Balta1701

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 08:52 PM) Oh, so you get to define "morally repugnant"? Barack Obama gets to define that? Who the hell made you and him king? That's arrogant and is the main reason that respect is lacking when this comes up. Does arrest and deportation of 15 million people strike you as anything other than morally repugnant? Does the current situation on the border, where people are being smuggled by coyotes, dying, etc., strike you as anything but morally repugnant? Does a situation where 10 million people are working illegally with no rights, workplace safety, or guarantees of any sort strike you as morally repugnant? Does splitting up families and locking chunks of them up in immigration processing facilities prior to shipping them back to the border strike you as morally repugnant? Does businesses profiting by slightly-better-than-slave-labor conditions strike you as morally repugnant? Sure as Hell does for me. Doing right by these people and by ourselves ought to be the most important thing here.

Nicely done Alexis!

A Twins defensive miscue! Make them pay Alex

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 08:43 PM) So? They want to build a xx story humongous building and have it funded with what will end up being 9 figures at least? It's an attention scam and nothing more... They're taking over the building of a vacant Burlington Coat Factory.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 08:41 PM) First, the cost of illegals is astronomical. Then, your logic is "make them all legal", which will cost even more. No one has a problem with legal immigration, which no one on your side seems to want or care about. That always seems to get dusted into the "racist" dustpan, whisked away at a moment's convenient notice. And the way the social networks keep being pushed toward government, and the more people you want the government to take care of (the biggest redistribution of wealth scheme ever), the more and more ponzi schemeish it all becomes. Just tattoo "Democrat" on people's foreheads, because that is all big government is about: control. So...illegals cost an enormous amount, making them all legal costs an enormous amount, pretending that they're not here right now costs an enormous amount, and deporting them all costs an enormous amount. Unless you have a cost effective way to go back in time and pass comprehensive immigration reform under Reagan, I don't see how any side gets to complain about costs, because every single solution costs an abject fortune. It's a question of who's cost estimate winds up being right which option is cheaper. Instead of worrying about which option costs more, let's worry about which one is actually possible, and which one is actually anything but morally repugnant.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 06:40 PM) Ozzie likes Kotsay and so called baseball experts say he brings a lot to the team. I don't know about that, but my guess is he continues to play. Teahan will stay in the minors until the last possible moment. Right now, Viciedo is not making a strong case for keeping him up.

QUOTE (aprec32 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 08:36 PM) Man this board is dead. As is the ball Carlos hit.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 07:42 PM) With that said... the only reason they are building that mosque near GZ is to start exactly what this is starting and NO other reason. There's been a mosque 4 blocks from ground zero since before the WTC was constructed. There are 3 gay bars closer to ground zero than this cultural center.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 06:33 PM) Not giving out millions more instances of medicade, social security, and every other social program under the sun isn't a significant cost savings? The minimum amount of social security paid is something like $500 a month. start multiplying that out, and tell me again how that is "anecdotes". So...these kids are born as citizens right? So therefore, they should have all the rights and benefits of citizens as of now? Isn't it official Republican party doctrine that America is the land of opportunity, that in America, everyone is created equal and everyone with the same rights should have the same results? In other words...if the child is a citizen, there's absolutely no reason why they should be a draw on Social Security or Medicare unless this nation has a permanent underclass as it currently is, such that they'd have an inherent disadvantage because of the economic status of their family. Basically, if you're going to argue that, then you're admitting that there is a problem with a lack of economic mobility in the country as it stands now. Of course, you'll probably try to turn that around and say "Oh, but what about the parents, they're just getting citizenship themselves!". Of course...then we can actually take a look at the rules. So, they have a kid who is a citizen. They then wait until the kid is 21. Nice short wait there. Then, they have to register and apply in Mexico, and go through about a 10 year waiting period while registered in Mexico, if they're lucky. So...all those benefits you're worried about...yeah, 30+ years later, we're totally in trouble. Of course, we've guaranteed that they're out of the country for 10 years while they're on the waiting list for a Visa in Mexico...so don't we get to celebrate that too? And, finally, as I pointed out earlier in the thread...We're right now spending about $20 billion taxpayer dollars on immigration enforcement this year. Over 10 years, that's $200 billion at the current rate, and we're dumping money into that like it's going out of style. So...you like to focus on the costs, and you're typically responded to by saying "Yes, but the people you're talking about work and pay into the system" and the one thing you always ignore is that we're wasting enough money there to cover health care for millions of people already.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 08:14 PM) BEAUTIFUL sequence against Mauer. Can anyone tell me what that last pitch to him was? Damn thing looked like a 90 mph changeup.

The deal between Isiah and the Knicks may be off.

Onion FTW. That may be the greatest satirical article I've ever read. That immediately goes up there with "Bush pledges that our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is at an end".

