Know Thy Enemy: NRA's New $50 MILLION Nemesis Emerges

You may have painted with too broad a brush but I agree with the general sentiment, that's why I quoted your post. Perception is half of reality and this is what many of us perceive. I'd wager that most legal immigrants become more patriotic and grateful to be here because they remember too well what they left behind. But they are not the ones we see on the news. TLDR20 is keeping things in perspective.

The assholes of the world get their mugs on TV. And they're the ones we visualize.



.
 
By what manner of twisting and turning the meaning of my post could you possibly come to that conclusion??

Ah, yes. I see. By utterly and completely ignoring the actual text.
By you making vast and complete generalizations and portraying them as facts.
I'm also concerned about the changing demographics in America (influx of unassimilated immigrants with no loyalty to America)
I am glad we have you to tell us who has, or doesn't have loyalty to our country. I like your use of the term unassimilated, I wonder how many generations it typically takes to become assimilated, I am almost sure it isn't zero, most early American immigrants from European nations took 3-4 generations before becoming assimilated. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/assimilation-models-old-and-new-explaining-long-term-process

Two decades ago, people came here because they wanted to be American.
And you have some kind of proof that they don't now? OR again are you making a huge generalization? Also 20 years ago had the some of the highest levels of illegal immigration, but those must have been the good illegals, coming here to wave flags and support the 2A right?

Now most of the immigrants I meet don't even bother referring to themselves as American, they just work here and send money back "home". America isn't home to them. They'll stay 10 or 20 years, make money and then leave.

So maybe the ones from 2 decades ago you referenced above are all back home now. Does anectdotal evidence count now? Again a broad brushstroke for a very personal issue. Do you have statistics that back what you are saying? Or do you have isolated incidents that you use to form your opinion.

Many of the ones that do stay aren't the least bit indoctrinated in the ideals of freedom that we used to aspire to. I'm convinced people aren't flocking to enter this country for the same reasons they once did. They could care less about gun rights, and come from countries where such rights don't exist anyway.

So yeah I must not of read what you wrote. You clearly didn't speak for them, you definitely didn't say what they care about, what they will do in the next few years or where there loyalties lay. Or wait, the opposite of that is true. Again JBS you are spouting off opinion as if it is factual, and then seeming offended when called out about it.
 
By you making vast and complete generalizations and portraying them as facts.


[snip]

I am glad we have you to tell us who has, or doesn't have loyalty to our country. I like your use of the term unassimilated, I wonder how many generations it typically takes to become assimilated, I am almost sure it isn't zero, most early American immigrants from European nations took 3-4 generations before becoming assimilated. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/assimilation-models-old-and-new-explaining-long-term-process

[snip]

And you have some kind of proof that they don't now? OR again are you making a huge generalization? Also 20 years ago had the some of the highest levels of illegal immigration, but those must have been the good illegals, coming here to wave flags and support the 2A right?

[snip]

So maybe the ones from 2 decades ago you referenced above are all back home now. Does anectdotal evidence count now? Again a broad brushstroke for a very personal issue. Do you have statistics that back what you are saying? Or do you have isolated incidents that you use to form your opinion.


So yeah I must not of read what you wrote. You clearly didn't speak for them, you definitely didn't say what they care about, what they will do in the next few years or where there loyalties lay. Or wait, the opposite of that is true. Again JBS you are spouting off opinion as if it is factual, and then seeming offended when called out about it.


So what do you call it when someone selectively quotes you to create a meaning different than when the whole quote is used?

Because in your lengthy quote of me, it seems you must have blown past the most important part:

I grew up in Miami, and had so many family friends who escaped Communist Cuba, and whose families came here to be American. Now most of the immigrants I meet don't even bother referring to themselves as American,...

The obvious meaning of what I'm saying is that my interaction with various immigrant groups has radically changed- and for the worse. Of course what I'm saying is a reflection of my perception, just as everything- 100% of what you might say- is your perception as well. The same is true about every post on the forum.

Every post I make is my perception. Every post I make is also in English. And typed. These kinds of statements have absolutely no value whatsoever, and contribute nothing to the thread.

Instead of attacking me with snide remarks you might try posting your own opinion, or counter my points with those of your own.

Again JBS you are spouting off opinion as if it is factual, and then seeming offended when called out about it.

I don't remember the role of a moderator being insulting and disrespectful ("spouting"?), and it definitely isn't professional. If you want to "call me out" then go ahead and do so, but the only thing I'm reading here is that you were offended by a post that was clearly my opinion. It's also not the first time you've done this- to me or other posters you don't agree with. Your post is also void of any facts of your own- something you seem to be demanding from me in support of my views.
 
