Political Caching

[+Miragee]

<snip>

 

Personally, I like to treat social caching like sitting around the dinner table. No political or religious discussion needed.

 

<snip>

That is the way I like it. I cache with several people who hold very different political opinions from my own, but the subject never comes up. I prefer it that way so we stay "happy cachers."

[+TrailGators]

<snip> Personally, I like to treat social caching like sitting around the dinner table. No political or religious discussion needed. <snip>

That is the way I like it. I cache with several people who hold very different political opinions from my own, but the subject never comes up. I prefer it that way so we stay "happy cachers."

If we get back to the original post, I don't think discussing "illegal" immigration would bother 99% of cachers. If we have to quit talking about things that only bother 1% of the people then we have taken political correctness to an ridiculous level. Edited June 26, 2007 by TrailGators

[+simpjkee]

Back off topic: I do find it odd that illegal immigration is considered to be a political topic. If it were any other crime, it would simply be a discussion regarding the disregarding of the law.

 

to clartify, I think "illegal immigration" is considered political in this thread, because I titled the thread "Political Caching" since the original point of the thread was discussing the political viewpoint regarding illegal immigration (written on the cache), not illegal immigration as being against the law

Edited June 26, 2007 by simpjkee

[+TrailGators]

Back off topic: I do find it odd that illegal immigration is considered to be a political topic. If it were any other crime, it would simply be a discussion regarding the disregarding of the law.

 

to clartify, I think "illegal immigration" is considered political in this thread, because I titled the thread "Political Caching" since the original point of the thread was discussing the political viewpoint regarding illegal immigration (written on the cache), not illegal immigration as being against the law

What do you mean by "political" viewpoint? Illegal immigration is a non-partisan issue....

[Clan Riffster]

Starting a thread about shoplifting, and calling it political, doesn't quite make shoplifting a political topic.

[+simpjkee]

Starting a thread about shoplifting, and calling it political, doesn't quite make shoplifting a political topic.

 

yeah, but there aren't millions of shoplifters and shoplifter supporters pressuring politicians to alter rules regarding shoplifting. I think everyone is on the same page that shoplifting should be illegal for the time being.

[+simpjkee]

Back off topic: I do find it odd that illegal immigration is considered to be a political topic. If it were any other crime, it would simply be a discussion regarding the disregarding of the law.

 

to clartify, I think "illegal immigration" is considered political in this thread, because I titled the thread "Political Caching" since the original point of the thread was discussing the political viewpoint regarding illegal immigration (written on the cache), not illegal immigration as being against the law

What do you mean by "political" viewpoint? Illegal immigration is a non-partisan issue....

 

political views on how to handle the illegal imigration issue. For example the "guest worker program" right now is a political viewpoint regarding the issue of illegal immigration.

 

an issue doesn't have to be partisan to be political.

[+boda]

Back off topic: I do find it odd that illegal immigration is considered to be a political topic. If it were any other crime, it would simply be a discussion regarding the disregarding of the law.

 

to clartify, I think "illegal immigration" is considered political in this thread, because I titled the thread "Political Caching" since the original point of the thread was discussing the political viewpoint regarding illegal immigration (written on the cache), not illegal immigration as being against the law

What do you mean by "political" viewpoint? Illegal immigration is a non-partisan issue....

The area of illegal immigration couldn't be any more political right now, and it is very partisan. Not necessarily aligned by political party, but political none-the-less.

 

More on topic. I cache in the local So Cal deserts at times. I have seen religious tracts and a few political items. I have left them all in the cache and moved on. I have yet to find an illegal immigrant in a cache; next to one, but not in one.

[Clan Riffster]

yeah, but there aren't millions of shoplifters and shoplifter supporters pressuring politicians to alter rules regarding shoplifting.

Actually, there are millions. Walk in any courthouse in this nation. See how long you have to wait to watch a theft case. Typically, it won't take too long. Once the hearing starts, you'll see at the minimum, one defendant and one lawyer trying to alter the rules, pressuring the elected officials we call judges. Often, the supporters of these defendants, AKA: family members, can be seen as well. Multiply the number of cases you see that day by the number of criminal courtrooms in the country. I bet it's pretty high.

