Oh yeah?

Well, it's likely I would catch it because I don't pay no attention to that man. I wouldn't know his wife from the lady down the block.

African-American is a lot better term than was previously used.

Even their god Reagan didn't like the situation.

Someone didn't like my haves/have nots argument, but isn't their argument "It's my $$$, land, benefits, taxes, etc... and I don't want to share it with you"?

You got me.  I knew that she was an American of Mexican decent when I wrote that.  I was waiting for a left wing deep thinker to call me on it. 

Just thinking out loud now.  Are there any American - Canadians, or African - Canadians, or American - Mexicans or  American - French, or African - Germans, or ...

Are we American - Fools or what ?  I guess its safe to be a wingnut and say that if you are a hyphenated American, then you just ain't an American.  Who came up with this hyphenated thing anyway ?  An American - Racist ?

Kurt, man... you are stepping in your own horseshit again. Debi Segura Dobbs is not a Mexican. She is an American. Her parents were Mexican nationals. At best, you might say she is a Mexican-American. Calling her a Mexican is a racist statement, one that you should be ashamed of, especially given your paranoid anti-illegal-immigration stance.

"...the illegal alien fuss.
Are great numbers of our unemployed really victims of the illegal alien invasion, or are those illegal tourists actually doing work our own people won't do? One thing is certain in this hungry world: No regulation or law should be allowed if it results in crops rotting in the fields for lack of harvesters."
-Gov. Ronald Reagan, Nov. 1977 Radio Address

Is there a pro-illegal immigration stance???

Is there a pro-illegal immigration stance???

Is there a pro-illegal immigration stance???

your unbridled hatred is not appealing...

Kurt, man... you are stepping in your own horseshit again. Debi Segura Dobbs is not a Mexican. She is an American. Her parents were Mexican nationals. At best, you might say she is a Mexican-American. Calling her a Mexican is a racist statement, one that you should be ashamed of, especially given your paranoid anti-illegal-immigration stance.

To call him, "Lou 'I hate brown people' Dobbs" is truly a racist remark of extreme ignorance.  His wife is a Mexican.  If you actually watch Dobbs at all you would know that he is hardly a racist.  Just because you are anti illegal immigration, does not mean you are a racist.  Or does it in the world you live ?

And to the transparent one.  Why not release the definitive documents requested, such as education records, his actual birth certificate and other documents his peers have provided ?  He should have nothing to fear, right, its all legit, right ?  By not releasing these documents, it provides ammo to the true kooks to keep going off and then associate these kooks with serious conservatives and thereby discredit by association.  Pretty smart and a time tested approach.  No one I know ever accused the transparent one of being stupid, except when it comes to economics.

Poor Republicans!! Wah Wah! 

mk
you are a voice shouting in the wilderness.
remember when bush was elected and took office, how much time did the lefties give him?...less than one day...?
they hated him with a knee jerk retarded vengeance, and now they criticize the low key criticisms of barack, like they were reasoned and measured and gave the republican a chance in 2001.. nonsense.
they never apologized for falsely accusing bush of stealing the election when every recount proved he won florida.
now they blame reps for the health care debacle, when it is the dems that could fast track the 'reform' but cannot due to a lack of democratic votes.
its like they think you are either for health care reform (as defined by the battalion of anonymous operatives) or you are against health care reform (as defined by the battalion of anonymous operatives).

oh, the irony.

MK, did you support the Iraq war?

I agree on the daily kos flag, but Lou "I hate brown people" Dobbs has repeated this on CNN, and several people in fairly high positions (Roy Blunt) are reluctant to disown this position. I do honestly believe that this is just a front for a thinly veiled racist view of "Obama can't be qualified because he is black", but even they know it's too stupid a position to hold openly.

