Friday, July 27, 2007

Tell them the grass is greener over there

Hundreds apply for New Haven ID cards
The Elm City residency card is the hottest item around. Many in line at city hall this morning admit they are illegal immigrants, anxious to obtain an American I.D. They also admit they are afraid of immigration agents finding them but are willing to take the chance.

Possible line in another story: many meth cooks are afraid of narcotics agents finding them but are willing to take the chance. (tear drops from the corner of my eye at the risk these folks are taking to "improve their financial situation."

Instead of calling it New Haven they should be calling it the "New Oregon." After all, they are only doing what our DMV has been openly doing for years. (thanks Lorna Youngs)

So it's going to be a tough sell to convince the criminals that New Haven will treat them better but ALIPAC has a new flier that suggests we send all our illegals to that new sanctuary city.

In Spanish and English, it comes with maps! Help an illegal go where he is wanted today!

32 comments:

adam said...

Hello I just entered before I have to leave to the airport, it's been very nice to meet you, if you want here is the site I told you about where I type some stuff and make good money (I work from home): here it is

Bobkatt said...

Hey illegals. Welcome to Safe Haven Connecticut. Please:
Step up.
Sign up.
Round up.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the "Back with a Vengeance" thread from a couple days ago, regarding Daniel's comment about the "illegal" who tried to sell him tamales:

Notice how Miglavs did not respond to the question of how he knew the woman who was selling tamales was an "illegal" and whether he asked her about it. The reason he didn't respond is that an honest answer would have been, "I didn't ask her about it." Which means, for any fool who still needs it spelled out for them, is that Daniel Miglavs assumes that ALL Latinos are "illegal aliens." And if you need someone to explain how that's racist, there's no point in anyone trying.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Notice how Miglavs did not respond to the question of how he knew the woman who was selling tamales was an "illegal" and whether he asked her about it. The reason he didn't respond is that an honest answer would have been, "I didn't ask her about it." Which means, for any fool who still needs it spelled out for them, is that Daniel Miglavs assumes that ALL Latinos are "illegal aliens." And if you need someone to explain how that's racist, there's no point in anyone trying.

6:35 PM

>Notice how these shitballs hate Daniel so much that they are willing to help destroy the United States just to get even with Daniel!!!

the bullshit police said...

It's a fair question.

Daniel said:

"When the illegal alien mother had one of her children approach me in the Wal-Mart parking lot to ask me if I wanted to buy tamales I said "no thanks."

The question was, and apparently remains: How did Miglavs know she was an "illegal alien"?

There are only two possibilities that get him off the hook:

1) The woman had a sign around her neck that said, "I am an illegal alien." (Or, one of the children had a sign saying "My mom is an illegal alien." Both scenarios ... extremely unlikely.

2) He asked her, and she said, "Yes" or "Si." In which case, fair comment. No problem with it.

Unless the answer is #1 or #2, we have another example, yet another confirmation (as if more were needed) of Daniel Miglavs' bigotry.

the bullshit police said...

It's a fair question.

Daniel said:

"When the illegal alien mother had one of her children approach me in the Wal-Mart parking lot to ask me if I wanted to buy tamales I said "no thanks."

The question was, and apparently remains: How did Miglavs know she was an "illegal alien"?

There are only two possibilities that get him off the hook:

1) The woman had a sign around her neck that said, "I am an illegal alien." (Or, one of the children had a sign saying "My mom is an illegal alien." Both scenarios ... extremely unlikely.

2) He asked her, and she said, "Yes" or "Si." In which case, fair comment. No problem with it.

Unless the answer is #1 or #2, we have another example, yet another confirmation (as if more were needed) of Daniel Miglavs' bigotry.

Anonymous said...

The fact that Daniel hates Latinos so much makes for interesting mindset on his own wife. She is Latino, yes. Knowing Daniel's background and reading what he writes on a regular basis, I am reminded of the stories about the early days of the Territory where whities took indians as wives. Most of them would dispise the heritage of their pieces of ass often trying to beat the indian out of them and their half-breed offspring. Some stories have children of mixed marriages sent away, even murdered by their self- hating whitey fathers. I think of Daniel when I read his anti-Latino hate filled rhetoric--then I think of his mexican wife and child. Sad, really.

Anonymous said...

Daniel's problem in dealing with this question is this: He's honest enough that he doesn't want to lie, but on the other hand he's smart enough to know that if he tells the truth, he leaves himself open to the legitimate accusation that he's a bigot. Anon 10:34, you called it right: It's actually kind of sad.