[+simpjkee]

yeah, but there aren't millions of shoplifters and shoplifter supporters pressuring politicians to alter rules regarding shoplifting.

Actually, there are millions. Walk in any courthouse in this nation. See how long you have to wait to watch a theft case. Typically, it won't take too long. Once the hearing starts, you'll see at the minimum, one defendant and one lawyer trying to alter the rules, pressuring the elected officials we call judges. Often, the supporters of these defendants, AKA: family members, can be seen as well. Multiply the number of cases you see that day by the number of criminal courtrooms in the country. I bet it's pretty high.

 

of course, it is high, i guess shoplifting will become a political issue once the shoplifters put enough pressure on politicians to consider the legalization of shoplifting. eeehhhhhhhhh......you know what I mean.

[+flask]

like it or not, illegal immigrants for the most part form a kind of underclass that is often much abused. they often come to escape what we would consider intolerable conditions.

 

we take lot of things like clean water for granted.

 

sometimes we get to know these folks personally. they become real people to us. we want to help them.

 

shoplifters, for the most part, are simply thieves. sometimes when we get to know their stories we find people in desperate need and we want to help them, too.

 

immigration has always been linked to larger issues, though. it has always been tied up in job security, wages, language, racial prejudice, blah, blah, blah. it may be possible for individuals to consider the problems of immigration (neverind illegal immigration!) without being influenced by those factors, but it would be very, very silly of us to try to divorce the concepts from the political storm surrounding them.

 

it isn't always the same people and the same parties, but they keep being the same issues.

 

we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

[+TrailGators]

like it or not, illegal immigrants for the most part form a kind of underclass that is often much abused. they often come to escape what we would consider intolerable conditions.

 

we take lot of things like clean water for granted.

 

sometimes we get to know these folks personally. they become real people to us. we want to help them.

 

shoplifters, for the most part, are simply thieves. sometimes when we get to know their stories we find people in desperate need and we want to help them, too.

 

immigration has always been linked to larger issues, though. it has always been tied up in job security, wages, language, racial prejudice, blah, blah, blah. it may be possible for individuals to consider the problems of immigration (neverind illegal immigration!) without being influenced by those factors, but it would be very, very silly of us to try to divorce the concepts from the political storm surrounding them.

 

it isn't always the same people and the same parties, but they keep being the same issues.

 

we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

We are talking "illegal." Do laws matter anymore?

[+simpjkee]

like it or not, illegal immigrants for the most part form a kind of underclass that is often much abused. they often come to escape what we would consider intolerable conditions.

 

we take lot of things like clean water for granted.

 

sometimes we get to know these folks personally. they become real people to us. we want to help them.

 

shoplifters, for the most part, are simply thieves. sometimes when we get to know their stories we find people in desperate need and we want to help them, too.

 

immigration has always been linked to larger issues, though. it has always been tied up in job security, wages, language, racial prejudice, blah, blah, blah. it may be possible for individuals to consider the problems of immigration (neverind illegal immigration!) without being influenced by those factors, but it would be very, very silly of us to try to divorce the concepts from the political storm surrounding them.

 

it isn't always the same people and the same parties, but they keep being the same issues.

 

we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

We are talking "illegal." Do laws matter anymore?

 

laws matter, but laws can also be revised and such if needbe. I think theres enough people who see the need to consider revision (not saying it will happen).

 

Like prohibition. if hardcore law abiders like yourself (i mean no disrespect by that) had their way, liquor would still be illegal.

 

Mary J is illegal, but obviously thats about to change soon, too.

[Clan Riffster]

we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

If you want to maintain some level of accuracy, you should add the term "illegally" between the words "Irish" and "into". If you just want to promote your personal, and hugely inaccurate strawman agenda, leave it like it is. In the 1840's, there were groups who did not like people from a particular nation. In this decade, there are groups who don't like people committing crimes. How anybody competant enough to operate a keyboard can confuse the two is beyond me, so I have to assume that your misinterpretation of the facts is deliberate. I dislike crime, as a general rule. I also dislike criminals, as a general rule. (Not you, Criminal!) I have absolutely no dislike for people from other countries.

[Clan Riffster]

laws matter, but laws can also be revised and such if needbe.

Just curious. Do you, personally, think our borders should be open to anyone? I realize that many of your posts were simply playing Devil's advocate, and I was wondering how you really felt.

