PDA

View Full Version : More GOP whining


Rigs11
08-06-2013, 09:36 AM
i don't know how you righties can stand by these clowns.Hopefullw CNN and NBC tell them to piss off.

Republicans want NBC, CNN to pull Clinton programs

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican National Committee charged Monday that NBC and CNN are promoting a potential presidential candidacy by Hillary Rodham Clinton, threatening to blackball them from future GOP primary debates if they air upcoming programs on the former secretary of state.

RNC chairman Reince Priebus called a planned NBC miniseries on Clinton and a CNN documentary on the first lady an "extended commercial" for a future Clinton presidential campaign. In separate letters to the networks, he urged them to cancel "this political ad masquerading as an unbiased production."

Clinton has not yet said whether she'll run for president again in 2016 but her future remains the subject of wide speculation in political circles and beyond. The primary debates typically provide a ratings boost for the networks and are highly-coveted as the presidential campaign unfolds.

In making the charge, the RNC was raising a common complaint among Republican activists that news and entertainment industries favor Democratic candidates. Republicans have also used a potential Clinton campaign as a fundraising tool in recent months as both parties begin to assess the crop of candidates to succeed President Barack Obama.

CNN Films is planning a feature-length documentary film on the former first lady, looking at her professional and personal life. It will be led by Oscar-winning director and producer Charles Ferguson and is expected to air in 2014.

NBC has announced a miniseries called "Hillary," starring actress Diane Lane. No air date has been announced but it is timed to be released before the 2016 presidential election. NBC has said the four-hour miniseries will follow Clinton's life and career from 1998 to the present.

Richard Licata, an NBC Entertainment spokesman, declined comment on the request and referred calls to NBC News, which said in a statement that it "is completely independent of NBC Entertainment and has no involvement in this project."

CNN said in a statement that "instead of making premature decisions about a project that is in the very early stages of development and months from completion, we would encourage the members of the Republican National Committee to reserve judgment until they know more."

"Should they decide not to participate in debates on CNN, we would find it curious, as limiting their debate participation seems to be the ultimate disservice to voters," CNN said.

In the letters, Priebus said the RNC would refuse to partner with the two networks on future Republican primary debates or sanction any debates which CNN or NBC may sponsor if they continued with their Clinton programs. Unless the networks comply, he plans to push for the sanctions at an RNC meeting in Boston beginning on Aug. 14.

GOP leaders in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina said they supported the request.

Since Mitt Romney's loss to Obama in last year's elections, Republicans have pushed to limit the number of primary debates. A large field of Republicans participated in about 20 debates in 2011 and 2012 and some party leaders argued that it hurt their ability to stay unified against Obama. An audit by the RNC released earlier this year called for about 10 to 12 primary debates during the 2016 campaign, with the first occurring no earlier than Sept. 1, 2015.

If NBC and CNN were excluded from sponsoring debates, it could help the RNC meet its recommendation.

The GOP request also shines a spotlight on the tricky nature of television news and how the entertainment wing of a network can cause headaches for its separate news division. CNN Films is a unit of CNN that was started last year to develop feature-length documentaries to be aired both on television and in movie theaters. CNN, part of Time Warner Inc., has said it also will air the Clinton documentary in theaters.

NBC Entertainment is separate from NBC News but both are part of NBCUniversal, which Comcast purchased from General Electric in 2011. In the letter, Priebus noted that executives and employees of Philadelphia-based Comcast have made large financial contributions to the campaigns of Obama and Clinton in the past.

http://tv.yahoo.com/news/republicans-want-nbc-cnn-pull-clinton-programs-161843430.html

peacepipe
08-06-2013, 09:53 AM
NBC & CNN have done just that so far,and should continue to do so.

Rohirrim
08-06-2013, 10:02 AM
On the other hand, they keep crowing about how Fox beats everybody in the ratings. ???

