« Stop the Disingenuousness | Main | A New Look For ABP »

Much ado about nothing

Quite a few people are in high dudgeon over California Democratic congressional candidate Francine Busby and her apparent solicitation of votes from illegal aliens, including my own colleague Kim Priestap. As a hard-nose on the illegal alien issue, the thought of this happening infuriated me, so I started looking into it myself. And my conclusion? As Dorothy Parker said, "there's no 'there' there."

From the full context of the discussion, it's clear to me that Ms. Busby was asked if one needed to prove one was a legal voter in order to "help" her campaign -- with the clear implication of volunteering to work for her,not simply vote. She replied that they do not check IDs for volunteers, and anyone was welcome to assist. And under current law, they I do not believe they are required to verify the immigration status of an unpaid volunteer.

Whether or not that should be the case, that's the way it is under current law. And whether or not Busby should be held to a higher standard than the legal minimum is another question.

Yes, it is possible to interpret the discussion as a solicitation for voter fraud. But it's a hell of a stretch.

I'm not a lawyer, but if I were defending Ms. Busby, it'd be a slam-dunk. "No, your honor, my client was not soliciting voter fraud. She took the question to mean 'can I volunteer for your campaign without proving my immigration status, as I do not have the papers on me at this moment?', and replied that her campaign, in compliance with the law, does not require such proof from unpaid volunteers. The issue of voting was never in question; the discussion was entirely about campaign volunteer work." It might not be true, but it's enough to generate reasonable doubt.

At the very most, we have a Democratic candidate who is accepting the support of a potential illegal alien. This is absolutely nothing new, and not against any laws.

I hope she is defeated in Congress, as it is attitudes like hers that have put us in such a bind regarding illegal aliens. But I'm afraid this is hardly a smoking gun.


Comments (164)

Sorry Jay, I have to disagr... (Below threshold)
dawnsblood:

Sorry Jay, I have to disagree. She specifically said "You don't need papers for voting." I'll in my common way of interpreting English assume she ment what she said. That being that you can vote without having papers to prove you are legal. Yes I heard her later clarification, all it means is that she later realized that she screwed up letting us know how she really feels.

Much ado about nothing? re... (Below threshold)
ted:

Much ado about nothing? really? The illegal immigration issue in the CA 50th has surpassed the corruption issue otherwise the focus of that particular election -- and this will mean a GOP win.

dawnsblood: "papers for vot... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

dawnsblood: "papers for voting" does not necessarily mean "papers to vote." It could be a stumble-mouthed way of saying one lacks identification in general.

ted: I agree with you on the issue, and hope you're right. I just don't think this is the knockout punch others are saying it is.

J.

papers for voting" does... (Below threshold)
Remy Logan:

papers for voting" does not necessarily mean "papers to vote."

I guess it all depends on what your definition of 'is' is Jay Tea. ; )

I think you need to sit back, close your eyes and repeat 'Occam's Razor' a few dozen times.

I do agree with you though that this probably won't be the knockout punch some are hoping for. Those who prefer illegal immigration will dissemble the text the way you have, and the others weren't going to vote for her anyway.

Jay,In tech... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:


Jay,

In technical terms you are more than likely correct in your assumption there is no "there, there "IF" this were a court of law and in the end this was only a solicitation of campaign help from someone in this country who is here illegally.

But even if this was a misstatement about voting without I.D. the voters in the district now at least understand her mindset.

First of all, her campaign was focused on "ethics reform". After all this election is to replace convicted congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham.

So what was so "unethical" about what went on you ask.

She knew she was speaking to people who were here illegally; otherwise she wouldn't need to have a Spanish only language exchange.

Then, toward the end, a man in the audience asked in Spanish: "I want to help, but I don't have papers.

No one left, right or in the middle can spin that she didn't know what that meant. The person was openly admitting their illegal status. And in the mean time employers across the country are having the heat put on them for employing people here illegally.

With that said, the next obvious spin is this was only volunteer work. But remember her platform "ethics reform". To the clear thinker this means following the rule of "law", which she was clearly trying to circumvent by the solicitation of illegal help, volunteer or paid.

I know it, you know it, and even the lefties that are trying to spin this know it because it is blatant.

As far as the so called misstatement about not needing papers to vote, well clearly she said out loud, intentional or not a Democratic Party voter issue.

It is a wide spread Democratic Party talking point that showing I.D. at the polling place is racist and is meant to intimidate minority voters. I continue to scratch my head over this one, but Democrats are not trying to reason with me but rather they are looking for a knee jerk reaction from the constituency they are catering to.

First and foremost Democrats are trying to continue to perpetrate racial divides.

Secondly the issue of not showing I.D. is flat out advocating voter fraud. Pure and simple.

I still have not heard one coherent rational from the lefties why NOT showing I.D. when voting is a good idea. Waiting..................

This is not as big a deal a... (Below threshold)
ordi:

This is not as big a deal as some are making out to be. However, it is bigger than some are admitting.

No, it is not a knockout punch but it is a uppercut to the chin. With this race being as close as it is, Busby scored a self-inflicted blow that she probably will not recover from.

I guess the question would ... (Below threshold)
Gringo:

I guess the question would be, would a Republican ever make the same "mistake?"

Not sure why everyone's so ... (Below threshold)

Not sure why everyone's so upset.

These Mexicans are only doing the grassroots legwork that real Americans couldn't be bothered to do for Democrats.

It is baffling that two peo... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

It is baffling that two people can read the same information and get different information from that information. What I read were direct quotes. It would be hard to make me believe she meant anything but she was welcoming the help, both in voting, by saying you do not need papers to vote, and campaign help. This from not undocumented immigrant, but illegal aliens, as part of a civil invasion, crossed our borders without permission of us. Disregarding our laws.

Jumpinjoe,Good poi... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Jumpinjoe,

Good points, all. Wizbang commentaries have jokingly stated that the U.S. should just annex Mexico, but if illegals can vote, it seems Mexico is in effect annexing the U.S. Ok, I know the numbers aren't overwhelming, but as we have seen in the last two presidential elections, the outcome can go either way depending on votes in thousands in a few key states. That makes positive ID of voters a key issue in my book. Conservatives shouldn't be dissuaded by the left's "raciest" label, but instead apply their own "lawless" label to those who oppose voter ID.

I guess the question wou... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

I guess the question would be, would a Republican ever make the same "mistake?"

Posted by: Gringo

I think the question should be worded; would the MSM forgive a misstatement from a Republican.

Would a Republican get away with advocating putting a bullet in the head of a Democrat president?

Answer: NO, but a Democrat can.

Would a Republican get away with saying "white niggers" on national TV?

Answer: NO, but a Democrat and former KKK member can and a Republican could lose their leadership position for something not even as close to that.

Would a stumbling drunk Republican that just missed a police car and crashed into a barrier be whisked away from the scene and disappear into rehab?

Answer: NO, but a Democrat can.

I could go on all day, but I think you get the drift.

It was Gertrude Stein who s... (Below threshold)
Malibu Stacy:

It was Gertrude Stein who said, "There's no there there", not Mrs. Parker. As far as I know, Dot never visited Oakland, CA.

Mac said:... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Mac said:

Conservatives shouldn't be dissuaded by the left's "raciest" label, but instead apply their own "lawless" label to those who oppose voter ID

Agreed, in fact that's what's so funny about this whole story especially coming from a Democrat with an "ethics reform" platform.

Definition of ethics: motivation based on ideas of right and wrong.

An illegal states to her he wants to help but doesn't have papers, yet "her ethics" dictate that she spins it to mean many in the audience look under 18 years old.

We all read the exchange and that was clearly not the case. She unambiguously stated that as an illegal without documentation of citizenship, that person could still work on her campaign.

Was it ethically right for her to lie about her statement? In liberal land since the end justifies the means, then yes. To the rest of us she is simply an ethically challenged liar.


Jumpinjoe: I don't know wha... (Below threshold)
Old Coot:

Jumpinjoe: I don't know what you ate for breakfast this morning, but you're on fire! Nice work.

Jumpinjoe: I don't know ... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Jumpinjoe: I don't know what you ate for breakfast this morning, but you're on fire! Nice work

Posted by: Old Coot

Thank you for the kind words. However in lieu of breakfast I am consuming some rather potent special blend coffee that I save for weekends.

Maybe there really is a correlation between the hairs on the back of my neck standing up and my patience to post long-winded rants.

Cheers..................

Jay, et al,I'm sor... (Below threshold)
Robb H:

Jay, et al,

I'm sorry, but on both sides of the isle, this is what I'm sick of.

We translate any more what law breaks are law breaks enough for jail. It used to be the difference between death and prison, and now it's between prison and exoneration.

We have Clinton officials walking out of the office with TOP SECRET papers (and jay, make no mistake, had I done that I would have been in jail in 30 minutes or less, or your next act of espionage is free), and walking away with a quick press quirk. ASSSAULT on capital police, and VIDEOTAPED BRIBES of 6 figures in LA.

I'll be the first to mention, I'm a member of the GOP, and yes, I believe at least 2/3s of our overall reps are just as crooked as 2/3s of liberals, but the reason why the GOP gets picked on more is the price. The GOP takes money as it's price. Phisical things. Libs tend to want more or less glory for their price. They want to be the next environmental hero, the next civil rights leader, the next tiananmen square hero, and they don't care who or what, to include the country they live in, to get it. Idealism from the left, materialism from the right? NO WAY, can't be.

Long short, Dems will continue to waive off this law, no matter how bad it hurts us, and there is no doubt it does, in order to gain that idealistic stance, especially because it's almost required for a California win.

Geesh. What is GO... (Below threshold)
Phredd:

Geesh.

What is GOAL #1 for ANY politician? Get re-elected.

Would/Will Busby accept votes from illegals? You bet she will.

Did she mean she wanted illegals to vote for her? You bet she did.

Will she have illegals vote for her? You can bet your next mortgage payment.

Amazing how liberals can say what they said but didn't say the thing they said when they said what they meant to say. "I voted for it before I voted against it."

At BEST she wants illegals to help her with her campaign, which is disgusting.

At WORST she wants illegals to actively vote for her.

This country is on a slippery slope to Socialism with ample help from both parties.

Who is John Galt?

Phredd.

Great lesson Jay! Just get ... (Below threshold)
Mark:

Great lesson Jay! Just get an attorney to lie for you......

In an overwhelming Republic... (Below threshold)
Michael:

In an overwhelming Republican district....Busby is toast.

[email protected] Jay Tea</p... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

@ Jay Tea

In what other instance would, or could, you interpret direct quotes in any other way?

Look. If she misspoke, and that's a huge "if", then why didn't she immediately correct herself? Why didn't she simply say "Sorry I mean that you can help out...". But even that is wrong isn't it? Even if I could possibly accept that Busby wasn't soliciting an illegal alien to commit voter fraud then I'd have to accept that Busby was violating the labor laws of this country to employ an illegal alien as a volunteer in her campaign.

Sorry Jay but there is a *there* there. And it's representative of why the Democrats have systematically removed all of the voting safeguards in this country.

Perhaps "you don't need pap... (Below threshold)
kth:

Perhaps "you don't need papers for voting" means "you don't have to be registered to vote to work on my campaign"?

Freudian Slip.Mend... (Below threshold)

Freudian Slip.

Mendacious apology.

Typical politics, nothing to see, move along...

I believe "There's no there... (Below threshold)

I believe "There's no there there" is a quote by Gertrude Stein (about Oakland, CA, her hometown) rather than by Dorothy Parker.

"She knew she was speaking ... (Below threshold)
Whispers:

"She knew she was speaking to people who were here illegally; otherwise she wouldn't need to have a Spanish only language exchange."

Because only English speakers are allowed in the country legally. There aren't any legal immigrants in the US who don't speak English at all.

In jumpinjoe's fantasy world, at least.

Oh, perhaps jumpinjoe didn't say exactly what he meant! I'm sure Busby would forgive him.

I don't believe your defens... (Below threshold)
DaveG:

I don't believe your defense of Busby is strong enough. I think the full quote makes it clear that the "papers" she was referring to were voter registration papers, not immigration papers. What she was saying is that you don't have to be a registered voter to help with Get Out The Vote efforts; illegal immigration had nothing to do with it.

Perhaps "you don't need ... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Perhaps "you don't need papers for voting" means "you don't have to be registered to vote to work on my campaign.

Kth.......

Toward the end, a man in the audience asked in Spanish: "I want to help, but I don't have papers."

Translation: I am here in this country illegally but I want to help you win in this election.

It was translated and Busby replied: "Everybody can help, yeah, absolutely, you can all help. You don't need papers for voting, you don't need to be a registered voter to help."

Translation: It doesn't matter if you are here illegally. You can still help me with my campaign. It's not like anyone is ever going to hear this conversation so go for it.

"I was clarifying the question that was being asked in Spanish and then stated that you do not have to be a registered voter to help the campaign because there were many people who appeared to be to be under 18 in the group who wanted to volunteer," she said in a statement.