[+simpjkee]

laws matter, but laws can also be revised and such if needbe.

Just curious. Do you, personally, think our borders should be open to anyone? I realize that many of your posts were simply playing Devil's advocate, and I was wondering how you really felt.

 

 

 

 

disclaimer: i am completely neutral, i'm just pointing out a few facts.

 

nobody is ever completely neutral.

 

for the sake of this forum and this thread, i am neutral. of course if you want to hop over to a political forum i'll be happy to express my views

[+simpjkee]

actually forget that. I think the moderators are doing a fine job of staying out of this one so I might as well share my view.

 

No, I absolutely do not think our borders should be open to anyone. That is absolutely foolish. I will say however that a "guest worker" or some sort of probationary period is plausible.

 

My sister married the son of a legal mexican immigrant(mom) and an illegal mexican immigrant(dad). The three of them are absolutely exceptional people. The father works his rump off and has always worked his rump off for his family. His son I have become to know personally and he is very nearly the nicest guy I've ever met. An exceptional addition to our family. The mother unfortunately passed on due to cancer two and a half years ago. She was the first person in her family to recieve a college degree. I know that the father was quite worried of being "caught" and deported once his wife passed on. Luckily that has yet to happen.

 

I believe 100% that illegal immigration needs to be addressed and that the neverending flow of illegals into our country needs to be stopped. But (and of course this is a big but) if it werent for illegal immigrants, my brother in law, his father, and his mother, would have never become part of my family (unless you believe in chance meetings and such, but of course thats another discussion)

 

In the end, if a mexican wants to come to america and work their rump off for all the freedoms we take advantage then they should be able without fear of deportation or hate from anti immigrant american zealots, and discrimination, etc. If some no good mexican wants to come over illegal take advantage of us and such then send his rump back. Of course, seperating the two is tough. I'll leave that up to the politicians and such. As far as I'm concerned, my uncle in law has earned his spot in america and he is an admirable addition to the country. But for now, he lives in fear of being "outed". Thats a shame.

Edited June 27, 2007 by simpjkee

[+simpjkee]

sorry moderator, saying the 3 letter "a" word was an honest mistake

[+TrailGators]

we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

If you want to maintain some level of accuracy, you should add the term "illegally" between the words "Irish" and "into". If you just want to promote your personal, and hugely inaccurate strawman agenda, leave it like it is. In the 1840's, there were groups who did not like people from a particular nation. In this decade, there are groups who don't like people committing crimes. How anybody competant enough to operate a keyboard can confuse the two is beyond me, so I have to assume that your misinterpretation of the facts is deliberate. I dislike crime, as a general rule. I also dislike criminals, as a general rule. (Not you, Criminal!) I have absolutely no dislike for people from other countries.

The ignorance was starting to get my Irish up a notch. I'm glad you responded CR.

[+BlueDeuce]

I found a cache today. Signed the log and went home.

 

Edit: oops too much about geocaching. My bad.

Edited June 27, 2007 by BlueDeuce

[+simpjkee]

I found a cache today. Signed the log and went home.

 

*yawn* bo-ring

 

[+BlueDeuce]

I found a cache today. Signed the log and went home.

 

*yawn* bo-ring

 

 

I found a cache today. Signed the log and went home.

 

Edit: oops too much about geocaching. My bad.

[+simpjkee]

I found a cache today. Signed the log and went home.

 

*yawn* bo-ring

 

 

I found a cache today. Signed the log and went home.

 

Edit: oops too much about geocaching. My bad.

 

no need to apologize. you can talk about geocaching in this thread if you want to.

[+flask]

i take it that i'm either being accused of being duplicitous, or playing fast and loose with the facts.

 

my intent was simply to point out and maybe give some causes and historical relationships with the reasons why what might otherwise be a simple legal matter gets politicized.

 

since i think someone above was fishing for my real opinion, ill have to say that i am against crime (illegal immigration included) AND i am against the immigration laws as they stand. these two items do not coexist peacefully.

 

i do not mean to imply that all people who are against illegal immigration are racist, but any fool can see that many are. of course, many people don't think racism is a bad thing either, and it too gets politicized.

