Do they VOTE? With passion and enthusiasm?

[Small Market Guy]

Sure but the end result is the same.

Your comparison would be the same if the Rochester jocks got fired for bad ratings or stealing office supplies. Or pretty much anything related to actual job performance and not because of the demands of a few people. Cantor got fired by a majority of the people who voted in the primary, whomever they might have been.

Everything is connected, and you can't be a strict ideologue when you're also responsible for millions of other people. If this Brat guy gets elected, he'll be faced with the same choices Cantor did.

No one is going to agree with any elected official 100%, but if you claim to be a Republican in a conservative district, you'd better not support amnesty for illegal immigrants and not support the Second Amendment. I can't think of two worse third rail issues for a Republican candidate. It would be like a pro-life and anti-gay marriage Democrat trying to get elected in San Francisco.

 

[TheBigA]

No one is going to agree with any elected official 100%, but if you claim to be a Republican in a conservative district, you'd better not support amnesty for illegal immigrants and not support the Second Amendment.

He was pretty careful in the way he phrased it. Like all issues, amnesty isn't black and white. He was open to a very restricted view of it, mainly for children. But if radio talk show hosts want to, they can forget to mention the limitations, and simply use the "A" word, and the locals break out the tar and feathers. That's what we're talking about with how a person is portrayed in the media. So at the end of the day, because he was open to compromise, the State of Virginia and the Republican Party lose a powerful Representative with high seniority, well respected, someone who could have done a lot for the state and the party. In exchange, they get a college professor with no legislative experience, who is determined to stick to his principles, regardless of the results. How is that an improvement? What did the radio talk show hosts gain by getting involved? It's kind of like the people who ask me how is radio better because of consolidation. Telling them, "We're still on the air" doesn't satisfy them.

 

[Avid Listener]

No one is going to agree with any elected official 100%, but if you claim to be a Republican in a conservative district, you'd better not support amnesty for illegal immigrants and not support the Second Amendment.

There is no such thing as an "illegal immigrant". Immigrants are people who enter the country legally. Those who are in the country illegally are "illegal aliens".

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

There is no such thing as an "illegal immigrant". Immigrants are people who enter the country legally. Those who are in the country illegally are "illegal aliens".

I hate to break the bad news to you, but the dictionaries do not support your explanation.

 

[Avid Listener]

I hate to break the bad news to you, but the dictionaries do not support your explanation.

Rhett Butler's parting words to Scarlett O'Hara apply here.

There are times when someone engaging in effective communications needs to look beyond denotative meanings and take into account the connotative meanings of words as well, if he wishes to be clearly understood.

 

[Small Market Guy]

There is no such thing as an "illegal immigrant". Immigrants are people who enter the country legally. Those who are in the country illegally are "illegal aliens".

I don't like using the word alien since it's more associated with little green men from Mars in this day and age.

 

[Small Market Guy]

He was pretty careful in the way he phrased it. Like all issues, amnesty isn't black and white. He was open to a very restricted view of it, mainly for children.

That's working out really well.

In exchange, they get a college professor with no legislative experience, who is determined to stick to his principles, regardless of the results.

Sounds kind of familiar. At least this one has decent principles.

 

[Avid Listener]

I don't like using the word alien since it's more associated with little green men from Mars in this day and age.

I don't like using the word "immigrant" to apply to people who are here illegally because if they are here illegally, they are criminals.

 

[Small Market Guy]

I don't like using the word "immigrant" to apply to people who are here illegally because if they are here illegally, they are criminals.

I get your point, but the "illegal" part clarifies it. I don't have any quarrel with either term as long as people don't start on the "undocumented" crap.

 

[TheBigA]

I don't like using the word "immigrant" to apply to people who are here illegally because if they are here illegally, they are criminals.

You'd be surprised how many of those "criminals" provide services you use every day.

 

[Small Market Guy]

You'd be surprised how many of those "criminals" provide services you use every day.