BEAR said...

The lefty trolls are out, again....yawn.

Anonymous said...

The idiot wingnut kkkhristians have woke up from their naps again.

Anonymous said...

The only -- and I mean the ONLY -- thing that can be said definitively about the "lefty trolls" who post here, Bear and Miglavs, is that they are clearly to the left of YOU. That's not saying much.

Many of the criticisms here of your perspectives, whether its about immigration, Iraq, drug policy, Bush, etc. could have easily have been made by a Republican of virtually any stripe -- the far right ones with the Constitution Party who have had it with the war, and more moderate ones who aren't as intransigent and hard-line about immigration and social issues. Them, and libertarians.

It may make you feel better to dismiss all of them as "lefties" and, even more laughably, as "anti-Americans," but it clearly isn't true.

You guys are to the right of everyone. That may define you, but it doesn't define the 90 or 95 percent of the population that would never think of associating with you politically -- even if they might happen to agree with you on a single, isolated issue. I know you probably can't get your head around the concept of political diversity, but there's plenty of it.

Wake up, Bear. Stop living in Fantasyland.

BEAR said...

Is this the same Constitution Party that claims that the President knew about 911? Well, so do michael moore-on and cindy sheehan. If diversity includes lefty insanity, then diversity ain't so great. Let's see.....madeline albright admitted to being fooled by the North Koreans, chuck schumer admits being fooled by the Republicans, hillary claims to have been fooled by the President. harry reid now denies that our Constitution gives authority to the President to appoint Supreme Court justices. "Fantasyland" is looking better all the time. BTW, anon, the critics you claim to exist are rinos, who won't allow anyone to drill for more oil, won't allow anyone to build more refineries, won't allow more nuclear plants, won't secure our borders, and won't enforce our laws. You can have 'em.

a 'lib' said...

Not that I'm going to take your word for it, but I wasn't aware that the Constitution Party holds that Bush "knew" about 9/11, whatever that means. Planned it? Did it? I don't believe that conspiracy theory shit, but the public record is pretty clear: Many within the Bush administration and the agencies in its charge DID know quite a lot of what was going on prior to 9/11, that they were in possession of information that ought to have enabled dedicated, intelligent and principled public officials to do something about it BEFORE it happened, and possibly even have prevented it. In that sense, yes --- he did know. That's not a conspiracy theory or even an opinion. Didn't you read the 9/11 Commission Report? Did you even read about it?

That is irrefutable, and most of the information was readily available in advance of the 2004 election, wasn't it?

And you still voted for him, didn't you?

Stephan Steel said...

Mary Starett made some statements about 9/11 and Bush Knew. That is not the whole Constitution Party. Just like Bush supporting amnesty isn't the whole Republican Party. Bear, you are very niave to use the assumtions you do. Although I respect your right to speak to what you wish. Please don't speak for ALL Republicans, Conservatives and those right of center. As a conservative myself, I hardly agree with anything you say including your somewhat biased statement against those of the Latino race.

BEAR said...

Mary was the Constitution Party candidate for GOVERNOR! In a statewide campaign she, indeed, did speak for her party. I'm listening for the thunderous repudiation of her staements (as I did, then) from her fellow party members. --still hearing crickets--

You say you hardly agree with anything I say, call me a bigot, and then try to call yourself a conservative. Stephan, get back on the meds. 80% of America agrees that our borders must be secured. Exactly which kind of confused, idiotic lefty are you?

a 'lib' claims he doesn't believe in conspiracies, but bush knew enough to have prevented 911. Had lunch with cindy and michael, recently, lib? With 300+ investigations currently being conducted in Congress, apparently your pals in the democrat party missed the boat on this one. They're in charge. You should set them straight. You'll let me know how it comes out, won't you?

stephan steel said...

Mr. Bear, care to meet and talk about what kind of conservative I am. I bet a weak little twerp like you has neither the guts nor the brawn to speak your mind to a man's face. The best your type can do is spout off with a secret psuedonym on a weblog. I used my name, now why don't you use yours, gutless.

To "repudiate", as you call it, Mrs. Staretts statements, I for one disagree with her but still believe she has every right to say it. That is what makes this country great and people like you that want to silence her a blight on the Republican party and an abomination of everything American. Again, you neither speak for conservatives, Republicans, Christian or any other group of people. You speak for you and you only. Anything more out of you is just rhetoric from someone who thinks they really matter. Welcome to reality bub.