 

many of the arguments about the irish immigrants are the same ones that people are using today about the mexicans, even though the irish were legal.

 

(i am not quite resisting the temptation to say that i don't see how anyone competent enogh to use a keyboard does not know this. i would like to be resisting it, but i am not that good a person and i'm sick of being accused of being stupid or a liar.)

 

i do understand that there is a significant cost to illegal immigration, and that many people are opposed to it on those grounds.

 

in my lovely ideal world we all live in a socialist paradise with no borders. take care to note that socialism is no good at all the moment it's mandatory. only an idiot would think this is a practical idea.

 

since i am not an idiot, i'm left trying to work out my little corner of the world where maybe people will play fair and share nicely. i haven't got a lot of good answers, but i find that the best work gets done by people who come together and try to do the best they can with what they've got.

 

because i have beliefs that place me wildly to the right and left of the political spectrum, i am often in leaugue with and at odds with the most surprising people.

 

but i do not like being insulted. i do not like being dismissed as a strawman. it's an unfair tactic.

[+BlueDeuce]

no need to apologize. you can talk about geocaching in this thread if you want to.

 

I would but I don't want to sidetrack the conversation.

[+simpjkee]

no need to apologize. you can talk about geocaching in this thread if you want to.

 

I would but I don't want to sidetrack the conversation.

 

suit yerself

[+simpjkee]

i do not like being dismissed as a strawman.

 

if someone called me a strawman I would have absolutely no clue what they were talking about.

[vtmtnman]

like it or not, illegal immigrants for the most part form a kind of underclass that is often much abused. they often come to escape what we would consider intolerable conditions.

 

we take lot of things like clean water for granted.

 

sometimes we get to know these folks personally. they become real people to us. we want to help them.

 

shoplifters, for the most part, are simply thieves. sometimes when we get to know their stories we find people in desperate need and we want to help them, too.

 

immigration has always been linked to larger issues, though. it has always been tied up in job security, wages, language, racial prejudice, blah, blah, blah. it may be possible for individuals to consider the problems of immigration (neverind illegal immigration!) without being influenced by those factors, but it would be very, very silly of us to try to divorce the concepts from the political storm surrounding them.

 

it isn't always the same people and the same parties, but they keep being the same issues.

 

we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

We are talking "illegal." Do laws matter anymore?

This is proof that you cannot be against ILLEGAL immigration without being considered against ALL immigration.The difference then was blatant hate and racism.Today it's laziness to do appriate paperwork.

 

The thing I always found amusing was watching anti-illegal immigration demonstrations on the news.Ummm,hello,if you're protesting illegal immigration laws,probably 90% of them are illegals.Send INS down to the rally and start checking green cards.You'd probably get half of them there.

 

Oh opps,my bad...that sounds like profiling(Or probably racist in someway).What WAS I thinking,this being 21st century America and all. Surely I'll be judged harshly.

[+TrailGators]

i take it that i'm either being accused of being duplicitous, or playing fast and loose with the facts.

 

my intent was simply to point out and maybe give some causes and historical relationships with the reasons why what might otherwise be a simple legal matter gets politicized.

 

since i think someone above was fishing for my real opinion, ill have to say that i am against crime (illegal immigration included) AND i am against the immigration laws as they stand. these two items do not coexist peacefully.

 

i do not mean to imply that all people who are against illegal immigration are racist, but any fool can see that many are. of course, many people don't think racism is a bad thing either, and it too gets politicized.

 

many of the arguments about the irish immigrants are the same ones that people are using today about the mexicans, even though the irish were legal.

 

(i am not quite resisting the temptation to say that i don't see how anyone competent enogh to use a keyboard does not know this. i would like to be resisting it, but i am not that good a person and i'm sick of being accused of being stupid or a liar.)

 

i do understand that there is a significant cost to illegal immigration, and that many people are opposed to it on those grounds.

 

in my lovely ideal world we all live in a socialist paradise with no borders. take care to note that socialism is no good at all the moment it's mandatory. only an idiot would think this is a practical idea.

 

since i am not an idiot, i'm left trying to work out my little corner of the world where maybe people will play fair and share nicely. i haven't got a lot of good answers, but i find that the best work gets done by people who come together and try to do the best they can with what they've got.

