Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Illegal Immigrant Says on CBS: In 20 Years, We'll Run America!

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   


posted by TrueAmerican

“ . . as far as I'm concerned, they can ‘evolutionize’ right back to the Constitution . . I wonder how the Constitution is going to read in Spanish . . where are all the illegal immigrants going to go then? Better watch out Canada, for surely you will get annexed into Aztlan as well. [Edited by Don W]



The first Constitutional fight in America took place in 1800. Jefferson beat Adams who was running for reelection. The election went to the House due to a snafu in the Constitution. It took 31 votes in the House and a push by Hamilton - who hated Jefferson only a fraction less than he hated Burr- to give the country Thomas Jefferson as our third president.

Burr and Jefferson were both called “Republicans” but later added “Democratic-Republicans” to their name, which finally morphed into “Democrats.” . Adams and Hamilton were Federalists which political group made its last stand known as Whigs. Us left wing liberals would have been Federalist or Whigs had we been alive then. Red state types would have been Jeffersonians. By dent of [a shameful] historical accident, the Dems came to claim Jefferson and later add Jackson into their own pantheon of political demigods.

Spain, Brazil, Costa Rica and so on are all civilized countries with a system of law and order. You can sue and be sued in any of them, plus about 190 other countries around the world. I am sorry to burst your bubble, but America does not possess anything that anyone around the world wants, government wise, culture wise, and many of those countries get better results than we are getting.

I have no fear of translating the Constitution into Spanish. A Spanish version will produce no more rancor than today’s English version.



[edit on 8/9/2006 by donwhite]




posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Any chance don you might consider when quoting someone not altering continuous lines of text into the same quote box? Not sure that's appropriate, as it is not what was stated with its contextual supporting content. You edit quotes continually to read in a different way- and then respond to the resulting quote. That's a new habit I haven't quite seen before here, and I'm not sure if it's even allowed...at least not quite in that manner...mods, any comments on that? Can we now just arbitrarily edit other people's quotes any way we want?

Anyway, I don't know how you could possibly say that no one else in the world wants anything culturally from us...I could think of many instances where that is just not right. Americanization happens all over the globe to varying degrees and across a multitude of issues...So where do you get that from?



posted on Aug, 10 2006 @ 08:17 PM
link   


posted by TrueAmerican

Any chance Don you might consider when quoting someone not altering continuous lines of text into the same quote box?
[Edited by Don W]



May I be like Fred Sanford? He would pause a moment, then go ahead with his original plan, excusing that he had indeed given it thought. Actually, T/A, I do that for 2 reasons. 1) I may see only a part of a statement I want to give a reply. 2) in some instances, Moderators have asked posters not to use excess bandwidth.

It is imperative in any editing that the editor does not alter the meaning of the original material.

I am sorry you do not agree with my editing practice. I want to delete your next paragraph because I have no additional response to make. I will try not to break apart your sentences. I will abide by any instructions on this issue given by ATS designated persons.



Anyway, I don't know how you could possibly say that no one else in the world wants anything culturally from us . . I could think of many instances where that is just not right. So where do you get that from?



The UK recently required MacDonald’s to stop using the golden arches logo, and MacDonald’s substituted an asterisk as their new emblem. Other countries in the EU are about to adopt fat content rules on fast foods. Singapore won’t let you chew Wrigley’s Spearmint gum in public. Most Muslim countries complain about our music, our dress attire and other expressive art forms. I have not kept a list, but I think I speak the truth on that topic.

If you look at Florida in 2000 you can see we cannot hold an election that even complies with our own laws. Jimmy Carter says that most of our states electoral practices do not comply with the UN minimum standards. I trust him.

The IMF and WB seem more like instruments of control than they seem to be altruistic agencies out looking for some country in trouble to help.

I think armaments are our major export and most countries around the world have given up on war. We’re still pushing “war” as the primo solution to most problems.





 
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join