Translation: Opps, someone heard that conversation so I'll spin it to mean something else. I'll say they all looked young and were probably not old enough to vote even though the person asking the question was obviously here illegally. Yeah, that's the ticket.

"I'm not surprised that the Republican Party is making this last-minute, desperate ploy and it is absolutely false."

Translation: I messed up but thank goodness my Democratic constituency is so gullible that they will believe my hogwash.

So all of those going again... (Below threshold)
Bill K:

So all of those going against Jay here believe that Busby was openly calling for illegal immigrants to commit voter fraud? That she is some amazingly stupid that she would say it publicly? There is no way in your minds that it was a case of slipping up?

You will go to town on a clear slipup, but pay not attention to a year run up of false information that leads to war. Awesome.

DaveG,You sir, are... (Below threshold)
Phredd:

DaveG,

You sir, are an idi0t. A confused, ignorant, idiot.

This is what Busby might have well have said:

"I know that most illegals vote for Democrats. Im holding this rally today for illegal aliens. I knew this rally would mostly be attended by illegals so I prepared ahead and brought a translator. To all illegal aliens at this rally - please understand, if you are illegal, YOU CAN STILL VOTE. We Democrats have fought the idea of NOT having to provide a Government issued ID to vote for decades and have won. Please come down and vote for me regardless of your citizenship. I need and want your vote although you are not American. Im OK with this because the only thing that is important to me is getting re-elected. I'm willing to put the entire country at risk for the sake and possibility of retaining my Congressional power. 'You don't need papers to vote'."

Anybody that does not believe that the above was EXACTLY what was going thru Busby's noggin is KIDDING THEMSEVLES. This is an irrefutable fact.

Phredd

"You can all help.... (Below threshold)
ahem:
"You can all help. You don't need papers for voting-- you don't need to be a registered voter to help."

Listen to the audio. The way I hear it, it's clearly a run-on sentence and by 'papers for voting' she meant voter registration cards. Some people simply aren't registered to vote. They aren't necessarily illegal aliens.

Look. If she misspoke, and that's a huge "if", then why didn't she immediately correct herself?

See, I think she did clarify it, in the same sentence, with the following clause. Listen to the audio and apply some basic English grammar.

I call it a Bush-esque language mangle, not Clintonian weaselry. You could get all linguistic about it and say that she was lapsing into Spanish sentence stucture: 'voter registration card' is tarjeta de votante, literally 'card for voting'. Whatever.

But if you listen to the audio and still insist on parsing it as 'you don't need papers in order to go out and vote' instead of 'you don't need to be registered in order to go out and help', then you'd better not claim to be an advocate for English as the official language.

"She knew she was speaki... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

"She knew she was speaking to people who were here illegally; otherwise she wouldn't need to have a Spanish only language exchange."

Posted by: Jumpinjoe

Because only English speakers are allowed in the country legally. There aren't any legal immigrants in the US who don't speak English at all.

In jumpinjoe's fantasy world, at least.
Oh, perhaps jumpinjoe didn't say exactly what he meant! I'm sure Busby would forgive him.

Posted by: Whispers

Wow, what an extraordinary coincidence that Busby found an entire room of "legal" immigrants that do not speak English.

I wonder what the odds of that happening are. One in two or one in a million. Place your bets. I'll take one in a million.

But Busby did bet her liberal supporters would believe her. Those odds were 100%.

Jumpinjoe

Hey Phredd, give a motherf&... (Below threshold)
nobody:

Hey Phredd, give a motherf&%$er a break. Not everyone has your Mad Mind Readin' Skillz.

Anybody that does not be... (Below threshold)
ahem:

Anybody that does not believe that the above was EXACTLY what was going thru Busby's noggin is KIDDING THEMSEVLES. This is an irrefutable fact.

Wow. I think there are about five different category errors and failures of logic crammed into those 25 words.

Btw, Phredd, if it's okay to put words in people's mouths and testify to the beliefs in their heads as 'irrefutable facts', does that mean I can be absolutely certain that you're a goat-molesting, wannabe-child-murdering islamofascist? Because I can assemble a list of things that 'Phredd might have well have written' very quickly indeed, and you won't like it.

If one applies Occam's Razo... (Below threshold)
blaze:

If one applies Occam's Razor to this situation, one must determine that she, indeed, "misspoke". What you are all, except for Jay Tea, implying runs directly against what Occam's Razor declares.

But if you listen to the... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

But if you listen to the audio and still insist on parsing it as 'you don't need papers in order to go out and vote' instead of 'you don't need to be registered in order to go out and help', then you'd better not claim to be an advocate for English as the official language.

Ahem, excuse me, but the comment made "I do not have papers" was made in Spanish. If the person didn't speak English, then the chances that they could read English on a voter registration card is probably nil.

The chances that they are here legally and can't speak English is probably nil. That is usually a perquisite for a work visa.

The chances that Busby thought she was addressing a "legal" immigrant, also nil.

Chances Busby was advocating an illegal work for her campaign, 100%.

Come on Jay. If elected De... (Below threshold)
Gmax:

Come on Jay. If elected Democrats like Kennedy can keep a straight face and say the Republicans stole a 2nd elections ( its a matter of accepted doxology for them at this juncture that Fla 2000 was stolen), surely you bleieve its all right to use the candidates own words against her in an lection contest that will surely be trumpeted as a sign of the next coming of the Democrat party if they are successful. Surely ( I know your name is not Shirley ) you can comprehend that. She just gave the Republicans a sound bite moment like "I voted for it before I voted against it." Perfect pitch for the wrong song to be singing days prior to an election to the House of Representatives.

Photo ID for voting is a ba... (Below threshold)
Kimyl Oh!:

Photo ID for voting is a bad idea because it is just as open to subterfuge and it would disenfranchise lots of poor and elderly voters. I love how Republicans get all "lawful" about this because it helps them win elections, but they rarely want to talk about lying propaganda distributed to poor and black neighborhoods with false information on when and where to vote. The more people vote, the better our democracy works, plain and simple.

How about using Occam's Razor as following: A woman running for Congress with a 7 point lead in recent polls and a fundraising advantage is going to appeal to illegal aliens in a rabidly anti-immigrant milieu like California. What? Why would she do that?

And I would also like to hear what you would say. "No, your labor is not wanted because you do not speak our language and you don't have the necessary papers. I will have someone from security verify your documentation status and we can find out if you are even allowed to be at this rally, much less in our country. Thanks for speaking up, have fun being deported. Democracy is for English speaking whites here. Move along."

Enjoy your outrage while the Republicans you support corrupt and overturn all of our foundations, like checks and balances, open government, and congressmen bought and sold. Go fix your own party before you attack the others.

The more people vote, th... (Below threshold)
Gmax:

The more people vote, the better our democracy works, plain and simple.

And if they vote multiple times in multiple places like in documentes cases in St Louis ( convictions ) and Milwaukee ( convictions ) and Detroit ( Judge removes elction official who permits violotions of elction law with absenttee ballots ) ( ALL DEMOCRATS ) its even more better working. Disregard that when an illegal vote is cast it cancels out a legal cast one, thus disenfranchising a legal voter. But as Animal Farm taught us "Everyone is equal, just some are more equal than others."

Kimyl - what a jhoke you ar... (Below threshold)
Michael:

Kimyl - what a jhoke you are. You need a photo i.d. for all sorts of things like cashing check....but it should not be used for voting?
This is the kind of corrupt thinking that is making your side permanent losers.

Kimyl - what a joke you are... (Below threshold)
Michael:

Kimyl - what a joke you are. You need a photo i.d. for all sorts of things like cashing check....but it should not be used for voting?
This is the kind of corrupt thinking that is making your side permanent losers.

There were no convictions i... (Below threshold)
Kimyl Oh!:

There were no convictions in Milwaukee on voter fraud, I live here and the DA said there was no evidence that it occurred and the case was dropped. And if you want to talk about vote disenfranchisement, the felon voter lists used in Florida or the lack of voting machines in Ohio's larger areas could be cited as well. If you want those problems to go away, your congress just has to do something. But they don't want comprehensive reform because right now they feel confident in their ability to game things to their favor. Paper trails? Who wants those?

The thing is, if your basis is that a "illegal" vote cancels out a legal vote, your assumption is that people who live and work in our communities, if they are here illegally to better their family, deserve no voice. Many states feel the same way about felons, even after they have served their time. I would argue that thousands of people flooding in from Canada to help defeat gay marriage bans, or flooding from the South to pass some legislation on language changes or legal status would be SERIOUS VOTER FRAUD. But when people come here to try and make a better life and play by the rules, their voices should not count.

I know, I know. They came illegally. But for me, and I do want to find a workable solution, this is what ANYONE would do. So how do we deal with normal human behavior? Do we send them back, or abuse them while they are here, or what?

I don't want illegal aliens to vote, but I do think in a real debate about this, middle class Americans have to acknowledge that they would come here to make 8x the wage and receive health care. The differences perpetuated by the first world between us and the third world are coming to a conflict around the world. Building fences is not the answer, but I don't have it either.

Lots of poor people and old... (Below threshold)
Kimyl Oh!:

Lots of poor people and old people don't cash checks, FYI. The problem with voter ID here in Wisconsin is that they want it mandatory but they don't want to help people get IDs, so it amounts to a poll tax.

And for all Republicans who think Dems are evil for getting poor votes by virtue of welfare, et al (an argument I have heard many times) how do you feel about getting votes on single issues that do not change while these people vote against their economic interests? Examples: They want to take my guns! They want to kill babies! They want gays to marry!

Guns are protected by the ACLU, the NRA, and the constitution. Abortion laws, as they are now, are supported by 2/3 of people (i.e. it is available but restricted). Gay marriage ban amendment has no chance of passing, but now its the main focus of the president and the Senate, to get the anti-gay voters fired up and ready to hit the polls. Sad.

Democratic troll here, stum... (Below threshold)
grepthis:

Democratic troll here, stumbled on this site by accident.

Shut up you rabid, frothing, Republican dorkwads manufacturing outrage over the inconsequential.

Look, look, what's that over there? WMDs? Go get em boy.


Subhuman filth, all of them... (Below threshold)
•••:

Subhuman filth, all of them. Democrats and Mexicans. I say string 'em all up!

Ahem, excuse me, but the... (Below threshold)
ahem:

Ahem, excuse me, but the comment made "I do not have papers" was made in Spanish. If the person didn't speak English--i>

Disregarding your large pile of groundless presumptions, please explain just how that non-English-speaker knew what Busby was saying in order to respond. Thanks.

Oh, and you don't need to be able to read a voter registration card or a ballot initiative in order to be a citizen. You may not like that one bit, but it's the law. Nor do you need to in order to get a work visa. (Ask an immigrant some time: you'll find that they're usually much better versed in what US immigration law actually says than natural-born Americans.)

Your reasoning is all lefty... (Below threshold)
Michael:

Your reasoning is all lefty pap. The sole reason you do not want
photo i.d.'s for voting is because you want the cheating.
Because it is the only way your side has any chance of winning
elections.

This thread confirms, the C... (Below threshold)
ted:

This thread confirms, the California 50th special election is a microcosm and a guide, in may respects, of this fall's congressional elections. Very, very, important! Illegal immigration is, in terms of Congressional elections this fall, voter determinent issue #1, in terms of both voter base turn out for the GOP and in terms of immigration "knocking out" the "culture of corruption" gambit of the Dems.

If requiring photo ID to vo... (Below threshold)
Xennady:

If requiring photo ID to vote is such a heavy burden why don't Democrats just come up with a federal program to get all those poor and elderly folks likely to be disenfranchised their very own picture card.After all, they want a program for every thing else.The answer is that they want the vote fraud to continue.This is blatently obvious to anyone with a clue.

Everybody can help, yeah... (Below threshold)
Thom:

Everybody can help, yeah, absolutely, you can all help. You don't need papers for voting, you don't need to be a registered voter to help.

"Parpers fo voting" clearly means "to be registered," hence the clarification in the next statement. There would be no reason to offer it if she didn't mean that. If she really meant to say "You don't need papers to vote, the clarification would have been in that direction, not its clear opposite.

Not to mention that the person asking the question didn't ask about voting, he asked about helping. the evidence here all points to, "This is a non-story."

There were no conviction... (Below threshold)
Gmax:

There were no convictions in Milwaukee on voter fraud, I live here and the DA said there was no evidence that it occurred

The Democrat DA said what? But you are right there were no convictions just something like 10,000 votes all registered on the same day vote was cast with no valid address, some with no address at all others with vacant lots and business addresses etc. I was thinking of the Democrats campaign workers ( include offspring of Democrat officeholder ) there that were convicted for voter suppression, when they vandalized the vans that the Republicans wanted to use to help get out the vote. want to tell me thats wrong too?

If Felons cant vote by law, and you want to change the law then work your ass off to try and change it. Something like 47 States bar Felons from voting but hey Massachusetts may have it right, who knows? But it is irrelevant to this discussion and I think you know it.