 

because i have beliefs that place me wildly to the right and left of the political spectrum, i am often in leaugue with and at odds with the most surprising people.

 

but i do not like being insulted. i do not like being dismissed as a strawman. it's an unfair tactic.

 

I think if you were less ambiguous then people would be less likely to misunderstand what you truly mean. The bottom line people need to adhere to the law until the law is changed. They should show they follow the process and get work visas like everyone else does. Crossing the border and popping out babies is an overt act of defiance. I wish we would do what Jeb Bush proposed and change the Constitution to not allow anyone born here illegally to automatically become a citizen. Also implying that we are racist is absurd. But if one group of people continues to break the law then they open themselves up to profiling, resentment and other negative reactions. There are good reasons the law is there. Follow it and the law-abiding citizens are happier and we can live in peace with the people that come here and also follow the laws. Edited June 27, 2007 by TrailGators

[+flask]

like it or not, illegal immigrants for the most part form a kind of underclass that is often much abused. they often come to escape what we would consider intolerable conditions.

 

we take lot of things like clean water for granted.

 

sometimes we get to know these folks personally. they become real people to us. we want to help them.

 

shoplifters, for the most part, are simply thieves. sometimes when we get to know their stories we find people in desperate need and we want to help them, too.

 

immigration has always been linked to larger issues, though. it has always been tied up in job security, wages, language, racial prejudice, blah, blah, blah. it may be possible for individuals to consider the problems of immigration (neverind illegal immigration!) without being influenced by those factors, but it would be very, very silly of us to try to divorce the concepts from the political storm surrounding them.

 

it isn't always the same people and the same parties, but they keep being the same issues.

 

we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

We are talking "illegal." Do laws matter anymore?

This is proof that you cannot be against ILLEGAL immigration without being considered against ALL immigration.The difference then was blatant hate and racism.Today it's laziness to do appriate paperwork.

 

 

uh, no. refer to my post, above.

 

the problem with the illegals is not failure to do paperwork; it's that too many of them want to come in and CAN'T get appropriate paperwork done. so they take the risk that they won't get caught.

 

then there's the problem that they can't get good jobs so they end up sucking up social services. there are two scchools of thought: 1) let them have good jobs, or 2)quit giving them any social services. both of these solutions have merit.

 

racism still figures prominently these days, although it keeps a lower profile. we're not so squeaky clean as we pretend to be.

 

it tends to be a lot of legal friends, relatives, and liberal bleeding hearts at the rallies. if you're illegal, you like to keep your head down.

[vtmtnman]

like it or not, illegal immigrants for the most part form a kind of underclass that is often much abused. they often come to escape what we would consider intolerable conditions.

 

we take lot of things like clean water for granted.

 

sometimes we get to know these folks personally. they become real people to us. we want to help them.

 

shoplifters, for the most part, are simply thieves. sometimes when we get to know their stories we find people in desperate need and we want to help them, too.

 

immigration has always been linked to larger issues, though. it has always been tied up in job security, wages, language, racial prejudice, blah, blah, blah. it may be possible for individuals to consider the problems of immigration (neverind illegal immigration!) without being influenced by those factors, but it would be very, very silly of us to try to divorce the concepts from the political storm surrounding them.

 

it isn't always the same people and the same parties, but they keep being the same issues.

 

we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

We are talking "illegal." Do laws matter anymore?

This is proof that you cannot be against ILLEGAL immigration without being considered against ALL immigration.The difference then was blatant hate and racism.Today it's laziness to do appriate paperwork.

 

 

uh, no. refer to my post, above.

 

You posted while I was typing.

[+flask]

 

 

You posted while I was typing.

 

oh. well, that 'splains a lot, then.

[+TrailGators]

If you're illegal, you like to keep your head down.

Not true at all. The population of the city I live in is 25% illegals. The city estimates that it spends over 12 million/year for illegals. There are often rallies and none of them have their heads down. Most have relatives that support them. There is a clear sense of entitlement. The city passed a law to convict anyone that rents to illegals. Some idiot judge overturned it that so life goes on. I don't have any issues with Mexican Americans. There is absolutely no prejudice on my part and I have never dissed any. I have stated my issue very clearly.

[Clan Riffster]

i do not mean to imply that all people who are against illegal immigration are racist, but any fool can see that many are. of course, many people don't think racism is a bad thing either, and it too gets politicized.

