and rapists.

gonna need an example of that one six.

No - no examples. Its enough for me to say that its true in order for it to become true. That's the reasoning you seem to be employing. I'm just following suit.

so it was just another OTT personal attack, after you got put out on your post history on an issue?

[SMOKE 1,426]

Find it then, if you are so clear that this is what it's all about. As I said before, it's a pissing contest. Neither you, nor BY give a damn what I actually think on the subject, although I have been as clear about it as anyone.

true. about any subject.

So knowing that, why on earth would I bother to explain my actual views to someone who persists in misinterpreting anything I say? Surely, an intelligent person would just play the game as I do?

so why do you keep responding?

Well why do you?

What is it exactly that you are you trying to do here - discuss a topical subject that you have an interest in or use that topic to engage in a slanging match?

i enjoy watching you back yourself in a corner & come out with personal attacks (which you say you never do & that you have done again). if i wanted to 'sling' you know where i'd be doing it.

[Peikko 1,575]

At the point you stop reading what is being written, but simply employ assumptions about what people think, the whole thing becomes meaningless. Perhaps this will be a lesson to you to read what is said, and make arguments based on that, rather than ascribe thoughts and beliefs to people who simply don't hold those beliefs?

[SMOKE 1,426]

At the point you stop reading what is being written, but simply employ assumptions about what people think, the whole thing becomes meaningless. Perhaps this will be a lesson to you to read what is said, and make arguments based on that, rather than ascribe thoughts and beliefs to people who simply don't hold those beliefs?

read that back to yourself cleo & try to take your own advice.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sure Smoke. And based on an observation of your posts over the last 2 years - I'm going to ask you why it is that you idolise child sex offenders and rapists.

gonna need an example of that one six.

No - no examples. Its enough for me to say that its true in order for it to become true. That's the reasoning you seem to be employing. I'm just following suit.

so it was just another OTT personal attack, after you got put out on your post history on an issue?

You mean I have to prove that you hold the arbitrary position I've ascribed to me, but there's no burden of proof on you to do likewise?

It doesn't seem quite fair somehow.

[Peikko 1,575]

Firstly the 20,000,000 is an estimate (on the high-end) of the number of illegal immigrants in this country. The truth is noone knows how many there are - but the estimates vary wildly between 11 million and 20 million. Might as well be made up numbers for how verifiable they are.

Ah okay, estimate. Hmm, so it could be more then? Be lets assume it's 1 million or even 500,000. What right to these 500,000 have to work while Americans live in Tents?

Separate question.

a good question too.

How so?

clearly its a simple question. he asked why an illegal immigrant should have the same right to employment a citizen or a legal immigrant out of work has. and yet you do not have an answer.

Because homeless people can't pick grapes worth a damn!

I think they can, but they just don't want to do so for less than an illegal is prepared to earn. I am surprised at this soft attitude to the homeless being portrayed in this thread to be quite honest. In previous discussions it's always been the 'if you want to work, you can damn well get up off your ####### and find work, work for less, blah blah blah". Now all of a sudden I am presented with, "it's the illegals that are at fault". I'm damned if I know where these guys stand now.

It is seasonal work, but highly sought after in the area where I live. The migrant workers here make good wages, and it is quasi-regulated.

Quasi-regulated, meaning? I guess not in terms of ensuring workers are legal to do the work? I guess the problem is that you have to be prepared to move constantly, following the work that becomes seasonally available in order to make enough to cover you for the whole year. That's not an easy life style.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Sure Smoke. And based on an observation of your posts over the last 2 years - I'm going to ask you why it is that you idolise child sex offenders and rapists.

gonna need an example of that one six.

No - no examples. Its enough for me to say that its true in order for it to become true. That's the reasoning you seem to be employing. I'm just following suit.

so it was just another OTT personal attack, after you got put out on your post history on an issue?

You mean I have to prove that you hold the arbitrary position I've ascribed to me, but there's no burden of proof on you to do likewise?

It doesn't seem quite fair somehow.

it seems you've resorted to baseless personal attacks & won't pony up evidence of the personal attack you made towards me....nothing new.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Find it then, if you are so clear that this is what it's all about. As I said before, it's a pissing contest. Neither you, nor BY give a damn what I actually think on the subject, although I have been as clear about it as anyone.

true. about any subject.

So knowing that, why on earth would I bother to explain my actual views to someone who persists in misinterpreting anything I say? Surely, an intelligent person would just play the game as I do?

so why do you keep responding?

Well why do you?

What is it exactly that you are you trying to do here - discuss a topical subject that you have an interest in or use that topic to engage in a slanging match?

i enjoy watching you back yourself in a corner & come out with personal attacks (which you say you never do & that you have done again). if i wanted to 'sling' you know where i'd be doing it.

You know its not exactly been proven here that I'm some massive illegal sympathiser or indeed that I said anything in this thread which conveys that impression.

All it shows is that you expect me to defend myself from your arbitrary and unproven accusations, but there's no emphasis on you to do likewise.

So quite what you think you have proven here - I really couldn't say.

[Peikko 1,575]

At the point you stop reading what is being written, but simply employ assumptions about what people think, the whole thing becomes meaningless. Perhaps this will be a lesson to you to read what is said, and make arguments based on that, rather than ascribe thoughts and beliefs to people who simply don't hold those beliefs?

read that back to yourself cleo & try to take your own advice.

What thoughts and beliefs have I ascribed to you? I love when people do this, they see something that seems very eloquently written and try to shove it back in the face of the writer, even when doing so renders what has been written as totally meaningless.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sure Smoke. And based on an observation of your posts over the last 2 years - I'm going to ask you why it is that you idolise child sex offenders and rapists.

gonna need an example of that one six.

No - no examples. Its enough for me to say that its true in order for it to become true. That's the reasoning you seem to be employing. I'm just following suit.

so it was just another OTT personal attack, after you got put out on your post history on an issue?

You mean I have to prove that you hold the arbitrary position I've ascribed to me, but there's no burden of proof on you to do likewise?

It doesn't seem quite fair somehow.

it seems you've resorted to baseless personal attacks & won't pony up evidence of the personal attack you made towards me....nothing new.

You won't validate your claims either - so why should I?

Just goes to show that anyone can pull something out of their butt (no matter how ridiculous) and cling to it as gospel without offering any substantial proof for why they hold the opinion.

[Peikko 1,575]

I'd love to do this all day, it's such fun, but sadly I have much more important and pressing business to attend to... :rofl:

[SMOKE 1,426]

ok the whinebags are in a tizzy...my work here is done.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

ok the whinebags are in a tizzy...my work here is done.

My work is done too Mr Smoke - your stress and anger levels are going through the roof. I suggest you pop a few blood pressure pills.