Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Snopes.com says the Prescott College students can opt out of paying the fee.
It's not mandatory.
It's not mandatory BUT you have to opt OUT. Now if they had it the other way around it might give you a valid point. Opt out is a sneaky,slimy way of getting something as far as I'm concerned.
So as the facts emerge we are down to one scholarship paid for with voluntary contributions. How many years of life have been taken from conservatives stressing over this story?
One thing for sure: Prescott College got tons of free ink over this. Nobody, even in Arizona, had heard of the place befor this. Now they are a national news sensation. Good work!
I think it's a matter of principal for many, not stress or "years of life" taken. And if it's a true choice, the default should not be a yes or no....let the student make this choice, not default to "yes". This is very controlling type behavior, smells a bit like the definition of fascism. That's like AZ mailing me a prefilled ballot already preselecting the R or D candidate for me and telling me to "opt out" if I want. That's not a true choice in my book. It's an ugly form of trying to control others to someone else's mindset.
Judging from the unscientific poll numbers here that only about 15% think the fee is no biggie/people would pay and the not so good reaction from other news sites nationwide, I wouldn't call it "good work". I think it exposed them as just playing on the PC choo choo train.
For some reason this episode brings the following saying to mind:
“If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain”
The premises under which most people here are talking about undocumented immigrants are quite ridiculous.
Talking about undocumented immigrants as "illegal aliens" or "illegal immigrants" alludes to or emphasizes the degree of choice that immigrants have to break or comply with U.S. immigration laws. If you have studied Latin American economic, social and political history, it is apparent how (and which actors benefited) most Latin American countries have such outrageous poverty levels and why their current political climate stabilizes these economic injustices. Undocumented immigrants weigh one poor choice (remaining in a state economy with bleak social mobility) or breaking U.S. law in hopes for a more livable life. There is no legal immigration access for the poorest Latin Americans. The way we talk about or assume "choice" in contemporary political contexts is so out of touch with the material and social conditions that people face. That they are forever labeled "illegal" while other high-status figures such as statesmen/stateswomen and CEOs who regularly break law, or even your every-day criminal, are not forever labeled "illegal" is ridiculous.
I await the tired out PC accusation without addressing the actual spirit of my comment.
The premises under which most people here are talking about undocumented immigrants are quite ridiculous.
Talking about undocumented immigrants as "illegal aliens" or "illegal immigrants" alludes to or emphasizes the degree of choice that immigrants have to break or comply with U.S. immigration laws. If you have studied Latin American economic, social and political history, it is apparent how (and which actors benefited) most Latin American countries have such outrageous poverty levels and why their current political climate stabilizes these economic injustices. Undocumented immigrants weigh one poor choice (remaining in a state economy with bleak social mobility) or breaking U.S. law in hopes for a more livable life. There is no legal immigration access for the poorest Latin Americans. The way we talk about or assume "choice" in contemporary political contexts is so out of touch with the material and social conditions that people face. That they are forever labeled "illegal" while other high-status figures such as statesmen/stateswomen and CEOs who regularly break law, or even your every-day criminal, are not forever labeled "illegal" is ridiculous.
I await the tired out PC accusation without addressing the actual spirit of my comment.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
I don't think anyone is questioning why many cross over into the US.
But I will say this.....just because people in other parts of the world are living in poverty doesn't give them the right to break our immigration rules and expect to be treated as legal citizens and roll out the red carpet for them. This is, at the least, a slap in the face of the many who play by our immigration rules, pay the fees, take the time, etc. to come here legally. I find it interesting you mention no sympathy for them.
Finally, the US can't save the world. We are broke. Many of our own citizens can't find steady work/jobs to sustain them. If you truly have concern for these people in latin american, have you considered joining the peace corps or something and be the change you want to see in the world?
Your plea for illegals falls flat to the ears of many given the above reasons.
In any case, the topic is college tuition for illegals in a Phoenix area college, yay or nay, or should be a choice. Back to that.
The premises under which most people here are talking about undocumented immigrants are quite ridiculous.
Talking about undocumented immigrants as "illegal aliens" or "illegal immigrants" alludes to or emphasizes the degree of choice that immigrants have to break or comply with U.S. immigration laws. If you have studied Latin American economic, social and political history, it is apparent how (and which actors benefited) most Latin American countries have such outrageous poverty levels and why their current political climate stabilizes these economic injustices. Undocumented immigrants weigh one poor choice (remaining in a state economy with bleak social mobility) or breaking U.S. law in hopes for a more livable life. There is no legal immigration access for the poorest Latin Americans. The way we talk about or assume "choice" in contemporary political contexts is so out of touch with the material and social conditions that people face. That they are forever labeled "illegal" while other high-status figures such as statesmen/stateswomen and CEOs who regularly break law, or even your every-day criminal, are not forever labeled "illegal" is ridiculous.
I await the tired out PC accusation without addressing the actual spirit of my comment.
I know a kid who can't afford to go to college as he comes from a family who's always been poor. He also can't afford to eat steak/lobster every day so I'm going to tell him to go break into your house and take over a bedroom and then we'll force you to pay for his college AND all his living expenses.
In America, "undocumented" = ILLEGAL BORDER CROSSER, aka: a person who ILLEGALLY CROSSED one of America's BORDERS. A person who was brought here ILLEGALLY as a child is still here ILLEGALLY. They need to make that ILLEGAL status right if they choose to remain in America.
Forums across the nation have these semantics debates all the time. Changing words doesn't change the reality. Why not tell it like it is?