I was wondering when you'd break out the race card. How is race an issue in illegal immigration? Do those who dislike the concept of a particular nation's laws being flaunted belong to one particular race? Do they dislike, mistreat or malign any particular race? Since the onus of your posts focus on Mexican nationals crossing the Northern border of their country, would you classify Mexican as a race? Would the French qualify as a separate race in your book? Italians? Scots? Peruvians? Perhaps our 'gubment' schools are failing to teach the definition of racism these days. Just a suggestion; If you need to apply "ism's" just to keep your foundering argument afloat, wouldn't "nationalism" be more accurate than "racism"? Personally, I don't like the concept of anybody violating another country's borders illegally, regardless of what race they might be.

[+flask]

i do not mean to imply that all people who are against illegal immigration are racist, but any fool can see that many are. of course, many people don't think racism is a bad thing either, and it too gets politicized.

I was wondering when you'd break out the race card. How is race an issue in illegal immigration? Do those who dislike the concept of a particular nation's laws being flaunted belong to one particular race? Do they dislike, mistreat or malign any particular race? Since the onus of your posts focus on Mexican nationals crossing the Northern border of their country, would you classify Mexican as a race? Would the French qualify as a separate race in your book? Italians? Scots? Peruvians? Perhaps our 'gubment' schools are failing to teach the definition of racism these days. Just a suggestion; If you need to apply "ism's" just to keep your foundering argument afloat, wouldn't "nationalism" be more accurate than "racism"? Personally, I don't like the concept of anybody violating another country's borders illegally, regardless of what race they might be.

 

this is kind of like calling me a straw man. you're not really engaging me. it is interesting that you do not make the claim about vtmtnman, who mentioned it above me.

 

i don't claim (if you whip out your handy-dandy reading comprehension) that the anti-illegal movement is racist, but that it has racist components. "nationalism" isn't usually properly used in reference to bias against nation. we usually use "racism" to describe that.

 

if your argument (and your intent) is that illegal immigration is wrong because it's expensive or dangerous or even just because you support law and order, you are not being racist.

 

if you are against it because you don't want more hispanics (or vietnamese, or kenyans...) here, it is racist. there are people of both stripe in the mix. you cannot have a full and fair discussion of it without acknowledging it.

 

and yes, i do place the majority of the focus on mexicans crossing our southern border. don't you? we don't have a lot of problems with canadians crossing illegally. mabe they do, but it isn't the hot button topic that mexicans and other hispancs are in the southern border states. folks in those states get pretty het up about it, and for a lot of different reasons.

 

what argument, exactly, do you think i'm making that's foundering? my essential point was to make some observations about how this issue becomes political. are you trying to argue that it's not political? perhaps you wish to assert that racial bias has nothing to do with the general issue? that it isn't a difficult problem? that it isn't related to the larger issue of the history of immigration? i think these were my salient points.

 

are you perhaps trying to tease out that i'm in favor of illegal immigration? that'd be a tough one, 'coz i'm not in favor of it. so what argument of mine is failing, exactly?

 

do you actually have a point other than to make weak attempts to cut me down? i do this for entertainment. i clip excerpts and send them to my friends.

[vtmtnman]

i do not mean to imply that all people who are against illegal immigration are racist, but any fool can see that many are. of course, many people don't think racism is a bad thing either, and it too gets politicized.

I was wondering when you'd break out the race card. How is race an issue in illegal immigration? Do those who dislike the concept of a particular nation's laws being flaunted belong to one particular race? Do they dislike, mistreat or malign any particular race? Since the onus of your posts focus on Mexican nationals crossing the Northern border of their country, would you classify Mexican as a race? Would the French qualify as a separate race in your book? Italians? Scots? Peruvians? Perhaps our 'gubment' schools are failing to teach the definition of racism these days. Just a suggestion; If you need to apply "ism's" just to keep your foundering argument afloat, wouldn't "nationalism" be more accurate than "racism"? Personally, I don't like the concept of anybody violating another country's borders illegally, regardless of what race they might be.

 

this is kind of like calling me a straw man. you're not really engaging me. it is interesting that you do not make the claim about vtmtnman, who mentioned it above me.

