Friday, August 29, 2008

Support American auto workers... buy a Honda?

There was a lot of "our jobs are going overseas" stuff from the Obama rally last night. An autoworker actually said that it started with Bush.

It starts with the consumer. How many Toyota Prius' were in the parking lot of that DNC event? Insisting that you want a product to thrive for the purpose of creating jobs and then buying a competing product is insanity.

Obama can't make you buy a GM vehicle and he didn't ask you to. Some unexplained method was going to be used to "keep jobs from going overseas." If you are worried about jobs at Burger King then stop eating at the McDonalds next door.

But while I'm on the subject, how about the workers who lose their jobs to illegal aliens? How about the firearm manufacturers who Obama would like to put out of bussiness with lawsuits? What about Kahr and Kel-Tec who make handguns for concealed carry that he would like to outlaw? What about StagArms which makes AR-15 rifles that he would like to ban?

Would those workers be featured at the next Repulican convention in four years?

15 comments:

Big Mike Lewis said...

When they enact this cap-and-trade fiasco, many, many more jobs will be headed overseas as well...if they enact a tax on them to prevent them from going overseas, those companies will just die and capitalism will die with them.

Everything is about to get really, really expensive and not just our gas prices.

They don't like "warrantless wiretaps" because of invasion of privacy. They haven't seen anything yet. Wait until everything you do is subject to regulation; how you spend money, what temp your house is, how much you drive, how much food you eat, etc. That's called Communism and Totalitarianism.

We'll be BEGGING for Bush's 3rd Term.

Gumby said...

Yep, If Obama is elected President, our entire economy will collapse next year.

Obama lacks experience and will be a puppet just as Bush was.

Anonymous said...

The entire economy will collapse next year regardless of who is president. (And like it's thrived so well under Bush II!)

MAX Redline said...

It starts with the consumer. How many Toyota Prius' were in the parking lot of that DNC event?

Geesh! I didn't even know that the Toyota Prius came in a limousine model!

Anonymous said...

Are all you naysayers and nattering nabobs of negativity going to get together on election night for a boo-hoo party? If so, where? I would love to crash it.

Anonymous said...

I just want to say I'm Gumby, and Daniel. I just like to talk to myself. If you see me in Sherwood Oregon stop by and we can look over my rap sheet

To see pictures of Gumby aka Daniel
and some of his dirty work he has done go to
http://larrysinclair-0926.blogspot.com/
and scroll down

Gumby The Fraud
Guess This Explains The Gang-Banger for Obama
More of the Gang-Banger Obama Thug
and has a little dick

Thank You
Hector

Anonymous said...

Obama - just more of the same old tired Socialist "We know what's best for you rubes" trying to pick winners and losers in the market. What about all the jobs that have been imported. BMW, Honda, Toyota for example.

Anonymous said...

Daniel aka Gumby the facest
Larry Sinclair kicked your ass

Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins
Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins Larry Wins

Anonymous said...

Check this out on Daniel aka Gumby


http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives/2006/08/daniel_is_wrong.html

Anonymous said...

« The GOP and what Army? | Main | The Personal Side Of The Episcopalian Split »

August 24, 2006
Daniel is Wrong
An interesting discussion is going on over at the Portland Mercury about the harassment of Mexican laborers by a group called Oregonians for Immigration Reform. Featured in the discussion is one Daniel Miglavs, whose apparent split personality is confounding the people who are posting on the subject.

The so-called "split personality" has to do with the fact that he is married to a Latina woman and is rabidly anti-illegal immigration. He also has a history of involvement in the 18th Street gang. And people say I've done a philosophical 180. Perhaps if Daniel didn't look like a skinhead, this argument wouldn't be given any credibility - after all, it is possible to be against illegal immigration without being a racist.

Daniel is a blogger, mostly writing about illegal immigration these days, but he has for some time been an active, outspoken right-wing Republican. I can't say I have ever read anything he wrote that I agreed with. But then, I don't read his posts that often. He just strikes me as an extremist and that sort of thinking annoys me to no end. But I do find it fascinating that one of his more outspoken critics at the Mercury accuses Daniel of being a hater and then calls him a "fucktard," all in the same breath. We're all blind to our own faults, I suppose.

As I've written before, the immigration issue is fracturing the Republican party power structure. But in what I would consider a big but unreported story, it seems Democrats are fractured by this issue, as well. I've talked with Democrats who think Pat Buchanan, as odd as he is, makes a lot of sense on immigration (he makes a lot of sense to me, too). On the other hand, no small number of Democrats see those who want to enforce immigration laws as barely closeted racists (I think in some cases that is true). And if you really want to have your brain twist up, consider this: The founder of Oregonians for Immigration Reform is an environmental activist. The point is, this issue is damned complicated and the usual categories don't apply here.

Here's where I part ways from Daniel and Oregonians for Immigration Reform. I would never get in the faces of these laborers and try to intimidate them because if I was Mexican, I'd be coming here, too. People pursuing freedom and a better life are not at fault for taking advantage of the situation that currently exists. We might think they could come legally, but the facts contradict that. I actually know well an illegal Mexican immigrant family who are truly assets to this country and who love the United States.

A lot of our political leaders would have us believe we have two choices - either enforce existing laws or come up with new laws, and they have succeeded in convincing too many activists to march in the streets for one view or the other. As I see it, however, such things as NAFTA, tax policies, and anti-worker policies have us so badly mired in muck that no easy solution exists.

