Welcome to PatsFans.com

NFL rejected a Border Patrol Recruting Ad for the Superbowl

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by FreeTedWilliams, Feb 14, 2007.

  1. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,307
    Likes Received:
    48
    Ratings:
    +116 / 31 / -3

    #75 Jersey

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070213-115739-3816r.htm

    Why anyone would want to be a BP agent after what Bush did to those two guys is beyond me, however this is a little ridiculous. If the NFL doesn't think that the presence of the US Border Patrol on the border is engaged in fighting terrorism, they need to recall the capture at the border of the muslim Canadian, who was going to bomb Los Angeles on New Years Eve. I don't know about the rest of you, But I would consider that fighting terrorism. Not to mention the thousands of Arabs captured at the border this year alone.

    This Hispandering is going to be the death of this country.
  2. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

    I read that article. It just reinforces what I've been saying about the immigration issue, it's all about politics and money. The NFL didn't want to piss off prospective customers, just like the politicians don't want to piss of prospective voters. Meanwhile, Joe Taxpayer gets fukced. There is no logical rationale for supporting the illegal invasion.
  3. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    For whatever reasons they have, many people don't find the illegal immigration issue to be very important to them. Maybe it's financial, maybe it's racial, but if enough people don't think it's a huge problem, then it won't be treated like one. If an overwhelming majority agreed with you, then politicians would be pandering to that majority.

    What we have now is you telling people what's in their best interests. People can decide for themselves what's in their own interests.
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2007
  4. Fixit

    Fixit Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,695
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +40 / 0 / -0

    Hell, I'd swap a couple million illegal immigrants who contribute to society by working hard for a couple million of "real" Americans who are friggin' do-nothing wastes of atmosphere.
  5. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

    :wha:

    Were you out of the country over the summer when both the house and senate were tryng to hash out an immigration policy, the illegals were marching in the tens of thousands in major cities, and the president had a primetime speach souly to discuss illegal immigration?

    Nah, no one really cares.
  6. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    So why haven't we cracked down?
  7. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

    If you could swap them then sure, even though they're both red ink, the former is less than the other, as the wastes are truly good for nothing.
  8. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

    Have you not even read a single post I've made regarding the illegal immigration issue in this country?

    V-O-T-E-S.
  9. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    You've now argued both sides of the same argument, of course I'm confused.

    If they're pandering for votes, then those VOTERS who they're pandering to don't care enough about the illegal immigration problem to want to crack down on it. Those people who they're "pandering" to are real voters, too.

    If there were enough people who thought like you, they would far outnumber the voters who don't really care, and the politicians would be pandering to you.

    So which is it?

    You can't say the voters want illegal immigration stamped out, but politicians won't do it because they're pandering to the voters.
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2007
  10. Fixit

    Fixit Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,695
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +40 / 0 / -0

    That's a pretty good argument.
  11. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

    You really need a lesson on reality. Hispanics are the fastest growing ethnic group in the country, and by a long shot. In 2005 they bacame the largest. Their average age is in the 20's, whereas whites are in the 30's. Not only are they the fastest growing in terms of populace, but they make up the fastest growing in the small business sector, and also have the highest birth rates. Because of their rapid ascention, they have not specifically alligned themlselves with either political party. In 2000 Bush lost the Hispanic vote to Gore, and in 2004, he won the vote versus Kerry. As you can see, they haven't aligned themsleves. Each party desperately wants to secure a foothold in this group. Imagine, that if like blacks, one party could guarantee themselves an 80-90% domination of this block of voters? Even if its not 80-90%, how about 60%? Doing so would be an absolute surity of power. Therefore, why would either party want to alienate them? This is why politics is dominating the immigration issue, and principles are being thrown to the waste side. The fiscal analysis of the illegal invasion is clearly one sided. Illegals cost the government, and especially the middle class taxpayer, an enormous cost. They are highly red ink. Politicians don't want to tell you this, because doing so would push even more of the public to demand action, which would force them to implement policies that would alienate the block, which niether wants to do. Why do you think the Senate agreed to not discuss illegal immigration until after the November election? Because they were too busy? Of course not. They did so because niether wanted to piss of americans if they were to pass an amnesty bill, or piss of latino's by passing a stricy immigration bill. It's all politics. i.e. VOTES.
  12. Seymour93

    Seymour93 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,681
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    I don't really care about it and I live in a town that is 40% Hispanic. We need the low wage workers and most of the immigrants are good people.
  13. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Well those Americans who they didn't want to piss off (by passing an anti-immigration bill) probably don't agree with your estimates of how bad of a problem illegal immigration is. This is a democracy, and there are apparantly enough voters who don't care much about the immigration "problem", hence the government is going to "pander" to them.

    Your side might think they're right and so that makes democracy irrelevant, but the hispanic voters would beg to differ, and their opinion counts for just as much as yours.
  14. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

    Do you even know what you are talking about, or are you merely installing your own bottom line kind of guy, thats the way it is so too bad, logic?

    Seriously, were you out of the country for a couple of years or something?

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
  15. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

  16. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

  17. Fixit

    Fixit Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,695
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +40 / 0 / -0

    Out of all that, one word stuck with me: "roundups."
  18. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I see, so politicians are pandering to the hispanic vote, while ignoring the 2/3 supermajority that wants a crackdown, and yet they're in office. It seems like your supermajority isn't voting for their interests.
  19. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +385 / 5 / -2

    Americans have already dictated which party they like or dislike. There is very little to gain or loose there. That's why both parties agreed to pass up the issue till after the elections. They colluded. Hispanics have not aligned themselves as white america has. If you look at the proformers that show how rapid an expansion hispanics are going to make in this country, you will understand why they are so attractive to politicians. Immigration directly affects hispanics, and thus, the direction of an administered policy will certainly help determine which party gets their vote. Just look at African Americans. Look how they vote. Imagine Latino's going one way or the other as they have. Furthermore, look at the poll numbers, hispanics are clearly the most negative toward a policy that would be restrictive on illegals.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>