 

i don't claim (if you whip out your handy-dandy reading comprehension) that the anti-illegal movement is racist, but that it has racist components. "nationalism" isn't usually properly used in reference to bias against nation. we usually use "racism" to describe that.

 

if your argument (and your intent) is that illegal immigration is wrong because it's expensive or dangerous or even just because you support law and order, you are not being racist.

 

if you are against it because you don't want more hispanics (or vietnamese, or kenyans...) here, it is racist. there are people of both stripe in the mix. you cannot have a full and fair discussion of it without acknowledging it.

 

and yes, i do place the majority of the focus on mexicans crossing our southern border. don't you? we don't have a lot of problems with canadians crossing illegally. mabe they do, but it isn't the hot button topic that mexicans and other hispancs are in the southern border states. folks in those states get pretty het up about it, and for a lot of different reasons.

 

what argument, exactly, do you think i'm making that's foundering? my essential point was to make some observations about how this issue becomes political. are you trying to argue that it's not political? perhaps you wish to assert that racial bias has nothing to do with the general issue? that it isn't a difficult problem? that it isn't related to the larger issue of the history of immigration? i think these were my salient points.

 

are you perhaps trying to tease out that i'm in favor of illegal immigration? that'd be a tough one, 'coz i'm not in favor of it. so what argument of mine is failing, exactly?

 

do you actually have a point other than to make weak attempts to cut me down? i do this for entertainment. i clip excerpts and send them to my friends.

Uh,woah now,I'm not calling anyone strawman,or whatever,and the intent of my post was not to cut you down.I apologize if you thought that was the intent.I was adding to the debate is all.You posted while I was typing,and I was to lazy to edit it.

[+flask]

not you, dude. you're cool.

[vtmtnman]

not you, dude. you're cool.

Right on.

[+JXH0816]

well I just started this, so I don't pretend to know what the accepted rules are - but I don't see how there could be any harm in a political type cache

 

nobody is going to make you hunt for it or anything

 

that being said, a political cache doesn't sound to me like it would be all that much fun to search for, but hey different strokes for different folks you know ?

 

just like I notice these forums have a lot of debate about are religious tracs appropriate for a cache or not, well while a religious trac wouldn't really be an exciting thing to find, and I personally would find it waste of space I don't see how some people can get offended by it, maybe if I searched a long time to find only some bible verses I might get disgusted or something I don't know - that hasn't happened yet.

 

It does seem to me that a tract is a pretty pointless thing anyway, someone like me isn't going to be convinced by some religious tract anyway, and those who already buy into that don't need a tract anyhow, I guess the same could be said for a political type cache - if thats your thing, then I don't see what it could hurt to make one, but just the same I wouldn't expect people to be knocking themselves out to find it.

 

Sorry, it just doesn't sound like that much fun.

[Clan Riffster]

"nationalism" isn't usually properly used in reference to bias against nation. we usually use "racism" to describe that.

Why would you knowingly use an incorrect term? Just for its emotional value? I guess if it works for Rev. Al, it'll work for you.

No need for accuracy, eh?

[+Renegade Knight]

Starting a thread about shoplifting, and calling it political, doesn't quite make shoplifting a political topic.

 

yeah, but there aren't millions of shoplifters and shoplifter supporters pressuring politicians to alter rules regarding shoplifting. I think everyone is on the same page that shoplifting should be illegal for the time being.

Most people think illegal immigration should be illegal as well. Most of us also think that Legal Immigration is fine.

[+Renegade Knight]

...we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

Any yet somehow it's become cool to be Irish.

 

To clarify something else you said about racism in immigration. The French work very hard to maintain their cultural purity. Their bias is in favor of that and against anything that would change that. That's much the same with Joe American. They want the USA to remain what is is now. If folks, any folks come here and work hard to speak english, learn our ways, and do the "When in Rome Bit" that's not racism. Thats something else again and it's fair. Silly at times the way the French do it but still fair. Americans are not above jacking the best of what other cultures bring. But for the most part Joe American wants those who come here to work to integrate with us not vice versa.

[+TrailGators]

...we must not let any more irish into this country; they are dirty and lazy and drunken. they are prone to crime and they are stupid and prone to violence. the irish will take jobs away from real americans by working for lower wages. they will burden what few services we have.

