Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Portland day labor protest: Part cinco

This is getting lengthy, make sure you scroll down through part uno!

Why so camera shy amigo? But that coffee cup is a clever disguise!

Having nothing to do with illegal aliens and everything to do with Portland:

This was plastered all over the place by the day labor site. And actually, if you read it, it may have something to do with illegal aliens after all... they just need the print a spanish version!


One of our liberal observers said that our flag waving was "a bit much" but I thought that it was just right.

20 comments:

bjdorr said...

"One of our liberal observers said that our flag waving was 'a bit much' but I thought that it was just right."

I guess that comment came because you weren't waving the Mexico flag. Ultimately, this isn't Mexico so there is no need to wave the Mexican flag. It's the United States and you have every right to wave the U.S. flag in allegiance to our great country.

If the U.S. flag offended someone then tell them to get the hell out of the United States and go to some other foreign communist regieme nation and live by their laws. They'll be back over here in a heartbeat once they know they have been deprived of their "liberty and freedoms."

Tim said...

The poster plastered about “Do you like sex, freedom, compassion, violence, drugs, poetry, pornography, dancing, tattoos, seduction, originality, love, rebellion, mysticism, art, anarchy, spirituality, music, funk, rock, metal, hip-hop?” Gee it reads like the Moral relativist- Democrat-Communist-Socialist Party oxy-moronic party platform. It must be the peoples Republic of Portland.

I have no doubt that the Moral relativist-Democrat-Communist-Socialist Party folks in the green hats thought the flag waving was a bit much as it wasn’t their flag…theirs is all red with a hammer & sickle. So if they hate America this much, they should just hop in their Subaru's and Volvo's with the John Kerry (North Vietnamese war hero) bumper stickers and leave town.

Bryan Saxton said...

Ok. Prove that democrats are communist instead of just being more socialist inclined?

Anonymous said...

bryan, we already have. You're not listening.

Daniel said...

Socialism combined with an absolute intolerance for competing points of view and a complete disregard for private property rights. Hmmmmm.

Anonymous said...

I found a great article today; it is kind of long, but it is well worth the read!

The Fascists Among Us

It’s no secret that hurling names about is as common in the political world as it is in a grammar school playground. One oft-used pejorative is “fascist,” which, along with racist, sexist, homophobe and others, tends to be least understood by those who utter it most. And because these damning terms are used wantonly, more to discredit than describe, they tend to be misapplied. Then, soon, calling someone a fascist becomes akin to calling him a snake: more a vague impugnment of character then a characterization of methods and goals.

Rhetoric aside, however, I’ve come to realize that true fascists do exist in our time. But who are they? How can they be correctly identified? To discover the answer, let’s start with a trip down Bad Memory Lane.

Another word that makes the rounds these days is “Brownshirts,” which, as many know, harks back to the SA, a paramilitary organization that was instrumental in Adolf Hitler’s rise to power in 1933. The Brownshirts were the adolescent Nazi Party’s muscle, squelching opposition through violence and intimidation. Shout-downs and beat-downs were their stock-in-trade, making their name a metaphor for fascist intolerance and oppression

Full Article:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5952

Bryan Saxton said...

Anon 4:50-

No you haven't.

Daniel-

"Socialism combined with an absolute intolerance for competing points of view and a complete disregard for private property rights. Hmmmmm."

First of all, I can think of a specific group of people who are guilty of "an absolute intolerence for competing points of view" not far from this blog (anyone remember the "el raz debates"?). Second, your history of labeling anyone with a different point of view as an extremist of some sort compells me, and should compell any pragmatic thinker, to reject any sort of label you impose on any group with a different perspective on social issues. As far as a complete disregard for private property, you would be very hard pressed to find a moderate progressive (the majority of the democratic party) who is in favor of the abolition of all sorts of private ownership. However, you will find a lot of democrats who will place the need on humanitarian reform above the protection of private ownership, which is a reason why many democrats are opposed to Wal-Mart (Slave Labor, drain on state welfare programs, mistreatment of workers) and are wary of large corperate mergings.

However, if we are going to keep continuing to create unfair labels on groups, I have one for the majority of users of this blog. "Neo-Facist-Monarchists for the abolition of personal liberties and basic human rights."

Ridiculous?

Anonymous said...

I think the flag-waving is a bit much. I don't see it as an us v. them as much as I see it as a failing of our own accord by letting this happen. Yeah, we didn't let it happen, but our "elected leaders" did, which means that we collectively failed. I am not taking the "war" to the streets of Portland or Cornelius. I don't think it'll do any good, but I know why you are there. Our politicians won't do anything about it, so what choice do you have to voice your opinion? It's ugly.

