BS: Bob Barr joins in - Libertarian candidate

Subject: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: irishenglish
Date: 12 May 08 - 03:01 PM

Well, have just seen that Bob Barr is now the Libertarian candidate for President. Already, just like Nader for the Democrats, I have seen some speculation on what this will mean for McCain. I have to say though, that this election this year, I don't think any third party candidate will have any significant effect on the results. Other than his initial announcement, I have barely seen anything about Nader in the news. I think this is a year where the desire for a third party candidate is non-existent as a whole.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 May 08 - 04:23 PM

Unless Hillary runs on the Green ticket!

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 12 May 08 - 07:08 PM

I think it might have been different had Barr been the Republican candidate and McCain announced for the Libertarian.

Barr makes McCain look more moderate and McCain might have pulled away the moderates and undecideds that couldn't stomach the democratic candidate (whoever it ends up being).

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: katlaughing
Date: 12 May 08 - 08:02 PM

Don't even know who he is!

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 12 May 08 - 08:20 PM

He's a former Congressman(forgot whether he was a representative or a senator)from Georgia who led the charge to have Pres. Clinton impeached. He lost his seat following the debacle but for the rabid right he's far more palatable than McCain. (And if your offended by that then you've labeled yourself, not me!)

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: katlaughing
Date: 12 May 08 - 10:19 PM

Yuck! I am glad he is "former" and may he remains so. Thanks, CC.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 May 08 - 10:21 PM

"Don't even know who he is!"


             He doesn't either. He's hoping this campaign will define him.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: MarkS
Date: 12 May 08 - 11:58 PM

Just came over the wire. Mike Gravel is trying to jump in as a Libertarian too.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 13 May 08 - 07:52 AM

I don't know that he has the nomination of the Libertarians. Most 3rd parties don't have nominating conventions until summer or fall.

The Greens would never nominate Clinton. There is, last I heard, still a two way race for the Green nomination, but it is likely to end up being Cynthia McKinney, whom I would definitely vote for, as their nominee.

The more high profile candidates running for third parties and drawing attention to election reform, the better as far as I am concerned.

The two party duopoly needs to go. It is so corrupt it can't be reformed. And it is quite clear their candidates and nominees aren't very good at governance, either.

Which is why it is so stupid to keep voting for them, just because they represent the mainstream elite.

Bob Barr was a Gingrich Republican--came in at the same time, IIRC.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 13 May 08 - 08:02 AM

Another point--Nader's campaign this year is better organized and better financed than it has ever been, and they have seasoned campaign managers still with him from his runs in 2000 and 2004.

He may well make it on the ballot in all 50 states AND have to the money to fight the Democratic party legal challenges to his candidacy.

If he can get into the debates, look out Democrats.

Barr will also offer an alternative to many Republicans (read many evangelicals and neo-cons) who hate McCain because he isn't one of their true believers (which is why McCain is still so strong among independent voters).

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Charley Noble
Date: 13 May 08 - 08:32 AM

Janet-

I believe the Libertarian National Convention is coming up May 22. Barr was certainly one of the most right-wing of the Republicans when he was in Congress, and particularly mean-spirited in his attacks on illegal immigrants, liberals, peaceniks, and folk singers (whatever they are!). If he had known about the Mudcat Forum, he would have chaired a special investigating sub-committee and heads (that weren't square) would have rolled!

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 13 May 08 - 08:52 AM

But politics always makes strange bedfellows, which is why the Libertarian party is still in existence.

Barr, a former pit bull for the Gingrich Republicans, also led the charge to impeach Bill Clinton, wrote the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (which said states did not have to recognize gay marriages performed in other states), and was a self-appointed four-star general in the "war on drugs."

But since being ousted in 2002, and watching the rise of fascism with the rise and rise of executive power since 9/11, he has clearly had a conservative epiphany of sorts, and done some very interesting about faces/flip flops (pick yer semantic hot button).

Barr, in the wake of his loss, became a paid consultant for the ACLU, renounced the war on drugs, and became a thorn in the side of Bush administration, criticizing what he perceives to be abuses of power and the Patriot Act.