I understand the new law re... (Below threshold)
gmaxc:

I understand the new law reguires photo ID to buy Sudafed. Anyone hear lefties decrying this as being unfair to poor and the elderly? Anyone? Sudafed fro freaking sake. But man to vote dont you dare try to impose that you racist trash yada yada yada yada ad nauseum.

Argument over Busby's exact... (Below threshold)
ted:

Argument over Busby's exact meaning intended by her by her words utterly misses the point. To 99.9% of those familiar with this matter, it confirms: (1) Busby is the candidate for those who favor lax illegal immigration enforcement and lax border, (2) the GOP is the candidate for just the opposite.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Conservatives Bigots = Cowa... (Below threshold)
Fox:

Conservatives Bigots = Cowards. What are you so scared of? You people must be afraid of your own shadow. What a way to have to live. Try growing up it will work wonders for you

And that is why this is pre... (Below threshold)
ted:

And that is why this is precisely NOT much ado about nothing.

it confirms: (1) Busby is t... (Below threshold)
gmax:

it confirms: (1) Busby is the candidate for those who favor lax illegal immigration enforcement and lax border, (2) the GOP is the candidate for just the opposite.

And therefore she is toast. What an injustice, using her own words aginst her. If she had only kept her mouth shut and not told us what she really believes (like most Democrats) she might still have a chance.

Use the audio link posted a... (Below threshold)
mak44:

Use the audio link posted above (from Drudge) or go to Drudge for the link. It is quite clear, and in simple English.

You don't need to be a registered voter to work on the campaign.

All this extremist rightie crap about voter fraud is PURE B.S. and you pack of intellectually dishonest extremists know it.

This is exactly the kind of election sliming that has become the hallmark of the Republican Party since at least the days of Lee Asswater and his scum tactics embraced by the GOP & now manifested in the tactics taught by his protege, Rove.

All of this waling & gnashing of teeth from Republican sycophants about alleged Busby fraudulent vote endorsement is simply the ongoing tactics of a "Tricky Dick," Lee Ass water & Karl Rove. What a shining history of ethical campaigning!!!!

Further manifestation of deceitful campaign tactics by the GOP is evidenced w/ their attempt to appeal to the bigotry & hatred of their predominant voting bloc by engendering fears about gay marriage & eliciting jingoistic patriotism in regards to flag burning.

The typical goal of a Republican campaign is to focus the voter's attention on fear & to ferret out the latent bigotry in the ranks of their voting bloc.

I think what disturbs the R... (Below threshold)
liberalMinded:

I think what disturbs the Republicans the most is that it's a person of hispanic heritage offering to do the work. Since it's clearly LEGAL for anyone regardless of immigration status to help out in an election, what really disturbs them is that here is just another example of Latinos fleeing from them -- just like the Blacks, and for much the same reasons.

By mak44's comment, above, ... (Below threshold)
ted:

By mak44's comment, above, it confirms that gmax (and I) hit a "bullseye"!

their attempt to appeal ... (Below threshold)
gmax:

their attempt to appeal to the bigotry & hatred of their predominant voting bloc by engendering fears about gay marriage & eliciting jingoistic patriotism in regards to flag burning.

Compare and contrast these alleged atrocities with the upstanding and fine traditions in the Democrat Party such as scaring the elderly that the Republicnas are going to take your Soc Security check away or telling Blacks that Republicans in office will return them to the plantation, and you can see why our friend mak44 is in such high dungeon today.

Ahem, it is a fact that eve... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Ahem, it is a fact that every immigrant that wishes to become a citizen must prove proficiency and literacy in English--the citizenship exam is administered in English.

You should have read your own link since it only gave the rare exemptions.

This is hilarious. This sor... (Below threshold)
Matt:

This is hilarious. This sort of thing is worth pouncing on? What party are Jay's readers supposed to support again?

Republicans should totally make voter fraud an issue. Since it's their Congress, it'll be the only way your country is going to mandate voting machines with paper trails. When a country that argues for unilateral democracy-smearing (wherever there's oil, anyway) uses electronic voting machines purchased from a GOP contributor that a moderately skilled computer hacker can break into and tamper with in under two minutes, you give people like Castro and Chavez ammunition to ridicule your attempt at making pro-democratic noises.

Please, for the sake of your country, make voter fraud an issue. I'd like to see Ann Coulter go to jail for a month.

Sorry terd & gmax</p... (Below threshold)
mak44:

Sorry terd & gmax

You didn't come close to a "bullseye" but you sure as hell can sling the Bulls_it. In fact so well so,that it can be smelled within 100 feet of a computer.

Wanting to preserve an inst... (Below threshold)
Gmax:

Wanting to preserve an institution that is at least 2000 years plus in tradition, BAD. Acting to try to change the law to make it a crime to desecrate the Stars and Stripes JINGOIST BAD!

Asking for a law change to force people to have an ID that everyone must have to function in modern society, RACIST BAD!

Quoting a candididate in her own words. DISPICABLE!!!

I get the agenda now. So will the voters in Cali 50. Too bad for you.

Photo ID for voting is a... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Photo ID for voting is a bad idea because it is just as open to subterfuge and it would disenfranchise lots of poor and elderly voters.

Thank you for the deep thought out reasons why photo ID's at the polling place are a bad idea.

Another way to explain it in this kind of detail would to simply say "DUH" that's what I heard so I'll repeat it.

Seriously, it explains your explanation the same way.


Sudafed yes, Jumpinjoe, but... (Below threshold)
gmax:

Sudafed yes, Jumpinjoe, but not to vote. Non Euclidean geometric reasoning, where parallel lines can and do meet. Its a world created and inhabited by those reality based community denizens, also known as Olestra Democrats ( Totally fact free ).

gminGet out your b... (Below threshold)
mak44:

gmin

Get out your black crepe & black widow's veil: the usual GOP slime-machine is working way overtime to pull Bilbray out of the jaws of defeat with this sack of last-minute sliming and the polls seem to show that it may not be working in this lopsidedly GOP district.

What you all fear & dread is that CA-50 may become the Omen; your bankrupt rotten Republican eggs are not likely to hatch... now or in November.

Even w/ assisstance from the slime-purveying Drudge, this crap isn't flying except w/ you loonies who are quite accustomed to feeding on it on a regular basis.

Probably explainbs why most of you have brown eyes.

Busby let the democrat skir... (Below threshold)
GS:

Busby let the democrat skirt show on this. She's done. And lying and making up excuses about what she said just makes it even worse.

On the topic of ID for voti... (Below threshold)
ffakr:

On the topic of ID for voting..

I belive the arguments against fall into disenfranchisement and liberterian categories.

On the liberterian side, I have one employee who does not have a state ID. He does have a passport as he absolutely needed it to travel to Japan. He's not a liberterian by declaration but I'd struggle to describe him any other way. He is very against the limitation of personal freedom by the Government (or anyone) though he's more than intelligent enough to understand that there are damn good reasons to have a government. [the kid is not just 'smart enough', he's brilliant and I'm lucky to have him but that's enought story]
He is an urban dweller so he used public transport and he's still pretty young so he doesn't have a drivers license. He doesn't have a state ID and he is, as far as I understand it, pretty against the stated 'tagging him' by forcing him to carry and show his 'papers', as it were.
In his mind, he's an educated and intelligent American and he should be able to vote without having paperwork. It doesn't hurt that he's white and probably 3rd, 4th, or 5th generation American.

The other argument I believe is an absolutist argument based on historical precident like poll taxes that were used to disenfranchise populations (like exceedingly poor blacks).

Personally, I reflexively pull out my Driver's license when I vote because I just expect to be questioned about whether or not I live in that district.
In this day and age, I don't think it's at all unreasonable to have a State ID at the least.
I'd hazard that most people on the left also don't see anything wrong with proving who you are and where you live when you vote. I strongly suspect that this is, once again, one side picking out the radical fringe from the other side to score some points.
That's just my opinion from the people I know from all political spectrums.

ffakr.

polls seem to show that ... (Below threshold)
Gmax:

polls seem to show that it may not be working in this lopsidedly GOP district.

Polls ah yes. Now what about those exit polls from 2004?

But come back Wednesday morning and tell me about who is hanging black crepe again.

To all decent folks here wh... (Below threshold)
Chris:

To all decent folks here who question the statement "you don't need papers to vote" a question. Does this mean that when somebody says "I'm going to vote with my pocketbook", that they explicitly mean they are going to buy votes? Never mind that Busby's next sentence more or less clarified what she meant.

This whole thing is ridiculous. If this type of slimy attack is the best my GOP can come up with to attack Busby, then we DESERVE to lose. Let me repeat DESERVE TO LOSE.

Chris you are not a Republi... (Below threshold)
Michael:

Chris you are not a Republican...just admit it.

To show you how dishonest a... (Below threshold)
Gmax:

To show you how dishonest at least some commenters here are I went to see the polls being cited as support for their proposition that its not working. Only thing is I find only one poll of any recent vintage and here it is :

SurveyUSA poll of Cali 50

I think what disturbs th... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

I think what disturbs the Republicans the most is that it's a person of hispanic heritage offering to do the work.

Typical lefty knee jerking with the racism. I know you kid's think you are smart when you regurgitate the mantras but it is really simplistic thinking. Getting a condescending pat on the head from another lefty doesn't actually make you smart either.

My wife is a legal immigrant. She went through all the processes to become a citizen before we met. She spent 12 years in the Army, is a Gulf War veteran and two tours in Korea. She spent a lot of time and effort jumping through the hoops while others just jump the border. There is the fundamental fairness issue here.

She agrees with me (rather I agree with her) on immigration. Kindly explain how she is a racist.

She is Hispanic and Republican and most of her family is Republican.

Is there a lefty term for the Hispanic "Uncle Tom"? After all, that's the racism coming from the leftist when minorities don't march in lock step with them.

What a bunch of self proclaimed elitists you lefties are.

Would one of you righties e... (Below threshold)
mak44:

Would one of you righties explain it?

Some days ago, on another thread about illegal immigration, I made some reference to having a National I,D. card to assure that American employers would know for certain whether the perspective employee was a citizen entitled to legally work in this country.

On that occasion I was assailed by all sorts of you bloggers as some sort of a "commie" or "socialist" or "Democratic moonbat" for even suggesting something as non-libertarian as a national I.D. card that would end up eventually being used to round up law-abiding citizens for the new gulag.

Now, when it comes to legal citizen-voting, the hue & cry is for proper legal verification.

I don't get it.

So what's thge difference?

Lets try it this way:... (Below threshold)
gmax:

Lets try it this way:

In a special election in California's 50th Congressional District today, 6/2/06, 96 hours till polls open, Republican Brian Bilbray and Democrat Francine Busby are locked in a fierce firefight that could go either way, according to a SurveyUSA poll of 448 Likely Voters, conducted exclusively for KGTV-TV San Diego. 4 days until the 6/6/06 Special Election, Republican Bilbray gets 47%, Democrat Busby gets 45%. Bilbray's 2-point advantage is within the poll's margin of sampling error. Voter turnout will decide whether this critical House seat remains in Republican hands, or becomes a Democrat pick-up. Since an identical SurveyUSA KGTV-TV poll released 5/10/06, Bilbray is up 2 points, from 45% to 47%; Busby is unchanged

HMMM Bilbray up 2% and Busby unchanged. By the way she got 44% in the primary and its up to 45% now. Think she will get any more?

She is at her ceiling at 45... (Below threshold)
Michael:

She is at her ceiling at 45%. She is toast. In the end 52/44 Bilbray.

What site and what thread? ... (Below threshold)
Gmax:

What site and what thread? And what comments. Sorry but after your comment about Polls and my own quick search I need to see what the hell you are talking about. Many many libertarians are quite liberal. If what you are talking about is comments by a libertarian, I would not make the logic jump that means they are Republicans. In fact the only libertarian I can think of that calls himself a Republican is Ron Paul in the House. And he is a looney tune that votes with the Moonbat chorus on many many occasions. In fact if you see a bill and it says one or two Republican defections on the vote win some money from your friends by betting on it being Paul. High likelyhood.

With Orwellian doublespeak ... (Below threshold)
Radian:

With Orwellian doublespeak comments like this...:

"But even that is wrong isn't it? Even if I could possibly accept that Busby wasn't soliciting an illegal alien to commit voter fraud then I'd have to accept that Busby was violating the labor laws of this country to employ an illegal alien as a volunteer in her campaign."

...it's no wonder people who think rationally don't take the GOP seriously.

Perhaps you need to look up the meaning of the words 'volunteer' and 'employ'. Volunteering is an unpaid service of one's own free will; hence, it is NOT employment, so a person's work/immigration status in this regard is moot.

I work at a major university's English as a Second Language program. Our students arrive here on F-1 visas; they are not immigrants and are expressly forbidden from paid employment, yet there is nothing in BCIS regulations that prevents them from doing volunteer work if they wish to do so. In fact, we encourage it in order for them to improve their language skills, and it's all perfectly legal.

JumpinjoeYo... (Below threshold)
mak44:

Jumpinjoe

You posted: "Is there a lefty term for the Hispanic "Uncle Tom"? After all, that's the racism coming from the leftist when minorities don't march in lock step with them.