The GOP has a basic Nazi streak running through the party: Stifle any action in government that doesn't fit their dogma, fix elections, get rid of the Voting Rights Act, redistrict to hold seats and control the House, control the media... It's a page right out of the Right Wing dictator hand book.

B-Large
08-06-2013, 11:12 AM
i don't know how you righties can stand by these clowns.Hopefullw CNN and NBC tell them to piss off.

Republicans want NBC, CNN to pull Clinton programs

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican National Committee charged Monday that NBC and CNN are promoting a potential presidential candidacy by Hillary Rodham Clinton, threatening to blackball them from future GOP primary debates if they air upcoming programs on the former secretary of state.

RNC chairman Reince Priebus called a planned NBC miniseries on Clinton and a CNN documentary on the first lady an "extended commercial" for a future Clinton presidential campaign. In separate letters to the networks, he urged them to cancel "this political ad masquerading as an unbiased production."

Clinton has not yet said whether she'll run for president again in 2016 but her future remains the subject of wide speculation in political circles and beyond. The primary debates typically provide a ratings boost for the networks and are highly-coveted as the presidential campaign unfolds.

In making the charge, the RNC was raising a common complaint among Republican activists that news and entertainment industries favor Democratic candidates. Republicans have also used a potential Clinton campaign as a fundraising tool in recent months as both parties begin to assess the crop of candidates to succeed President Barack Obama.

CNN Films is planning a feature-length documentary film on the former first lady, looking at her professional and personal life. It will be led by Oscar-winning director and producer Charles Ferguson and is expected to air in 2014.

NBC has announced a miniseries called "Hillary," starring actress Diane Lane. No air date has been announced but it is timed to be released before the 2016 presidential election. NBC has said the four-hour miniseries will follow Clinton's life and career from 1998 to the present.

Richard Licata, an NBC Entertainment spokesman, declined comment on the request and referred calls to NBC News, which said in a statement that it "is completely independent of NBC Entertainment and has no involvement in this project."

CNN said in a statement that "instead of making premature decisions about a project that is in the very early stages of development and months from completion, we would encourage the members of the Republican National Committee to reserve judgment until they know more."

"Should they decide not to participate in debates on CNN, we would find it curious, as limiting their debate participation seems to be the ultimate disservice to voters," CNN said.

In the letters, Priebus said the RNC would refuse to partner with the two networks on future Republican primary debates or sanction any debates which CNN or NBC may sponsor if they continued with their Clinton programs. Unless the networks comply, he plans to push for the sanctions at an RNC meeting in Boston beginning on Aug. 14.

GOP leaders in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina said they supported the request.

Since Mitt Romney's loss to Obama in last year's elections, Republicans have pushed to limit the number of primary debates. A large field of Republicans participated in about 20 debates in 2011 and 2012 and some party leaders argued that it hurt their ability to stay unified against Obama. An audit by the RNC released earlier this year called for about 10 to 12 primary debates during the 2016 campaign, with the first occurring no earlier than Sept. 1, 2015.

If NBC and CNN were excluded from sponsoring debates, it could help the RNC meet its recommendation.

The GOP request also shines a spotlight on the tricky nature of television news and how the entertainment wing of a network can cause headaches for its separate news division. CNN Films is a unit of CNN that was started last year to develop feature-length documentaries to be aired both on television and in movie theaters. CNN, part of Time Warner Inc., has said it also will air the Clinton documentary in theaters.

NBC Entertainment is separate from NBC News but both are part of NBCUniversal, which Comcast purchased from General Electric in 2011. In the letter, Priebus noted that executives and employees of Philadelphia-based Comcast have made large financial contributions to the campaigns of Obama and Clinton in the past.

http://tv.yahoo.com/news/republicans-want-nbc-cnn-pull-clinton-programs-161843430.html

Its the Media's fault- nothing to do with poor candidates and less than desireable policies...

nyuk nyuk
08-06-2013, 11:20 AM
It's pretty obvious and bald-faced advance election spiking. At the very least, journalistic ethics should apply here, regardless of one's affiliation.