When accused of being a Republican "spoiler" (spit), he says:

"The notion that Republicans see a third-party candidate as spoiling their chances simply illustrates the arrogance of the two-party system."

Which is, of course, true.

The arrogance of duopoly is one of the greatest threats to the US democracy.

Plenty of citizens see this.

This year, more than other since god left for Chicago, does hold the potential for a "Gilded Era" size voter revolt against the duopoly status quo establishment, which everyone loves to hate, but keeps voting for because they don't see the alternatives as viable.

That is changing on the ground, certainly on the progressive left, where there is no love lost anymore for the Democratic party the way there was in 2004.

No sirreee, there aren't that many Dupes for Dems still in the game, and they KNOW Obama will never be the president they want, especially on the environment and the war.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 13 May 08 - 08:53 AM

And don't forget, the right wing talk radio pirahnas HATE McCain, and there are plenty of Repubs too who refer to him regularly as "Juan McCain".

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 May 08 - 08:55 AM

Barr is just like all those borrow and spend Republicans. When the money is going to defense, it's not being "spent" somehow. And when it's going to education, or health and welfare, it's being wasted.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 13 May 08 - 09:02 AM

I didn't say I was voting for him, I was just pointing out that he has changed positions, to make himself palatable to the Libertarian party this year.

Despite liberal delusions about them, Libertarians do not equal Republicans. Just like Greens don't equal Democrats (despite Democrats claiming they are the same, they very much are not).

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 13 May 08 - 09:35 PM

As I've said, he's more conservative/republican than McCain. The right has been grumbling for years about the current administration because of Bush's habits which most of us seem to think would continue under McCain.
Unfortunately when we're talking about the election it seems to me that it will be more decided on who is towards the center than at either extreme so this might make him more palatable for people who think that the (eventual) democratic candidate is too far to the left.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 May 08 - 10:30 PM

It's not even a done deal that Barr will be the Libertarian candidate. I've read that if that seems likely, quite a few Libertarians say they will leave the party.

But we should wish him wonderful success-- though possibly without going as far as Rove operatives did in 2004 by supporting Nader financially.

And I'm sorry Rig hasn't been successful yet in convincing Lou Dobbs to throw his hat in the ring. Hope that happens soon. I pointed out earlier that McCain already has problems with his less than simon-pure attitude towards illegal immigrants--far too tolerant for the fire-eaters who call him "Juan" McCain, as I noted then. And that's why Obama should push that issue--a path to citizenship for all illegal immigrants, and without insisting on the chimera of "border security" first-- to the hilt.   It will put McCain in a lose-lose situation: either he loses his rabid restrictionists or his share of the Hispanic vote plunges from the 40% GWB got in 2004--which more than made the difference in a close election.

Just as Obama should push the defense of Roe v Wade--an issue where the difference between him and McCain is stark.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 08 - 08:23 AM

Ron - I don't think Lou Dobbs is going to lower himself to get into the manure-wrestiling arena with Obama.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Mr Red
Date: 14 May 08 - 08:33 AM

Well that should raise the Barr.............

I'll get my coat.............

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: pdq
Date: 14 May 08 - 10:01 AM

Coat in hand, he's off to the bar.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: pdq
Date: 14 May 08 - 11:19 AM

...from Wiki:

"Barr was born in Iowa City, Iowa, the second of six children. His father, Bob Sr., pursued a career in Army Corps of Engineers, and as a result he grew up in far-flung places around the world. Bob and his parents spent a few years in Lima, Peru where he attended The American School of Lima, Franklin D. Roosevelt and also in Iran, graduating from Community High School in Tehran in 1966. He later earned his B.A. from University of Southern California in 1970 and an M.A. from George Washington University in 1972. Barr earned his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 1977. From 1970 to 1978, Barr was employed by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

After leaving the CIA, Barr moved to Georgia, where he practiced law and became active in the Republican Party. Barr made an unsuccessful bid for the Georgia House of Representatives in 1984. In 1986, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia - a post Barr held until 1990. From 1990 to 1991, Barr was president of the Southeastern Legal Foundation."