What a bunch of self proclaimed elitists you lefties are. "

Actually, there is....Tio Juan

BTW I understand your "user" now that you exp;ained some background above. Tell your wife to cut back on the Mexican "jumping beans" at dinner.

Isnt the colloquial actuall... (Below threshold)
gmax:

Isnt the colloquial actually " I am going to vote my pocketbook" No "with". Always meant to me, I am going to let the issues that influence my paycheck control my vote.

Sorry for breaking your karma and ruining your analogy here, but I think your quote was wrong.

This was either a call for ... (Below threshold)

This was either a call for illegals to vote in our elections (at worse), or a plea for people here illegally to help candidates get elected (at best).

Either way, Jay, she's dead wrong! I wouldn't want an illegal anyone working on my campaign. No one running for the House Of Representatives should ever want such a thing. You tell people here illegally that you appreciate the sentiment, but no thanks.

That, instead of the mindless pandering, would have earned her some votes...

Viva Busby VICTORY!!! ;-)

Perhaps you need to look... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Perhaps you need to look up the meaning of the words 'volunteer' and 'employ'. Volunteering is an unpaid service of one's own free will; hence, it is NOT employment, so a person's work/immigration status in this regard is moot.

Posted by: Radian

Sorry you missed the memo but Busby has denied solicitation of an illegal working for her campaign.

She should have said, "of course as somebody illegally in this country you can work to get me elected".

Why couldn't she just be honest like you an advocate people here illegally work to get Democrats elected to office?

Inquiring minds want to know.

I helped out in political c... (Below threshold)
doug r:

I helped out in political campaigns since I was 13 years old-I wasn't legal to vote then either!

BTW I understand your "u... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

BTW I understand your "user" now that you exp;ained some background above. Tell your wife to cut back on the Mexican "jumping beans" at dinner.

Actually Jumpinjoe is derived from my 20 years on Airborne status in the U.S. Army, to include my 4000+ skydives on behalf of the Army with the Golden Knights.

My wife is also Airborne qualified and spent 5 years at the Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg on jump status.

But at least you are trying. BTW, she's not into jumping beans, but she is my jumping beaner.

Airborne and Special Ops. ... (Below threshold)
gmax:

Airborne and Special Ops. Is she also a Ranger?

Nevertheless I bet you speak damn respectfully to the woman. I would unless I wanted my @** kicked!

Doug R,It's not ab... (Below threshold)

Doug R,

It's not about being legal to vote, but legal to be in this country in the first place. Young people help on campaigns all of the time, do illegal aliens as well?

Apparently, they are welcome to help with the Busby campaign.

Don't be stupid...

Airborne and Special Ops... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Airborne and Special Ops. Is she also a Ranger?

She wore the maroon beret like the other none SF qualified personnel. She was MOS 71LP, office clerk parachutist.

We also consider our daughter Airborne since she technically made a jump within the first weeks of conception.

Nevertheless I bet you speak damn respectfully to the woman. I would unless I wanted my @** kicked.

Actually she is petite, yet hard as woodpecker lips. Just the way I like it.


My point is not with what B... (Below threshold)
Radian:

My point is not with what Busby said but with a previous poster's choice of words, i.e "employ an illegal alien as a volunteer". Call me old-school, but to me the phrase 'employ...as a volunteer' (ellipsis mine) is an oxymoron. It's meaningless, and there is no violation of US labor law in this respect.

But don't take my word for it. If you feel Busby's actions are wrong, drop a dime on her to the State and Federal Labor Depts. and see what their policy is on someone who isn't authorized to work but wishes to volunteer somewhere. My guess is that they won't have a problem with it.

Moreover, I went back and re-read my post, but I couldn't find where I "advocate people here illegally work to get Democrats elected to office". My post didn't even imply that, but rather took issue with mindless commentary.

But since many here seem so omniscient, maybe Republicans should adopt the slogan 'GOP - the Party of ESP'; it might just be what the they need to revitalize themselves.

Just as an FYI, I'm not at all a supporter of the Democratic Party; but I do take exception to illogical and reactionary thinking.

Hmmmm.What utter i... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

What utter imbeclic tripe.

Because only English speakers are allowed in the country legally. There aren't any legal immigrants in the US who don't speak English at all.

That's absolutely right. There are NO legal immigrants in the USA that don't speak English at all. Why? Because command of English is a frigging requirement for NATURALIZATION. IN other words if you are an immigrant then you MUST know English in order to pass the naturalization process. This is because the oath you're require to recite is in English and it's not legally binding unless you are able to comprehend it.

I think the full quote makes it clear that the "papers" she was referring to were voter registration papers, not immigration papers. What she was saying is that you don't have to be a registered voter to help with Get Out The Vote efforts; illegal immigration had nothing to do with it.

It's nice that you completely ignored the fact that she was exhorting people to VOTE. Not just help her campaign, but VOTE. And you do need to have "papers" to vote. The most basic requirement of any such election is that you must be a registered voter in order to vote. So even if she were talking about voter registration papers and not legal immigration papers then she's still completely wrong.

And note that in order to be a registered voter the person must be a citizen, not just a green card holder.

Why this is so hard for you lefties to comprehend is frankly absurd.

So all of those going against Jay here believe that Busby was openly calling for illegal immigrants to commit voter fraud? That she is some amazingly stupid that she would say it publicly? There is no way in your minds that it was a case of slipping up?

No not at all. Because there is only one recording of the speech and it wasn't recorded by Busby or her campaign staff. It was recorded by a member of the audience.

So it's extremely clear that Busby felt safe in making such outrageous statements because she didn't think she could be called to account on it.

Listen to the audio. The way I hear it, it's clearly a run-on sentence and by 'papers for voting' she meant voter registration cards. Some people simply aren't registered to vote. They aren't necessarily illegal aliens.

And if you're not registered to vote, then you cannot vote! If that was what she meant then she would have worded it completely differently.

She specifically stated that you did not need papers to vote. This is utterly false. You must be a registered voter to vote and you must be a citizen and a resident to be a registered voter.

So you MUST have papers in order to vote. Unless you, she in this case, is exhorting people to commit voter fraud!

Photo ID for voting is a bad idea because it is just as open to subterfuge and it would disenfranchise lots of poor and elderly voters.

A *FREE* photo id for all citizens is not a bad idea at all. As for disenfranchising poor and elderly, well that's why it's *free*.

And yet you Democrats oppose even that? It's pretty obvious that you rely heavily on voter fraud.

C.f. Washington state 2004 Govenor's race & St. Louis.

Oh, and you don't need to be able to read a voter registration card or a ballot initiative in order to be a citizen.

Actually you damn well do need to be able to speak English! Because, again, English is required to be naturalised.

"Parpers fo voting" clearly means "to be registered," hence the clarification in the next statement. There would be no reason to offer it if she didn't mean that. If she really meant to say "You don't need papers to vote, the clarification would have been in that direction, not its clear opposite.

Utter bullshit.

You do need papers to vote. And that second sentence is clearly not a run-on sentence. It is not a clarification. It is clearly a separate sentence with both a completely different orientation and a completely different goal.

Conservatives Bigots = Cowards. What are you so scared of? You people must be afraid of your own shadow. What a way to have to live. Try growing up it will work wonders for you

And you Democrats are the party of frauds and cheats.

So far you've maintained what little political power you have by cheating at the polls. But you can bet the next iteration of the illegal alien issue is going to be clamping down hard on voter fraud. Once that happens, your political power will freefall.

Since it's clearly LEGAL for anyone regardless of immigration status to help out in an election, what really disturbs them is that here is just another example of Latinos fleeing from them -- just like the Blacks, and for much the same reasons.

Utter bullshit. No it is not clearly LEGAL for an illegal alien to work on an election campaign. It's clearly NOT legal for that person to be in America. It's also clearly NOT legal for that person to be working at all.

To all decent folks here who question the statement "you don't need papers to vote" a question. Does this mean that when somebody says "I'm going to vote with my pocketbook", that they explicitly mean they are going to buy votes? Never mind that Busby's next sentence more or less clarified what she meant.

That is perhaps the stupidest comment I've seen yet.

The phrase "voting with my pocketbook" has nothing to do with "you don't need papers to vote".

When can we start feeding a... (Below threshold)

When can we start feeding all the Christians and right-wing faggots to the lions? I'd buy that for a dollar!

I think Jay Tea may be on t... (Below threshold)
jack:

I think Jay Tea may be on to something. A little-reported part of the story quotes Busby as yelling from the ladies room, "Hey a little help here. We're out of papers for wiping!"

Go ed! Go ed! Go ed! Go ed!... (Below threshold)
Phredd:

Go ed! Go ed! Go ed! Go ed! Go ed!

Moreover, I went back a... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Moreover, I went back and re-read my post, but I couldn't find where I "advocate people here illegally work to get Democrats elected to office". My post didn't even imply that, but rather took issue with mindless commentary

Posted by: Radian

Well Radian, since we were discussing an illegal being solicited to work for a Democrat your reaction was this.

it's no wonder people who think rationally don't take the GOP seriously

Perhaps you need to look up the meaning of the words 'volunteer' and 'employ'. Volunteering is an unpaid service of one's own free will; hence, it is NOT employment, so a person's work/immigration status in this regard is moot

There is no way to misconstrue your point, which btw was to argue immigration status does not hinder whom that person can volunteer with even if that status is illegal and on behalf of getting a Democrat elected to Congress.


Jumpinjoe, you are absolute... (Below threshold)
Radian:

Jumpinjoe, you are absolutely correct - that is my point, but to interpret that as advocation on my part (as others have) is a total leap in logic.

As far as the issue of having an illegal volunteering on a campaign, I personally don't think it's good policy, if for no other reason than leading to another case of foot-in-mouth disease, with a side effect of backpedalitis, on the part of a candidate, something that seems to be endemic to pols of all political persuasions. However, it doesn't change the fact that, while political volunteering by an illegal may be questionable, it is not illegal. If it is, I challenge anyone out there to cite relevant law to that effect and I'll be the first to retract what I've written.

A statement of fact (not opinion) is just that, and the mere mention of it should not be construed as support for that fact; e.g abortion is legal (there, I've said it). But just because I said it doesn't mean I think abortion is right or wrong, it's only a mention of the obvious.

However, It's nice to know that there are so many people out there who know - even more than I do - exactly what I'm thinking. Must be nice to have such powers.

Hmmmm.As ... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

As far as the issue of having an illegal volunteering on a campaign

Frankly I was curious about this myself as there are many stringent restrictions on the conduct of political campaigns that do not apply to most other situations. For volunteers of political campaigns there are monetary restrictions on amounts that can be spent on lodgings, fuel, food & other travel expenses. If a volunteer spends more than the allocated amount then I believe fines begin to accrue.

I tried Googling for any relevant documentation that would deal with the issue of illegal aliens volunteering for political campaigns but it's nearly impossible. The incredible morass of webpages concerned with various component issues just makes trying to find a specific unknown webage almost impossible. The just number of websites that deal with "illegal alien" alone is daunting to search through.

Hmmm.And just in c... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

And just in case anybody is thinking of trying to use the "you hate immigrants" canard on me you are advised that I was born in Seoul, South Korea, and I AM an immigrant and a naturalized citizen.

And hopefully this will nip that sort of nonsense in the bud.

However, it doesn't chan... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

However, it doesn't change the fact that, while political volunteering by an illegal may be questionable, it is not illegal. If it is, I challenge anyone out there to cite relevant law to that effect and I'll be the first to retract what I've written.

Here you go, this should cover it.

Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who:

· Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or

· Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or

· Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;

has committed a federal crime.

Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

So the question is, how can someone committing a federal crime work for a political campaign even if it is volunteer work.

When can we start feedin... (Below threshold)
gmax:

When can we start feeding all the Christians and right-wing faggots to the lions?

Well then all you'd be left with is Democrats and leftwing faggots ( sorry for repeating myself).

However, It's nice to kn... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

However, It's nice to know that there are so many people out there who know - even more than I do - exactly what I'm thinking. Must be nice to have such powers.

It is not a supernatural power; it's just simple intuition. You see if I say up, then the other person is more than likely going to say down.

Now that you know my secret, proceed........

"So the question is, how ca... (Below threshold)
Radian:

"So the question is, how can someone committing a federal crime work for a political campaign even if it is volunteer work."

Exactly. How can someone? Unfortunately, the law you cited doesn't address that specific situation, and as any lawyer will tell you, under American jurisprudence, laws are meant to be as narrowly interpreted as possible.

In this respect, ed is correct in atempting to cite Federal Election Law, which theoretically should deal with these kinds of situations.

Oh well, maybe living in Chicago has tainted my perceptions. There are numerous convicted felons (state and federal) working at all levels of politics and government here; a criminal record doesn't seem to have hindered them at all.

Hmmmm.Wel... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

Well then all you'd be left with is Democrats and leftwing faggots ( sorry for repeating myself).

Ouch, that's going to leave a mark.