The jury is currently deadlocked on several issues.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 05:54 PM) I'm admittedly a little rusty on my reading and facts - someone correct me if I'm wrong - but I don't think this is the norm for citizenship in most other countries. About 33 countries have birthright citizenship laws Lost, but only Canada and the U.S. out of modern countries. A lot of the countries in Western Europe have removed birthright citizenship laws or never had them, and at least to my eyes, that's a key factor in the development of their excluded/oppressed minority communities. Mexico isn't going to take people just because we don't want them, and all that it would do is create a permanent group of people without citizenship here who have no place to go and no opportunities for anything. The best argument I think I've got is the little-c conservatism one...that the ability to decide who is and who is not a citizen is not a power we want the federal government to have. We don't want people thinking they'll be deported if they're pregnant and go to a hospital without the proper papers, we don't want the federal government deciding which people who are here on Visas are allowed to have their children as citizens because of their pure motives and which have bad motives, and we don't want people stuck here with no future here or anywhere else. Furthermore, aside from a vague notion of "cost", it's hard to see how changing the situation makes the current situation any better, and it would be an absolute mess to implement. "Birth Tourism" is likely equally common or perhaps more common on legal visas than it is on the immigration drop-and-run setup that we currently have. If you run through the thread, that's my point...then there's some stuff about Nazis and Florida.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:58 PM) This law passed and stuck in New Mexico. The roads there were probably worse than california's...higher %age of illegals because of the smaller population.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:52 PM) In Illinois you have to provide proof of residency and your SS# to obtain a license. So yeah, I think you have to be a citizen/legal alien to drive. California a few years ago had a large debate over a proposal to allow illegal immigrants to obtain drivers' licenses...the proposal came about basically because the population of unlicensed illegals who either didn't know the rules of the road or who didn't care to follow them because they were driving illegally anyway was making a complete mess of California's highway system. Plus, it brought illegals into the system by requiring that they also have automobile insurance. The bill was repealed by the current Governor upon taking office.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:51 PM) So tourists have to show their passports and/or vacation itineraries for a routine traffic stop? Thankfully, Florida has no major tourism industry to worry about inconveniencing.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:44 PM) On a related topic, Florida's Attorney General proposes a stricter version of the Arizona immigration bill, REQUIRING immigration status checks for any lawful stop. Who has issues with this? What if it became a law that every citizen of the state were required to provide proof of citizenship during a stop, just like a Drivers license and insurance are already required? What if the state can change the immigration status onto your drivers license? Is that still discrimination? This sort of law would make law enforcement in any state with a legitimate illegal immigration population absolutely impossible.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:39 PM) I'll take my chances. If we want it to be a good chance...then he better have watched some video of his AB's against the Orioles and worked on stuff in the batting cages, because the O's pitching demolished him.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:38 PM) Well, if it's up to your party any "enforcement" is just racist discrimination right? And so fine, if it turns out that enforcement costs that much, you again say that the change is effective from this day forward, not the past. Up to my party? Um, my Party's president has vastly increased the amount spent on enforcing immigration law since he took office. Frankly though...yeah, I think that there's a strong racial element to why we obsess over illegal immigration when the only reason it's illegal is that we won't update our laws to reflect reality. Immigration quotas have a history of being a great way for America to express its racial issues in legal ways.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:15 PM) They could have signed Korver and gotten Ariza, no? If it was stricly a salary dump for Houston, then yeah they probably could have.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:21 PM) Seems to me a "decent lineup" to us is having no Kotsay in it with Viciedo in it. Is that all it takes to have a "good lineup" to Sox fans on here these days? Is that all it would take for no b****ing? No Viqquel; no Kotsay and addition of Viciedo every day? Quentin back to the 5th spot instead of the 7th spot, Alexei in the 2 spot, Beckham back in the lineup, Quentin at DH., lots of possible other positives.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:09 PM) I think they were provided, but cost savings would be the biggest one. Taking away a benefit of coming here illegally (so hopefully a decrease in illegal immigration in general) would be another. No one's been able to give us anything more than anecdotes on cost savings, and we can respond with possible significant extra costs associated with enforcement that could easily offset any cost savings. As BS pointed out...having a mechanism to actually fully research the immigration status of every child born in this country would not be cheap. We're already spending about $15-20 billion this year on the Mexican border and enforcement as it is...which happens to be a similar number to some estimates of the cost of the benefits that all those illegal immigrants would get if they became citizens.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:01 PM) Game attendence right now, absolutely. For one, Sox fans tend to be much more aligned on performance than Cubs fans, and this team sucked until mid-June. For another thing, the Sox attendence also tends to follow a weather pattern, and will increase in these next couple months guaranteed. I've been watching the numbers for quite some time this year...they've gone up by a couple hundred seats per game since the winning streak began, but there's just not going to be a lot of shift left. Frank Thomas day and the Yankees series will help, but the Sox also have a ton of games against non-heavy-draws in September, after the school year starts and the weather turns.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 04:07 PM) Actually they should be part of the discussion about whether a policy change is necessary. Under the best of circumstances, this kind of change in policy would require huge growth in INS and grow government bureaucracy to a large extent, because INS' tentacles would now have to literally reach every medical facility and county clerk's office in the country. And its a big country! (It stopped being the INS when the DHS was created. It's the ICE now I believe). (Heading off to go down some more alphabet soup).