Now, how about that meeting. Just you, me and the love of baby Jesus in my big green eyes. You name the place.

Bobkatt said...

I don't know if I'm allow in this private little pissing contest, but I'm a conservative, constitution loving kind of guy. The only one running for president that earns my vote is Ron Paul.
If you don't close the borders you aren't serious about protecting this country. If you aren't about protecting this country you should be gone.
No U.N. agenda.
No globalist one world order.
No Nafta, Cafta, or Shafta.
I voted for Bush, but because of his desire to sell or give away this country-he must be impeached and tried for treason. His executive orders threaten the very existence of this democracy and the Democrats are letting this happen.
Don't expect the government to fix our problems, they are the problem.

the 'Lib' said...

As the "Lib" who posted at 2:33, I would first like to thank and salute Stephan. A breath of fresh air, at last. I am sure there is a great deal that you and I disagree on, Stephan, but what is most important and relevant as far as this exchange goes is the one thing we do agree on, and that is our assessment of Bear and the political perspective he (and Miglavs) represents.

Now, to address some of Bear's ridiculous comments:

You are surely aware of the 9/11 "truth" movement, which believes Bush & Company conspired to plan and "do" 9/11. That the towers were detonated, that United 93 was shot down, that a missile hit the Pentagon. Etc. All that. Let me absolutely fucking clear with you: That is a conspiracy theory, and I do NOT believe it. I think it's delusional hogwash and a total distraction from what the country ought to be talking about.

That is a profoundly different thing from what I did say, which is to point to the obvious fact that the Bush administration and the agencies in its charge DID have, in their possession prior to 9/11 an abundance of information that indicated something was coming. This is an objective, irrefutable FACT. It is utterly incomprehensible that any sane, reasonably intelligent human being with even a cursory understanding of what's transpired in the last six years would deny that. This is not the stuff of "conspiracy" theories; it's a matter of the goddamned public record.

You continue to make outlandish assumptions with regard to supposed political affiliations and positions. Am I liberal? Compared to you, obviously. Am I a liberal? I suppose. However: I am NOT a member or supporter of the Democratic Party. I didn't vote for Clinton or Kerry. Got it? And while I have a great deal of admiration for Cindy Sheehan and what she's trying to do, my view of Michael Moore (and his films) is considerably less flattering than what you obviously suppose it to be. Suffice to say, I have NOT had lunch with the man, nor would I particularly care to.

Actually, if we're talking lunch dates and given a choice, I'd far prefer sharing a meal and political conversation with Mr. Steel. I'm sure we agree on little, but he seems like a thoughtful, reasonable man with an ability to recognize complexity and nuance.

Suffice to say, he's obviously nothing like you.

R Huse said...

Look - To say the Bush administration had an abundance of information that "something big was coming" is not exactly a revelation. Everybody knew it. Is it a big secret that terrorist organizations have had a dream of blowing stuff up here for a really long time? I suppose if you had somehow managed to avoid reading any modern thriller novel for the last 30 years then maybe the first try at blowing up the World Trade Center would have made the thought gel a little. Id love to meet the one person out there who DIDN'T know that terrorists were planning a large scale attack on the US. Did they think the phrase "death to America" meant "we Love J-Lo" in Urdu?

Yeah yeah, I know, "but Bush is the President and he should have done something, dude he was asleep on the job". Right, yeah, something like a preemptive action, or surveillance, or flown F-15s round the clock.

the 'lib' said...

To say the Bush administration had an abundance of information that "something big was coming" is not exactly a revelation ...

It is, apparently, for Bear. And I think it's fair to say, RHuse, that with all things being equal and it had been on Clinton's watch, you'd be singing a different tune, so save the bullshit for someone who will believe it.

50K said...

Hey, 50k here. They ought to just send ICE over there and bust those people in line. In fact, send ICE to the Oregon DMV. Anytime I am in there, it always seems to be well over 50% spanish-speaking. When I go there, I feel like I am in a foreign country. You know, like Mexico.

history detective said...

That's probably how a lot of Mexicans felt after 1848. Probably felt like they were in a foreign country. You know, like the United States.

Calhoun said...

anonymouse 6:35 PM said :

"...Daniel Miglavs assumes that ALL Latinos are "illegal aliens." And if you need someone to explain how that's racist, there's no point in anyone trying."