In other words, Daniel is wrong.

Daniel's goals would probably much better served if the generous donors funding Oregonians for Immigration Reform paid for him and the other picketers to fly to Washington, DC and protest in front of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. where they could get in the face of George W. Bush. From there, they could head over to the Capitol with their video cameras and, a la Michael Moore, ask members of Congress what they plan to do, rather than using their camera to document police harrassment and accusatory counter-protestors.

Instead, their protests, whether motivated by hate for brown people or love of country or both (or neither), are succeeding only in bringing out more hate and distracting people from a very serious issue, one that I personally find very internally conflicting and would like to rationally discuss a lot more with thinking people.


Posted by Becky at August 24, 2006 08:25 PM
http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives

Anonymous said...

http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives
« The GOP and what Army? | Main | The Personal Side Of The Episcopalian Split »

August 24, 2006
Daniel is Wrong
An interesting discussion is going on over at the Portland Mercury about the harassment of Mexican laborers by a group called Oregonians for Immigration Reform. Featured in the discussion is one Daniel Miglavs, whose apparent split personality is confounding the people who are posting on the subject.

The so-called "split personality" has to do with the fact that he is married to a Latina woman and is rabidly anti-illegal immigration. He also has a history of involvement in the 18th Street gang. And people say I've done a philosophical 180. Perhaps if Daniel didn't look like a skinhead, this argument wouldn't be given any credibility - after all, it is possible to be against illegal immigration without being a racist.

Daniel is a blogger, mostly writing about illegal immigration these days, but he has for some time been an active, outspoken right-wing Republican. I can't say I have ever read anything he wrote that I agreed with. But then, I don't read his posts that often. He just strikes me as an extremist and that sort of thinking annoys me to no end. But I do find it fascinating that one of his more outspoken critics at the Mercury accuses Daniel of being a hater and then calls him a "fucktard," all in the same breath. We're all blind to our own faults, I suppose.

As I've written before, the immigration issue is fracturing the Republican party power structure. But in what I would consider a big but unreported story, it seems Democrats are fractured by this issue, as well. I've talked with Democrats who think Pat Buchanan, as odd as he is, makes a lot of sense on immigration (he makes a lot of sense to me, too). On the other hand, no small number of Democrats see those who want to enforce immigration laws as barely closeted racists (I think in some cases that is true). And if you really want to have your brain twist up, consider this: The founder of Oregonians for Immigration Reform is an environmental activist. The point is, this issue is damned complicated and the usual categories don't apply here.

Here's where I part ways from Daniel and Oregonians for Immigration Reform. I would never get in the faces of these laborers and try to intimidate them because if I was Mexican, I'd be coming here, too. People pursuing freedom and a better life are not at fault for taking advantage of the situation that currently exists. We might think they could come legally, but the facts contradict that. I actually know well an illegal Mexican immigrant family who are truly assets to this country and who love the United States.

A lot of our political leaders would have us believe we have two choices - either enforce existing laws or come up with new laws, and they have succeeded in convincing too many activists to march in the streets for one view or the other. As I see it, however, such things as NAFTA, tax policies, and anti-worker policies have us so badly mired in muck that no easy solution exists.

In other words, Daniel is wrong.

Daniel's goals would probably much better served if the generous donors funding Oregonians for Immigration Reform paid for him and the other picketers to fly to Washington, DC and protest in front of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. where they could get in the face of George W. Bush. From there, they could head over to the Capitol with their video cameras and, a la Michael Moore, ask members of Congress what they plan to do, rather than using their camera to document police harrassment and accusatory counter-protestors.

Instead, their protests, whether motivated by hate for brown people or love of country or both (or neither), are succeeding only in bringing out more hate and distracting people from a very serious issue, one that I personally find very internally conflicting and would like to rationally discuss a lot more with thinking people.


Posted by Becky at August 24, 2006 08:25 PM

Bobkatt said...

I'm not really sure why anyone would find it necessary to double post a two year old comment to the Portland Mercury. Especially one that is so ignorant.
The author is confused because Daniel is married to a Latino yet still a "rabid anti-illegal immigrant". Once again, anti-illegal does not equate to anti-immigrant, which the author admits in the following statement, "after all, it is possible to be against illegal immigration without being a racist".
The author then writes: 'I can't say I have ever read anything he wrote that I agreed with. But then, I don't read his posts that often". Brilliant.

The author is also confused that the founder of OFIR is an environmental activist. Why is it confusing to see the environmental impact of up to 30 million illegal invaders adding to our population. All this has dire consequences for our housing, water usage, energy needs, highway congestion and land usage.

To sum it up, this article does seem to merit publishing once two years ago, let alone twice today.

Gumby said...

If anyone wonders about the source of all the "Gumby is Daniel" crap, just go to this nutjob's blog and find where it's coming from:

http://larrysinclair-0926.blogspot.com/

This flaming faggot fool has a real hard-on for me and he ASSumes I must be Daniel since I live in Oregon and support OFIR.

What a douchebag!

Anonymous said...

That's your opinion BobKatt, and only your opinion.

I enjoyed the article when it was first published and, in my opnion, it was worth reading again.

Thanks for sharing it with us, Anon 548.

Anonymous said...

ups sorry delete plz [url=http://duhum.com].[/url]