Anonymous said...

Bryan, so glad you at least had the balls to acknowledge that socialist and democrats are essentially the same, which they are out here, but not everywhere in the country. This supports my position that Oregon democrats are really socialists (as are most in WA and CA, too), while democrats in much of the Midwest and the South tend to be more traditional democrats and more closely mirror Oregon Republicans.

Get out more, you'll learn something. Oregon is fucked up. No thanks to people like you.

Bryan Saxton said...

Seriously, did you all go to the same community college and take the same deductive reasoning class?

I guess the advocation of any sort of socialist reform makes you guilty of being a socialist. If any of you had any sort of background in aggressive buisiness strategies, you would see the threat that Wal-Mart poses to smaller (which equates to any) business it competes against.

Anyway, time for you to learn something else, Anon. 15% of the workforce in today's economy is foreign born. 40% of the low-skilled labor market is foreign born. Why? Blame it on education.

Since the 1980's, the number of less educated natives has steadily declined because more people began graduating from high school. Conversly, the willingness of natives to engage in low skilled labor has decreased significantly, as well as the availability of those native workers due to them working higher paying/higher skill positions (Urban Institute Study). However, immigrants are much more willing to partake in low skilled labor.

If we want to keep the economy in the direction it is going (up), we need low skilled laborers to work our low skilled labor positions. Since there aren't enough native low skilled workers available, foreign laborers are important to our economy.

Scott said...

Daniel
Thank You.

Tim said...

Bryan, I really don't have to prove that Democrats are communists, they do a fine job themselves of occasionally exposing their true colors (Red). But, in all fairness, just read the Socialist/Communist "People's Weekly World" website, http://www.pww.org and there you’ll find nearly matching rhetoric, hate (of Republicans) and support of which political party? Why yes it’s the Democrats.

While it is true the Commies sort of view the Dems as their “Red headed step-child” they will continue to support Dems as long as the Democratic Party continues to do their bidding. Those who aren’t “Left” enough will be tossed overboard.

Additionally, there is a group of yes Democrats who make up the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which is affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America. http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html. Still not convinced? Some more “Light reading” can be found at http://www.sovereignty.net/center/socialists.htm

As most know, you don't get to a full fledged Communist utopia over night, not without first achieving the Socialist utopia. Communism didn’t fall with the Soviet Union, it is alive and well here in America and yes it seeks our destruction as much as any terrorist.

Bobkatt said...

I don't recall anything in the media about how comrade Teddy Kennedy offered his services to the Communist Russians to undermine our sitting presidents on their foreign policies. When liberals talk about how patriotic it is to disagree with current policy concider what the following reported offers:
"One of the documents, a KGB report to bosses in the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee, revealed that "In 1978, American Sen. Edward Kennedy requested the assistance of the KGB to establish a relationship" between the Soviet apparatus and a firm owned by former Sen. John Tunney (D.-Calif.)."
Another KGB report to their bosses revealed that on March 5, 1980, John Tunney met with the KGB in Moscow on behalf of Sen. Kennedy. Tunney expressed Kennedy's opinion that "nonsense about 'the Soviet military threat' and Soviet ambitions for military expansion in the Persian Gulf . . . was being fueled by [President Jimmy] Carter, [National Security Advisor Zbigniew] Brzezinski, the Pentagon and the military industrial complex."

In May 1983, the KGB again reported to their bosses on a discussion in Moscow with former Sen. John Tunney. Kennedy had instructed Tunney, according to the KGB, to carry a message to Yuri Andropov, the General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, expressing Kennedy's concern about the anti-Soviet activities of President Ronald Reagan. The KGB reported "in Kennedy's opinion the opposition to Reagan remains weak. Speeches of the President's opponents are not well-coordinated and not effective enough, and Reagan has the chance to use successful counterpropaganda." Kennedy offered to "undertake some additional steps to counter the militaristic, policy of Reagan and his campaign of psychological pressure on the American population." Kennedy asked for a meeting with Andropov for the purpose of "arming himself with the Soviet leader's explanations of arms control policy so he can use them later for more convincing speeches in the U.S." He also offered to help get Soviet views on the major U.S. networks and suggested inviting "Elton Rule, ABC chairman of the board, or observers Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters to Moscow."
"Kennedy told the Senate Intelligence Committee in 1976 that "For the last five years, I and others in the Senate have labored unsuccessfully to place some meaningful statutory restrictions on the so-called inherent power of the Executive to engage in surveillance." When Congress discussed legislation to require a court warrant to wiretap enemy agents and terrorists, Kennedy and the ACLU began a campaign to raise the barriers as high as possible.
The restrictions that Kennedy successfully put in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act were so tight that when the FBI arrested Zacarias Moussaoui (the so-called 20th highjacker) in August 2001, they could not get permission to download his computer since FBI headquarters understood that they did not have enough evidence to get a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. After 9/11 when they did download his computer they found, among other interesting things, information on the air currents over New York.