Personally I enjoy a good biting remark, regardless of the issue or the ideology of the target. And this one definitely made me smile.

Well then all you'd be l... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Well then all you'd be left with is Democrats and leftwing faggots ( sorry for repeating myself)

Posted by: gmax

I saw that post too. But I was afraid to reply since the left clearly decided to invade this thread with their big guns with that post.


Hmmmm.Oh ... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

Oh well, maybe living in Chicago has tainted my perceptions. There are numerous convicted felons (state and federal) working at all levels of politics and government here; a criminal record doesn't seem to have hindered them at all.

Heck I live in New Jersey. At last count the leadership of approximately 36 townships are under federal investigation or indictment. In the last 10 years we've had about 12 county DA's indicted, including one fellow who absconded with millions in forfeiture money and was found dead of suicide in Las Vegas.

Around here having a felon as a mayor is pretty much normal.

Care to share with us the P... (Below threshold)
gmax:

Care to share with us the Party registration of the 12 county DAs? I am sure I know but since this is news to me here in Texas, go ahead and tell us.

Gmax-- A lot of p... (Below threshold)
Jackson:

Gmax--
A lot of people on this comment thread seem to think only Democrats commit voter fraud.
Just so I can make sure you're aware of & opposed to Republican voter fraud as well, you guys all condemn the actions taken in New Hampshire in 2002 by James Tobin and two other Republicans to jam the phones? (Should be easy for you to do so; they all were convicted; two served time in prison & Tobin's on his way there now.)
Also, re 2000: There's a book by Greg Palast called "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy." You might want to check out Chapter 1. It's a bit of an eye-opener. Palast got ahold of a list of felons prevented from voting. At least 300 people were clearly innocent.) The *dates* listed that these 300 people commited crimes...2007. Do you agree these people should have been allowed to vote? And do you agree that there's something just a *little* suspicious about the fact that the CEO of the company in charge of the Florida voters list was a major Bush donor? (If you're having trouble, just reverse the parties in your mind.)

Thanks,

Jackson

Exactly. How can someone... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Exactly. How can someone? Unfortunately, the law you cited doesn't address that specific situation, and as any lawyer will tell you, under American jurisprudence, laws are meant to be as narrowly interpreted as possible.

Well, I'm not a lawyer and I never played one on TV, but my layman's interpretation is that just standing there in place for the illegal is a federal crime.

So if that person was passing out campaign material they are still committing a federal crime because they are still standing where they shouldn't. It's just they are working on behalf of a candidate while simultaneously committing the crime with the blessing of the person wanting to be a lawmaker.

But then to be a lawmaker it's always a good idea to start off obeying the laws to give yourself credibility, especially if your platform is "ethics reform".

Republicans are always so e... (Below threshold)
Kimyl Oh!:

Republicans are always so entertaining. They attack, then when you challenge their assumptions or try to determine the root of their logic they resort to attacking you or your beliefs. Here is what I hear from most Republicans; "Well, my party might have failed to solve all of the problems, and I cannot list anything they have done to benefit me but we have not been attacked (tell that to the men and women in Iraq) and the Democrats are evil, they want to raise taxes (yeah, and invest in our communities or maintain our public facilities, what a crazy idea) and they hate God, and they are racists, and they just want to win and blah blah...

What do Republicans stand for anymore?

Defense--foolish excursions, nation building, and preemptive war

Small Government--the DHS is ENORMOUS, the NSA is spying on you, you apparently want national ID cards for voting, spending is going through the roof, pork barrel spending is at an all time high, the new Medicare bill is a boondoggle and gives your tax dollars to the needy insurance and drug industries.

Republican governance is failed. Our best hope, as always, is two parties that have to battle it out and find a workable center. I mean, what is Busby gonna do in the house? She is gonna restrain Bush and the Republicans from making bad decisions to appease the 30-40% who support him. If she tries to do anything to REWARD illegal aliens, she is gonna be stopped immediately. No elected official can take a position opposed by 60,70,80% of their constituents. They lose then. The idea that she is some stealth communist liberal who cannot wait to open the gates up and let the Chavez socialist party invade California is patently absurd.

The answer to your question, Jumpinjoe, is that your congress and President has sat on its ASS for the last 5, 10, 15 years because illegal immigrants are GOOD FOR BUSINESS and business buys votes. And you know what you do when your elected leaders dont do shit about a problem you care about? You elect someone else! Its simple!

Unlike gays, guns, god and the others, you can work with Democrats to find a solution. You can find out why President Bush cut 10,000 border patrol agents from his budget only to send the National Guard later.

If the Democratic Party took a shit on all the things I cared about, or started to pander to the far far left (and I mean like maximum wage, everyone gets a job, eliminate the defense budget, taxes at 60% to pay for free lobsters for all poor people, whatever crazy left shit you can think of)
I would vote for another party. Seriously. I would not march our country off the deep end to make the rabid right wingers happy or the rabid left wingers. And you can do it. You can say, I want a Republican president, but I am OK with a Democrat in the house to keep an eye on him.

If you have no party to belong to, find one, start one, or change the one you belong to.

"how can someone committ... (Below threshold)
db:

"how can someone committing a federal crime work for a political campaign even if it is volunteer work."

Oh, come on. You can do better than this unimaginative tripe. But I'll indulge you.

I strongly doubt that volunteers are required to show id when they work for a campaign. Well, maybe a Republican campaign. But rather than id they seem to want loyalty pledges. Creepy.

So, unless you expect folks to ask everyone around them whether or not they are legally in this country, I think the the answer you seek is quite obvious. Though I have a funny feeling that you aren't very interested in answers.

Jackson,Anyone can... (Below threshold)

Jackson,

Anyone can cast a vote in an election whether they are on the voter roles or not. It's called a provisional ballot. Once the error is found, the vote counts. Yes, jamming phone lines is wrong.

Now, care to explain the last gubernatorial election in the state of Washington. Gee, 500 ballots are "found" weeks after the election ends. Oh wow, let's just put them in with the rest of the ballots right away! And golly gee whiz! The Democrat wins on the third recount!!!

I look forward to reading your thoughts...

I am damn sick and tired of idiot leftists hiding behind what is legal. Lying in a campaign is legal. Would you vote for an admitted habitual liar? It is legal after all...

An adult male asked if he could help the campaign even though he has no papers. This would make him an illegal resident. Instead of telling him thanks, but no thanks, she tells him he doesn't need here legally to help with the campaign.

I, and a whole lot of other people, have a problem with illegals helping candidates get into office in any way, shape, manner or form.

What part of this is so hard to understand?

Kimyl, you know as well as ... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Kimyl, you know as well as I do Democrats see a pool of loyal party voters in the long term with illegal immigrants.

And the only big business employing illegals is places like Tyson chicken farms and I'm pretty sure they will be supporting the home girl Hillary even if she did carpet bag to New York.

I strongly doubt that vo... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

I strongly doubt that volunteers are required to show id when they work for a campaign. Well, maybe a Republican campaign. But rather than id they seem to want loyalty pledges.

Posted by: db

Gee whiz, I missed that story where Republicans were asking illegals to help with their campaigns. Maybe you could provide a link so we could all expand our horizons.

But then I am on a thread on a blog where a Democrat knowingly told an illegal it was OK to work for her campaign.

mmmmm-Kay

So get crack'in. And not the pipe variety, but with the link to the story about the Republican soliciting illegal campaign help.

Great thread. Let me add m... (Below threshold)
KobeClan:

Great thread. Let me add my 2 cents worth.

I am a "Zell Miller" Democrat, born and raised in Chicago before living in GA for 15 years. Spent time working in Chicago politics. 100s of great stories to tell, but this is neither the time nor place for storytelling.

Bottom Line: The Democratic Party is the party of voter fraud; always has been, always will be.

I found the irony of a Republican winning the presidency due to "voter fraud" deliciously ironic. If anyone wants to know why BDS is so prevelant, now you know. A Republican stealing democratic tactics to win an election just ain't right!!

Busby was just doing what Democrats have always done, get the most votes anyway you can. To think that she "misspoke" is to not recognize the obvious: The Democratic Party is the party of voter fraud. Always has been, always will be.

Hmmm.Care... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

Care to share with us the Party registration of the 12 county DAs? I am sure I know but since this is news to me here in Texas, go ahead and tell us.

I believe they were all Democrats. Generally Republicans have a slim chance at state-wide races but lose heavily in county and local races. And even then really only in certain pro-Republican areas and if the Democrats have been a little excessive.

Hmmmmm.An... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmmm.

And do you agree that there's something just a *little* suspicious about the fact that the CEO of the company in charge of the Florida voters list was a major Bush donor? (If you're having trouble, just reverse the parties in your mind.)

If the best you've got is unfounded innuendo compared to actual convictions then I'm neither surprised nor impressed.

And if the matter of phone tampering is that important then I'm sure you'll be as angry as I am that John Kerry's brother-in-law was apprehended monekying around with Kerry's political opponent in his first House race in Lowell, Massachusetts.

So yes, the parties are rather reversed aren't they.

Hmmmm.In ... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

In this respect, ed is correct in atempting to cite Federal Election Law, which theoretically should deal with these kinds of situations.

Interestingly enough there actually does seem to be a law on the books that can cause a prosecution of an employer that uses illegal aliens for volunteer work. But not if that employer is a church or religious organization.

Evidently an exception was passed by Congress a few years back because some churches were concerned that they could be held criminally liable if they were found to be using illegal aliens as volunteers. Since then there have been allegations that churches, and mosques, have been using this shield law far beyond the expectations to do everything from shielding illegal aliens from INS to railroading illegal aliens all over America at will.

Senator Tom Tancredo is looking to revoke or reform this shield law.

So yes there actually might be a criminal statute on the books that would cause Busby to be indicted if she employed unpaid illegal alien volunteers.

Hmmm.I should real... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

I should really re-start my own blog rather than clogging up WizBang.

Sorry about that guys.

The Dems are the party of v... (Below threshold)
Matt:

The Dems are the party of voter fraud? Are you out of your fucking mind? When Bill Frist essentially apologized to black Americans for attempting to prevent them from voting through the dissemination of misinformation (etc.), Rush Limbaugh said that the GOP might as well "put its head between its legs and kiss its own ass goodbye" or something to that effect. I'm adlibbing here, and probably not doing that gifted orator of the Glorious Conservative Revolution (R.I.P.) credit with my paraphrasing. (I can't watch Daryn Kagan ever again, not that I had much reason to do so in the first place.)

Diebold execs donated to the GOP, on an almost, if not entirely, exclusive basis. Those machines are designed to be tampered with. So why don't you shut the fuck up with your "Dems are the party of fraud!" nonsense, because I think I know more Republicans that identify with Richard Nixon and Lee Atwater than I do Dems with Mayor Daly and his thugs.

It hurts my fucking eyeballs to read this idiocy. Yes, some people might not like her allowing illegal immigrants to work for her campaign, and no, it's not illegal. Vote for her opponent, or run for the legislature yourself. (Even better, go help smear some FreedomButter over a hot slice of Iraq.)

Hmmm.Google:... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

Google:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=tancredo+church+%22illegal+alien%22+volunteers&btnG=Google+Search

Ahhhh. Here we go:

Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), of 1996

There we go. Sooooo. Since the liberals here are arguing that Busby was only looking to volunteer illegal aliens, can we arrest her now?

Hmmmm.Die... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

Diebold execs donated to the GOP, on an almost, if not entirely, exclusive basis.

You Democrats really are amusing you know that?

When Republicans complained about Al Gore and Bill Clinton getting hundreds of thousands of dollars from a "retired" Chinese intelligence officer laundered through a California Buddhist monastery you Democrats couldn't be dismissive enough. "Legal donations" was the cry. "Nothing illegal here" was the shout.

And now some Diebold execs make legal donations to the GOP and it's supposed to be a scandal?

Don't make me laugh. Diebold sold their machines to a lot of other states that aren't at all controlled by Republicans. And I'll point out, yet again, that the precints where the most trouble is had in the polls is in areas where Democrats are in control.

The Dems are the party of voter fraud? Are you out of your fucking mind?

Washington State.
St. Louis.
Michigan.
Minnesota.
Florida.

And the Democrats have never apologised for any of them.

Yes, some people might not like her allowing illegal immigrants to work for her campaign, and no, it's not illegal.

And it hurts my eyeballs to see something so ignorant. Because yes, it is illegal. It's a violation of federal law.

Hey Special Ed--Wh... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

Hey Special Ed--

Why mention that you're South Korean? Like that makes you an expert on the oughts and ought-nots of immigration reform? Should we leave the discussion of gay marriage only to gays, then?

When your boner deflates, why don't you send an e-mail to Busby's people and to the proper authorities and try to rat her out? (You are a rat, FYI.) Illegal aliens are, by definition, never NOT committing a crime. Americans know that. It's a crime for them to breathe your air. Does that make it wrong? Hell no. With the stellar bench on the Supreme Court right now, presuming Scalia and Alito don't lobotomize Kennedy, your laws might catch up to sound liberal principles of fair governance someday.