Last edited:
Also, the article you linked to about how uncontrolled immigration is such a great thing is written by a Leftist activist. He's also someone who recently mobilied on behalf of Muslim students who shouted down the Israeli ambassador- an invited guest speaker at UC Irvine- so severely that he couldn't say a word. The Muslim students were charged with a misdemeanor. (UC Irvine being that bastion of Centrist political views)

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/02/uc-irvine-muslim-students-charged.html

Let me enroll in his class, stand up and shout him down incessantly with some bearded Tea Party people, to the point where he cannot even say a single word, and see if he's understanding and compassionate as we interfere with his free speech. Something tells me I'd be escorted out of the building by law enforcement or campus police.
 
Also, the article you linked to about how uncontrolled immigration is such a great thing is written by a Leftist activist. He's also someone who recently mobilied on behalf of Muslim students who shouted down the Israeli ambassador- an invited guest speaker at UC Irvine- so severely that he couldn't say a word. The Muslim students were charged with a misdemeanor. (UC Irvine being that bastion of Centrist political views)

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/02/uc-irvine-muslim-students-charged.html

Let me enroll in his class, stand up and shout him down incessantly with some bearded Tea Party people, to the point where he cannot even say a single word, and see if he's understanding and compassionate as we interfere with his free speech. Something tells me I'd be escorted out of the building by law enforcement or campus police.

That has what to do with assimilation? The point of the article is to demonstrate the length of time it takes to assimilate into a culture. Migration Policy Institute as a source is one I am confident in posting.
Nowhere in that article does it say "uncontrolled immigration is such a great thing." But the guy who wrote it is a what I would consider an expert:

"Author or editor of more than 150 scholarly articles and chapters and 18 books, Bean's research focuses on international migration, unauthorized migration, U.S. immigration policy, and the demography of the U.S. Hispanic population. A member of the Council on Foreign Relations, he has been a Guggenheim Fellow[2] and held numerous visiting scholar positions (at the Russell Sage Foundation, the Transatlantic Academy, the American Academy in Berlin, the Research School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University, and the Center for U.S./Mexico Studies at the University of California at San Diego). He has mentored dozens of students, who hold (or have held) positions at such places as Georgetown University, UCLA, the University of Illinois, the University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania State University, Princeton University, the University of Washington, the Migration Policy Institute, and the U.S. Bureau of the Census. A frequent recipient of foundation and federal grants, Bean has been a Principal Investigator of NICHD behavioral science grants in population in every decade since the inception of the program in 1969. In 2011, he received the Distinguished Lifetime Scholarly Career Award in International Migration at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association"

"He co-directed a large research program at The Urban Institute and Rand Corporation on the implementation and effectiveness of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), legislation that initiated employer penalties for hiring unauthorized workers and permitted legalization of unauthorized immigrants in the country. His research involved developing estimates of how IRCA affected unauthorized migration and what factors affected flows from Mexico.[5] In the mid-1990s, he led a group of U.S. and Mexican scholars seeking to improve estimates of unauthorized migration for the Mexico/U.S. Binational Migration Study, mandated by the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform.[6] The research provided what The New York Times called in a front-page story "the first authoritative estimate of the net annual flow of illegal Mexican workers into the United States." [7] This work also helped to spawn adjustments for coverage error in all subsequent official and widely accepted estimates of unauthorized migration."

I think he is qualified to speak about assimilation and migration. In your link his name is not mentioned. Strange that I didn't see any links to liberal activism in any of his works or summaries of his work.
 
Last edited:
http://www.examiner.com/article/bloomberg-group-adds-another-650k-to-wash-gun-control-campaign
Bloomberg Gun Control $$$$ Millions Begin Rolling Into State Election Campaigns

While support appears to be slipping for Initiative 594, the 18-page gun control measure on the November ballot, the lobbying group funded by anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg kicked in another $650,000 last week (third line down, dated Oct. 8), according to the Public Disclosure Commission, lending more credence to arguments that rich elitists are trying to buy the Washington state election.

In addition to Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety group, Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Paul Allen and Nick Hanauer have each contributed in the six-figure range to I-594. Gates, Ballmer, Hanauer and their wives have each kicked in $1 million or more, the PDC reports say. The total raised so far exceeds $8.3 million; a lot of money to pass a measure that is supposed to be a shoo-in. KOMO and the Associated Press today are reporting that the National Rifle Association just added another $150,000 to the anti-594 campaign, but there's nothing in the article about the Bloomberg group's contribution.

Interestingly, the Associated Press did highlight the NRA's involvement, but remained silent about Bloomberg's (hefty) cash infusion.
 
Back
Top