A cultural elite that rejects middle class values and censors debate - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-23-2009, 01:16 AM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 11:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Care to explain?
I did explain. Why should people pay tax dollars for art they wouldn't subscribe to especially in bad economic times?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
You're joking right? If it was illegal immigration, he would have fucking jumped on using that word. Nice dodge.
You just want to paint any criticism of immigration as racism just like the article explained. Governments always have to look at how many people are coming to the country for social benefits so they don't go bankrupt like California. If social programs were eliminated I'm sure immigration would be different but because we have social programs there needs to be auditing of immigration to make sure freeriders don't manipulate the system to get in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
You cannot be serious??? Not even Hannity uses this shit anymore. NO ONE has tried to bring it back, I've asked you at least a dozen times to try and find me one person trying to bring it back and you fail every time. Drop it, Hannity has. You never even could explain how the doctine was censorship.
Just because they failed at it (because listeners of popular shows would write to congressmen) doesn't mean many Democrats wouldn't want conservative talk radio off the air.

Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Too simplistic by half, to be honest.

An artistic sensibility is a way of looking at the world. Few artists are genuine believing socialists. To me, it's almost contradictory. Of course, artists may support left policies for tactical or self-interested reasons. Artists are no more or less moral than the rest of us.
I wasn't making it a moral issue just a cost issue. The subsidization of artists and its argument could be used in any industry in the name of protection against foreign competition. A lower tax regime makes sense but it makes sense for all industries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
I'm not purpleoscar, but I'll explain.

For starters, the 50k per year to make home movies sounds to me like an urban legend perpetuated by some angry conservative. No one here receives money to make personal home movies, I can assure you.
I called it a home movie because it was a film that only his family and friends showed up to the premiere to see. People like that should find another line of work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
The right tends to bitch and complain - it costs unnecessary tax dollars, let them rise on their own merit, blah blah blah - but the bottom line is, it is culturally and artistically important to Canada, and we'd be poorer as a nation without it.
Well Canadians don't watch much Canadian movies or listen to Canadian artists at the same level of as the U.S. or British artists anyways. I don't see this groundbreaking relevance to our culture. I'd rather have a lower tax scheme that would allow risk taking and investment in all areas including art. If art needs to be subsidized because of the influence of the U.S. then why not other industries? Lots of industries all over the world cry for protectionism.
__________________

__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 01:55 AM   #32
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 01:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post

I called it a home movie because it was a film that only his family and friends showed up to the premiere to see. People like that should find another line of work.



Well Canadians don't watch much Canadian movies or listen to Canadian artists at the same level of as the U.S. or British artists anyways. I don't see this groundbreaking relevance to our culture. I'd rather have a lower tax scheme that would allow risk taking and investment in all areas including art. If art needs to be subsidized because of the influence of the U.S. then why not other industries? Lots of industries all over the world cry for protectionism.
Canadian film, when compared to the US film industry, is mostly of the sort that makes the film festival circuit, or plays in art houses. That doesn't make it artistically without merit, though. As for Canadian music, I'd beg to differ. Have you ever left Alberta? Ever been to Toronto to see live shows? Ever been to Vancouver? Montreal? Halifax? Do you have any idea what it was like here in the 70's, musically? What about our aboriginal musicians, artists and film industry people? I could probably sit here and easily name you 50 Canadian bands or artists that I follow, maybe 15 or so UK artists, and imo, the US scene has declined so much in recent decades that I'd probably be lucky to think of 10. Same goes for a lot of my friends...and my daughter and her friends. If you think that Canadian music isn't supported, you really need to get out more.

Further, I really think you'd be happy living an austere life, denying yourself anything materially, experientially, or artistically pleasing if it would save you a few bucks for the future, and you think everyone else should live that way, too. I've got news for you - in the real world, a lot of people would find that kind of existence soul-killing. Every important culture has placed emphasis on its arts. It's not an all or nothing proposition, government doesn't have to sink all its money into the arts. Like the rest of us, they can budget and allot some money to make the cultural lives of its citizens and artists better. It really does benefit us as a society.
__________________

__________________
VintagePunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 04:51 AM   #33
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 01:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I did explain. Why should people pay tax dollars for art they wouldn't subscribe to especially in bad economic times?
Why should people pay tax dollars for anything that they don't support or benefit from? What a silly argument this is.