As an aside, in my insular world of political philosophy, my favourite professor once told a fellow student that the best academic ideas usually take over two hundred years to distill into the public consciousness. With Rawls et al having so thoroughly trounced Nozickian and Hayekian anarcho-conserva-libertarianism (can't believe that wasn't theoretically sound!), your country, by this (flawed, silly, hypothetical) reasoning, might be only two centuries away from being a progressive utopia. It might take a little longer to purge all of the Lockean retardation, though, as it seems to be pretty firmly entrenched in the psyches of GOPers. And they're a solid 30-40% of the population.

Jackson: I strongl... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Jackson:

I strongly suggest you search Wizbang for "Tobin." I'm a lifelong New Hampshirite, and voted in that election. I've been reporting on that story for some time, and every single piece has been a vehement denouncement of it.

What else might you have wrong, hmm?

J.

Bemused: I'm so gl... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Bemused:

I'm so glad we have an expert on everything to correct us. Especially ed, who has these horribly misguided impressions on what it's like to become a naturalized American, as he only has his own experience of having done it, versus your extensive listening to lectures and reading books of theory.

ed: if you don't want the hassle of starting up your own blog, feel free to sign up for the Bomb Squad. We're always looking for good writers -- of all persuasions. Hell if any of the moonbats above wanted to join, they'd be permitted.

J.

Now that Busby is polling e... (Below threshold)
Matt:

Now that Busby is polling even with her opponent, it seems that some Republicans on here are taking this as a victory. This district is a GOP stronghold--rich people who feel indignant about having to pay for stuff that other people use, etc. (Caricaturization is fun!)

And she's now polling even.

And Republicans are cheering? Like this is a victory? I guess if everyday when you wake up, somebody stabs you in the eye with a fork, it's automatically a good day when it doesn't happen.

Dick Cheney lies like it's his second favourite hobby (next to shooting old men in the face). Busby allows Mexicans to hand out flyers. Sadly, I'm not convinced that voters will punish the right party, but that's not an indictment of the Democratic platform; it's an indictment of Democratic pols and the gullible American public, and a demonstration of just how good that fat motherfucker Karl Rove is at his job. He might be the most powerful virgin in the world.

Lots of room up here in Canada, and the housing is affordable...

As an aside, in my insul... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

As an aside, in my insular world of political philosophy, my favourite professor once told a fellow student that the best academic ideas usually take over two hundred years to distill into the public consciousness

Posted by Dazed and Bemused

Gee, too bad you didn't expand on what those academic ideas are that are going to lead us to the lefty social utopia.

What's the matter, are you embarrassed they may sound like ideas that already crumbled along with the Berlin Wall.

Trust me moron, once you emerge from your dorm room that reeks of petulie oil and ass and quit living in a world of washed up theories from pinko lib professors, you just like most before you will abandon the theories for the realities of the real world.

Jay - I was away for the we... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Jay - I was away for the weekend or I would have said this much sooner - but you're right (re Busby and the meaning behind the quote).

Thank you for standing up for what's right, and for taking the punches that go along with taking a stand on an issue like this.

"Perhaps "you don't need pa... (Below threshold)
Mysticdog:

"Perhaps "you don't need papers for voting" means "you don't have to be registered to vote to work on my campaign.

Kth.......

Toward the end, a man in the audience asked in Spanish: "I want to help, but I don't have papers."

Translation: I am not registered to vote, can I still help with the campaign.

It was translated and Busby replied: "Everybody can help, yeah, absolutely, you can all help. You don't need papers for voting, you don't need to be a registered voter to help."

Translation: You don't need to be registered to vote to help with the campaign.

"I was clarifying the question that was being asked in Spanish and then stated that you do not have to be a registered voter to help the campaign because there were many people who appeared to be to be under 18 in the group who wanted to volunteer," she said in a statement.

Translation: Seriously, what the $#@% is wrong with you racist morons? A guy asks if he can take part in the political process in spanish, and you asshats freak out about it. People speak spanish in America. We are a nations of immigrants, and all but three countries in this hemisphere speak spanish. And one of those speaks portugese. Don't be such stupid, racist freaks for once. I'm serious, you'll like it knowing the sky isn't falling.

"I'm not surprised that the Republican Party is making this last-minute, desperate ploy and it is absolutely false."

Translation: Asshats. Desperate asshats praying for any sign of corruption that will allow them to ignore the gross incompetence and corruption that has been the signature of their governance for the past half century. They lie. Shamelessly. As easily as breathing. Its time for them to go.

Gertrude Stein said "There ... (Below threshold)
Frankye:

Gertrude Stein said "There is no there there." She was talking about her home town of Oakland, Calif.

Mysticdog - all you did wit... (Below threshold)
Michael:

Mysticdog - all you did with your stupid post is to show us all what a major asshat you are.

Hey Matt, (and lib's)... (Below threshold)
Phredd:

Hey Matt, (and lib's)

Funny how you liberals would rather throw personal stones ("that fat motherfucker") than discuss logic and FACTS.

I guess when you have no leg to stand on, it makes you mad and strike out...it must be frustrating.

Phredd

Mr. ed, the talking ass... (Below threshold)
mak44:

Mr. ed, the talking ass

Your multiple posts above do go to show that there is such a critter as a talking ass. All your braying notwithstanding, any listen to the audio of Busby's talk does not support any of your contentions, You are stubbornly recycling the rightie extremist chyme in regard to this matter.

But then, I should have realized; Busby's opponent, Bil"bray," made you think he's a kissin' cousin of yours.

All the libby trolls are fr... (Below threshold)
Michael:

All the libby trolls are freaking out with there moronic posts
because they all realize that whatever chance Busby had of winning this race went out the window with her revealing comment. She is toast...accept it.

Nr. ed, the talking ass<... (Below threshold)
mak44:

Nr. ed, the talking ass

Forgot to mention; for a guy, you sure are giving a lot of hmmmmmm-ers tonite. Kinda makes a person wonder a little about the likes of you.

"Gee, too bad you didn't ex... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

"Gee, too bad you didn't expand on what those academic ideas are that are going to lead us to the lefty social utopia.

What's the matter, are you embarrassed they may sound like ideas that already crumbled along with the Berlin Wall."

What does liberalism have to do with Communism? Are you seriously that fucking stupid? Shit, I think you are. That fucking stupid, that is. Rawls' theory of justice (explained in his Theory of Justice, which is about a thousand pages and maybe a little dense for people who subscribe to the Regnery Press e-mail newsletter) outlines several principles that ought to govern any and all political decisions. My favourite is the one which most likely leads to misinterpretations of liberalism on behalf of "ME! MINE! GET THE FUCK OFF MY LAWN!" conservatarians. This principle states that imbalances in well-being, defined however you may define it (utiles, dollars, some attempt at an objective measurement of contentment), are justified only insofar as they serve to benefit those in society who do poorly. So it is tolerable for a society to have an underclass only insofar as said underclass is a necessary condition for the flourishing of the vast majority.

That ain't Communism, comrade. Academic liberals are so radically disparate from the patchouli-stinking idiots that you inaccurately lumped me in with, that we appear downright conservative to those halfwits. "Bush = Hitler!" is the sort of comment we ignore, because it's stupid. You and yours use it as a paradigmatic case of left-wing sentiment across the entire spectrum of ideas that owes as much to Adam Smith as it does to Karl Marx. You can keep Marx's critique of gluttony and alienation while ignoring the tiny part of his corpus that focuses on authoritarian policy. Liberalism is pluralistic, and can only consistently advocate an open, secular society. See also: Karl Popper's "The Open Society and its Enemies"; John Dewey's "Reconstruction in Philosophy"; and Richard Rorty's "Philosophy and Social Hope". All left-leaning intellectuals, and all anti-authoritarian.

So before you associate 90% of Americans with PhDs with the regime in East Germany, you could think a little bit harder about what it is you're saying; if upon realizing that you have nothing to say, perhaps you should... I dunno... call somebody a moonbat and send Michelle Malkin some fan mail.

Hmmmm.sigh. Here ... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

sigh. Here we go. Further proof that pregnant women shouldn't use crack.

Hey Special Ed--

Yes, yes, yes. You are most definitely witty for being the very first person on planet Earth to think of that. I'm sure there are billions of souls in Heaven right now slapping their foreheads and wondering why they didn't think of that when they had the chance.

It is a pity. Amusement rides can have signs that say "you must be this tall" but blogs can't have a "you must be this intelligent" sign anywhere.

Why mention that you're South Korean? Like that makes you an expert on the oughts and ought-nots of immigration reform? Should we leave the discussion of gay marriage only to gays, then?

sigh.

If you read that comment you'd see exactly why I posted it, because I actually listed the reason in the comment. And, just for you, I'll post the reason why yet again:

Because Democrats have been throwing around terms like "racist" and "anti-immigrant". As a first generation immigrant and naturalized citizen, neither such terms can't possibly apply.

When your boner deflates, why don't you send an e-mail to Busby's people and to the proper authorities and try to rat her out? (You are a rat, FYI.)

Well nobody can say you're original.

Illegal aliens are, by definition, never NOT committing a crime. Americans know that.

Well you actually wrote something that is true.

I am impressed. I didn't think you were capable of that.

It's a crime for them to breathe your air. Does that make it wrong? Hell no. With the stellar bench on the Supreme Court right now, presuming Scalia and Alito don't lobotomize Kennedy, your laws might catch up to sound liberal principles of fair governance someday.

Yes I'm sure we'd all like to have the bursting economy of France or Germany, with a GDP growth of -1%, rather than the one we have now of +5.3%.

Just think of it. Right now people are worried that there will be far too many unfilled jobs if the illegals were deported en masse. In Europe you could deport all of the illegals, and quite a few citizens, and still not have enough jobs to go around.

That is quite an impressive example of liberal governance.

As an aside, in my insular world of political philosophy, my favourite professor once told a fellow student that the best academic ideas usually take over two hundred years to distill into the public consciousness.

Ahhhh. You're a college student/graduate? That explains everything.

Uneducated? check.
Unable to grasp basic concepts? check.
Only able to regurgitate liberal nonsense? check.
Generally uninformed? check.
College educated? check.

Yep, it's a slam-dunk.

Soooo. Two hundred years eh? Like most claptrap coming from incompetent academics, it's utter bunkum. And considering that this is about political science, a "science" that wasn't even a separate discipline a hundred years ago, it's even more nonsense.

And yes, I treasure my lack of a high-school diploma. My education came from reading several libraries rather than parroting some lame twit.

With Rawls et al having so thoroughly trounced Nozickian and Hayekian anarcho-conserva-libertarianism (can't believe that wasn't theoretically sound!), your country, by this (flawed, silly, hypothetical) reasoning, might be only two centuries away from being a progressive utopia.

Oh my, what big words you have.

Your problem is that classical liberalism, as emplified by John Rawls is more properly the basis of modern conservatism, which is oriented around liberty, rather than modern liberals which is far more oriented around Marxism.

I.e. conservatism is oriented towards the individual while modern liberalism, which has nothing to do with classical liberalism, is oriented around the state.

But please, show off dem big ole words.

It might take a little longer to purge all of the Lockean retardation, though, as it seems to be pretty firmly entrenched in the psyches of GOPers. And they're a solid 30-40% of the population.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yada yada yada. Sis boom bah.

And I'll point out that if it weren't for the vast immigration of illegal aliens, most of whom come directly from excessively socialist cultures, the modern liberals would be dying out. It required the influx of millions of such illegals each year for the modern liberals to lose overall population.

Then there's the example of modern liberals in Europe whose numbers would be cut by at least half by 2050.

Not prime examples of long-term success I'd say.

Hmmmm.For... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

Forgot to mention; for a guy, you sure are giving a lot of hmmmmmm-ers tonite. Kinda makes a person wonder a little about the likes of you.

You certainly do tend to concentrate on homosexual issues.

Hmmmm.ed:... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

ed: if you don't want the hassle of starting up your own blog, feel free to sign up for the Bomb Squad. We're always looking for good writers -- of all persuasions. Hell if any of the moonbats above wanted to join, they'd be permitted.

I'll definitely keep that in mind. I kinda abandoned keeping up my own blog because of time constraints.

Right now I'm appraising various implementations of AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript And XML) and AJAJ (Asynchronous Javascript And JSON) technologies and putting some time in to learn Ruby on Rails. Frankly the next generation of blogging software is going to be AJAX or AJAJ based UIs.

This is because it can dramatically cut down on bandwidth costs by intelligently storing retrieved data in an in-memory cache, asynchronously retrieving new posts & comments, providing flexible customizable UIs for readers and a bunch of other stuff.

*shrug* I need a summer hobby.

Hmmm.Here's an exa... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

Here's an example of a AJAX/DHTML UI done with a Java based server code.

http://www.nextapp.com/platform/echo2/echo/demo/

Very interesting stuff. This example seems a bit server heavy but it has some interesting special effects.

Hmmmm.So ... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

So it is tolerable for a society to have an underclass only insofar as said underclass is a necessary condition for the flourishing of the vast majority.

