The Goat Pen

you've may not be a member, but you've visited the Church, haven't you IB?

Bush received 44% of the national Hispanic vote in 2004.

aTm wrote:Do you at least have a family anecdote to pass on to us about someone who does attend the church?

If you are asking me, then no, I do not. I have no idea what kind of church cletus was talking about.... not really interested in it, have never heard of it until today.

Disappointing.

aTm,

aTm wrote:2% may not seem that huge, but Bush actually lost overall by only half a percent. Also it sounds more the the FL Hispanic vote was split, not monolithic.

The reason why immigrants (be it hispanic or otherwise) largely vote Democrat (and not GOP) is largely monolithic (the GOP is he party of the rich and we are poor, vote Democrat.) That was my point. That was Ann Coulter's point. That was always my point.

I don't know what point Owl is trying to make since he keeps changing his position whenever I give data points.

Largely, immigrants agree with the GOP on pretty much all their social platforms. Doesn't matter aTm. Immigrants still see the GOP as the party of the rich and immigrants still want money. So, when they become US citizens, vote Democrat.

Owlman wrote:you've may not be a member, but you've visited the Church, haven't you IB?

No.

I have been to exactly two churches since I moved to Arizona, and the Harvest Chapel is one of them. And I only attended that Harvest Chapel church for one Sunday. I didn't like it.

I am not a member of any church in Arizona. I attend one church pretty regularly but I will not be a member of any church where the clergy are paid or the people follow any book other than the King James Bible. So far, I have yet to find the right church. Still looking.

aTm wrote:Bush received 44% of the national Hispanic vote in 2004.

How much went to John Kerry? Not 56%. Probably 53% or so (with dribs and drabs going to 3rd party candidates.) But the majority was NOT GOP. And that 44%, it will be declining.

But the point wasn't about immigrants, was it. It was about Latinos. Not going to let you change that assertion. You keep treating as though they are the same, yet you are the one that provides the facts that they aren't.

Owlman wrote:But the point wasn't about immigrants, was it. It was about Latinos. Not going to let you change that assertion. You keep treating as though they are the same, yet you are the one that provides the facts that they aren't.

Owl, I don't even think you even remember the point I made. What was my point Owl and why did I make it?

My nuts itch.

If you shave everyday they don't.

sex with disease riddled women will teach you that.

BigRedMan wrote:My nuts itch.

My grandfather left me some DDT (now contraband) from the 1950s. I'll send you some to kill the crab lice.

"You have no idea what the definition of labor is, but if you keep talking confidently some people will believe you know what you're talking about."

There is no chance of that happening...

I do have to give IB credit for introducing the word "bastardy" into the forum...

hedge wrote:I do have to give IB credit for introducing the word "bastardy" into the forum...

(smiles) Oh you like that? I figured someone would.

innocentbystander wrote:

Owlman wrote:But the point wasn't about immigrants, was it. It was about Latinos. Not going to let you change that assertion. You keep treating as though they are the same, yet you are the one that provides the facts that they aren't.

Owl, I don't even think you even remember the point I made. What was my point Owl and why did I make it?

Quit proving your ignorance. The original point came out of a discussion that I had with eCat about Rand Paul. I made a point that the GOP treated all Latinos as though they were the same after someone said that all they were interested in was one issue, immigration. You weren't in the conversation at all. You went from the assertion that Latinos only cared about one issue (immigration) to Latinos were all immigrants You then proceeded to back up your argument by putting up charts about hispanics and using that as a substitute about immigrants.

As you probably now recognize (but will have a hard time adimitting), this was never about immigrants. Your problem is that you live in stereotypes. Your use of stereotypes just proved my original assertion.

The GOP can get Latino votes, but not with people like Ann Coulter fronting them treating Latinos as they are all the same and only believe in one issue.

be interesting to see if brewer vetoes the antigay legislation today

Owlman wrote:

innocentbystander wrote:Owl, I don't even think you even remember the point I made. What was my point Owl and why did I make it?

Quit proving your ignorance. The original point came out of a discussion that I had with eCat about Rand Paul.

That was NOT what I asked. I don't care about Rand-fucking-Paul. I asked if you even remember the point I made because you have had a hair up your ass since I've made it. It appears you do NOT remember (or even care) about my point given your next comment.

Owlman wrote:I made a point that the GOP treated all Latinos as though they were the same after someone said that all they were interested in was one issue, immigration. You weren't in the conversation at all. You went from the assertion that Latinos only cared about one issue (immigration) to Latinos were all immigrants You then proceeded to back up your argument by putting up charts about hispanics and using that as a substitute about immigrants.

Rubbish.

I said that immigrants (who become US citizens) vote Democrat for one issue (and one issue only), rich vs poor. That is the only issue that matters to them (politically) not the GOP opinion on immigration. Our immigrants are poor. They are uneducated, unskilled, illiterate, and pretty much useless. We are not going to build a 1st world economy on house clearners, pool cleaners, landscapers, strippers, drug dealers, restaurant help, general construction help, lettuce and orange pickers. Our immigrants have massive social welfare needs because they are breeding the plurality of our bastards which become the majority of our prison population.

Owlman wrote:As you probably now recognize (but will have a hard time adimitting), this was never about immigrants. Your problem is that you live in stereotypes. Your use of stereotypes just proved my original assertion.

The GOP can get Latino votes, but not with people like Ann Coulter fronting them treating Latinos as they are all the same and only believe in one issue.

Latinos believe in a variety of political issues. Ann Coulter believe that they believe in a variety of issues. But until Latinos become wealthier (the way the Italian-Americans and the Irish-Americans did in the mid 20th century) they will largely, (note I said largely and not entirely) continue to vote Democrat (the way the Italian-Americans and the Irish-Americans did UNTIL the mid 20th century.) This is about money. That was Ann Coulter's point (the one issue they actually VOTE ON) and she is right. The Democrats know this which is why they fixed the immigration reform laws in the mid 60s to target the most needy immigrants and admit them first. That enables the Democrats to win elections.

Fuck everything else Owl.

I don't know a whole lot about that Arizona law but it goes back to what Space and I were discussing regarding personal property laws. In this case I think they are trying to veil it under the idea of religious beliefs which is probably easier to justify than personal property but still is based on your rights to decide what you do with your property.

It will be interesting to see if it stands or falls and what the federal government will do if it does stand (or passes or whatever)

I think they should let it fly. Let anybody ban anybody they want. The market will weed those places out...