I think you might be well served to watch this and ponder for a moment or two.

YouTube - Sir Ken Robinson: Do schools kill creativity?
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 05:13 AM   #34
pgv
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,979
Local Time: 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post

You just want to paint any criticism of immigration as racism just like the article explained. Governments always have to look at how many people are coming to the country for social benefits so they don't go bankrupt like California. If social programs were eliminated I'm sure immigration would be different but because we have social programs there needs to be auditing of immigration to make sure freeriders don't manipulate the system to get in.
I think your own use of the terms 'freeriders' and 'manipulate' not only cancels out any sense that may have been in that post (even though I disagree with it entirely), but reveals your argument to hold - which is almost everyone's argument against immigration- blatant xenophobic undertones.

Perhaps the racists should stop sounding racist so the rest of us wouldn't assume them racist.
__________________
pgv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 07:14 AM   #35
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 12:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
You just want to paint any criticism of immigration as racism just like the article explained. Governments always have to look at how many people are coming to the country for social benefits so they don't go bankrupt like California. If social programs were eliminated I'm sure immigration would be different but because we have social programs there needs to be auditing of immigration to make sure freeriders don't manipulate the system to get in.
No, Oscar I don't, and you're being a liar by painting me so. I have only criticized certain arguments about the immigration issue in the U.S. as racist. The immigration issue in Europe is different, but I don't think you seem to grasp that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Just because they failed at it (because listeners of popular shows would write to congressmen) doesn't mean many Democrats wouldn't want conservative talk radio off the air.
You can't fail at it, if it was never tried... Wow, you've become completely full of it. So now you know the thoughts of Democrats? What a joke. Face it, you've never been able to name one person that wants to bring it back because no one has made any kind of move to do so. The only reason you bring it back is because Rush made up some strawman argument about how the Dems are going to bring it back and how it's designed to silence the conservative movement. He just made it up and you fell for it. Do us all a favor don't ever use this as an argument again unless you have proof someone is making a move to bring it back.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 07:33 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by partygirlvox View Post
I think your own use of the terms 'freeriders' and 'manipulate' not only cancels out any sense that may have been in that post (even though I disagree with it entirely), but reveals your argument to hold - which is almost everyone's argument against immigration- blatant xenophobic undertones.

Perhaps the racists should stop sounding racist so the rest of us wouldn't assume them racist.
But your location: "Regretfully, England."

So the multicultural paradise isn't all that great after all?
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 07:52 PM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
I'm assuming 'recent years' includes before the recession, when most of your immigrants were presumably filling available jobs at the lower end of the wage scale, as immigrants everywhere usually do.
I think that's probably true up to a point. But not completely. Certainly, if you go into a McDonald's in Ireland most of the staff - even now - will be immigrants. But also, they will largely be students and not permanent immigrants. You have subgroups such as Pakistani doctors, you have the Chinese community which includes relatively wealthy restauranteurs, some of whom have been in the country for a long time - and indeed, there are now second-generation Chinese Irish - and you have Polish construction workers who were on very good pay rates in recent years - granted, for hard physical work, but the conditions are a lot better than, say, Irish construction workers would have experienced in Britain last century.

I did read a few years ago that the % of mortgage applicants coming from immigrants roughly corresponded to the % of immigrants in the general population - which seems to indicate that immigrants were not necessarily on low wage. Though, granted, it could also just be an indication that the banks were loosening credit policy to take advantage of 'new Irish'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
What constitutes a 'benefit'?
What constitutes a benefit to me is that both the host country and immigrant are enhanced by the immigration experience. I don't believe that that has necessarily been the case. I'm sure it has been in some individual cases. Some (Irish owned) construction companies have been known to have a de-facto 'no Irish' policy in recent years, because of the perception that Poles work harder and are less demanding regarding working hours and conditions. I can think of at least one constituency that benefits - the boss class, for want of a better expression - but it certainly doesn't benefit the Irish workers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
In the US, generally speaking there's a sharper dividing line between 'real' newspapers and what we call 'tabloids,' which are basically straight scandal rags which don't make even the faintest pretense at covering 'real' news (and are usually weeklies anyway). But, even so, for many years now the 'real' paper with the widest circulation here has been USA Today, which has little discernible political slant but, more importantly, is a colorful, photo- and graphic-packed paper (lots of 'What Do You Think?' public opinion polls), written for a lower reading level than most of our major papers, and with a far greater amount of its bulk taken up by the 'Life' (read: entertainment) and 'Sports' sections (actually pretty good) compared to the competition. So, same principle, nice easy unchallenging read, and you still get the pleasure of feeling at least a little better informed after reading it. Just not as much outright garbage as a lower-end British newspaper would have. And yes, people of all social classes and political views read it.
I know what you mean, but I'm not sure that I entirely agree. The Sun is at a whole new level of dumbing down. If you look at the New York Post for example, yes it's sensationalist, but it isn't as crude and base.