http://www.blahblahbook.com/ 

alt,
As of now, it's mostly Democrat v. Democrat. There has been some movement, but to suggest Republicans stand in the way of heath care reform is both a canard and a denial of reality. If you look at headlines of the past two weeks, it's clear who is pitched against whom: D v D. A few weeks back, how many had heard of Bluedog Democrats? Pretty much an inside baseball term there.
Where have I stated any objection or offered resistance to efficient health care delivery? As a student of US History, I have a difficult time recalling any Congress or President who found the savings they sought, either to reduce a deficit, or pay for a program other than going the tax route. I would also be hard pressed to find any area where The Government defines efficiency. They do the opposite, they redefine maximum inefficiencies. The Government does a terrible job of rooting out waste, fraud and abuse, it's overloaded with redundancies and programs that simply do not work as designed. Programs morph beyond their original scope and purpose, never really hitting targets as called for, never really solving problems and never, ever, staying within assumed costs. Never. Not even close on that count. Not...even...close. Since President Johnson declared war on poverty in 1965, we have poured in excess of 20 TRILLION DOLLARS into that effort. 20 TRILLION DOLLARS, a staggering sum *it's fun to break such a figure down so it is easier to grasp....20,000 BILLION DOLLARS* And yet, we still have poverty. It's not that a country does not make an effort to raise all its people, it's that its people must understand they are grabbing at false Utopias promoted by Governments eager to ladle largesse. Despite all efforts, the poor will always be among us. I think too many are hanging too much hope on health care reform, not keeping in mind that Government has a terrible and predictable record of underachieving on over promised programs, under scoring considerably, their costs and never failing to correct errors at the most fundamental levels. What has been fundamentally changed in Social Security since it came to be in 1935? Nothing.  While Social Security and Medicare race towards economic insolvency, we should now rush to add a program that will dwarf them? Add to them, a program given short work, little debate, no readings, no public review *as promised*? There is a finite amount of money to be raised from the people. I think we're moving swiftly towards that limit. Then what? What is it that the Government does well that instills notions of health care efficienies in the minds of some? The Government does a terrible job of running Medicare with any degree of acceptable efficiency. Keep rolling over in your mind the price tag for that program and how it is racing towards an economic implosion long about 2019 and how that will jolt this Nation. Follow that with Social Security imploding a few years later and now trust that after health care reform is on the books, the price tag shown will be what the consumer actually pays. And do not forget, the first ten years will be somewhere near 1 TRILLION. Any bets that number is on the low side? Who can hazard a guess at costs in the out years? Yipes!
I am not opposed to health care reform. I am opposed to this country going bankrupt and I take that possibility in a serious vein. Extrapolating current trend lines, somewhere around 2012-2013, the National Debt will push past 60% of GDP, an unsustainable point. Sen. Bayh, D-IN, today reiterated that point: unsustainable. Well, 2012-2013 is right over the horizon.
mk

alt,
As of now, it's mostly Democrat v. Democrat. There has been some movement, but to suggest Republicans stand in the way of heath care reform is both a canard and a denial of reality. If you look at headlines of the past two weeks, it's clear who is pitched against whom: D v D. A few weeks back, how many had heard of Bluedog Democrats? Pretty much an inside baseball term there.
Where have I stated any objection or offered resistance to efficient health care delivery? As a student of US History, I have a difficult time recalling any Congress or President who found the savings they sought, either to reduce a deficit, or pay for a program other than going the tax route. I would also be hard pressed to find any area where The Government defines efficiency. They do the opposite, they redefine maximum inefficiencies. The Government does a terrible job of rooting out waste, fraud and abuse, it's overloaded with redundancies and programs that simply do not work as designed. Programs morph beyond their original scope and purpose, never really hitting targets as called for, never really solving problems and never, ever, staying within assumed costs. Never. Not even close on that count. Not...even...close. Since President Johnson declared war on poverty in 1965, we have poured in excess of 20 TRILLION DOLLARS into that effort. 20 TRILLION DOLLARS, a staggering sum *it's fun to break such a figure down so it is easier to grasp....20,000 BILLION DOLLARS* And yet, we still have poverty. It's not that a country does not make an effort to raise all its people, it's that its people must understand they are grabbing at false Utopias promoted by Governments eager to ladle largesse. Despite all efforts, the poor will always be among us. I think too many are hanging too much hope on health care reform, not keeping in mind that Government has a terrible and predictable record of underachieving on over promised programs, under scoring considerably, their costs and never failing to correct errors at the most fundamental levels. What has been fundamentally changed in Social Security since it came to be in 1935? Nothing.  While Social Security and Medicare race towards economic insolvency, we should now rush to add a program that will dwarf them? Add to them, a program given short work, little debate, no readings, no public review *as promised*? There is a finite amount of money to be raised from the people. I think we're moving swiftly towards that limit. Then what? What is it that the Government does well that instills notions of health care efficienies in the minds of some? The Government does a terrible job of running Medicare with any degree of acceptable efficiency. Keep rolling over in your mind the price tag for that program and how it is racing towards an economic implosion long about 2019 and how that will jolt this Nation. Follow that with Social Security imploding a few years later and now trust that after health care reform is on the books, the price tag shown will be what the consumer actually pays. And do not forget, the first ten years will be somewhere near 1 TRILLION. Any bets that number is on the low side? Who can hazard a guess at costs in the out years? Yipes!
I am not opposed to health care reform. I am opposed to this country going bankrupt and I take that possibility in a serious vein. Extrapolating current trend lines, somewhere around 2012-2013, the National Debt will push past 60% of GDP, an unsustainable point. Sen. Bayh, D-IN, today reiterated that point: unsustainable. Well, 2012-2013 is right over the horizon.
mk