He is from Iowa, graduated from high school in Tehran (Iran), college degree from USC, etc. Not the classic Southern cracker as media want you to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Goose Gander
Date: 14 May 08 - 11:36 AM

"Barr, a former pit bull for the Gingrich Republicans . . . ."

What does the American Staffordshire Terrier have to do with all this?

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 08 - 06:40 PM

"Not the classic Southern cracker as media want you to believe."


                   Well, given his views on religion, you certainly couldn't call him a wise-cracker. So what kind of a cracker is he?

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 15 May 08 - 10:57 AM

Wasn't he involved in a sexual scandal at the same time he was demonizing Clinton?

Seamus

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 May 08 - 12:42 PM

Henry Hyde was, I think. I'm not sure about Barr. I do recall a whole long list of the dizzy idiots lining up to confess to some indiscretion or another.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 May 08 - 09:47 PM

Rig--

If manure-wrestling is to be done, Barr (or Dobbs) will provide his own manure.

Obama believes that's a waste of time and energy. Perhaps you disagree, based on your affinity for slime and smears.

And if Dobbs does get in the race, Obama can let him and McCain battle it out for the votes of the Neanderthal restrictionists.

Obama is on the other side--realizes how important a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is to the country--as well as being the right thing to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 May 08 - 09:49 PM

"for the votes of the Neanderthals AKA restrictionists"

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 May 08 - 10:01 PM

Ron - I don't think there's anything that connects Bob Barr and Lou Dobbs. If you would check out some of Lou's positions, I think you would agree with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 May 08 - 10:30 PM

Just referring to your response on Lou Dobbs. And it breaks my heart to tell you, but I put both manufactured outrage against immigrants and stage-managing Bill Clinton's impeachment both firmly in the category of manure.

So there is a strong link between Dobbs and Barr.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 08 - 09:59 AM

Ron - There is nothing manufactured about the outrage against immigrants (if you're talking about illegal immigrants). Have you checked out what's going on in Italy?

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 May 08 - 10:15 PM

Rig--

As usual with your pronouncements on immigration, you're all wet.

Current immigrants, legal and illegal, mainly take jobs at the top and the bottom of the economic scale, whereas most US-born workers' jobs are in the middle.

Assimilation of Hispanics is proceeding, just as with all the preceding groups. By the 3rd generation, they usually prefer to speak English.

I don't know the origin of your rabidly-anti-immigrant views--funny that they seem to match your similarly rabid anti-religion attitude. Maybe there is something in your background which you haven't told us and which underlies one or both.

But as I've said earlier, if you really feel that strongly, you're far better off with a Republican president. But in that case, don't complain about Iraq--or religion in public life.

You can't always get what you waa--ant.

And anti-immigrant feeling can be found all over the world. That it happens in Italy proves nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 08 - 10:40 PM

Ron - All I said was, the outrage is not manufactured. I simply don't think you've looked into the issue.

                            Most people express sympathy with the immigrants, but the process that is going on now is not helping them in the long run, and is devastating to working class people in the countries they are going to.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 May 08 - 10:57 PM

Rig--

You say you have personal evidence of the harm caused by illegal immigrants, yet somehow are a bit thin on actual proof. Tends to undercut the admitted sterling quality of your posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 11:32 AM

Okay Ron - I posted your evidence on the other thread.
                               None of this is relevant, however, as long as voters perceive that they are disadvantaged by immigrants they will act accordingly.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 May 08 - 11:41 AM

Rig--

Not good enough Let's have it on this thread. You brought up on this thread the allegation that you know specific examples of harm illegal immigrants have done to people you know. Let's have the actual details. With sources, of course. Not that we don't trust you to be totally accurate.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:01 PM

Ron,

         I don't know how much time you have, but I'll start with this:

         First, we need to distinguish between legal and illegal immigration. People coming into the country on visas to do specific things in the light of day are not the ones causing blue collar workers so much trouble.

         Second, as far as illegal workers are concerned, people who say we should be going after the employers are 100% right. I think the board of directors of Tyson Foods ought to be in jail. Lou Dobbs would agree with that, I'm not sure Tom Tancredo would. So there are differences here.