Tabloid US mags like the National Inquirer are aimed at people who largely know that what they're reading is fiction, an alternative narrative where celebrities don't just sometimes mess up but only ever mess up. At least, I hope the readers realise this. The Sun is aimed at people who are basically drooling morons. That's the market segment, and they've got it nicely tied down. Someone who regularly reads the Telegraph or Guardian isn't going to pick up the Sun for light entertainment, at least I doubt it.

The worst of the UK gutter press is worse than the US equivalent, I suppose is what I am trying to say. Disturbingly, the Irish media have increasingly followed the dumbing down tendency in recent years.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 08:17 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 11:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
No, Oscar I don't, and you're being a liar by painting me so. I have only criticized certain arguments about the immigration issue in the U.S. as racist. The immigration issue in Europe is different, but I don't think you seem to grasp that.
So do you know the guy who wrote the article? Is he a known racist? From what I understand most rich countries have problems with illegal immigration and freeriders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
You can't fail at it, if it was never tried... Wow, you've become completely full of it. So now you know the thoughts of Democrats? What a joke. Face it, you've never been able to name one person that wants to bring it back because no one has made any kind of move to do so. The only reason you bring it back is because Rush made up some strawman argument about how the Dems are going to bring it back and how it's designed to silence the conservative movement. He just made it up and you fell for it. Do us all a favor don't ever use this as an argument again unless you have proof someone is making a move to bring it back.
The reason Rush and others talked about the Fairness doctrine was because of this guy:

Sen. Bingaman (D-N.M.): Fairness Doctrine Would Help Radio Reach 'Higher Calling' | NewsBusters.org

and this guy:

TheHill.com - Schumer on Fox: Fairness Doctrine ‘fair and balanced’

Obviously the listenership/viewership would get mad and write to congressmen to stop it if they tried, but it's not if they wouldn't want Rush to be put off the air or accidentally walk in front of a bus or Hannity to trip in front of an oncoming train. I don't think I have to be a swami to know how many Democrats feel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
Canadian film, when compared to the US film industry, is mostly of the sort that makes the film festival circuit, or plays in art houses. That doesn't make it artistically without merit, though. As for Canadian music, I'd beg to differ. Have you ever left Alberta? Ever been to Toronto to see live shows? Ever been to Vancouver? Montreal? Halifax? Do you have any idea what it was like here in the 70's, musically? What about our aboriginal musicians, artists and film industry people? I could probably sit here and easily name you 50 Canadian bands or artists that I follow, maybe 15 or so UK artists, and imo, the US scene has declined so much in recent decades that I'd probably be lucky to think of 10. Same goes for a lot of my friends...and my daughter and her friends. If you think that Canadian music isn't supported, you really need to get out more.
Well name me some artists and I will try. The Arcade Fire is the closest thing to Canadian art that I enjoy and would actually buy. If I can get some of my tax dollars back that would be great. The problem I have is that there are so many artist hacks that should do this as a hobby and it’s justified to be careful with our hard earned money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
Further, I really think you'd be happy living an austere life, denying yourself anything materially, experientially, or artistically pleasing if it would save you a few bucks for the future, and you think everyone else should live that way, too. I've got news for you - in the real world, a lot of people would find that kind of existence soul-killing.
Well I wouldn't go that far. I absorb lots of art but it tends to be classical music, classic rock. I'm trying to get into some jazz. I like lots of movies (mostly American though many foreign movies. I pay for art myself. The problem is when crappy art is paid by the taxpayer and the taxpayer doesn’t support it the way they do more popular art. Bad art can be soul-killing too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
Every important culture has placed emphasis on its arts. It's not an all or nothing proposition, government doesn't have to sink all its money into the arts. Like the rest of us, they can budget and allot some money to make the cultural lives of its citizens and artists better. It really does benefit us as a society.
I mean the public puts arts as a side issue precisely because it isn’t as expensive as healthcare and education but it would be nice to see a large portion of government paid art actually get mainstream success.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Why should people pay tax dollars for anything that they don't support or benefit from? What a silly argument this is.