Rohirrim
08-06-2013, 11:29 AM
It's pretty obvious and bald-faced advance election spiking. At the very least, journalistic ethics should apply here, regardless of one's affiliation.

Poor GOP. If only they had a propaganda arm or a media mogul that could make a movie about Rand Paul, or Cruz, or whatever flavor-of-the-month whack job they support this week. That's the problem with the GOP. They have such a wealth of whackos to choose from that they can't make up their minds.

It's so tough, always being the victims.

Rigs11
08-06-2013, 11:34 AM
Poor GOP. If only they had a propaganda arm or a media mogul that could make a movie about Rand Paul, or Cruz, or whatever flavor-of-the-month whack job they support this week. That's the problem with the GOP. They have such a wealth of whackos to choose from that they can't make up their minds.

It's so tough, always being the victims.

yup, they are the victims.:rofl:the vile crap that fox news spouts, the guests that they have on, seems like very failed repub has a job there.poor widdle repubs..

peacepipe
08-06-2013, 11:39 AM
It's pretty obvious and bald-faced advance election spiking. At the very least, journalistic ethics should apply here, regardless of one's affiliation.
LOL between fix news & other right-wing tabloid outlets they wouldn't know journalistic ethics even if their lives depended on it.

nyuk nyuk
08-06-2013, 12:31 PM
yup, they are the victims.:rofl:the vile crap that fox news spouts, the guests that they have on, seems like very failed repub has a job there.poor widdle repubs..

For people who supposedly never watch Fox because it's such a bad network, you seem quite in tune with what they are "spouting."

nyuk nyuk
08-06-2013, 12:32 PM
LOL between fix news & other right-wing tabloid outlets they wouldn't know journalistic ethics even if their lives depended on it.

And that you don't see journalistic ethics being trampled on outside of conservative networks proves my point about liberals not being able to see bias that matches their own. That's why you never take aim at CNN and MSNBC. Them = you.

nyuk nyuk
08-06-2013, 12:32 PM
Poor GOP. If only they had a propaganda arm or a media mogul that could make a movie about Rand Paul, or Cruz, or whatever flavor-of-the-month whack job they support this week. That's the problem with the GOP. They have such a wealth of whackos to choose from that they can't make up their minds.

It's so tough, always being the victims.

At least you admit Hillary has media outlets in her pocket, if albeit indirectly.

bronco militia
08-06-2013, 12:40 PM
who the hell watches network tv, let a lone made-for-TV movies?

nyuk nyuk
08-06-2013, 12:44 PM
People on this thread would understand the issue if Fox News had gotten with someone known for their interest in the 2016 presidential election by airing nice documentaries about them. They would understand, rightly so, such things are pretty thinly-veiled forms of campaign advertising. It is indeed an example of the media trying to meddle in an election. You betcha it is.

peacepipe
08-06-2013, 12:47 PM
These are being released by their entertainment divisions not by the news divisions, there's a difference.

nyuk nyuk
08-06-2013, 01:23 PM
These are being released by their entertainment divisions not by the news divisions, there's a difference.

Not a ton. They both influence people and opinions. Advertisements influence people, too. That's why ethics in all types of media are of paramount importance.

Would you think it inappropriate if someone released a documentary glamorizing Hitler as long as it were done through an "entertainment division"? You think it wouldn't impress people in a bad way to air such programs?

Rigs11
08-06-2013, 01:55 PM
For people who supposedly never watch Fox because it's such a bad network, you seem quite in tune with what they are "spouting."

who ever said I don't watch it? It's the funniest channel on tv.

