 sj |
||
|
||
BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
|
|
|
Subject: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,mg Date: 13 May 08 - 06:34 PM I am not able to listen to radio, search internet etc. Can people occasionally post an update when results start coming in. Thanks. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Peace Date: 13 May 08 - 06:46 PM No question that Hillary will win big there. But that doesn't really matter. Mississippi will tell people lots more about the realities in November, imo. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: bobad Date: 13 May 08 - 06:51 PM There are 28 delegates at stake in West Virginia. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bill D Date: 13 May 08 - 08:39 PM She is winning 2 to 1...It may get her 19 out of 26 delegates. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bill D Date: 13 May 08 - 09:13 PM ...and she is still talking about winning...and demanding Florida & Michigan be seated & counted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bobert Date: 13 May 08 - 09:22 PM West Va. Projections: Hillary: 130% Obama: -30% |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 13 May 08 - 09:28 PM Last I saw actual returns it was 56-38. A bit better than I expected Barack to do. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 13 May 08 - 09:30 PM Whoops! With 23% returned it is: DemocratsVote %WV DelTotal Del* Clinton 63% 15 1,712 Obama 30% 3 1,877 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Guest is Q Date: 13 May 08 - 11:04 PM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Guest is Q Date: 13 May 08 - 11:11 PM Whoops! I hit enter on my keyboard. It activates a post. Joe was supposed to figure out why. Anyway, here is a song I propose for Hillary- Hillary, Hillary, Brave, courageous and bold; Long live her fame And long live her glory, And long may her story be told! Now who out there remembers the TV show which had that bit of doggerel as the theme song? Another name, of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ebbie Date: 13 May 08 - 11:16 PM Davy! Davy Crocket! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: catspaw49 Date: 13 May 08 - 11:25 PM Wyatt Earp starring Hugh O'Brian Actually the series was called something like "The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp" or something like that. I was a hooked 6 year old as I recall. I even ordered a "Buntline Special" toy six shooter with the looonnnggg barrel. I think there was a life lesson there too.
The Buntline WAS in fact a legend as I later found out and no real proof of its existence was ever found in contemporary accounts short of Earp's own.....and old Wyatt was known to spin a yarn now and again. When mine came in the mail after waiting for what seemed an eternity, it turned out to be a cheap plastic thing which broke the first time I played with it. I was totally heartbroken as only a 6 year old can be when a dream goes poof. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Q as guest Date: 14 May 08 - 12:20 AM The top banana is Catspaw. The rotten banana goes to - no, she doesn't deserve that. Earp had an Army Colt single action, with 12-inch barrel, not a special model, that he used to whack drunk cowboys with, but no one seems to know what he used after he left Kansas. Davy! Davy Crocket! King of the wild frontier. Now those were the good old days of TV. I think Hillary could gun down McCain if they met in the Fall shootout, but McCain would easily take Obama down. The WVA result is a clear warning. It may be too late for the Demos to reconsider and reorganize. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Janie Date: 14 May 08 - 01:03 AM The significance of West Virginia, is not the number of delegates at stake. West Virginia is a blue collar State with a very small minority population. 2006 US Census estimates are that the population is 94.9% White. 3.3% of the population is African-American, which means all other minority populations are miniscule. The pundits and the Clinton campaign think Clinton's strong showing there demonstrates that she is more electable, assuming the the importance of the the White, blue collar vote to the the success of the Democratic nominee. 27% of the population is under age 18, and just over 15% is over age 65. I'm guessing the average age of registered voters in WV is higher than the national average. Given the atypical demographics of WV, a 30% showing for Obama ain't too bad. My West Virginia family all voted for Clinton. If Obama wins the nomination, they will all vote for him in the general election. However, my family is somewhat atypical for West Virginia in this day and age, and also tend to be straight party Democrats - an increasingly rare breed anywhere. Given the State demographics, the fact that nationally, the Democratic party is more pro environment than are the Republicians, (McCain;s recent noises re: global warming not withstanding), and the reality that any kind of economic survival for in the foreseeable future for the State depends on free rein to continue to rape the environment, West Virginia's electoral votes will go to McCain if Obama wins the nomination. It is the electoral college that determines the election (don't we all know that!) When the demographics are examined state by state, it is clear we are in for a real horse race come November. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bobert Date: 14 May 08 - 07:21 AM Well, it looks as if Hillary took 67% and Obama 26% in West Virginia... In exit polls 91% of the voters said that "race was a factor" in their vote... Having lived in Wess Virginia from 1985 to 2006 I am surprised that Obama got 1 in 4 votes... Other than Janie, I don't know anyone who lives in WV who would have voted for Obama... And darned few who would have voted for Clinton either... I suspect some level of mischief here with Republican voters voting in the Dem primary... I think we will see this in the remaining primaries as well... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 14 May 08 - 07:44 AM I see that according to the morning papers, the Obama campaign strategy for West Virginia is to completely ignore it, as if no primary took place. That should cheer everyone up. The fingers in their ears, screaming "lalalalalalalal" strategy. That'll capture the White House in November fer sure, especially when you add in the fact they are using the same strategy in Florida and Michigan. Ignore the white working class voters (which no Democratic president has ever won without, I might add), and hope they'll go away strategy. You combine that with Obama's shitty record on immigration and his being in the pockets of the energy conglomerates, and McCain already looks like the more liberal and moderate of the two. I dunno. This bloc of voters has never been predictably Democratic since Ronnie Ray Guns shot his way into town. When Dean came in as party leader, he said his main priority was to woo them back to the party fold. How ya gonna do that with Obama and his huge negatives (Wright, his shenanigans w/the Canadians over NAFTA, etc) with white working class voters, whose loyalty can't be assumed? I mean, it's pretty damn arrogant of the Obama campaign to say they won't bother with WV in the fall either, and that they are already counting on the Clinton supporters to vote for him instead of McCain in the fall. This campaign is starting to look more like the same old arrogant Democrat crap people hate the Democrats for all the time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: pdq Date: 14 May 08 - 08:06 AM The power base of the Democratic party is union workers, some of whom are blue collar. Not really the same as blue collar workers as a whole. The democrats also expect all non-White folks, homosexuals and criminals (including organized crime) to join their coalition of union members, academics, professional politicians and the wealthy elite (see John Kerry, Babs Streisand, George Soros, etc.). I don't see any attempt to get the common working people into the Democrat's big tent. By ignoring us and they will lose most elections outside the big urban centers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 14 May 08 - 08:14 AM While I don't agree completely with your portrayals of the Democrats' preferred demographic voter blocs, pdq, I do think you may be right in your assessment with the union voters. It doesn't matter to them who their union leadership endorses, and Ronald Reagan proved that, in spades. If you look at the wildcat shutdown of the west coast ports on May Day, and even more importantly, the beginnings of a nascent coalition with immigration rights groups who are the only potential new union recruits in this country in a very long time, and the Obama camp just cannot afford to get this wrong. The Latino voting bloc isn't in his corner, and if he keeps dissing the working class and low income voters of color outside the African American community, and you have a real problem come November. Because if the unions can't get the rank and file out to work the streets for Obama in the fall, then Obama is doomed as a candidate. I mean, he is going to need more than just the solidly middle class public sector unions to win. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 14 May 08 - 08:17 AM Yeah, Obama is shaping up to be a pretty weak candidatet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 14 May 08 - 08:27 AM Jesus, Rig, that i s pure bull. Don't you do mathematics? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 14 May 08 - 08:41 AM People should also be concerned with the voters and supporters Obama seems to be attracting--uniters they ain't, no matter what Obama's rhetoric says. It seems to me the Obama campaign has racially polarized Democrats in a way they haven't been since 1968, and his core supporters are some of the most divisive folk in the electorate--they appear more and more like the Rove Republicans every day. To win in November, Obama can't afford to alienate Clinton's voters. Yet, alienate them they do. We'll see if the white male working class voters abandon the party and cross back over to the Republicans this cycle. We'll see if the Latino voters abandon the party again, and go to McCain in at least the same numbers they crossed over to Bush in 2000, because McCain is so much better on immigration than Obama is. In other words, the two voting blocs the Obama camp is counting on to stay with him, haven't supported him in the primaries, and also have been swing voters since the Reagan days. To assume they will swing to Obama this time is a very dangerous assumption to be making, IMO. And it is an assumption based more on arrogant denial, than historical and present day realities. I honest to god don't have a clue who will win in November if the #1 issue is "it's the economy, stupid", because that issue for McCain and Obama both, is their weakest. And does anyone think we can pull off enough of an economic recovery by the fall for the #1 issue for voters NOT to be the economy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bobert Date: 14 May 08 - 09:36 AM Well, one thing is for sure anmd that is the Mc/Mc/Mc spinster are up to their usual bag ot tricks this morning... Obama has won 3 states by more than 60% of the vote... Does that make McClinton look like a weak candidiate.. This is pure racism in disguise... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 14 May 08 - 09:59 AM It seems to me the Obama campaign has racially polarized Democrats in a way they haven't been since 1968 This is just selective myopia in play, Fantz. The divisiveness in the Dem campaign has entirely stemmed from the media making a huge horserace out of it. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Jim Lad Date: 14 May 08 - 11:30 AM "The divisiveness in the Dem campaign has entirely stemmed from the media making a huge horse race out of it." Finally, Amos got something right. It's all about colour now and that lies squarely on the shoulders of the media. Blacks for Obama, Whites for Clinton. Like many onlookers, I have turned away in disgust. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bobert Date: 14 May 08 - 12:29 PM yeah, but it didn'y have to happen like this... The Clinton's thought they were ***entitled*** to another 8 years... When they found themselves behind in the 4th quarter it was "Hail Mary" time, which meant playing the race card and play it they have... ... and the media has jumped right in, as well... Hey, Rev. Wright is a friggin Boy Scout compared to some of the skelatons rattlin' 'round the Clinton closets but the media doesn't seem to bothered with diggin' 'round in there... Like I have said... McMedia doesn't want a black man in the "White" House... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Guest is Q Date: 14 May 08 - 12:56 PM Missouri was also a wake-up call to the Democrats. Although the vote was split almost 50-50, a look at the map shows that Obama carried only the cities of St. Louis, Kansas City and Jefferson City. The entire state outside of these cities was solidly for Clinton. Only 5 of 141 counties showed a majority for Obama. One may duplicate the results across the country. Much of the Obama 'lead' was engineered in the caucus votes, which never attract 'middle' Americans because they appear to them as elite closed circles. I have just about reached the point of putting my money on McCain, although I fear nothing innovative will come from his leadership. Of course, a Democratic president in the White House can only accomplish so much in a divided Congress, which is a certainty. A moderate advance in health care, legislation encouraging development of nuclear and other energy sources, possible legislation leading to a partial solution of immigration problems, and a gradual realization that the Middle East conflicts cannot be resolved by the American military or by thwarting legitimate Middle East aspirations or ignoring their complex demographics and cultures, are perhaps the best we can hope for. 'Change' will come slowly regardless of the outcome. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,mg Date: 14 May 08 - 02:40 PM I don't think at all he has stirred the racism pot. It is there, it is steaming underneath the surface, and can easily be brought to a boil, which is exactly what creepy Hillary is doing. She is trying to tap right into that, which is something decent people would not do. She is evil, plain and simple. In the long run, it might be best to get more out in the open, but of course it will affect the election, but hopefully people who believe in civil rights etc. will prevail. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 14 May 08 - 06:14 PM The only evil figure I've seen in the whole thing is Reverend Jeremiah Wright, at least so far. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 14 May 08 - 10:13 PM Q-- You haven't learned any more as a Guest, it seems. McCain could easily take Obama down? We'll see. Doesn't look good for McCain at this point. 1) Polls already about even--and that's before Obama's bounce when Hillary finally bows out. 2) The US--including Republicans---is thoroughly sick of Bush. Obama's theme will be: Do you want a Bush 3rd term? And it's a winning theme. 3) The US mood is more sour than it's been in a long time. "Throw the bums out" always starts with the president's party. 4) There are huge numbers of new Democrats, including young people and black people--who joined because of Obama. Added to this are large numbers of independents--including, for sure, anybody who wants to end the Iraq war, and that includes some Republicans. As I recall, you subscribe to the rather dubious notion that "we have to fight al-Qaeda there or they will follow us home", totally disregarding the fact that Iraqi Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds hate al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda will have its hands full surviving in Iraq--not exactly in posture to take over Iraq, despite your delusions. 5) Many women now say they want Hillary or nobody. But many more realize that they must keep McCain from having a chance to name a Supreme Court justice if they want to preserve Roe v Wade. So they must vote for the Democratic nominee--whoever that person is. And it will be Obama. The first group will be persuading the second group. 6) Then there's the Hispanic vote. Obama will be coming out strongly for a path to ciizenship for all illegal immigrants. As I've noted elsewhere, this puts McCain in a box. Either he also supports this idea--and loses the Tancredo true believers--or he opposes it--and his portion of the Hispanic vote plunges from the 40% GWB got in 2004--which more than made the difference in a very close election. It looks as if McCain will be left with the racists and the under-educated. That's not a majority. If I didn't know better, I'd think your prediction is based on frustrated schadenfreude--since so far all your predictions have come to nothing, to put it mildly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 14 May 08 - 10:15 PM "path to citizenship" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Q as guest Date: 15 May 08 - 12:31 AM Yes, we will see. Nothing I have seen suggests a sweep for the Obamites. A few comments on Ron Davies free-wheeling digressions- I'll make a few myself. I said nothing about fighting Al Qaeda. They are a small group who flourish in troubled areas; they are not representative of any of the Muslim nations. Cooperative efforts towards solving problems would be the be the best way to minimize them. This means cooperation with Syrians, Iranians, et al.; not one of the candidates has said anything helpful in this regard- and why should only Israel have nuclear capabilities in the Middle east? I did say in other words that current American ideas that the Taliban is a group that can be fought in the same way as Al Qaeda is laughable; they are the 'young Turks' of the Pashtun people, a conservative cultural group