College Liberal

Wise comment.. good one!

How are the immigrants increasing the Democrat voting base if they're so conservative?

They vote based on the issue that primarily affects them, which is immigration and benefits to illegals. Look at the social laws in South America and muslim countries - they are much more to the right of where America will ever be.

What is this wave of South Americans you keep referring to? Are we being overrun by Peruvians? Chile and Argentina are infiltrating by freight boats?

Good catch! I missed the forest for the trees. We all know he really meant "them lazy Mexican'ts."

http://lawstreetmedia.com/issues/politics/part-will-hispanic-voters-play-2016-elections/

Didn't see one word in there about South America. So I conclude you're just throwing terms out there at random.

i see. you probably don't realize that the US Census defines hispanic as someone from Spanish decent, with the largest portion of hispanics living in the United States coming from South American countries. I don't mind connecting the dots for you...you clearly need it.

That is just... incorrect data. Source please?
Here is my source: the actual US Census Bureau. 50,477,594 total Hispanic population in US for the year 2010, 31,798,258 of which are of Mexican origin, compared to 2,769,434 from all of South America. Follow this link if you want to confirm.
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-04.pdf
Now, thank you for wasting my time digging this up for you. Good day to you Sir, and to the high horse you apparently rode in on.

for your edification (from wikipedia): "Officially, however, the U.S. Government has defined Hispanic or Latino persons as being 'persons who trace their origin or descent to Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Central and South America, and other Spanish cultures.' This includes Spain which is the origin of Spanish culture. The United States Census uses the ethnonym Hispanic or Latino to refer to "a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin regardless of race."

so the article was discussing the impact of "persons who trace their origin or descent to Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Central and South America, and other Spanish cultures."

in an unrelated article, you'll see that immigration from south america (not the generalized hispanics) has grown 7 fold (in terms of share of immigrant population in the united states) from 1960 (1%) to 2011 (7%). http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/south-american-immigrants-united-states#1

Might those laws be part of why they're moving? There is no such thing as an "illegal": it's an adjective, not a noun.

No such thing as a liberal or a conservative but those of us with the intelligence to adapt to context make due. And typically it's the financial opportunities that is the reason that they are moving. At least according to everyone. Does Google not work where you are?

I'm sure the fact ISIS has murdered thousands of them is unrelated to their desire to immigrate. Google it.

Really?!? Really?!? You think I'm talking about Syrian refugees?!? They won't get here for 2 years and even then won't get to vote for waaaay long after, if ever. Smh.

Ladies and gentlemen: your 2016 Democrat voter!!!!

We pander to immigrants, you pander to anti-American traitors who despise all this country stands for.

Well yes, racism was also big back in the 1700s.

The party currently labeled "Republican" is racist now. They generally support the same policies as the "Democrats" of old. I have a BA in History, so I'm set.

Republicans endorse slavery? Really? They endorse blacks not having full voting rights? What liberal arts school would give you a degree????

They ditched the Voting Rights Act. They have passed voter ID laws that pose a greater burden to black voters. They favor States' Rights, which is but a euphemism for the right to discriminate. And I said "generally." My point is that your argument predicated on party names is facile and childish.

favoring States' rights is a euphemism?!? the constitution specifically says that any rights not expressly granted to the federal government in the constitution is left to the States. Now, i realize that as a leftie, you don't hold that the constitution holds any weight beyond a court's ability to create new rights that fit your particular mood of the decade, but for the rest of the united states (e.g., non-liberals and americans throughout history, regardless of their political leanings), the constitution was a pretty vital instrument for our governance.

States' Rights exist, but normally the term is used to defend the rights of states to violate federal law or federal court rulings, which the Constitution expressly forbids. Judicial activism is another term used by your ilk to deride liberal judges, but is practiced with equal aplomb by conservative judges. Heller and Hobby Lobby are two fine examples.

actually people use the term 'states rights' when discussing federal encroachment of those rights, whether by legislation or by judicial mandate. and we FINALLY AGREE ON SOMETHING!!!! yes, judicial activism goes both ways. too many conservative judges try giving non-existent powers to states to advance their own beliefs, though i'd posit that hobby lobby is not a case of judicial activism - its based on the first sentence of the US Code (which defines corporations as people) and case law dating back to the 19th century which treated corporations as people. that said, there is definitely conservative activism that needs to be stamped out. that doesn't justify the left both are wrong.

Nice one :)

More Irony

I've seen this before. The issue most people take with the liberal view on American values is that they only work if you ignore the nation's judeo-christian roots and imagine that the country was founded by a group of atheists looking for religious exemption instead of a group of heavily devout Christians looking for a place to worship without oppression. Almost all American jurisprudence from the 1700's and 1800's (and early 1900's) reflected this basic understanding. So comparing Christianity to Islam in this country is not just ignorant, it's stupid. And yet liberals will go on congratulating themselves thinking that they are so wise and intellectual, all because they've constructed a revisionist history to fit the model of the country they wish this was and blame conservatives for sticking to the original principles of the founders.

Many of the Founding Fathers were not Christians nor atheists. America is a place with zero oppression of Christians. The rare oppression Christians have ever received in America was at the hands of other Christians. The only way to ensure Christians are never again oppressed is to protect all religious groups from oppression. Religion is mentioned twice in the Constitution, preceded closed by "no" in both instances. God is mentioned zero times. That was very much on purpose.

That's a stretch.

Fair enough. It was simply a convention of the time. I suppose putting the date at all could be construed as an endorsement of Christianity.

You are stereotyping. I wasn't comparing Christians to Muslims, I don't think today's Christianity resembles the Muslim religion in the least. Only the old testament from the Bible before JESUS. I have always viewed the religion and those that convert as a bit backwards like they are running back in time to something most of the free world has worked hard to escape (radicalism) like the Amish but much more brutal like a cult of sorts. Still feeling that they have permissions from God to make Judgements about life and death over others, women especially. There are also morality issues that men feel they have the right to ignore in their own behavior but exercise strict control over women. I know that many especially from that country see us as like a Sodom & Gomorrah. Grouping us all as one as if there is no difference which I'm also doing to them in a way, however I have more reason to because they dress the same way, they live the same way they pray the same way and they call for a type of law over the land that we would find unbearable. What I am saying is stop telling Democrats what we think or where we stand, ask, listen, talk over these things can we find answers that work for everyone. Yeah I think the government is responsible for the refugee situation. Yeah I think we should help homeless and hungry here as well as the refugees. Does that mean I would live with them or feel safe, no I'm Native American, people coming here has never been a good thing, each group always ends up fighting with the other groups as we fought amongst ourselves as did Europeans, as did African tribes. Yeah I know, but is there not a way to help that does not involve bringing in radically religious people who, let's be honest, think we need to change and be as they are, just as much as we want them to change and be more like we are. It's like we never learn anything from history, we can never pause to really just talk and compare what has passed to what we face now. Nope everyone is just you think this and you think that,you're stupid, no you're stupid. Let's block progress! Fun fun fun. While we bicker, Corporate America is filthy rich, they wipe with enough money to fix all of this but we can't see that, that ok we are capitalist the country was built on wonderful industrialism never mind that wonderful industrialism has produced enough waste poison part of the planet for our lifetime at least, don't look now but water shortages and nestle is trying to hoard it. Just Talk

"I wasn't comparing Christians to Muslims...etc, etc, etc" - i suggest you actually read the sheet you copy/pasted.

The last thing I wrote was word for word from my thoughts, the sheet I pasted about the merry go round is just an observation that this is something going in circles, we are not getting anywhere. I'm well aware that the founding fathers were Christian and that this country was Christian as it was flooded as the people here were slaughtered, forbidden their type of worship, herded to reservations. "Christian Boarding Schools were set up to try as hard as they could to strip the children of all things Native while assimilating them to live among whites. How could I notbe aware of that?" What I said was we have moved away from the days of old puritanistic or more radical forms of it that did closely resemble parts of Islam, most of us anyway. I am Christian, supporting Christian Values but lovingly as Jesus preached, not from fire/brimstone men that twist things and use fear to manipulate. The sheet I copied pasted just struck me as a truth, I am guilty of some of what is on that paper too. We can't circle forever, as if we are unaware that we are being surrounded by a new form of corporate government that we will rip that constitution to shreds, they don't want a government for the citizens they want to buy and control everything. I'll help protect the Constitution, It may have not been written to protect people of Color originally but as it is written, it's for citizens which is what we are and we need to act like it before it's taken away.

[image deleted]

I think I saw this on the "Republicans obviously lack logic" Facebook page.

I see it!

You forgot women's rights.

Oh great you made me laugh at non PC, thanks a lot I'm gonna burn in hell!

Dammit, I wanted to be 1st... oh well, welcome to the party gal! :)