         When I lived in California, the illegal aliens moved in with huge families--6 to 12 children per family in some cases. The schools were quickly overwhelmed, and the people who suffered were the kids who were the legally, and could not get an education.
         Now, they've become so desperate they're laying teachers off in an effort to meet expeneses, and this is a perfect example of what overpopulation does.

          Emergency rooms at hospitals have had to shut down. Hospitals have had to shut down, because they simply could not keep up with the huge demands brought about by illegals flooding into their facilities.

          Wages have been driven into the cellar. Illegal aliens have flooded into construction sites and have taken jobs at wages that are below what American workers can make on unemployment benefits. That has driven the unemployment programs into financial ruin.

         The wages for construction workers continually going down, has driven the value of houses down, which has exacerbated falling housing prices and the mortgage crisis.

         Illegal aliens bought houses. They would not have qualified for loans under normal circumstances, and should not have been taking out mortagages, but they were. Once in default, all they have to do is to go back to Mexico and there's nothing the lending institutions can do to recover what they consider to be "their money." This makes the entire situation much worse, and the empty houses are dragging down the value of the houses around them. To complicat the situation, knowing no one can come after them, they often "strip" the house of anything of value before they head south. This is why the central valley of California is considered to be the "foreclosure capital of America."

            Now I'm back in Oregon. Retired people are flocking here each day to get away from the illegal aliens in California. The problems that have been generated here as a result of the runaway immigration in California is a whole 'nother chapter. I'll fo on with that in book II. But it all stems from illegal immigration and the American government's failure to confront it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 May 08 - 09:13 AM

I've already pointed out just a few of the many flaws in your reading of the situation, Rig.

Just one (more on other threads):

You have no idea how many of the houses now vacant were bought by legal immigrants, how many by illegals, and how many by mostly non-Hispanic US citizens who've been flipping houses for years now, riding the real-estate escalator up. But now the escalator is stuck, or even going down. And they're still on it--and stuck.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 May 08 - 12:47 PM

Ron - If you leave the immigrant issue out, what makes the foreclosure rates in the Central Valley of California the highest in the country?

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 May 08 - 08:31 PM

Rig--

Actually I've heard the highest rate was in Nevada. Source for your allegation, please, Rig. You're going to have to get used to providing sources, or your stories will resemble, in the famous words of Hillary's spouse: a "fairy tale".

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 May 08 - 11:38 PM

Ground Zero.... the Foreclosure Capital of America! Stockton, CA
Can I have a minute... to recap 60 minutes from the Foreclosure Capital of America or Ground Zero - Stockton, CA.

Stockton is located 80 miles East of San Francisco and 80 miles North of San Jose. Stockton, CA has a population of over 290,000 people. A large amount of that population moved into Stockton starting back in with the real estate bubble in 2003, coming from the Bay Area and the Silicon Valley. The median house was sold at $230,000 (4 Bedroom single family home). By 2005, that same house had a value of $400,000. And now in 2008, same house is probably
selling for 70% or less.



Stockton: Foreclosure Capital USA
by Maricel Ferrer-Custodio on September 13th, 2007
According to RealtyTrac, Stockton is the foreclosure capital of USA. In a population of 300000, 1 in 27 households is facing foreclosure. Stockton had 8000 foreclosures so far in 2007.

Among the neighborhoods in the area, Weston Ranch; a 15-year old subdivision of modest tract homes has the worst foreclosure rate. In fact, it has 350 homes for sale right now, equivalent to 5 years in inventory.

According to a local broker in Weston Ranch, Geri Taylor:

"Houses are sitting on the market three times as long as in 2006 and the average sale price had dropped by 10 percent…Nobody has a crystal ball, but I don't expect to see an improvement until 2010."

With foreclosures this bad, what have this community done wrong?

Many borrowed 100% of their purchase price including their closing costs.
Adjustable rate mortgages were offered to lot of subprime borrowers.
Many availed of a teaser rate, but were not able to meet their mortgage commitments when the rates went up.
In their desire to pursue their American dream of owning a home, many people bought houses that they cannot really afford. As Taylor mentioned "Adjustable rate mortgages offered to sub-prime borrowers, hopeful homeowners with shaky credit, lured families into houses with inflated prices."