of many millions in Afganistan and Pakistan. They will control Afganistan fully again. Have you written that speech for Obama in which he comes out strongly for that citizenship path for all illegal immigrants? Hmmm, I just might support him if he ever did that. A steal from Bush, of course. And wasn't Bush pushing for it but Congress turned him back? I have also suggested that Congress will remain strongly divided after the election; the extravagant and childish claims that humungous change will prevail will fizzle. Hope for a few improvements in health care, a considered and careful withdrawal from the mess we made in the Middle East, and a few baby steps towards sustainable, varied energy sources that can supplant some of the current oil-coal base. Now back to West Virginia- or is that now just old news, with no lessons to be learned from it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 15 May 08 - 07:54 AM Don't think you'll find many people in Mudcat to talk about West Virginia with, because the majority here support Obama. If it is bad news for Obama, they either ignore it or shout down the messengers and villify them. That is the "Yes We Can" strategy, it seems, at least on the ground. What should worry a lot of folks is the sheer nastiness of a certain percentage of Obama's supporters. The hate mongers who are the mirror image of the Rove Republicans. We even have a few of them here in Mudcat. Those folks are already causing problems, because they keep alienating the very voters they need to attract for Obama to win in November. He can't win without the white working class voters. He doesn't need to win all of them, of course. Just the vast majority of them. And he isn't doing really well with that group, as the WV landslide victory for Clinton just demonstrated. And a victory like that after Obama's supposed "come back" in North Carolina, is pretty ominous for the general election trends. They don't all have to switch to McCain for Obama to lose. Just enough of them, while the rest stay home & sit this election out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 15 May 08 - 07:59 AM What about "the sheer nastiness of a certain percentage of Obama's opponents"? We even have a few of them here in Mudcat... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 15 May 08 - 08:28 AM As I've said elsewhere, WV proves nothing except that racism still exists and that Obama has to repeat ad nauseam that he is in fact a patriotic Christian -- not a Moslem-- who rejects Wright's outlandish remarks. And that his wife is also not an atheist but a patriotic American Christian who does the same. Eminently do-able between now and November. McCain has 3 serious problems--any of which can cost him the election. 1) Sour mood of the US--throw the bums out. And as you note in the recent special elections, it's Republicans who are being tossed out---in Republican districts. 2) He's tied to GWB--instant revulsion in many quarters 3) He has to reach beyond his base to win--especially independents. But whenever he does, his base threatens to revolt a) illegal immigration--Tancredo fire-eaters will alienate Hispanics and other thinking beings. b) climate change--WSJ came out yesterday against his cap-and-trade idea. c) health reform--base will not allow it unless "market based"--a bandaid for a gaping wound |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 15 May 08 - 08:38 AM And your pig headed, bigoted stereotyping of the white working class is a perfect example of how to lose the election for Obama. Or have you forgotten, the white working class doesn't control the MSM? And they've been the race baiting scapegoats this election cycle far more than Rev Wright has. But don't hide your contempt for the working class folks, Ron. Tell us how your white elitist ass truly feels about them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 15 May 08 - 08:43 AM "And your pig headed, bigoted stereotyping of the white working class is a perfect example of how to lose the election for Obama." And the same charge has been leveled at Hispanics. We've seen blacks in the south vote enmasse, but why would we expect Hispanics to do that? I don't think they will. They haven't in the past. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 15 May 08 - 08:59 AM Not to worry, I'm sure all of Ron Davies best middle class elitist friends are black. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Q as guest Date: 15 May 08 - 03:17 PM Voting outside of major urban centers in Missouri as well as West Virginia show that the 'working class' vote for Clinton included the small shopkeeper, business man and the average farmer as well as what used to be known as 'working class' 50 or more years ago. The reasons for Clinton support are complex, understandable for women, but the lukewarm support from men is just another signal that many of them will vote for the certainties of McCain come the Fall election. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Peace Date: 15 May 08 - 07:04 PM "Yeah, Obama is shaping up to be a pretty weak candidatet." Keep sayin' that often enough, Rig, and you'll start believing it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 15 May 08 - 07:23 PM Weak candidate! Weak candidate! Weak candidate! Weak... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bobert Date: 15 May 08 - 07:24 PM He's not really formulating that opinion, Brucie... It is the PR thing that the Mc 'n Mc camps are putting out... So it is parroting... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Peace Date: 15 May 08 - 07:28 PM Betcha can't say the word gullible ten times fast . . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bill D Date: 15 May 08 - 07:37 PM "I'm sure all of Ron Davies best middle class elitist friends are black." Funny, I don't look black. And I know a couple dozen of Ron's 'elitist' friends who aren't either. Hey Fanta...are you FOR anyone or anything? Or just get off throwing stones at everyone else's ideas? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Peace Date: 15 May 08 - 07:50 PM "Not to worry, I'm sure all of Ron Davies best middle class elitist friends are black." I'm one of Ron's friends and last I looked I'm a kinda pale skinned guy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 15 May 08 - 10:38 PM Gee, Janet, sounds like you still haven't found that stronger tranquilizer you need. Please keep looking--for your own sake, not for ours. We still appreciate your entertainment value, I can assure you. It's also fascinating that for all your foaming at the mouth, you haven't managed to even begin to address any of the arguments I brought up as to why McCain has problems. One might think you're bankrupt of ideas--though foul language comes easily to you. Some say that's the surest sign of mental bankruptcy. But I'm sure that's not the case for you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 15 May 08 - 10:52 PM And by the way, I stereotype nobody. But I have run across some classic remarks by WV voters--such as the observation that the voter in question could not vote for Obama since he was a Moslem and his wife was an atheist. Other variations have included the objection that he did not salute the flag and that he agreed with Rev. Wright's outlandish remarks--despite his clear rejection of them on more than one occasion. And Hillary was kind enough to assure the WV voters that she realized white workers were important. Now why do you suppose she had to mention the workers were white? You might be aware that if you try hard enough you can always find a reason other than the real one to vote against somebody. And as I've pointed out, many people, including many blue-collar workers in WV, just don't know him well enough--an omission he can easily remedy by November. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Guest is Q Date: 16 May 08 - 12:20 AM Blue collar labor is becoming hard to define, since government figures include both skilled and unskilled workers. Manufacturing jobs are decreasing- moving offshore or increasingly automated, requiring technical expertise in computers and machines. Growing, and now often defined as blue collar, are in communications, law enforcement, transportation and crafts. U. S. government figures show that 32% of craft workers have some college experience, or have graduated. Many in communications, commerce, law enforcement, computers, etc., have attended schools like DeVry, Phoenix and dozens of state institutions. Plumbers, electricians, mechanics, gas and steam fitters and construction workers require licenses in order to practice, and technical school training is required for many of these jobs. Installation, maintenance and repair work is increasingly more technical. Immigrants, legal or illegal, do the cleaning, fruit picking, etc. There are still some jobs 'working for the city' but even these require knowledge of equipment, etc., in many cases. In other words, the old 'blue collar' worker who worked on an assembly line or in the mills is disappearing. In Pennsylvania, about 22% of workers are classed as blue collar, and this now includes many with training, and a spread in wages. Improved education is a must- Unfortuntely, the number who graduate even at high school level is only around 50% in many large city schools. The people who drop out have few chances at middle class life. The candidates have not addressed the problems. Speeches do not revive obsolete jobs. "No child left behind" is empty rhetoric in too many cases. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 16 May 08 - 12:40 PM Q - I agree with everything you say above. I'm still a little puzzled about why those displcaced people flock to Hillary. I have one observation. These are the people who have been hurt the most by illegal immigration, affirmative action, and minority set-aside programs. But when they voice their opposition to these things, the media happily labels the "racist." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Q as guest Date: 16 May 08 - 03:54 PM 'Illegal immigration' does not hurt anyone; the numbers are small and a threat only in the minds of bigots, or ranters like Lew Dobbs. Without them fruit and perishable vegetables would go unpicked and washrooms would not get cleaned- the 'blue collar' so-called will not take these jobs. Because the immigrants often work together, they not only subsist on low wages but are able to send a little back 'home.' They are a worldwide phenomenon, the impact is much greater in western Europe than in the United States. Affirmative action had good intentions, but it put one group of disadvantaged above another- both groups need the chance at education and jobs. The United States and Canada are falling behind in educating the population for the workplace. China is expected to have more 'middle class' people than the United States in the next census, and India is not far behind. (Of course, large numbers are still mired in third-world conditions, but in the cities the demand for education and the quality of the schools is amazing). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 16 May 08 - 04:21 PM Illegal immigration hurts everyone I know, but maybe those are the only ones. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 16 May 08 - 10:19 PM Rig-- If illegal immigration hurts everyone you know, let's have some details. Exactly how does it hurt them? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 16 May 08 - 10:34 PM They're in agony. They can't talk right now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 16 May 08 - 10:39 PM Gee, that tends to support the allegation in some quarters that your allegation is total drivel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 16 May 08 - 11:36 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: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Q as guest Date: 17 May 08 - 12:20 AM Don't construction jobs require licensed and bonded labor? They certainly do here in Alberta. The mortgage problem certainly is not the result of illegal immigrants buying houses, this is a fabrication. Most shortages in the health care industry are the result of inadequate funding, lack of funding for medical education, and poor wages for medical personnel. This complaint by a Boston area medical student is typical- Yearly tuition at Boston Univ. School Medicine- $42734, Fees $2914, Room and board $11933, Books and supplies, $2843. Only about 30% of students obtain any grant aid. Debt after graduation astronomical! In California, some eight million people live in officially designated primary care shortage areas. An a letter to the NY Times, Carla Kakutani, President of the California Academy of Family Physicians writes: "In California, nearly eight million people live in officially designated primary care shortage areas. Millions more seriously ill patients must wait several weeks for appointments or seek care in emergency rooms, which drives up health care costs and leaves patients without essential follow-up care. Family physicians in California support universal coverage and comprehensive health care reform that addresses the primary care doctor shortage. Ignoring this problem would derail any attempt to provide universal health care." And more to the letter, but that is enough. No blame is attached to illegal immigrants. NY Times, April 13, 2008. Are conditions any better here in Canada? Not in wealthy Alberta, home of the tar sands and supplier of much of the petroleum going to the United States. Medical education suffers from the same lack of funds. Hospitals are inadequate in size and facilities; patients wait on cots in hallways and one may spend hours in waiting rooms. Family physicians are booked solid, and take few new patients, although the population is growing since the economy is booming. Specialist attention requires weeks, if not months, on a wait list. The oil millions-er billions- are not spent to allieviate the problem. Health care wages are low, much of the staff is immigrant, people with their first jobs in their new homeland. Medicine is too expensive a career choice, and it requires long hours if one is compassionate; much better to go into engineering, geology, management, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 17 May 08 - 07:26 AM And last night on Washington Week, a bigoted MSM jerk put an even finer point on "white working class" by referring to "them" as "Scots Irish". And anyone who can remember ANY media hack using that term to refer to voters in the last 30 odd years or so, has a far better memory than me. Why not just refer to them as the cracker vote? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 17 May 08 - 09:03 AM "Don't construction jobs require licensed and bonded labor?" Q - Contractors sometimes - labor never. "Most shortages in the health care industry are the result of inadequate funding, lack of funding for medical education, and poor wages for medical personnel." Not in this case. It's just simply overwhelming demand from clients who nobody anticipated being there. "No blame is attached to illegal immigrants. NY Times, April 13, 2008." That's because the NY Times, and their elite readership, is part of the problem. And also because, in this case, they were really talking about a different aspect of health care. I would agree with your other observations on health care. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 17 May 08 - 09:27 AM In the above posting I was really trying to explain why I think West Virginia voters went overwhelmingly for Hillary. I wasn't trying to argue a case for or against immigration, but got caught up in attempting to address one of Ron Davies' many pointed questions. Illegal immigration (or the lack of enforcing the rules), schools crowded with illegals--preventing native children from advancing, affirmative action, minority set-asides for business, and other public programs for minorities are some of the things that make white working class voters vote for Hillary over Obama. I don't think they see themselves as racist at all. They would see the Ku Klux Klan, Neo-Nazi's, and Skinheads as racist. But the programs that were put into place by the folks they call "elites," for the purpose of helping minorities had no negative effect on wealthy white citizens (if you got bumped off the list for enrollment at UC Berkley, your parents could simply buy you a spot at a private school, like Harvard, Princeton, or Yale). The people who really paid for the programs to help minorities--and they paid through the nose--are the working class whites who are now voting for Hillary. They see Obama as a product of the programs for minorities that were put into place by the wealthy elites, and that's why if Obama is the nominee in November, they will probably vote for McCain. Frankly, I don't see anything Obama or any of his supporters can do about it. As far as calling these people "crackers," that's up to you, but I don't think it would be smart to call them crackers to their face. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 17 May 08 - 09:36 AM Of course not, the Ivy League liberal types merely do that in private (like during fundraisers in San Francisco) and on the internet, where their faces can't be smashed in. The crowing wing of the Democratic party that marched out in lock step last Wednesday morning and de facto accused any and all of the West Virginia voters who voted for Clinton of being racists, well...try googling "crackers for Clinton" and you'll get the gist of it. Every bit as race and class coded speech as anything the right wing Repubs have been doing for decades. And make no mistake about it, The shit with Obama this week--the Edwards endorsement, the Bush remarks in Israel, the McCain speech to the NRA, and the Obama "attack" on Bush & McCain--every one of those speeches was directed to one group of voters: white male working class voters and their "machismo" voting patterns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 17 May 08 - 10:05 AM Okay, I googled, whoever put that up is slimier than Edwards himself. I suspect the Edwards endorsement did more to hurt Obama with those voters than help. He got the steel worker's union, but all that means is he got he management of the union. If Obama is the nominee, I think the rank and file will be squarely behind McCain in November. I think you're misreading the voting patterns by labeling it "machismo." There is some of that amoung younger males to be sure, but I think the more experienced blue collar white is simpling looking for a square deal from his government. So far, I think Hillary is promising that. I don't think there's anything Obama could do to win them over, and I don't think it's his race as much as his history--or maybe you can't separate them. The point is, I don't think many of those poorer white voters think it's racism, themselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 17 May 08 - 10:33 AM Riginslinger, McCain has a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected as things stand right now. But as we all know, shit happens. Between now and November, lots of shit is gonna happen, and this last week is but the beginning of both sides trying to out-Machiavelli the other. I'm not labeling that voting as machismo, but there are always efforts, including efforts by Obama himself in the "god and guns" remarks, to portray the white working class male voters they need to win, as being dumb, machismo, and reactionary. I think the realities on the ground are far more complex than that, and that Obama already dug his own grave in terms of being able to pull in that voting bloc Clinton has so easily carried. Which does beg the question, when Clinton and Obama's stands on the issues are virtually identical, why does this gulf remain in the Democratic party? Answer: war veterans and their families. Veterans of WWII, Korea & Vietnam. And they vote for the candidates they feel respect them, even if they opposed the Vietnam war. So it isn't the youngsters voting for Clinton. It's the older vets & their families, whose lives were so changed by the wars they fought in, they still look to national leaders to recognize them and respect them in every single election. Which is why we need to put an end to our military madness in this country. It is the engine that drives us everywhere we go in the world. One more reason why I love Russ Feingold--he challenges citizens to become citizen diplomats for the US in their international travel. I'm guessing Obama hasn't learned the importance of the aging vet vote to the national psyche at this point, largely because he and his advisors have their heads up their asses. It doesn't matter if he won't win their vote, he still needs to pander to them. Obama should be standing alongside Iraq Veterans Against the War. He should be demanding they no longer be marginalized by Congress, and that the Winter Soldier Hearings be shown the light of day, in hearings that don't stick them in a back room, and keep their testimony out of the Congressional Record. He should be their champion, in terms of getting Congress to listen to them. He doesn't have to change his pro-war position to do that, but if he wanted to pull a lot of those Clinton voters inside the fence, he'd start making a huge deal about their right to be heard by the very people who sent them into harm's way. When Obama meets with vets, there is a huge cringe factor I see that is reminiscent of the Dukakis in a tank photo. Say what you will about Clinton, she knows the importance of vets to the national "don't tread on me" psyche and how to play to them. Obama clearly doesn't. He is surrounded by far too many Ivy League elitists to ever "get it". Which is one reason why McCain still poses a threat to the Dems winning the White House this year. And the Bush/McCain machine was very savvy framing Obama for November this week. Brilliant stroke of genius, and if I may say it, a play that has Rove writ large all over it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 17 May 08 - 11:19 AM I don't know that I'd write McCain off. When you look at how easily Obama won all of the states in the deep south, he won it with upwards of 90% of the black vote. I think he'll get the same number of votes down there in general that he got in the primary. Everybody else will either not vote for president, stay home, or go for McCain. Personally, I've been thinking of voting for everything on the ballet except the office of president, and just leaving that blank, or voting for the Green candidate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 17 May 08 - 11:34 AM I'm not writing McCain off. Not by a long shot. In fact, if being a Republican aligned with Bush on the war doesn't kill him off, nothing will. And there is still a good chance nothing will, IMO. I think there is a very real chance the American electorate will give the Dems landslide victories to take complete control back of the House and Senate, many state houses & governorships, but still deny them White House. I think there is a very real chance of that scenario being the one we wake up to come November 5th. But as it stands right now, the Dems, either Obama or Clinton, would beat McCain if the election were being held today. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 17 May 08 - 12:07 PM To address a few of your--unsupported--points, Rig 1) Emergency rooms--many illegals are reluctant to take advantage of emergency health care, for fear of apprehension by the authorities. 2) Illegal immigrants who collect a paycheck also pay payroll and Social Security taxes. They are lopsidedly too young to take advantage of Social Security. And since they are illegal they would not get Social Security anyway. 3) You have no idea the extent to which the homebuyers are legal or illegal--or rich US- born non-Hispanic speculators, who've been flipping houses for years--and just now are getting caught. You're good at scare tactics--as all propagandists are. A bit thin on facts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Q as guest Date: 17 May 08 - 01:20 PM More digression- Construction labor- In Alberta, to work as a carpenter, one must be a certified journeyman, a registered apprentice, or holds a recognized trade certificate. Casual labor can only act as helpers, etc. The same is true for all other trades. Apprenticeship for carpenter 4 years on the job training, and 8 weeks of technial training each year. Is not the same demanded by the licensing boards in the States? Anyone who builds a house with unskilled or unapproved labor is just stupid; it is doubtful that the house would pass the necessary inspections. The letters I quoted were by the head of the California Academy of Family Physicians, and a medical student- The NY Times staff did not write them. Rig-'s assertions are nonsense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 17 May 08 - 01:37 PM Q - I've been in the construction industry for over 40 years. There is nothing in California or Oregon that compells anyone to be a member of a union, a guild, be certified as a journeyman, or any of that stuff. Check it out. Contractors have to have licenses, and bonds, and etc. but there are a lot of unlicensed contractors out there as well. Re: The NYT article, they just didn't talk about the problems at emergency rooms, but you can read about them at any time in most newspapers around the country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 17 May 08 - 01:38 PM "2) Illegal immigrants who collect a paycheck also pay payroll and Social Security taxes. They are lopsidedly too young to take advantage of Social Security. And since they are illegal they would not get Social Security anyway." Not true, Ron. Most of these people work under the table for cash. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 17 May 08 - 07:06 PM According to Pew Research, 72% of the American public is against the Democratic party & MSM drive to push Clinton out of the primaries. Of course, the Democrats have never been known to follow the will of the public, so I'm sure they'll just keep crowing for Clinton to leave. Apparently, no one has noticed the MSM has the biggest incentive for making the horse race "divisive" and "negative" and all that crap. It's called "the ratings". Divisive elections make for juicy coverage. But the arrogance of presumption involved in the MSM declaring a candidate who has won a majority of the popular vote "dead" just beggars belief. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 17 May 08 - 07:23 PM I don't believe she has, in fact, won any such thing, Fantz. The delegate count at present: Barack Obama Pledged: 1612 Superdelegates: 292 Total: 1,904 Hillary Clinton Pledged: 1443 Superdelegates: 274 Total: 1,717 Popular Vote (w/FL) 16,680,827 48.4% 16,381,989 47.6% A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Peace Date: 17 May 08 - 07:25 PM Obama will be the next president. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 17 May 08 - 07:49 PM However, I entirely agree with you about the degraded performance of the American media. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 17 May 08 - 08:04 PM When the Florida and Michigan popular vote is included, she is ahead in the popular vote. Now, call me crazy, but my thing is if someone goes to all the trouble to get off their ass and show up at the polling booth as a legal voter, we should probably count their votes. Or we can do it the Obama Banana Republic way, which is to only count the votes that make you the winner. Which, incidentally, makes the Democrats look about as fair minded as the Myanmar junta. Unless you have a crush on Obama, of course, or work for the MSM. And Peace, I wouldn't be so sure Obama will be the next president. I agree he is likely to be the next president, but McCain is a damn formidable opponent, and it is already clear that Rove the Hard Man is already orchestrating on his behalf (whether he is in agreement with that or not). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bobert Date: 17 May 08 - 08:07 PM Wow!!! Lotta Daddy Bush stuff going on here... What exactly does eleite mean??? Being educated??? When did that become a friggin' sin... "These gol danged pin head, Volvo drivin', sandle wearin' elitist is the problem, Ralph..." Yeah, no friggin' wonder that the US is quickly becoming a place where educated people don't want to live and work... The "brain drain" in America is a direct result of Daddy Bush's teaching his kids well to put down anyone who has made the sacrifices and become highly educated... There are scientists who flat out won't work in the US because of this attack on eductated people... This is one fu*ked up mess that Daddy Bush and his kids have started and if the US is going to survive it had better start valuing education and quit the friggin' bashing of folks who have pushed to become educated... And for so called intellegent people here in Mudville to become shills for the Bush anti-intellect campaign is frightfully sickening... Tell ya what??? What you gonna do when the doctors quit on ya'??? Answer me that one... They seem to be the only intllectuals you folks haven't run the fu*k off... If that is elitist then sign this ol' hillbilly up... I am sick of ignorance... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 17 May 08 - 08:18 PM Oh, the irony. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 17 May 08 - 08:20 PM Fanz: This not a national election, air-head. This is a Democrat Party primary in which the party--an organization--defines a process for choosing a candidate for an election. The Party and the Flordia and Michigan principles of the party made an agreement about how this was going to go down, and as a result of that agreement, when the two states rescheduled against the rules, the party told them their primary votes wouldn't count--and as a result Obama did not campaign in either state, and wasn't even on the ballot, because he was playing by the rules. These voters have NOT been disenfranchised. I don't know who was in the decision the state party members made to break the agreement with the DNC people, but it is pretty clear that a ballot with only one candidate on it is not a fair electoral process. Or do you not see that? What do you think would be a fair solution to the fact that the MI and FL Democrats are now complaining their delgations are being snubbed, despite the fact that they clearly decided this would be the consequence they preferred? Sometimes your rhetorical armwaving is pure Bolshie, ya know that? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 17 May 08 - 08:38 PM So, Amos--how did you get Howard Dean's job? And BTW Amos, I sure as shit don't need the likes of a spineless party man like yourself to tell me what a disenfranchised voter is or isn't, thank you very much. You are such a phony hypocrit! If it is Ohio in 2004, it is a travesty not to be tolerated. If it is Florida in 2000, it is a travesty not to be tolerated. If it is Michigan or Florida in 2008? Well, that isn't the same, right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 17 May 08 - 09:29 PM Silly airhead--those were national elections, where the citizen's franchise is guaranteed by Federal law. If you don't see the difference, then all your steam is about as weighty as a whistling teapot. As for being spineless, and a party man, I don't think so. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 07:54 AM "Most of these people work under the table for cash." Some do. Any company which itself has to file tax returns cannot afford to hire people on this basis however--serious consequences if they were discovered. So they do not. It's nowhere near as black and white as you paint it, Rig. As usual, your facts are missing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 08:34 AM Janet-- I had thought you were too intelligent to fall for the "FL and MI disenfranchised" canard. I'll try not to overestimate you in the future. 1) Your girl Hillary herself explicitly endorsed the idea that FL and MI votes would not count--before she "won" them herself. It's only since then that we've heard the whining about "disenfranchisement". 2) Her own campaign chairman said in January it would be a 17-state primary season--Hillary's campaign expected it to be over when she disposed of Obama on "Super Tuesday"--so did not plan at all beyond that. ( Not exactly the best advertisement for a president--who really should be able to plan for more than one contingency). But when he said that, it would seem that 33 states would have been "disenfranchised" according to the Hillary plan. Yet obviously that did not bother her people--or Hillary herself. 3) It's a tempest in a teapot, at this point. I've read that the Michigan Democratic party has offered a deal whereby she gets 69 delegates and he gets 59. And the Florida party solution has to do with halving the number--so she will come out 29 ahead in FL. He'll still be comfortably ahead. Time for even you to come to terms with the fact that he ran a much better and more innovative campaign--harnessing the power of the Net to raise money in small amounts from huge numbers of people, thereby giving them a stake in his success. His campaign was also more perceptive, and far more positive than that of Team Clinton. She had all the advantages when she started--and she threw them away. He has won this contest fair and square. One obvious aspect of this--his team recognized, right from the start---, possibly from his experience in Chicago politics, where numbers are important-- that they could pile up lots of delegates in caucuses--especially in the period right after "Super Tuesday" . Her team could have done the same--after all, in 2007, she had more money, more name recognition, and more delegates already lined up--including the Democratic "Establishment" most places. But they squandered their money on pricy hotels, Mark Penn, and other necessities. And on top of that she alienated the antiwar movement by refusing to admit she was wrong in voting to authorize Bush to use force against Iraq. She had scads of opportunities to rectify this, including several explicit invitations in debates. But she declined to do so, thinking she could "triangulate" the electorate right from the start---run from the beginning as if she were in the general election, not bothering to actually address the desires of her own party first. Perhaps the "triangulation" was based on advice from Bill--who's been full of wonderful ideas this primary season. She--and he--guessed-- spectacularly-- wrong. And they have paid the price. And your accusation of misogynistic attitudes being behind her loss is also-- not to put too fine a point on it--total drivel. There are many strong women who could have run a better campaign--and gotten far more support--and that I and many other Obama supporters would have been pleased to support--and will be pleased to support in the future. Nancy Pelosi leaps to mind. The first requirement this campaign season was to be strongly against the Iraq war. She blew even this first point. And that in itself was enough to kill her chances. Her refusal to admit she was wrong in the 2002 Iraq vote--and her backing GWB in his saber-rattling against Iran--forced the anti-war movement to look elsewhere for a home. They tried Kucinich and some others. But when it came down to only HRC and Obama, no question where the antiwar movement was going to go. And it ain't Hillary. Sounds like classic sour grapes on your part. Unsurprisingly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 18 May 08 - 08:38 AM Ron, if you're talking about companies operating facilities like meat packing plants, yes the illegal alien needs to steal somebody's social security number, and work on that basis, but it was my understanding that we were talking about construction. The "company," as you put it, might be a developer, or he/she could be a general contractor. In either case, the work is let to a long series of sub-contractors--site development, framing, concrete, roofing, dry-wall, painting, plumbing, electrical. The illegal aliens are usually working for these subcontractors, and that's where they're expenses are buried. In California, during the recession of the early 1990's, a large number of the plumbers and electrictians were laundering money for crack cocaine dealers. They dealt strictly in cash. They'd buy all of their supplies and materials for Home Depot and Lowes, for cash, and pay their people in cash, and they didn't need to make a profit at all. The profit was in the coke. An honest plumber didn't have a chance. These are realities you won't find in Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 08:50 AM So Amos, it is just fine with you to have banana republic voting standards, so long as it is at the state level? Ron, no offense or anything, but I am REALLY tired of your propagandizing for Obama. Thanks, I'm happy to wait until May 31st to let the DNC Rules Committee sort it all out, rather than have you shove your propaganda down my throat. And just so you know, Ron--I don't read 98% of the crap you post, much less cut and past here. And your demands for "proof" are a joke. You come off like a bad parody of Elliot Ness. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 09:04 AM Fascinating, Janet, that you have not even the beginnings of a counter-argument to my evaluation of the situation--which, as usual, is based on facts and logic, not frustration and bitterness, which seems to be the only song you know. Your response says worlds. Don't forget the sedative. And more exercise. And more sleep. We're only looking out for your best interests. And thanks for staying out of the gutter. See, you can do it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 09:07 AM "Large percentage" of plumbers and electricians were laundering money for crack dealers. Gee, I wonder why that sounds like yet another unsubstantiated accusation. Source and date, please. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 09:07 AM Ron, do you have a drug problem? I ask, because you talk about drugs a lot around here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 09:17 AM Janet- No, not likely. Unless you count music. I'm ferociously addicted to that. What kind of music do you do? It's just that since your meter appears to be stuck on outrage--and, as Bobert as pointed out, you're sorely lacking a sense of humor-- we around here worry for your blood pressure. Now how about some actual facts and logic to contradict my reading of the current political scene? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 09:21 AM I'm not too worried about my sense of humor, Ron. But I do understand why folks like you and Bobert are so concerned, because it is quite simple for most of us to have a laugh at your expense. Have a nice day, Ron and work on those kindness skills! We know how hard it is for you to put nice and kind together in practice. But we think you really need to keep working on it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 09:29 AM Janet-- "Most of us". Uh, not exactly. Unless you're really a split personality-- more than Bobert, Amos, I and many others thought. Why don't you realize we're only looking out for your best interests? Constant outrage is just not good for your health. But I'm still waiting for even the beginning of a rebuttal to my evaluation of the current US political scene. Don't worry, I have lots of patience. I'll check in from time to time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 09:32 AM Janet-- And please tell us, when you get a chance, what sort of music you like to do. This is after all a music site--and Bobert, Amos, I and the vast majority of other Mudcatters do a lot of it. And it's endlessly satisfying. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 10:05 AM My precioussssssss.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Bobert Date: 18 May 08 - 10:55 AM "...a laugh..." Somehow I don't see you being able to laugh at anything, Fantz... b~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 10:57 AM hehehehe |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 11:16 AM Sounds like a bitter laugh to me, Janet . And where's the answer to my question re: the current political scene? Exactly why is my reading incorrect? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 11:25 AM Here is Ron from the 'Popular Views on Obama' thread this morning: "OK--still waiting for any rebuttal for this, by anybody who badmouths Obama's chances." hehehehe |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 11:27 AM Janet-- A few monosyllables are not usually considered a rebuttal of anything--except perhaps in your circles. Perhaps you need to learn this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 11:33 AM I say a little prayer for you... "May I have the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, The courage to change the things I can, And the wisdom to know the difference." Accepting the things one cannot change is a very important skill to develop in order to reduce stress and stay healthy, Ron. Get back to us when you are ready to do your work, and we'll be happy to recommend some professionals in your area. My precioussssssss...hehehe |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 12:18 PM Janet-- There's only one person on Mudcat whose meter is always set on "Outrage". Clue: look in the mirror. And the fact that you cannot come up with any rebuttal to my reading of the current political scene says all we need to know about your grasp of the situation. Sorry--no more time to spend in your delightful company for a while. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 18 May 08 - 12:30 PM Nothing Banana Republic about it, dumkopf. Not a matter of state or Federal level, either. That is a stupid alteration. It has to do with the party versus the state. The primary election is managed, run by, designed by, and for the benefit of the Democratic or Republican party in its quest for a nominee. If there is an argument wihtin the party that legitimately disqualifies a vote, it is not a legal matter but a party matter. General elections, at state and federal levels, are a different matter altogether. Neve rmind, I'm done pouring more hot air into a crowded skull. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 18 May 08 - 12:51 PM "'Large percentage" of plumbers and electricians were laundering money for crack dealers... Gee, I wonder why that sounds like yet another unsubstantiated accusation... Source and date, please.'" Ron - This might come as a complete shock to you, but I didn't hire on here as your personal research libratian. Look it up, it's all over the place. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 12:54 PM "It has to do with the party versus the state. The primary election is managed, run by, designed by, and for the benefit of the Democratic or Republican party in its quest for a nominee." Not when the taxpayer foots the bill for the party, Amos. Sorry, but homey don't play dat tune. Of course, the state has a huge stake in clean elections. But the solutions to our electoral clusterfucks in the US are evolving. 50 years from now, our descendants will look back on this electoral era and wonder why we put up with and paid for this level of electoral corruption. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 18 May 08 - 01:08 PM Are you saying, dearest colleague, that the Democratic Party--perish the thought--is capable of corruption!!!!!??? But, seriously, are you saying that by making a rule that says if P, then Q, and finding P, therefore implementing Q is tantamount to corruption? How on earth do you reckon that? Florida and Michigan both, for whatever reasons, decided to reschedule their primaries in direct nonconformance with agreed upon rules of conduct, yes? Or do I have that part wrong as well? That is like going 80 in a 35 zone and calling the cop who pulls you over a fascist pig for not understanding that you were just having fun and weren't endangering anyone. Or like skipping all your classes and calling the prof a capitalist tool because he fails you for the course. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 01:11 PM To say your logic is convoluted is an understatement, Amos. You are, by your history here, utterly incapable of thinking outside that wee, conventional box you inhabit. You can't even conceive of an American society that isn't controlled by the duopoly. So why bother your pointy little head trying to figure it out? There, there go have a nice Sunday rest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 18 May 08 - 01:20 PM Aw Jaysus, Fantz, obvously you see right through me, don't you? I am revealed tot he world as a pointy-headed, strictly in the box, kool-aid drinking, numb-nutted conformist who cannot imagine a world not owned and run by the two-party system. You, on the other hand, are a free-spirit, free-thinking, steely-eyed visionary who sees right through the clouds of corruption and dismal duplicity being foisted on the American people by fools like me. You stand with history's heros, and I lie with the dross of yesteryears conventional thinkers.Come the revolution, I shall be cast down, or maybe shot, for my middle-class bourgeois myopia; you will be raised up as a loyal charter member of the New World. Is that's what's botherin' you, Bunky? Have some ice cream. It might fix everything (except your love life) Back to more rational propositions, what is it about the loop with Michigan and Florida disqualifying themselves that you see as corrupt, specifically? That they didn't take a stand for a worker's utopia? A A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: GUEST,Fantasma Date: 18 May 08 - 01:29 PM Awwww, Amos--I would never shoot you! That would be far too quick, and I've never been one for the quickies. But then, I know that's the only occassion some of you old boys have been able to rise to even with your Viagra, for decades or more now. But still, does every conversation with you old timers have to be about your penis problems? Besides, I'd much rather drag you behind my car for a long distance, watching you kick and scream your way into the Brave New World. :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 18 May 08 - 04:09 PM I have concluded that the problem that lurks behind your erratic emotional roller-coaster, Fantz, is a badly sporadic delivery of oxytocin. Regarding never being one for quickies, I am forced to assume this derives from a lack of opportunity. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 08:24 PM Janet-- Still waiting for any rebuttal of my view of the current political scene. And by the way: re: cut and paste: I have never cut and pasted anything on Mudcat. I give direct quotes or put it in my own words. But I'm flattered that you think something I wrote was from the WSJ. I'm not up to their standard. Or perhaps it was your usual careless reading that made you think I had cut and pasted something. Be that as it may, I do believe in reading, thinking and assimilating--and in facts and logic, rather than unrelenting cynicism. You might try them some time. Just a friendly suggestion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 18 May 08 - 08:56 PM Rig-- It's simple. Unfortunately your track record of accuracy--or in fact anything but smearing, which is without question your true expertise--is, not to put too fine a point on it, wretched. Therefore you have two choices. Either you can provide sources, with date, for any allegation you make--or you have, bluntly, no credibility. And your postings will be treated accordingly. Your call. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 18 May 08 - 11:32 PM Ron - Treat them as you will. The fact that my personal observations don't show up in Rupert Murdoch's newspaper says more about the paper than it say's about my observations. All of this goes to the issue as to why Barack Obama will never grasp the reality of how to communicate with white working class voters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 19 May 08 - 08:39 PM Rig-- I've explained it to you more than once. You need credibility. At this point you have none. You can sneer at the WSJ all you want. But I recognize bias when I see it. You know I was really annoyed when Murdoch took over the WSJ. And the moment I sense creeping Fox-News-ism, I will drop it like a hot potato. But so far, it appears he's smart enough to not destroy his own crown jewel. The reporting--as opposed to the always Neanderthal editorials-- has not been influenced in the slightest. For my money it's still the best in the world. And if you think you have a better source, please share it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 19 May 08 - 08:56 PM Rig-- And what the WSJ says has exactly zero influence on Obama's troubles with white working-class voters--that's yet another of your classic smears--or non sequiturs. Sometimes it seems you are capable of nothing else. But those troubles can--and will--be addressed by direct contrast of Bush (and now McCain) on issues which concern those voters. Specifically health care, loss of jobs, and the war in Iraq. It was never likely that Obama would get large numbers of voters in WV or in the PA mountains, for instance. But anybody capable of thinking should realize that Hillary was not about to get them either in the fall--against McCain--are you kidding? Her supporters--like your good self?-- were living in a fool's paradise to assume that anybody who voted for her against Obama would support her against an authentic American hero with more military experience than any presidential nominee for decades. But Obama has great sources for votes elsewhere. And Hillary, as I've said over and over, thanks to her position as the most polarizing candidate and her stupidly poisoning the well she intended to drink from, had no chance against McCain. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 19 May 08 - 10:19 PM "And the moment I sense creeping Fox-News-ism, I will drop it like a hot potato." Ron - You're like the frog in the slow boiling pot on this one. By the time you realize they've led you down the primrose path, Obama might be president, and it'll be too late. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 19 May 08 - 10:26 PM "Specifically health care, loss of jobs, and the war in Iraq." Ron - In the words of the worlds most pathetic scum-bag-pig-fucker, "there you go again." What matters to white working class voters is not what they think they can get, but what they're losing. That's how it's different than Jeremiah Wright and the ghettos of Chicago. They're losing their dignity, their homes, their way of life, and their culture. They are never going to vote for what they preceive to be a black Muslim for Indonesia. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 20 May 08 - 10:05 PM And they obviously feel that way in Kentucky as well! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 20 May 08 - 11:49 PM Sorry, Rig, that's yet more drivel. Obama is not well known to many people at this point. But, as I've said before, that can easily be remedied between now and November. There are some he could never get to vote for him no matter what he had said. But many can be educated. As Balladeer says, Obama is not so threatening as some seem to think--and can't be stereotyped by a few absurd allegations from a pastor from whom he has parted company--much as you seem to delight in doing just that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 21 May 08 - 08:34 AM Ron - If Obama is not well known by now, I don't think there's much hope for him. By the way, have you checked out his new preacher? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 21 May 08 - 11:15 AM Still think the Constitution is misguided about forbidding religous tests for public office, eh, Rig? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 21 May 08 - 11:44 AM Amos - Why would you think I thought that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 21 May 08 - 11:53 AM Because you keep bringing pastors and churches up, Rig. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Riginslinger Date: 21 May 08 - 01:19 PM Actually, I was talking about preachers, but I'd be happy to quit talking about them if they'd all go away. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 21 May 08 - 02:09 PM Well, I could not agree with you more. How refreshing it would be, some day, to hear a viable, attractive, dynamic and charismatic candidate say to the hustings, "My religious beliefs are private, and are no-one's business but my own." And still win the support of millions because he was smart and able on matters of the commons, where we need it so much more. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Ron Davies Date: 21 May 08 - 10:16 PM Anybody who thinks Obama is a Moslem obviously doesn't know him very well. That's exactly the sort of thing that can be remedied. And he has to repeat, over and over, that he does not endorse Wright's outlandish statements--nor share the rage that caused them. It's ironic--since the vast majority of presidential candidates do this far too much--but Obama has to wrap himself in the flag as many times as possible. He has the right idea--repeat constantly how much he owes to the US--that only here would he have the chance he now has. And for many people, this will ease their concerns. Obviously for the racists there is no hope--but they are a small sliver of the population. This is one situation where--for most voters- familiarity will not breed contempt but comfort. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.? From: Amos Date: 21 May 08 - 10:49 PM It amazes me how many people do not recognize that propositions of hate are much more likely to contain untruths that propositions of reason. It's like not knowing the difference between a red light and a green one. You do not often get truth from people who are filled with hate or anger, especially those who are in those states chronically. A |