It's not racist because "Latino" isn't a race.

Anonymous said...

That's a bullshit semantics game. Tell me, does it also depend on what the meaning of the word "is" is?

50K said...

Dear history dick. I remember 1848. That's when we deported a bunch of Mexicans en masse. Ah...the good old days.

Moron.

R Huse said...

"The Lib"

No, your suggestion is entirely ridiculous. Under Clinton, we had numerous terrorist attacks. I even list one, the first world trade center bombing. At that time I never made the argument that Clinton should have known. I frankly never heard much of anyone on the right ever make this same conspiracy argument that the libs now make about Bush. Clinton was only faulted, and rightly so, for doing nothing in response.

So lets see, we had similar circumstances under Clinton, WTC1, Khobar Towers, USS Cole, and no one, including me, reacted the way you claim we would have. As a matter of fact I have fairly regularly commented against Clinton conspiracy theories on this very blog. Therefore we can conclude your argument is bullshit. Don't ever try and lump me in with your wild conspiracy nut crew.

Daniel said...

RE: the illegal alien mother

Sometimes in life we make educated guesses. All of us can look at a certain person and say to ourselves "he's a stoner" without actually witnessing the person smoke marijuana.

There may be the occasional time that your educated guess is incorrect but since you aren't on the jury in his PCS trial no harm is done.

Did I actually ask the mother if she was an illegal alien? No I didn't. Would I be willing to be you $100 that she was? In a heart beat.

I don't make my assumptions based entirely on race but any honest person will tell you that it is a factor in this debate. Census data tells us that half of hispanics in Oregon are here illegaly.

Does this mean that I think that "all Latinos are illegal" as assumed by on anonymous poster? No way Jose.

But since I am a thinking person I can add up inferential data and form a conclusion.

When police are searching for a serial killer they don't start assuming their suspect is an Asian female. They start with white males. This is absolutely fair because a majority of serial killers are white males. (though obviously not a majority of white males are serial killers, see how this works?)

As for my wife and kids, it's really classy to bring someone family into this. It's much more important that say, the actual issues. Come out and say "I support criminal aliens" instead of "Daniel must hate his wife because she is Hispanic."

She's not "Mexican" by the way she is American. That's another reason it's hard to take you loons seriously, you don't seem to understand the difference between nationality and ethnicity.

I look forward to your future name calling.

Stephan Steel said...

I see through all the days upon my return to Bear hasn't graced us with a response. He seems to comment so much that I find it unlikely that he would have not darkened this weblog. Some people like to shoot their mouths off about things they have no idea about. Bear, my furry little friend, you are a coward. I have known many Bears in my life, but you should change your name to "little cub".

Until the Republicans and Democrats get over the blame game and start being real, they will continue to loose numbers. In this day and age, I would never want to identify myself with either party. Get over the Clinton did this, Bush did that garbage.

And Little Cub, I am still waiting for you to set up our meeting to discuss how I am not a conservative.

Anthony DeLucca said...

To Stephan Steele:

Regarding your 10:52 p.m. post.

"Mr. Bear, care to meet and talk about what kind of conservative I am. I bet a weak little twerp like you has neither the guts nor the brawn to speak your mind to a man's face. The best your type can do is spout off with a secret psuedonym on a weblog. I used my name, now why don't you use yours, gutless."

Sounds like you're picking a fight. And why would you need "brawn" to speak your mind? I don't get it, would you care to help me out on this one. I'd be interested in your answer.

And oh yeah, I used my name.

Anonymous said...

Great ... two right-wingers want to convince each other that he's got the biggest dick.

Meanwhile, listening to Daniel Miglavs explain why he's not a bigot is like listening to Bill Clinton insist that he "did not have sex with that woman." Both pathetic, and both unconvincing. And that's just not my opinion ... that's an "educated guess."

Good luck to you, Mr. Steel. I think you'll find the difference between Bear and DeLucca pretty slight: Mr. DeLucca is an articulate asshole, but Bear, as you've already learned, is just an asshole. Have fun ... and may the biggest dick win. Ahem.

Anthony DeLucca said...

Anon 9:17,
You've already proven who the biggest dick is.

amish Abe said...

This is gettin' good. Con vs. Con No "Little Cub" (hahaha I love it) for how many days now? That is quite unusual. But all of a sudden DeLuggi speaks. Does "Little Cub" = DeLuggi?