Yep. You're a modern liberal.

Only a modern liberal would actually believe that it benefits society to have failures.

My favourite is the one ... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

My favourite is the one which most likely leads to misinterpretations of liberalism on behalf of "ME! MINE! GET THE FUCK OFF MY LAWN!" conservatarians. This principle states that imbalances in well-being, defined however you may define it (utiles, dollars, some attempt at an objective measurement of contentment), are justified only insofar as they serve to benefit those in society who do poorly. So it is tolerable for a society to have an underclass only insofar as said underclass is a necessary condition for the flourishing of the vast majority.

Posted by: Bemused

Wow, they sure are putting pretty wrapping paper on the Karl Marx collection and selling it as new and improved. And as an extra bonus you get a condescending pat on the head and are reinsured how enlightened you are compared to us poor hicks in fly over country.

The reality is you could have easily condensed your rant. Here, I'll give you a hand:

From each according to their ability, to each according to their need.

You are a gullible lefty sheep.

Ed, they attack you persona... (Below threshold)

Ed, they attack you personally because they can't touch your ideals...

Keep it up!

We've gone quite tangential... (Below threshold)
KobeClan:

We've gone quite tangential. Back to the original story.

Words mean things. Papers!! Papers!! You don't need no stinking papers!!

The real lesson to be learned is that "business as usual" is over. No longer can any politician or public figure throw red meat to a particular audience and not have their words publicized to the four corners of the earth within 24 hours.

Words mean things. Papers!! Papers!! You don't need no stinking papers!!

In Chicago, we used a different phrase: Vote early and vote often.

ed: "Your problem is that c... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

ed: "Your problem is that classical liberalism, as emplified by John Rawls is more properly the basis of modern conservatism, which is oriented around liberty, rather than modern liberals which is far more oriented around Marxism.

I.e. conservatism is oriented towards the individual while modern liberalism, which has nothing to do with classical liberalism, is oriented around the state."

Rawls' liberalism is motivated primarily (but not exclusively) by the Kantian deontic imperative, not Locke's individualism. "Act such that you will your maxim to be universal law." Dude couldn't write (and the funny thing is, it's supposedly worse in the original German. German philosophers learn English to read Kant. The more you know!). Rather than rehash Kantian moral metaphysics, you can just take some dude named Jesus' version of it: "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you." (As far as I'm concerned, it's one of maybe five worthwhile passages in the whole Bible.) Locke and Kant are not, as some might argue, diametrically opposed, but they do come at the same issue from different places. (Locke: what's good for me? Kant: what is the right thing to do?) I will of course concede that modern conservatives want to live in a country that would fit most of Rawls' criteria, as would modern liberals. Rawls would be disgusted, though, by the narrow-minded populism that drives so much (but not all! No strawpersons here!) of the anti-immigrant rhetoric. Populism is never, ever, under any circumstances, a justification for anything.

ed: "Uneducated? check.
Unable to grasp basic concepts? check.
Only able to regurgitate liberal nonsense? check.
Generally uninformed? check.
College educated? check."

The first thing there is an attempt to ridicule me for being uneducated. I have an MA, and work as a policy analyst for a healthcare company. The last thing is an apparent acknowledgement of what I said, and a contradiction of item 1 in your checklist. (I know you know that A = A, 1 + 1 = 2; it's just that since I'm such a bleeding heart, I care deeply about your ability to consistently articulate yourself, and I'm selflessly correcting you.) Also, as far as being uninformed, I subscribe to Harper's and read tons of lefty blogs, but I also read righty blogs, NRO and the Weekly Standard online; so it's not like I've never thought about what you're "arguing" for. In fact, I have to consider it all of the time in order to properly do my job; usually the only way forward is a synthesis of your convictions, and of mine. Quelle surprise!!!

As for what I said earlier:

"So it is tolerable for a society to have an underclass only insofar as said underclass is a necessary condition for the flourishing of the vast majority."

That said, I was then accused of repackaging Lenin's mantra by Jumpinjoe, who is really awesome because he fell out of an airplane 4,000 times and didn't even die once. Here ya go, Joe: any functioning capitalist society, which we all want to live in (whether or not you are willing to acknowledge it), requires a mobile pool of labour. Some people will be unemployed, and many will be under-employed (janitors, dude at 7-11, poor bastards at KFC). Even Henry Ford, a neo-fascist asshole if ever there was one, recognized this, and paid his workers handsomely to earn their loyalty and an acceptable level of performance. Unemployment rates increase with rates of taxation, as capital is more mobile than labour. Liberals know this. Liberals aren't people who failed out of Conservative school. Where we disagree with you, is where to say "Not worth it." No clear demarcation point there, hence, politics in all its murky glory.

The US economy has outgrown the Canadian economy since Clinton righted your ship. Disposable incomes are much higher in your country. Unemployment is lower. I know all of that, and yet I prefer living in a country that treats its worst off not as failures, but as by-products of the quality of life we enjoy. This is most obviously reflected in our socialized healthcare system, which is something that stagnates our growth relative to yours, and yet most of us would never part with it. (Those that would probably don't have cancer treatments to pay for.) We also take a more compassionate approach to criminal law, which you'll undoubtedly ridicule; but we take it as fact that our homicide rates, indexed to the number of guns we own (more than ya'll, per capita) make your cities look like Fallujah. Harsher enforcement of draconian legislation exacerbates the problem, or so it seems from this vantage point. Also, on social issues, we're all libertarian, so we get that stuff right. Once the Conservatives lose their minority gov't, the Liberals will decriminalize pot, tax the shit out of it, and could potentially guarantee public healthcare for the next few generations of happily gay married hosers. The Conservatives might win again, though, but in order to do so they're going to have to win in urban areas, which means running dead-center. (I.e., not reducing per-capita funds in the public health system for those who choose to use it.) I apologize for the crappy lesson in boring Canadian politics, but it's a comparative point that is hard to make in one sentence. I'll let you do that for me. (Howzabout "Commie Eskimos!!"? You can use that. It's a knock-down argument.)

Karl Marx would have liked some of what we do up here, but it doesn't make us Marxists. Adam Smith believed that every person has the inalienable right to appear in society as a dignified individual, and that if one was unable to secure the means of dignity for oneself (regardless of relevant causal factors, i.e. a gambling/drinking problem), the obligation must thereby fall upon others. He spoke of duties of charity, but that's a contradiction, so he committed himself to some minimal version of a welfare state. Marx shared Smith's affinity of the market, albeit with a bit of consternation which was perfectly understandable when one surveyed the state of things in 19th century early-industrial England/Germany. (The check on the unfair consolidation of wealth, for Marx, was always class revolution and transferring production to the workers and STARTING OVER, not remaining in oligarchical stasis; we're okay with rules of fair play, as revolution is hard work and could potentially interrupt our brewing capacity. What's a revolution with beer shortages?) I think the two of them would probably both hate Larry Kudlow. And Joseph Stalin.

The left-wing caricature of conservatives as that guy from the Monopoly box is a lot more fair than the right-wing caricature of people like me as poncho-wearing, koombaya-singing no-nothings. Some Deaniacs might occasionally "bark", and some people are 9/11 sceptics, but the radical knee-jerk leftism on campuses just isn't prominent anymore. It's there, and you can find it, but I taught tutorials for years, and it seemed that kids were mostly apolitical, with about an equal number of moonbats and wingnuts. Pretty well all of them smart people too. Most people at universities are. And the word "moonbat" is quite possibly the least offensive thing I've ever been called, ya feckin' wingnuts. =)

Shitsakes, I've regurgitated the last argument I had with my father in its entirety. Sorry Jay Tea. I will also get my own blog. Thanks for the fair coverage of this non-issue.

Bemused,I guess we... (Below threshold)

Bemused,

I guess we'll find out on Tuesday whether this is a non-issue or is in fact an issue...

The voters determine these things, not you or I.

A shortage of left wing anti-American lunatics on college campuses though?!?

You must not be listening, or, you simply agree with what you hear...

So lemme get this straight,... (Below threshold)
Poll Smoker:

So lemme get this straight,

A Democratic candidate is BADBADBAD for welcoming illegals to volunteer for her campaign, BUT

Republican-owned and -controlled corporations that employ that same illegal to pick lettuce for 7 cents an hour are successfully employing the model of capatalism.

Hey mom! I understand that Republican Logic thing now!

IN other words if you ar... (Below threshold)
ahem:

IN other words if you are an immigrant then you MUST know English in order to pass the naturalization process.

Strawman: legal immigrants are not necessarily on the road to naturalization. (JumpinJoe seems to suffer the same misconception.) While many legal immigrants gain permanent residence, and after a period of earned residence file tne N-400 for naturalization, many do not. They are not allowed to vote. They are still allowed to work on campaigns. After all, their congresscritter represents them as well. None of this is illegal.

I worked on a congressional campaign in 2004. I am a legal immigrant. I have the advantage of coming from an English-speaking nation. Christopher Hitchens has been writing on American politics for decades. He's not a US citizen -- the USCIS has lost his N-400. Twice. He has the advantage of coming from an English-speaking nation.

She specifically stated that you did not need papers to vote. This is utterly false.

Bzzt. She said that you didn't need to be registered in order to help. While I might make allowances for you, ed )if English isn't your first language) the audio is clear enough. Have you listened to it? I provided a link.

Had she said 'you don't need papers to vote', I'd concede the point to you. Instead, she said 'papers for voting' as a subsidiary clause of a sentence saying you don't have to be registered to help.

I find it hilarious that so many here who probably support English as the official language of the US seem to throw away their understanding of grammar for cheap partisan points.

Richard:First, pre... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

Richard:

First, preliminarily, saying "I hate this government and its foreign/domestic policies" is not anti-American. Some anti-Americans spit on troops or criticize their Purple Hearts as unearned. (Ever see the pic of that disgustingly fat woman at the GOPC in NYC with the Purple Heart bandage on one of her chins? She's a good example of an anti-American.) More importantly, though, anti-Americans dislike the Constitution, and leftists across the spectrum agree, along with many libertarians and conservatives, that this administration is very un-American in its disregard for that quasi-sacred document.

Anyway, I see you listen to what your fellow conservatives tell you about college campuses. Most people who are/were conservative in college probably see the modern academy as a breeding ground for Bolsheviks because most profs do not subject students to the same bullshit that passes for debate in the so-called liberal media. The way to argue in a classroom debate is "Why? Following from what principles? Defend these principles deductively or empirically." You learn that "Because 51% of Americans think so!" commits the logical fallacy of appealing to the majority, or, in Latin, ad populum. If you watch ten minutes of cable TV, you can tell that the average American (lib or con) isn't subjected to much of this in their daily lives, and thinks that a debate consists in "What does Side A think? What does Side B think? Well go on and yell at each other! Yeah, that's the stuff! Well, we'll know who was right after the election. Up next, Larry King's body interviews a gorilla that knows sign language!"

I do not doubt that you've seen lots (dozens? a dozen? four?) examples of some loon cheering for "a thousand more Mogadishus" or some such garbage, but in reality these people are detested by most of their colleagues who are usually moderate liberals that enjoy their relatively affluent and comfortable lifestyles. They will defend any asshat's right to say whatever s/he wants, but that's separate from what they themselves teach. Most of my former professors and fellow grad students hold a very Whitman-esque conception of the United States, in that it embodies both the greatest promise and some of the greatest challenges for all people that wish to live freely. Boundless vistas of possibility! Tolerance for all of those who will tolerate in turn! It's like a warmer version of Nietzsche!

But then we watched your country's worst administrator since Hoover squander an unimaginable amount of post-9/11 international goodwill when Chimpy McFlightsuit (I can't not use ad hominems to refer to that imbecile, and I know you secretly hate him too so it's okay) decided to let the PNAC play Calvinball with international law and invade Iraq. You can criticize left-wing professors for saying some stupid shit, but we get to criticize right-wing intellectuals like Perle and Wolfowitz and Ledeen and Victor Davis Hanson for actually DOING rather than just SAYING something immensely stupid. Guys like them teach at universities, but liberal academics don't perceive them as an indictment of conservativism. We just read the better ones: the Friedmans, and the WFB's, the Hayeks.

That the second invasion of Iraq was a terrible idea is in fact a majority opinion in your country now; it was a majority opinion in Canada, like pretty well everywhere else (a few trivial counter-examples notwithstanding), in 2003. People of this opinion in the US were ridiculed in the media as being soft, and for not supporting the troops; our media did its job and so did our government, and not one Canadian soldier has died trying to get Shi'ite and Sunni Muslims to like each other. We supported our troops by advocating against their involvement in a misguided invasion. Our government listened, and agreed with very little hue and cry from the Tories. I never thought that the universities I studied and worked at were much more liberal than the daily newspapers. You should attend a colloquium at a college sometime to get a sense of the actual diversity on campuses, Richrad, rather than listening to what that bitter fool David Horowitz has to say about them.

can you imagine if this had... (Below threshold)
Sandra:

can you imagine if this had been a republican candidate who had done this, man the press and mdedia would have had it plastered all over and the outrage among the democrats, I hate to think of the outrage, but since it was a democrat who did this, just like the article said here, much to do about nothing, sure........... please give me a break, you liberals know it is bad, she should have never said such a thing, talk about corruption, even before she even gets in office, and they call us corrupt, they just hide it better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Preach on Sandra!!! You na... (Below threshold)
Phredd:

Preach on Sandra!!! You nailed it!