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Ron Davies
Date: 19 May 08 - 09:05 PM

Rig--

Thanks for actually providing a source. See, it didn't hurt that bad. And, as I said, it helps your credibility--as long as your source is not Hannity or sterling authorities of that sort.

It is very likely that Stockton is in fact ground zero in foreclosures--I've just seen indications elsewhere which support that idea. I note, however, no link in the article you cite to the illegal immigration issue. Your allegation that illegal immigrants are responsible for Stockton's problem has no proof--or even evidence--still.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 May 08 - 10:16 PM

Ron - You've got the same problem Obama has. If something is obviously happening, but there are no studies on it--because such studies would counter everything the big bosses want--then there are no statistics. If there are no statistics, there is no conclusive evidence. If there is no conclusive evidence, it doesn't exist.
                   This is why an empty suit can't win votes in West Virginia.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in
From: Joe Offer
Date: 20 May 08 - 01:41 PM

I've been through Stockton several times a year since 1970, and I worked the city on a regular basis as a federal investigator from 1981-1999, so I know the city quite well. Yes, the city has a large number of illegal aliens, and I suppose some of them found ways to buy housing. There's lots of substandard housing in Stockton, and much of it could be picked up cheaply before the recent housing boom. Not too long ago, you could pick up a fairly decent house for a fairly decent price in Stockton. It would seem to me that only a small percentage of foreclosures could be traced to illegal aliens - that's what I'll believe until I see data that proves otherwise.

Stockton has always been a rather disgusting city. It's hot and dusty in summer, and foggy and damp in winter. There are a few older parts of town, especially around the University of the Pacific, that are really nice, but most of the older part of the city is a slum, and the newer part of town was mostly lower-class tract housing until just recently. Three other cities in the Central Valley of California, Modesto, Fresno, and Bakersfield, are similar - but not as disgusting as Stockton. Some say Sacramento fits with those other four cities, but I lived in Sacramento for 20 years and found it a heck of a lot better than my previous home in Fresno. However, all of the Central Valley cities have had an inflated housing market, with Stockton the most inflated of them all.

When the housing in the San Francisco Bay Area got too expensive for most people, developers started building in Stockton, and in the sleepy neighboring agricultural towns of Lathrop, Manteca, and Tracy. The electronics industries of the Bay Area were booming, and new employees bought houses in Stockton and commuted 50 to 75 miles to work ing the Bay. All of a sudden, prices for housing in the area went sky-high. The prices weren't as ridiculously high as the Bay Area, but I kept thinking that nobody in his right mind would pay so much to live in such a disgusting place. So, when the economy faltered, it was inevitable that housing prices in Stockton would drop dramatically. It's my understanding that the price of a house in Stockton has dropped 50% in the last few years. Houses are probably underpriced there now, but it will take a long time for the housing market to recover.

I'm sure that many of the Bay Area workers who moved to Stockton were the first ones to lose their jobs when the high-tech industry took a downturn, since senior employees were more likely to have been able to buy housing in the Bay Area back when it was affordable.

So, I think it was the hugely inflated cost of housing that caused the dramatic foreclosure rate in Stockton, tied to the downturn of the electronics industry and layoffs that likely hit hardest among the younger and newer employees who were likely to have moved to Stockton.

And yes, Stockton and the rest of the Central Valley have a lot of illegal aliens - but I don't see a connection between the aliens and the housing market and foreclosures. I'd like to see data on that.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in - Libertarian candidate
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 May 08 - 02:16 PM

Joe - I don't find Stockton as disgusting as you seem to have. But I think everything else you have to say above can be validated.
             The piece that was done on 60 Minutes touched on the subject of illegals buying houses, but all of this, like everything else that has to do with illegal aliens is hard to verify. This is argely because, the documentation that went into generating the loan in the first place was probably fabricated.
             Also, the way I remember it, the 60 Minutes piece indicated that it is not against the law for an alien to buy a house in America, so being illegally here doesn't play into these transactions, in the sense that it's not the responsibility of a Mortgage Broker to police the immigration status of his/her customers.
             All I would say is, when you look at the statistics, if only a small percentage of the foreclosures in Stockton, Fresno et. al., was the result of illegals buying houses, that would be enough to push the foreclosure rate over the rates of some other places.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in - Libertarian candidate
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 May 08 - 04:34 PM