I'm pretty sure we all know that illegals do all kinds of work. Doesn't change the fact that they broke the law coming here.

Now if you want to talk about allowing more people to come here LEGALLY, that's a discussion we can have. Or some kind of guest worker program. But until there are consequences of some sort for breaking the law, people will continue to break the law. Obviously we're not going to round up 20 million people and send them home, but there are things that can be done to alleviate the problem.

 

[TheBigA]

Now if you want to talk about allowing more people to come here LEGALLY, that's a discussion we can have.

It's not a discussion for US to have, because we don't make the laws. It's a discussion for our elected representatives to have. But if they do, they get targeted by radio talk show hosts, and lose the election. A Congressman shouldn't be targeted because he wants to have a discussion, and that's what happened this week.

 

[Small Market Guy]

A Congressman shouldn't be targeted because he wants to have a discussion

Why not? If the people who elect him don't want it, then that's their prerogative. The guy they elected is an intelligent and decent guy. The fact that you think people in congress shouldn't be held accountable for something is kinda scary.

It's not a discussion for US to have, because we don't make the laws.

Nonsense. We HAVE to have this discussion. We're the ones that elect the guys in Congress. Maybe if more people had the discussion themselves, the guys in Congress could as well.

The people demanding every illegal be rounded up and shipped back are not being realistic. The people demanding immediate amnesty for every single one are trolling for new voters. Let's not pretend that this isn't about trying to make some of those border red states into border blue states. I can see why conservatives would be so steadfast in their refusal to even consider amnesty. Because it's about more than just immigration. It's a much larger issue.

 

[TheBigA]

Why not? If the people who elect him don't want it, then that's their prerogative. The guy they elected is an intelligent and decent guy. The fact that you think people in congress shouldn't be held accountable for something is kinda scary.

Huh? I didn't say he shouldn't be held accountable. I said he shouldn't be fired because he wants to open a discussion. And the discussion was never had. A law was never proposed. He was defeated because he merely said something people didn't like. To me, that stifles free speech. It's one thing to being a sponsor of a bill that your constituents don't like. I get that, and I support that. But this never got that far. Making laws isn't a "my way or the highway" thing. It's a process. Give & take. The reason nothing gets done is that no one wants to give or take. And it doesn't help when national radio talk show hosts perpetuate the mythology rather than promote the overall discussion. There is no question that we need to solve the immigration problem, and it won't get solved until Congress sits down and talks about it. We already know how the tea party feels about it. We the people have already had our discussion. It had to be dealt with in legislation, and that step was killed this week.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Huh? I didn't say he shouldn't be held accountable. I said he shouldn't be fired because he wants to open a discussion. And the discussion was never had. A law was never proposed. He was defeated because he merely said something people didn't like. To me, that stifles free speech. It's one thing to being a sponsor of a bill that your constituents don't like. I get that, and I support that. But this never got that far. Making laws isn't a "my way or the highway" thing. It's a process. Give & take. The reason nothing gets done is that no one wants to give or take. And it doesn't help when national radio talk show hosts perpetuate the mythology rather than promote the overall discussion.

There is an irony in the Cantor situation. I remember from the days of reading farm news and farm markets on the air, there are THREE major poultry producing regions in the U.S.
Arkansas.
Georgia.
Del-mar-va. And the va in Del-mar-va is VIRGINIA.

The poultry industry is one of a handful of industries that most need the immigrant-guest worker-deportation issues to be talked about, and talked about in congress, and some kind of legislative progress as a result. And there are three states where talking about solving the problem is the kiss-of-death for a sitting Congressman right now appear to be: <drum roll please> Arkansas. Georgia. Virginia. (Some one else will have to educate me on how it would go over in Maryland or Delaware as a campaign topic.)

You would think if the major players in the Talk Radio empire had reasonable mixtures of politics and economics and ethics in their being, they would be lecturing the listeners in those states that maybe solving the immigration issues is important to their economies.

 

[TheBigA]

You would think if the major players in the Talk Radio empire had reasonable mixtures of politics and economics and ethics in their being, they would be lecturing the listeners in those states that maybe solving the immigration issues is important to their economies.

That's why it's such a huge mistake to allow people with no real education in the issues to be setting the agenda, and punishing those who do. The tail is wagging the dog. Not that there's anything anyone can do about it. But we get the government we deserve.

 

[Silkie]

Passion, enthusiasm, hype, emotion, skin shade, sixteen page posts and other nonsense, have no place in a vote; rather, obedience to the Constitution is the only consideration.

 

[Avid Listener]

I don't much give a damn whether or not illegal aliens perform work that needs to be done. I do notice that it is often the same liberals who whine about wanting amnesty for illegal aliens who also whine about raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, and there would be plenty of legal citizens who'd accept those jobs that supposedly only illegal aliens would do. On the other hand, if we need migrant workers to come into the country and work, then the issue is passing proper laws that enable them to do so legally.

That's not something that you just "talk about". If you're a political leader, then you LEAD. You put forth specific proposals, you put legislation before committees and you DO SOMETHING. Talk is cheap. It's free on news/talk radio, but it's still cheap when it happens in Washington, DC. Any politician who simply says that we need to talk, or worse, to "engage in dialogue", is useless, and not worth voting for. If you have an idea, lay it out there. If you don't, move over for someone who does.

 

[TheBigA]

That's not something that you just "talk about". If you're a political leader, then you LEAD. You put forth specific proposals, you put legislation before committees and you DO SOMETHING.

I agree, except the minute someone tries to lead, he gets targeted by talk radio, and is defeated before anything is done. It doesn't encourage leadership. It encourages people to stay home in their districts and keep their mouths shut. There are lots of ideas that have been proposed. None of them have been enacted, because that takes consensus-building. That means you have to convince a guy from another state that it's in their best interest to support your law. The problem is that most of these guys are so wrapped in their ideology, they can't be convinced, and if they seem to shift from their previous view, they're attacked by talk radio as flip flopping.

Right now we have a bunch of Congressmen who say: "Don't judge me on what I do, but on what I DON'T do." Those are the guys who need to move over, or stop taking their paychecks.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I don't much give a damn whether or not illegal aliens perform work that needs to be done. I do notice that it is often the same liberals who whine about wanting amnesty for illegal aliens who also whine about raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, and there would be plenty of legal citizens who'd accept those jobs that supposedly only illegal aliens would do. On the other hand, if we need migrant workers to come into the country and work, then the issue is passing proper laws that enable them to do so legally.

You ever hired hands to work on a farm during the harvest season?

You ever got out of bed in time to be down at the corner and load into the back of a truck for a ride to the spinach patch and spend the day on your hands and knees cutting spinach?

Have you ever taken the tour through a plant where the live chickens come in at one end of the building, and chicken-pot-pies come out the other end of the plant?

I have this feeling that you may be delivering philosophical observations about things you may not have ever waded through.

I grew up on a cotton farm... before machines picked the cotton. My father was promising the people who slipped across the river to pick our cotton that one of these days we were going to make it possible and legal for them to cross the border with dignity and not have to run and hide in the cactus and mesquite woods every time a big black car came wandering through the fields looking for people without legal status to be here. There was a short period of time when there was a Bracero Program and it was a laugh. But here we are... 60 years later and our legislators have never gotten serious about fixing the problem. Even before legislators had Conservative Radio looking over their shoulder ready to tattle about bad behavior in the legislature, they didn't have the cajones to get the job done. (You learn words like that when you are a kid on a cotton and vegetable farm. )

Long before I ever thought about becoming the Goat Rodeo Cowboy, these field laborers gave me my very own, my first "nome de plum"... I was El Chico Patron.