Phredd

Jay: Sound reasoning all ar... (Below threshold)
Jimmmmm:

Jay: Sound reasoning all around, with one minor quibble: It was Gertrude Stein, not Dot Parker, who contributed "there is no there there" to our lexicon. Miss Stein was referring to Oakland, Ca, when she gave that bon-mot. Quite the dis, since Miss Stein was from Pittsburgh.

Hmmmm.Str... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

Strawman: legal immigrants are not necessarily on the road to naturalization. (JumpinJoe seems to suffer the same misconception.) While many legal immigrants gain permanent residence, and after a period of earned residence file tne N-400 for naturalization, many do not. They are not allowed to vote. They are still allowed to work on campaigns. After all, their congresscritter represents them as well. None of this is illegal.

Except that your strawman is utterly ridiculous since you don't address the single specific point that she stated explicitly that people didn't need papers to VOTE.

Which frankly throws your entire line of reasoning right into the garbage can.

Hmmm.Rawl... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

Rawls' liberalism is motivated primarily (but not exclusively) by the Kantian deontic imperative, not Locke's individualism. "Act such that you will your maxim to be universal law." Dude couldn't write (and the funny thing is, it's supposedly worse in the original German. German philosophers learn English to read Kant. The more you know!).

Well you certainly do know how to diverge from the current topic that's for certain.

Frankly I'm rather uninterested in this. I'm sure it's interesting to you, but it really bores the hell out of me.

The first thing there is an attempt to ridicule me for being uneducated.

My experience with many college educated programmers has been that they need about 3 years to forget the nonsense that they were taught in school and learn how things really work. In my experience that is the victory of reality over the artificial construct that is the basis of most college oriented academics.

As for you, I was ridiculing you for the pretentiousness that riddles your particular writing style and your singular inability to actually stay on topic.

Some people will be unemployed, and many will be under-employed (janitors, dude at 7-11, poor bastards at KFC).

That doesn't make them an "underclass". The very term "underclass" has conceptual meanings that are quite frankly insulting. And why is that? Because my family is a member of that "underclass". My uncles were roofers. My mother worked for decades in a clothing and shoe factory. My father worked for our town's water department. My grandmother delivered mail on an extremely rural route for decades. My aunt worked as a cook at a middle school until she retired.

So I take exception to your concept of an "underclass". Not everyone reaches a level of success that you perhaps deem a requirement for escaping the "underclass". But many people lead happy loving lives, reaching what success they can, and they do not deserve that absurd term.

Frankly the term "underclass" is yet another example of the liberal's disdain and barely concealed contempt for the average American.

The US economy has outgrown the Canadian economy since Clinton righted your ship.

And yet you show your ignorance. Clinton didn't do a damn thing, it was the Republican House that forced that upon Clinton. If you knew what you were talking about you'd know that Clinton's sole idea for economic growth was taxation, taxation and more taxation.

Tax cuts, welfare reform and pretty much everything of value came from the Republicans.

I find it amusing that no o... (Below threshold)
Nik:

I find it amusing that no one seems to have mentioned that it would have been illegal for Mrs. Busby to have attempted to "hold a higher standard than the legal minimum". If she was asked what was required to volunteer for her campaign and she demanded additional paperwork beyond the "legal minimum", she could have been held accountable for violating anti-discrimination statutes.

Hmmm.*shrug* consi... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

*shrug* considering the legal minimum is the I9 form I really don't see how that's exculpatory.

Jumpin Joe says: "once you ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Jumpin Joe says: "once you emerge from your dorm room that reeks of petulie oil and ass and quit living in a world of washed up theories from pinko lib professors, you just like most before you will abandon the theories for the realities of the real world....

--... and you prefer, what, neoconservatism'??

Here the "reality"
- Thousands of Soldiers to death and injury
- Our economic solvency .. gone
- Our global reputation .. gone
- Our Moral authority ... gone

Yet all I hear from people like this is "Yes, thats exactly right. We need MORE of that". God, I just love love LOVE watching all these conservatives get all worked up as the party goes further and further down the tubes. They resort to blaming the media, blaming professors/college institutions, crying like children about "[waaah], what if a Republican would do that??[waaah]", even "blame the Kennedy's", while posturing how tough minded they are, all because they STILL can't get over the fact that they voted for the utter moron who made it all happen... TWICE!

ed, if an academic discussi... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

ed, if an academic discussion bores the hell out of you, you shouldn't have chosen to get involved in the first place. Like, ignore things that sound "pretentious" rather than trying to engage with the ideas and then saying "I'm bored!" when your opponent extrapolates upon his own. (I know it's more fun to name-call and blame shit on people and move on, but sometimes a dialogue is good. Your fractured national fabric could sure as hell use more of it.)

I don't doubt that programmers need to be submerged in a professional environment to actually become good at their jobs. I, however, do not need to read the right-wing tabloid papers, or to listen to what Shortsleeves McSixPack has to say about immigration, to develop a principled understanding of this issue, provided I've had a cursory look at the relevant empirical data.

As for your offense at the term "underclass", you can be offended by whatever words you choose. The point stands: your society needs people to do things that most people don't want to do. I think your federal government ought to increase minimum wage to roughly what San Fran has it at ($11/hour, or thereabouts, which has had no detrimental effect on their local economy). There is an underclass because people who equate good governing with growing the GDP think it's bad to guarantee all of those who choose to work a living wage. (The problem here, obviously, is that GDP and quality of life indices often intersect, but are not interchangeable and oftimes completely disconnected from one another. See: Amartya Sen's discussion of China's vs. India's economy, in his Development as Freedom; or, consider Chile's growth in GDP under Pinochet, concurrent with a rapid decline in QOL.) You don't like the term underclass? Then you drive through a rough neighbourhood of Queen's, or Detroit, or L.A., and you try to think of a better word for it. The term I choose to use has packed into it a normative measure, namely, that those with the power to do so ought to be advocating on behalf of those in dire straits. You automatically assumed that since I identified a stratum of society that don't earn enough money to elevate their status (or to pay for health insurance), I'm insulting them. Yes, we should brush 'em under the rug instead. (Once again, the fact that you're intimately familiar with low income earners does not thereby make you a moral authority on their behalf. Both of my parents came from immigrant farm families who started with nothing and overcame hostile nativists, so I guess that cancels out your perspectival authority, don't it.)

Anyway, I'm bored too, ed. You're a smart guy, but you ain't too polite, and as far as being open-minded, well, it's obvious that you won't be contributing to the vanguard of new solutions to old problems. It's cool that you're self-taught--many of my smartest friends haven't finished high school either--but your auto-assumption that anyone who values theoretical knowledge as a buttress to real-life dilemmas, is a naive liberal, is demonstrative of the poisonous anti-intellectualism that the GOP so effectively (and unfortunately) wields. Read Kevin Baker's latest article in Harper's. Only in America could a presidential candidate's fluency in French and aristocratic tastes be used as a negative talking point. Only in America would people rather have someone who almost failed out of two gentleman's degrees and who dresses up like a cowboy as their leader, rather than a war hero who has read philosophers other than "Jesus Christ" (Dubya's favourite!)

Anyway, God's Ol' Party seem to have a real selective interpretation of their Good Book. It is obvious to anyone who has read It, rather than having It read to them by some mega-church ass clown, that Jesus would want amnesty, and guaranteed healthcare, for all of the illegals in your country, plus their relatives back home. If it affects your lifestyle, good: Christianity is supposed to hold charity and sacrifice as its paradigmatic virtues. That's pretty much indisputable, unless you're Fred Phelps or one of his inbred spawn. I'm not a Christian, but for those of you Republicans who are, you need to start reading some gospel because you sound like a bunch of Pharisees.

Hmmmm.ed,... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmmm.

ed, if an academic discussion bores the hell out of you, you shouldn't have chosen to get involved in the first place. ...

No actually you're the only one interested in this argument. I'm the one interested in the debate over Busby's call for illegal aliens to vote.

It's nice that you want to diverge into something that you're interested in but I'm not, and quite frankly I don't see where I have to indulge you.

So either shift back to the topic at hand, or ... frolic.

Elections tomorrow so we wi... (Below threshold)
gmax:

Elections tomorrow so we will be rid of these liberal gadflys soon enough. They will be found licking their wounds over at Kos, not understanding why he is oh ofr life on picking candidates to back.

Bemused, you'll forgive me ... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Bemused, you'll forgive me if I say ed's a hell of a lot more on topic than you are. You brought up the pretentious, pseudo-intellectual bullshit as a form of bullying over the issue, and now you're whining that others don't want to play your little game of "how smart I am." And as 1) the author of the piece that triggered this and B) the section editor of the page, I think my opinion on relevance carries a smidgen more weight than yours.

J.

Sorry, Jay Tea, I thought t... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

Sorry, Jay Tea, I thought the topic was all but dried up, since we had established that Busby did not, in fact, state that undocumented people can vote, but only that they can answer phones/hand out flyers/etc. I kind of thought that discussion had concluded, despite protestations to the contrary.

Anyway, I enjoy your blog, have bookmarked it, and look forward to lots of interesting posts leading up to the mid-terms. Thanks again.

Is that mid-term elections,... (Below threshold)

Is that mid-term elections, or mid terms at your boarding school?

HAHAHAHA! Well, since I hav... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

HAHAHAHA! Well, since I have already claimed to be a graduate of a Master's program and an employee of a healthcare organization working in policy analysis...

epador, it's okay if you're stupid. It doesn't make it okay, though, for you to take up space on the internet. I was referring to the fall congressional elections. How could any thinking person think otherwise? I mean that--how? I presume you're not illiterate...

Shit, you're stupid, aren't you? Right! I was being redundantly redundant by even asking.

Damning video of Bus... (Below threshold)
GS:


Damning video of Busby kissing her victory goodbye.........

THERE IS NO MISTAKE WHAT SHE MEANS, THERE IS NO WIGGLE ROOM.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f9vbngizSI

And thanks go to Busy for showing why democrats want ILLEGAL ALIENS in the country. Why to vote of course!


Stoopid democrats, voting is for citizens.

Republicans in this distric... (Below threshold)
Ev:

Republicans in this district took millions in bribes over decades. Republicans in this district looked the other way and underfunded the border patrol so money could be made on the sweat of immigrants for decades. Republican issues, both.

Honest people working for honest representation is a win-win situation. Busby will win because America is still great!

Bemused,Well, it d... (Below threshold)

Bemused,

Well, it did matter...

Second, did you know Kerry received a Purple Heart for a wound that required a band-aid as the sole treatment? The Purple Heart on the band-aid thing was not tactful, but equating that with spitting on someone, namely a returning soldier?

Third, why would you pretend to know where I get my information? Typical look down the nose at everyone liberal on display complete with cuss words and more venom than you can fit in a mason jar...

I know what many professors have said because of first hand accounts and listening to tapes. Beyond the ramblings of a few professors, look at the treatment of any conservative, no matter how credentialed, asked to give the commencement address for college graduations. Professors resigning, people standing up and turning their backs on them as they speak and other petty actions.

Also look at how apolitical their remarks are compared to the shrill politics that come from many people on the left giving commencement addresses.

Last, why would you call an opinion a fact? We won't know whether the invasion of Iraq was or was not a mistake for some time. Pretentious to say the least.

I don't care what the poll of the day says and I didn't care about it in 2003. I was sold on the need to remove Hussein based on the never adhered to cease fire agreement and his violent actions toward this country (firing on our planes patrolling the agreed to no fly zone). To not see where there was no other future outcome than to one day have to confront him once and for all is to be near blind in my opinion. Frankly, I don't care what our attention deficited microwave war society that couldn't fight and win WW 2 to save their skins thinks about the war. Even at that though, the same polls show the same people that have turned against this war are in favor of finishing the job. I only hope our leaders will have the strength to see this through.

Oh, and sitting out Iraq sure helped you guys up north on the terrorist front. Home grown none the less...

Thank God for "domestic spying..."

Guess what, their war is against the west (which you live in) not just America or England. Wave your arms and tell them you mean them no harm and they will kill you anyway. Given enough time, they would likely behead you with a sort of sharp knife while your arms are tied behind your back. But hey, you know it all. You have all of the answers. You can cuss and call people stupid while being redundantly redundant. Wow, you have it all.

Please keep talking though. Keep looking down you nose at those you see as being of less value than you. Let everyone that encounters you know what a liberal is and we'll keep winning elections. Bemused, apropos name. Get used to that feeling.

Thanks...

i love you.... (Below threshold)
emdawg (::

i love you.

i love shakespeare.

:) :) :)




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy