Texsox

Link

I am thinking about Dubya and if he's having any fun and what could his crusade be. It's about the time he thinks about his legacy, dynasty building, making a lasting impact, and instead I see a man who can not be having fun. His terms will be run against a time line of death and misery, not all of his making. Tsunamis, terrorists, hurricanes, war, a festering immigration problem suddenly rears its head. So where does he go from here? A shake up in the cabinet may be a temporary boost for him, but he can't be having any fun. No more flights onto a carrier. I still believe he is a good man. I think he's just running out this term without something to really ignite him. Are we still looking for Bin Laden? Maybe catching him would be something. I'm at a lost here. I think both parties are also drifting, waiting for the next big election.

The only twisting and turning is from either looking at the hot Texas women out west or trying to get comfortable after not moving for three hours down the highway.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ May 30, 2006 -> 09:09 AM) Having a belief is one thing. Being an active participant in trying to change a law or policy to one side or the other is different. Gun owners don't always agree with the NRA, just as non-gun owners don't always agree with the Brady group. But put the director of the NRA reporting on gun control laws, of course it will be slanted towards his views, just as this guys are slanted against. it is not all or nothing, Tex. I am not saying all or nothing. I don't agree with some of the NRAs position. To me a well armed militia is not my hunting rifles, at least not in today's world. And I am not an originalist with the Constitution. What I am saying if I write a gun article, people should know this is one liberal that also loves my weapons, and believes I should be allowed to own a gun, not because of the Constitution, but because I can be responsible. So if I wrote that piece, some of y'all would claim I'm just a liberal and don't like guns, like all liberals. That would be a wrong. So when I say a gun in the home with children for protection is a bad idea, it is from a guy who owns guns and isn't anti-gun. BTW, my reasoning is, with limited time to react during a home invasion, you would need the weapon in an easy to reach location, loaded, and without a safety. The exact opposite of what you would want with children around. So I sleep better knowing my kids would not accidentaly shoot themselves or anyone else.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ May 30, 2006 -> 09:04 AM) TEx, you seem to be forgetting the sizeable American population that didn't finish high school and has no marketable skills other than hard labor. At least according to Newsweek, dropouts are an epedemic, growing each year. No matter how much the parents of those kids wants their children to be doctors or accountants, it isn't gonna happen. Why should they not at least be happy that their kids are working, and not being a burden on society? America will be a better place when the people who have no skills stop being too 'proud' or 'spoiled' to pick fruit, wash dishes or process chickens. Excellent points, both you and SS. But I believe they are working, based on our unemployment numbers. There will never be 0% unemployment, you have people between jobs, incapable of working, etc. It is my belief we are employing them, plus immigrants. And immigrants are working at all levels of our economy. We are just talking about manual labor here, why are we also importing so many professionals as well? Wouldn't we be better served if we focused on why we need to import so many Doctors, computer programmers, etc.? As far as underemployment, since these are the most undesirable of jobs, wouldn't placing existing citizens into these jobs increase the underemployment numbers? Do y'all believe there are enough workers to support our growing economy and, if not, at what end of the skill rainbow should we be using immigrants? With historically low unemployment and increasing unemployment, I believe we should be focusing Americans on higher skill and more desirable jobs and allowing immigrants to fill those less desirable jobs as an entre into this country. Not coming over as highly paid machinists, health care workers, and other professionals. We have placed systems for professionals H1B Visa's etc. Why not place a system for lower skilled labor? If unemplyment was hovering in the double digits, I would have a much different opinion. I see an economy that is growing jobs faster than we can make babies to fill those jobs. When that happens allow immigration to push everyone up.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 30, 2006 -> 01:41 AM) For almost a week I had the last post in the GOP thread. Hows that for weird? Republicans never know what to do when a minority shows up.

Nice pick.

Reader's Digest Version: #1 paragraph 1, Agree 100% #1 paragraph 2, Disagree. This is not the American dream of better lives for our children. It condems our education system and with our low unemployment rate, pulling people from more desirable careers would cause more immigration of those jobs or outsourcing overseas. Remember, our unemployment rate is very low. #2 Doesn't matter who is working those jobs, the benefits will remain the same. So why don't we raise everyone's minimum wage so they can contribute in taxes? Let's do it now. We have many millions more than just these workers. No matter the literacy rate, fruit pickers, unless we raise minimum wage, will never generate a positive tax flow to the government. That is the cost of living in a first world country. #3 Conditions would need to improve far better when second and longer generation Americans are working these jobs. Which is why my plan to tie immigration to jobs makes the most sense. A willing work force is better. How long will you stay at a job for the money? Most everyone here who has the opportunity (sorry Nuke) has made a job change in the past couple years, or come close. Why? For working conditions, and other job satisfaction issues, not always money. We should improve the working conditions, which by the way, are already much better than in previous generations. I am proud of your Ceasar Chavez like position. Again, controlled, legal immigration is the answer. Not raising wages until our children will take the jobs or a pourous border. Further fod for thought. This is about the least desirable jobs in America and the people to work them. Physical labor is hard work, very demanding. No parent wants their child to grow up to pick oranges, mow lawns, or process chickens. This is especially true if the children have been educated in US schools. For many decades, especailly since WW2, immigrants have done this work as a toe hold into America. The dream is their children stand on their shoulders and make a better life for themselves. During that time our economy has become the largest in the world. Our unemployment rate is very low, controlled, legal immigration just makes sense. Trying to entice people to work these jobs, just doesn't make sense. Why pound a square peg in a round hole? Why tell Americans that after 12 years of a US education, you should be picking fruit? Have you abandoned the American education system? Are you telling parents to abondon the thought of a better life for their kids? Should we hear a parent say I know I am an accountant son, but you will just have to pick fruit? Is that what America will become? What about the American dream of a better life for our children? Why replace a willing workforce with one that has to be enticed? Someone would be working those jobs. The government benefits would be paid to whomever was working those jobs. Of course if we pay people above the poverty line, that would be a mute point, but the GOP is against any hikes in minimum wage. No, the problem is this; we allowed uncontrolled immigration. Controlled immigration, tied to jobs, is the best path for America. It is best for our economy, it is best for our close ally.