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/05/12/open-borders-and-the-mortgage-mess/

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in - Libertarian candidate
From: Ron Davies
Date: 20 May 08 - 10:56 PM

Rig--

You have still provided no hard evidence that illegal immigrants are responsible for the foreclosure rate in Stockton being the highest in the country.

No surprise there, for somebody who has credibility at this point somewhat below zero. It will take you quite a while to get back to zero, after months of unsupported smears.

Your only chance of being taken seriously on anything is to give specific sources--with dates and direct quotes, or direct links--with "blue clicky"-- which supposedly support your allegations.

And you'd be advised to not cite Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh or similar sources. Just a bit of friendly advice.

Of course if it doesn't bother you to be seen as totally unreliable on everything, by all means continue your current approach.

And we will treat your postings accordingly.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in - Libertarian candidate
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 08 - 08:32 AM

Ron - What I've discovered, and it sounds like you never will, is one of the problems of using the interenet for source material. If somebody doesn't post it there, it won't be there.
                   This has a tendancy to lead people in one direction or another that might, or might not, be factual or useful.

                   When I myself, or somebody else posts something that was experienced first hand, you pop with with "where's the evidence?" "Date and time, please."

                   You're demonstrating your own limited grasp of the real world, and cutting yourself off from information that might otherwise be useful to you.

                   So, getting back to the impact of houses sold to illegal immigrants in California. There is a little backup for that, and I've provided what I could. You, however, have apparently chosen not to check it out. Then you come back and complain that nothing was provided.

                   In any event, I didn't say these activities were a major part of the foreclosure crisis, I simply said that it added to it.

                   When I lived there, I lived next door to a mortgage broker who used to come home and laugh about the deals he put together for illegals. What he really thought would happen was, they'd lose their job(s) during a slow down, and he (the broker) and his friends would be able to take the property back and resell it at a profit.
                   We know that's not the way it worked, however. When they left, in many cases, they trashed the houses, (see the 60 Minutes piece) and even if they didn't, the value had dropped to the point where they couldn't resell it.
                   I suspect the guy is bankrupt by now, and it's hard to feel sorry for him.

                   But if you understood anything about economics, you would know that these things often operate on the margins. The illegal alien owner factor just pushes the value down a few percentage points more, those few points add tremendously to the problem, and, as far as reporting the statistics, they make Stockton, CA worse than some other place in, say, Ohio.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in - Libertarian candidate
From: Amos
Date: 21 May 08 - 10:50 AM

The subtle distortion introduced here is that "illegals" are identical to ireesponsible or shiftless people. I do not find this to be true.

In my experience with immigrants from Mexico and points south of there, I have found by and large they tend to be hard-working energetic, skilled and work to very high standards. This seems to be true regardless of the color of the cardboard int heir wallet.

I have found them to be generally intensely family-oriented, deeply loyal and affectionate parents, intelligent in their areas of experience and education, and willing and able to work to make things better. This seems to be generally true whether or not they have been blessed by the Federal government and given a license to survive.

My conclusion is that in the court of human merit, the majority of these peopel are as entitiled as anyone to buy ahouse in which to raise a family.

The set of people who precipitate extreme market crashes in housing is NOT defined by their legal status but by their responsibility level, either as lenders or as borrowers.

I suspect you will find a lot more foreclosures caused by misleading and corrupt lenders than by corrupt borrowers.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in - Libertarian candidate
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 May 08 - 11:51 AM

"The subtle distortion introduced here is that "illegals" are identical to ireesponsible or shiftless people."


                   I didn't see that anyplace.

Subject: RE: BS: Bob Barr joins in - Libertarian candidate
From: Ron Davies
Date: 21 May 08 - 10:18 PM

As Amos says, it's there--read your own post, Rig.