After 9/11 Kennedy and other demagogues in the Congress blamed the FBI and CIA for the intelligence failure. The slogan was "they didn't connect the dots." There was no way to connect the dots when they weren't allowed to collect the dots.
Who's looking out for you? I don't think it's this bunch.

Bryan Saxton said...

Tim-

Holy crap. Do you have any sense of rhetorical tact?

"http://www.pww.org and there you’ll find nearly matching rhetoric, hate (of Republicans) and support of which political party? Why yes it’s the Democrats."

Of course they support the democratic party. Only rich corperate whores and uneducated lower and middle class vote republican. I'm 100% sure facist sects support the Republican party as well. Are all republicans facist?

"While it is true the Commies sort of view the Dems as their “Red headed step-child” they will continue to support Dems as long as the Democratic Party continues to do their bidding. Those who aren’t “Left” enough will be tossed overboard."

...which just goes to show that you have no clue what the moderate progressive movement is. Perhaps you are referring to my views on Wal-Mart. It's not just a communist view. It's a humanitarian view, a fair business practice view, a liberal economist view. It's called state capitalism, and it's something the government needs to do a better job of implementing.

"Additionally, there is a group of yes Democrats who make up the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which is affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America. http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html. Still not convinced? Some more “Light reading” can be found at http://www.sovereignty.net/center/socialists.htm"

This is some sort of joke, right? No?

So, you're citing small, special interest groups publications to convince me that the moderate progressive movement associated with the Democratic party is somehow associated with communism? Get real. The link breaks at limited social reform, my friend.

"As most know, you don't get to a full fledged Communist utopia over night, not without first achieving the Socialist utopia. Communism didn’t fall with the Soviet Union, it is alive and well here in America and yes it seeks our destruction as much as any terrorist."

And you call people who claim that 9/11 was set up by Bush conspiracy theorists? First of all, communism has never been so much as implemented except as an ideal to unite the masses of a nation to revolt. Communism a threat to the United States? Since when? I recall the Soviet Union being a threat to the US, but never did the ideal of communism threaten the America way of life. Perhaps the now deceased senator McCarthy would agree with you, but not many other people (outside this blog) would. Communism is alive and well? Where? Show me.

If anything, neo-conservativism is on the rise (this blog, for example). If anything threatens society, this is it.

Bryan Saxton said...

Bobkatt-

No. Bill O'Rielly is looking out for you :).

Anyway, you found that article in Human events? And you think it's legit? For goodness sake, they publish Ann Coulter. I can't think of a better way to loose credibility than to do that. On top of that, they put John Maynard Keynes on the list of most harmfull books ever written. You might as well have posted an article from the Nation.

Bobkatt said...

Bryan, I listen to O'reilly often but also NPR everyday and Jefferson radio. I can't stand Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter or Air America because of their constant vitriolic personal attacks.
Bill O'reilly's attack of Jim Fetzer a couple of days ago just enhanced my view that he too is controlled from above on what he can and can not say on his show. He was so condescending and interrupted Fetzer so much that he couldn't even get a word in. The entire interview was you are a nut, you are a traitor, you need to be locked up in a nut house. Why even have the gentleman on if you don't let him talk. I have never seen O'reilly be so rude.
As far as Human Events go, they also publish many articles by Jerome Corsi that illuminate the dangers of Nafta, illegal immigration and the elimination of the borders that define our entire country and way of life.

Bryan Saxton said...

Bobbkat-

I only mentioned O'Rielly because of the quote "We're watching out for you." I just recognized that he used that quote a lot.

Having said that, I don't think there are many shows on any 24 hour news station that I would watch (except maybe the occasional Larry King interview) just because they're so full of crap.

BEAR said...

bryan saxton, you are sooooo sad. How lefty of you.

Bryan Saxton said...

"Bryan Saxton, you are sooooo sad."

I think that's the pot calling the kettle black.

Anonymous said...

Only in America. Is it not politically correct anymore to waive our own flag? Better not offend Mexico! They flee and leave behind their own to come here, but remain loyal to the filthy country they left. Hell, they wont even flush their shitty toilet paper, instead they throw it on the floor or in trash basket. They just do not want this to be any different than Mexico do they? Even after the workings of the sewer system are explained, they STILL do it!! Un-friggin-believable!! If you think this is a lie, ask a construction worker that has to be on a job-site with these job stealers. And you heard right, a construction job, not farm labor.