Location: The edge of the world and all of Western civilization
984 posts, read 1,196,310 times
Reputation: 1691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt Cassidy
In America, "undocumented" = ILLEGAL BORDER CROSSER, aka: a person who ILLEGALLY CROSSED one of America's BORDERS. A person who was brought here ILLEGALLY as a child is still here ILLEGALLY. They need to make that ILLEGAL status right if they choose to remain in America.
Forums across the nation have these semantics debates all the time. Changing words doesn't change the reality. Why not tell it like it is?
People do tell it like it is: racism. But because being that is so taboo in our culture (even though its rampant), people justify it any way they can. I notice the same people who are so concerned with taxes "illegals" don't pay while "using" social programs (proven false) really don't seem to be bothered with the billions of dollars businesses siphon away from taxes that could be used to make improvements, nor do they seem interested in righting a wrong and returning the country to the natives. Frankly, this is a very hateful, mean-spirited, selfish, intolerant, stuck-up, arrogant, self-righteous country, and this stupid debate is nothing new...
"'Well, you ain't in your country now. You're in California, an' we don't want you goddamn **** settlin' down'... '****?' she said softly. '****.' ... 'Yeah, ****! An' if you're here when I come tomorra, I'll run ya in.'"
"The boy in white went into the iron building where his helper labored over a book of bills. 'Jesus, what a hard-looking outfit!' ... 'Them ****? They're all hard-lookin'.' ... 'Jesus, I'd hate to start out in a jalopy like that.' ... 'Well, you and me got sense. Them goddamn **** got no sense and no feeling. They ain't human. A human being wouldn't live like they do. A human being couldn't stand it to be so dirty and miserable. They ain't a hell of a lot better than gorillas.'"
I edited in the asterisks. Throw in the word "illegals" and you have people today. However... these excerpts are from The Grapes of Wrath, a book noted for its accuracy in depicting the times and sentiment of central California in the late 1930s, and every instance was really the word "Okies." In other words, this is how Americans treated other Americans when they left the Great Plains because of the Dust Bowl. I seem to recall a localized issue in Houston after Katrina refugees fled New Orleans. But of course, that event involved desperate people who had to move for survival, being strangers in a strange land, being treated like garbage by the locals, working for much less money than the locals, being exploited for their labor while landowners made larger profits, working more laborious jobs than the locals, told to go home and that they weren't welcome, being persecuted, being considered less than human, being accused of perverting the culture... Do you fail to see the parallels? That's why I and others tell it like it is: racism.
People do tell it like it is: racism...
But of course, that event involved desperate people who had to move for survival, being strangers in a strange land, being treated like garbage by the locals, working for much less money than the locals, being exploited for their labor while landowners made larger profits, working more laborious jobs than the locals, told to go home and that they weren't welcome, being persecuted, being considered less than human, being accused of perverting the culture... Do you fail to see the parallels? That's why I and others tell it like it is: racism.
I don't give a rats ass what color they are, even if they are the same race as I am...they are breaking the law. They're called Illegals because what they are doing is illegal. Your analogy doesn't work because the two examples are not equal to each other. Anyone moving around a country as a legal citizen and not being accepted by the locals is nowhere near the same as someone entering a country without disclosure to the country's government.
Location: The edge of the world and all of Western civilization
984 posts, read 1,196,310 times
Reputation: 1691
Quote:
Originally Posted by cactusland
I don't give a rats ass what color they are, even if they are the same race as I am...they are breaking the law. They're called Illegals because what they are doing is illegal. Your analogy doesn't work because the two examples are not equal to each other. Anyone moving around a country as a legal citizen and not being accepted by the locals is nowhere near the same as someone entering a country without disclosure to the country's government.
And you're a boy scout, right? Never gone over the speed limit, ran a red light/sped up on yellow, used any kind of banned drug, sung "Happy Birthday" in a public space (yes, that really is illegal and you can be sued for it)? Or do you prefer to pick and choose which laws apply to you and which to others? If you step back and look at the logic of this situation, it is a bit strange that people are fixated on a certain law, while forgetting thousands of others. They're not called "illegals" for the reason you stated. It's much easier for you to keep that fire in your belly when you use a label like that, which only your fellow puppets on the bandwagon use. If you'd bother to do any research, you'd find that not only are there a lot of myths about them, but also that if you had your wish and, in true Kristallnacht fashion, they were all rounded up and deported, the US economy would suffer a major blow.
And silly me, I should've known that anti-immigrants wouldn't be able to wrap their heads around the nature of this country when there is precedent for it. This selfish, entitled attitude has been in this country for centuries, but the target changes. I mentioned the Dust Bowl refugees. In the early 20th century, legal immigrants were also told they weren't welcome and many Americans wouldn't serve them. Around WWII, Americans wanted nothing to do with the flood of Jews who fled Europe, and many had this same attitude. Can you really not see a pattern? I began my previous statement with the truth: you just find a reason to justify why you don't want them here. If the government started issuing work visas, and made it easy, quick and painless to get them, and suddenly they were all legal, you'd just find another reason to complain about them. Then it would likely be complaining that they will replace you by working for less... which technically, under federal law, Americans with severe disabilities can do as well under the FLSA (Department of Labor link below), and Goodwill was found to be paying them as low as 22 cents per hour. Of course, when you think about it, most people can't and won't be replaced by someone that disabled, just as many people have jobs an undocumented worker can't fill.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First off it's a silly question which will start a predictable flurry of posts that belong in P.O.C. threads.