 

oh, wait. that was the 1840's. see? same stuff, different decade.

Any yet somehow it's become cool to be Irish.

 

To clarify something else you said about racism in immigration. The French work very hard to maintain their cultural purity. Their bias is in favor of that and against anything that would change that. That's much the same with Joe American. They want the USA to remain what is is now. If folks, any folks come here and work hard to speak english, learn our ways, and do the "When in Rome Bit" that's not racism. Thats something else again and it's fair. Silly at times the way the French do it but still fair. Americans are not above jacking the best of what other cultures bring. But for the most part Joe American wants those who come here to work to integrate with us not vice versa.

Hear Hear!

[+Team Chinook]

So I came across a hate cache today. Unfortunately it's probably acceptable because the hider hates George Bush and it's in the Bay Area and well that's the popular viewpoint for many a lib in the Bay. Not mine.

 

The cache is called I hate Bush hides - so you wouldn't completely know it's a hateful hide until you get to the cache and it has pictures of George Bush XXXed out.

 

My view is there's no place for that type of hide. I explained to my 8 year old daughter that there are people that don't like some of our Politicians, but for all of the different viewpoints out there we could possibly end up with nothing but attack caches from either side all day long. If I was emporer of Groundspeak I'd ban political statements and political hides - particularly "hate hides".

[+KoosKoos]

If I was emporer of Groundspeak I'd ban political statements and political hides - particularly "hate hides".

 

Maybe something in the guidelines about caches shouldn't promote an "agenda".

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

So I came across a hate cache today. Unfortunately it's probably acceptable because the hider hates George Bush and it's in the Bay Area and well that's the popular viewpoint for many a lib in the Bay. Not mine.

 

The cache is called I hate Bush hides - so you wouldn't completely know it's a hateful hide until you get to the cache and it has pictures of George Bush XXXed out.

 

My view is there's no place for that type of hide. I explained to my 8 year old daughter that there are people that don't like some of our Politicians, but for all of the different viewpoints out there we could possibly end up with nothing but attack caches from either side all day long. If I was emporer of Groundspeak I'd ban political statements and political hides - particularly "hate hides".

Regardless of my political leanings (and, believe me, you don't want to hear about how I vote for Daffy Duck and Pepe LePew each year in the elections...!), I personally feel that ANY cache bearing a political message or any other agenda-laden message should be verboten, and luckily, such agenda caches ARE against the guidelines!

[+TrailGators]

So I came across a hate cache today. Unfortunately it's probably acceptable because the hider hates George Bush and it's in the Bay Area and well that's the popular viewpoint for many a lib in the Bay. Not mine.

 

The cache is called I hate Bush hides - so you wouldn't completely know it's a hateful hide until you get to the cache and it has pictures of George Bush XXXed out.

 

My view is there's no place for that type of hide. I explained to my 8 year old daughter that there are people that don't like some of our Politicians, but for all of the different viewpoints out there we could possibly end up with nothing but attack caches from either side all day long. If I was emporer of Groundspeak I'd ban political statements and political hides - particularly "hate hides".

They are already against the guidelines. You should report it to your local reviewer.

[+TrailGators]

Regardless of my political leanings (and, believe me, you don't want to hear about how I vote for Daffy Duck and Pepe LePew each year in the elections...!)

[Clan Riffster]

You should report it to your local reviewer.

I think Keystone made the necessary notification.

[+TrailGators]

You should report it to your local reviewer.

I think Keystone made the necessary notification.

I was referring to post 194:

So I came across a hate cache today. Unfortunately it's probably acceptable because the hider hates George Bush and it's in the Bay Area and well that's the popular viewpoint for many a lib in the Bay. Not mine.

 

The cache is called I hate Bush hides - so you wouldn't completely know it's a hateful hide until you get to the cache and it has pictures of George Bush XXXed out.

 

My view is there's no place for that type of hide. I explained to my 8 year old daughter that there are people that don't like some of our Politicians, but for all of the different viewpoints out there we could possibly end up with nothing but attack caches from either side all day long. If I was emporer of Groundspeak I'd ban political statements and political hides - particularly "hate hides".

Keystone hasn't posted since that new question came up....

Edited September 28, 2008 by TrailGators