I think you might be well served to watch this and ponder for a moment or two.
I'm not against art school or school funded by government. I'm talking about careers after school is over and final products. Does government funding have to be cradle to grave? At some point somebody has got something or not. People can learn in other faculties other than art and find the same problem requiring them to change their vocation. Careers and investment involve risk taking and it seems people like the benefits of risks but they don’t want to deal with the losses in risk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by partygirlvox View Post
I think your own use of the terms 'freeriders' and 'manipulate' not only cancels out any sense that may have been in that post (even though I disagree with it entirely), but reveals your argument to hold - which is almost everyone's argument against immigration- blatant xenophobic undertones.

Perhaps the racists should stop sounding racist so the rest of us wouldn't assume them racist.
Now unless BVS or you knows more about this article and is reading between the lines properly that this guy is just criticizing the concept of immigration period then I wish someone would bring some evidence beyond vague comments of “mass immigration”.

Everyone who is honest knows that all social programs have to worry about freerider problems. To call it xenophobic is just to end discussion. As long as you have social programs you will need borders and an immigration program to weed out freeriders from people who genuinely want to work and join society. It's not racist it is just respecting taxpayers.

Here's a good article on our situation in Canada and as you can see it's a thorny issue in our country as well since many politicians of all stripes want to use immigration as a way of gaining votes:

Jason Kenney fires up the melting pot
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 08:49 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Well I wouldn't go that far. I absorb lots of art but it tends to be classical music, classic rock. I'm trying to get into some jazz. I like lots of movies (mostly American though many foreign movies. I pay for art myself. The problem is when crappy art is paid by the taxpayer and the taxpayer doesn’t support it the way they do more popular art. Bad art can be soul-killing too.

I mean the public puts arts as a side issue precisely because it isn’t as expensive as healthcare and education but it would be nice to see a large portion of government paid art actually get mainstream success.

I'm not against art school or school funded by government. I'm talking about careers after school is over and final products. Does government funding have to be cradle to grave? At some point somebody has got something or not. People can learn in other faculties other than art and find the same problem requiring them to change their vocation. Careers and investment involve risk taking and it seems people like the benefits of risks but they don’t want to deal with the losses in risk.
I think that in popular music, the best usually arises out of a 'scene', I think in recent years Britpop was a good example, and more recently still, Arcade Fire which you already mentioned is another example. On the other hand, when we look at bands, the Beatles and U2 came from pretty much nowhere, and never needed any government handouts. U2 benefited from the artist exemption scheme, but I reckon they would have been a success without it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Everyone who is honest knows that all social programs have to worry about freerider problems. To call it xenophobic is just to end discussion. As long as you have social programs you will need borders and an immigration program to weed out freeriders from people who genuinely want to work and join society. It's not racist it is just respecting taxpayers.
Completely agree. I have no respect for ad hominem attacks that scream racist. There has been no racism in the thread, and there was no evidence of racism in the article either. The ad hominem attacks from at least two posters directed at your posts would indicate to me that some people doubt the validity of their own arguments.

If someone calls me a racist for pointing out, for example, that Nigerian immigrants into Ireland exploit the system, and do so disproportionately compared to immigrants from other countries, then I'll call them a liar, or at the very least spectacularly stupid and/or spectacularly ill-informed.

Unless of course, racism encompasses anyone that even mentions race - in which case Obama, Jesse Jackson, the late Michael Jackson, and Al Sharpton are all racists. I don't believe Obama is a racist, not sure about Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 09:44 PM   #40
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 12:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
So do you know the guy who wrote the article? Is he a known racist? From what I understand most rich countries have problems with illegal immigration and freeriders.
Show me where it's about ILLEGAL immigration and freeriders.


Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Look, you finally answered my question... sorta.

Two guys who support it for ALL media facets, but haven't pushed for it... That doesn't sound like paranoia to you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Obviously the listenership/viewership would get mad and write to congressmen to stop it if they tried, but it's not if they wouldn't want Rush to be put off the air or accidentally walk in front of a bus or Hannity to trip in front of an oncoming train. I don't think I have to be a swami to know how many Democrats feel.
Read this again and tell me if it makes sense to you... The listenership would want Rush to walk in front of a bus?








Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Now unless BVS or you knows more about this article and is reading between the lines properly that this guy is just criticizing the concept of immigration period then I wish someone would bring some evidence beyond vague comments of “mass immigration”.

Everyone who is honest knows that all social programs have to worry about freerider problems. To call it xenophobic is just to end discussion. As long as you have social programs you will need borders and an immigration program to weed out freeriders from people who genuinely want to work and join society. It's not racist it is just respecting taxpayers.
Once again you are showing everyone your lack of living(or reading) outside Alberta. The discussion of MASS immigration is one of "losing culture" to the foreigners not of legality or "freeriders". It's of competition for jobs. You're trying to impose the same arguments of the American debate and you can't.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 09:51 PM   #41
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 12:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Completely agree. I have no respect for ad hominem attacks that scream racist. There has been no racism in the thread, and there was no evidence of racism in the article either.
Ok, then let me ask you an honest question. In not one of the articles I've read about mass immigration does it mention the legality of the immigration. And very few mention the social programs. And these are the right wing side articles that I've read. They mostly mention cultural adaptation and losing of identity, and the competition for jobs. Am I correct in this summary, if not can you show me a good article that proves otherwise?

Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
The ad hominem attacks from at least two posters directed at your posts would indicate to me that some people doubt the validity of their own arguments.
Yeah, I would love for you to try and show evidence of this...
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 09:59 PM   #42
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Ok, then let me ask you an honest question. In not one of the articles I've read about mass immigration does it mention the legality of the immigration. And very few mention the social programs. And these are the right wing side articles that I've read. They mostly mention cultural adaptation and losing of identity, and the competition for jobs. Am I correct in this summary, if not can you show me a good article that proves otherwise?
10% of immigrants into Ireland are - or were - defrauding the system.


Quote:
NON-national dole cheats defrauded millions of euro from the Exchequer by flying into the country once a month to sign on.

New figures obtained by the Irish Independent show thousands of foreign benefit claimants were investigated by the Department of Social and Family Affairs between October 2007 and February last year.

In a first trawl of suspected benefit fraudsters, 776 non-national cases were examined, of which 76 were found to be permanently living outside of the State.

Officials were so alarmed they ordered residency checks on a further 3,665 non-nationals, and found that 403 (11pc) of these were living outside the State and flying in once a month to collect their benefit.

The vast majority of the claimants were from Eastern European countries.

Both investigations between them yielded savings of more than €4m -- or up to €10,000 per dole cheat -- for the cash-strapped Exchequer.

Fraudsters flew in to claim dole payments - National News, Frontpage - Independent.ie


Evidence presented in a court case involving claims of illegal immigration:

http://www.wicklowpeople.ie/news/man...es-891953.html
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 10:02 PM   #43
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Yeah, I would love for you to try and show evidence of this...
A value judgement. I note, in passing, that you have not challenged my assertion with regard to Nigerian immigrants.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 10:13 PM   #44
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 12:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
10% of immigrants into Ireland are - or were - defrauding the system.
So this is it? A small portion you think are defrauding the system so immigration becomes an issue? The other 90% you have no issue with?

How much of the naturalized citizens defraud the system?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 10:19 PM   #45
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 12:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
I note, in passing, that you have not challenged my assertion with regard to Nigerian immigrants.
I know very little of the situation when it comes down to those specifics. So why would I comment?

I can comment on the article and other articles that the author has written about the subject because I've read them and I've seen how he frames the issue. Why is it so difficult to see the difference? You and Oscar disagree on so much, but you love to make your stretches in logic together if it means you get to hate on liberals.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com