I always thought he believe God was telling him to leave Genesis. While I respect each person's walk with their higher power, I always wondered why God wanted to hear a Gabriel-less Genesis. I mean Phil is ok, but I thought their better stuff was with Peter. Perhaps God doesn't know much about putting together a band?

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ May 30, 2006 -> 12:20 AM) I disagree. I think someone who owns guns can do a good job of reporting on gun control issues, and I think (perhaps incorrectly) that a gun control advocate can report impartially on those same issues. I definitely agree with EM that there needs to be full disclosure. I think that would go a long way in all media issues, actually. It would seem pretty easy for every reporter to have a bio available on the internet with all his activities, his voting records, any clubs and societies he has joined, etc. Then we can dismiss those whose opinions we don't agree with and just listen to those people who are like us. Why should I listen to some anti-gun nut or someone who believes in the death penalty when they write stories about those subjects?

I was at a Southern Region training class this past week and accidentaly stumbled on Bush's plot. I let it slip and told someone, I am certain Bush will send some of the CIA operatives his Dad commanded to kill me. After all, Dubya has already ordered the murder of thousands of citizens on 9/11. So I want to get it out here as fast as possible before that happens. I can sense them coming towards me now. This plot starts in 1959 when Alaska is admitted into the Union, making Texas the second biggest state. The Bush family takes great pride, and profit, in being Texas oil men. Bush lead a Skull and Crossbones meeting over the skull of Geronimo and decided that something had to be done, or else the Bush Family Dynasty (BFD) would be in jeopardy. They found the answer in an obscure document authored by, get this, Al Gore. Gore, while inventing the Internet, developed a theory that fossil fuel emmissions would cause a warming of the environent and the polar ice sheet would melt. The BFD, quickly realized if they could shrink Alaska's ice, Texas would once again be the largest state. Even better, they could reap billions in profits from the sale of oil for the vehicles. So the BFD, through global mind control in the Dallas TV Series, convinced Americans to drive bigger and bigger cars, trucks, and invented the SUV. The global warming will shrink Alaska to Rhode Island proportions and Texas will reclaim it's rightful spot as the biggest state. The government is blocking any links to the important documents that would prove this. Documentaries have been produced, but the authors suddenly disappear or received huge government contracts and a lifetime lease on Fantasy Island.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 30, 2006 -> 01:37 AM) In Texas, that's only illegal if he's the one driving. And if its West Texas, 80 aint speedin. Just to clarify, to the best of my knowledge, the 80 mph limit is just on a stretch of I10. I don't think it will stretch much beyond that highway. Interesting note, from my little corner of Texas, if I was driving to California, El Paso would be the half way point, Texas, A Big Ass State,

QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 30, 2006 -> 12:45 AM) A certain Motley Crue song comes to mind: Don't go away mad, JUST GO AWAY. Kap, this is obviously just good entertainment. Let's all find a great conspiracy and start posting? I think it would be a hoot.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 30, 2006 -> 05:13 AM) Now, pray tell, where in the world did the American citizens get the idea that they were entitled to this or entitled to that? Where did this entitlement mentality come from? I wonder .... hmmmm. From both parties. When we were younger, Democrates would have a great new program they would like to see and would raise taxes to pay for it. The GOP would try their darndest to stop the tax and spend Democrates. Then Reagan taught America we can have the programs and actually cut taxes! Then the economy gets much stronger and we all win. Now we have these great entitlement programs, we pay less in taxes, and a booming economy. Poor people can shop in stores, which increases the profit for the business owner who has risked everything. He pays lower taxes so he can hire more people.

I've always enjoyed Peter Gabriels Solsbury Hill, but what the hell is he writing about? S

Of course this is all part of a liberal plot to corrupt the morals of America's youth and keeping them from being laborers allowing immigrants to take over America, which is good because Bush is secretly killing Americans anyway.

Is there a government that doesn't secretly kill their citizens and plot against them?

Let's bring back Dad this time, then Jeb for two terms

Now that DeLay is out, Jeb would be a great choice and would keep the BFD (Bush Family Dynasty) going.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 29, 2006 -> 01:56 PM) Tex, go have another beer. A Shiner in one hand and travelling 80 mph to Fort Stockton, great idea . . . Kinky for Gov. Why The Hell Not?

The same way viewers would like to know if he owned a gun. It would also be good to know the views on all the editors and anyone else who touched the story. I think if someone is going to report on guns, they shouldn't own one, or be a part of an anti-gun group.

Sorry to hear that Kalapse. Imagine all she saw in her lifetime. The birth of TV, too many wars, computers, everyone having automobiles, and so much more. It sounds like you were close, what was she like?

QUOTE(Soxy @ May 29, 2006 -> 04:45 PM) Although the guys on the next court actually stopped playing to watch us. You are drifting dangerously close to losing your feminist card . . . Oh my! It's sooooo hoooot, my blouse is clinging to me, just look

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 29, 2006 -> 05:24 PM) Im glad you came by DePloderer. Throughout history when America has gone to war the British have stood right by our side. We owe you guys a HUGE debt of gratitude. Yep, England has that tradition all the way back to 1776

Holy crap, I've been posting here over 3 years. WTF all the time wasted