Rigs11
08-06-2013, 01:59 PM
People on this thread would understand the issue if Fox News had gotten with someone known for their interest in the 2016 presidential election by airing nice documentaries about them. They would understand, rightly so, such things are pretty thinly-veiled forms of campaign advertising. It is indeed an example of the media trying to meddle in an election. You betcha it is.

boo hoo, those cable channels couldn't possibly be airing this for ratings...right? Quit yer whining

peacepipe
08-06-2013, 02:03 PM
Not a ton. They both influence people and opinions. Advertisements influence people, too. That's why ethics in all types of media are of paramount importance.

Would you think it inappropriate if someone released a documentary glamorizing Hitler as long as it were done through an "entertainment division"? You think it wouldn't impress people in a bad way to air such programs?

So what. It isn't a news piece,it's a documentary. If fox or whoever wants to put a documentary glamorizing hitler so be it,its there prerogative/stupidity. But we're not talking about a Hitler type figure here,no comparison.

elsid13
08-06-2013, 03:18 PM
Made up Swift Boat Films are alright, documentaries with historical accurate information are bad.

nyuk nyuk
08-06-2013, 03:21 PM
So what. It isn't a news piece,it's a documentary. If fox or whoever wants to put a documentary glamorizing hitler so be it,its there prerogative/stupidity. But we're not talking about a Hitler type figure here,no comparison.

As I said it's unethical and clearly a tactic of advance election influence. You haven't denied this.

Rohirrim
08-06-2013, 03:39 PM
At least you admit Hillary has media outlets in her pocket, if albeit indirectly.

Syllogistic fallacy.

peacepipe
08-06-2013, 05:37 PM
As I said it's unethical and clearly a tactic of advance election influence. You haven't denied this.

If it makes you feel better I go ahead and deny it. Not all news channels act like fox.

Bacchus
08-06-2013, 09:24 PM
Its not like poor GOP does not have their own 500 radio stations and a TV station just dedicated for the sole purpose of advancing the policies of the GOP and their corporate overlords.

http://cdn.motinetwork.net/politifake.org/image/political/1210/corporate-overlords-what-politics-1349320985.burns

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5531963648/hBBA5FBE0/

http://jdeanicite.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8345158e269e20120a7fd6671970b-800wi

nyuk nyuk
08-07-2013, 05:07 AM
There are no Democrat corporate overlords? Then why are Democrats the primary culprits behind the amnesty scheme, refusing to control the border? All that dirt cheap labor coming over here is lowering American wages and inflating American unemployment.

But Democrats aren't fat cats and are for the worker?

Maybe for the Mexican worker...

nyuk nyuk
08-07-2013, 05:09 AM
Syllogistic fallacy.

It's called reading between the lines.

TonyR
08-07-2013, 06:11 AM
Then why are Democrats ... refusing to control the border? All that dirt cheap labor coming over here is lowering American wages and inflating American unemployment.

Read. Learn.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2013/jul/01/debbie-wasserman-schultz/more-border-security-and-patrols-under-obama-previ/

Rohirrim
08-07-2013, 07:14 AM
It's called reading between the lines.

Also known as "making **** up."

Rohirrim
08-07-2013, 07:18 AM
There are no Democrat corporate overlords? Then why are Democrats the primary culprits behind the amnesty scheme, refusing to control the border? All that dirt cheap labor coming over here is lowering American wages and inflating American unemployment.

But Democrats aren't fat cats and are for the worker?

Maybe for the Mexican worker...

Actually, the Right Wing destruction of the American economy was the most successful immigration reduction policy. Good work! :thumbs:

Rigs11
08-07-2013, 08:41 AM
There are no Democrat corporate overlords? Then why are Democrats the primary culprits behind the amnesty scheme, refusing to control the border? All that dirt cheap labor coming over here is lowering American wages and inflating American unemployment.

But Democrats aren't fat cats and are for the worker?

Maybe for the Mexican worker...

You've obviously been brainwashed by the party of no. They want you to always have someone to blame.Tell me yuk yuk, who is going to build your fence? Americans or mexicans? It's funny that on one hand you say that people should get off their butts and work, yet on the other you blame immigrants for taking their jobs? make up your mind.

houghtam
08-07-2013, 09:16 AM
You've obviously been brainwashed by the party of no. They want you to always have someone to blame.Tell me yuk yuk, who is going to build your fence? Americans or mexicans? It's funny that on one hand you say that people should get off their butts and work, yet on the other you blame immigrants for taking their jobs? make up your mind.

He and many other conservatives are under the delusion that there are Americans just lining up for those jobs. When the fact of the matter is that immigrant labor is the only demographic willing to do the work. At any price.

BroncoBeavis
08-07-2013, 10:01 AM
Poor GOP. If only they had a propaganda arm or a media mogul that could make a movie about Rand Paul, or Cruz, or whatever flavor-of-the-month whack job they support this week. That's the problem with the GOP. They have such a wealth of whackos to choose from that they can't make up their minds.

It's so tough, always being the victims.

Just curious, were Democrats playing the victim when they blacklisted Fox News for their debates?

BroncoBeavis
08-07-2013, 10:10 AM
He and many other conservatives are under the delusion that there are Americans just lining up for those jobs. When the fact of the matter is that immigrant labor is the only demographic willing to do the work. At any price.

It's funny how you kids lament Walmart wages, but then say there are all these jobs Americans won't do that in reality only pay Walmart wages.

Give me an even-dollar choice between cashing people out at Wally World or picking Strawberries in the heat all day and I'll pick Wally World every time. The difference is, illegal and/or spanglish-speaking immigrants have a lot tougher time landing jobs working with and around the public. So they take what they can get. If they weren't available, fruit picking wages would rise closer to the mythical "living wage" so many clamor for but few do anything about.

But this idea that there are just some tasks socioeconomically beneath the otherwise-starving American is pretty comical when you think about it.

houghtam
08-07-2013, 10:17 AM
It's funny how you kids lament Walmart wages, but then say there are all these jobs Americans won't do that in reality only pay Walmart wages.

Give me an even-dollar choice between cashing people out at Wally World or picking Strawberries in the heat all day and I'll pick Wally World every time. The difference is, illegal and/or spanglish-speaking immigrants have a lot tougher time landing jobs working with and around the public. So they take what they can get. If they weren't available, fruit picking wages would rise closer to the mythical "living wage" so many clamor for but few do anything about.

But this idea that there are just some tasks socioeconomically beneath the otherwise-starving American is pretty comical when you think about it.

Except many of the "fruit picking jobs" you refer to pay better than wal mart. Two of them hilighted during testimony on cspan were $10.50 and $13 an hour. I know many of the construction jobs my company hired for were quite well-paying, as well.

BroncoBeavis
08-07-2013, 10:28 AM
Except many of the "fruit picking jobs" you refer to pay better than wal mart. Two of them hilighted during testimony on cspan were $10.50 and $13 an hour. I know many of the construction jobs my company hired for were quite well-paying, as well.

Uh huh.

http://migration.ucdavis.edu/rmn/more.php?id=1596_0_5_0

Strawberry fields are picked by hand multiple times, often every three days. An average 1,000 hours of harvest labor is required to harvest a typical acre of strawberries, representing half of the $19,000 cost of production. Pickers are paid hourly wages when yields are low, usually the minimum wage of $8 an hour or a bit more. During peak periods, most receive a piece rate wage, often $1.50 to pick a tray containing 12 pints, plus an hourly wage.

The best strawberry pickers earn $10 to $12 an hour during the peak season, but most earn less. In surveys of farm employers, strawberry workers have the lowest average hourly earnings, an average $9.13 an hour in 2007, lower than the average $9.31 for employees of labor contractors and the $10.27 average of all crop workers. Reasons for low strawberry wages may include the long season, the ability of families to work together and, because the work involves bending rather than climbing trees, more older workers and women, which increases the pool of workers available to harvest berries, holding down wages.

Basically minimum wage or a hair above. Like I said, Wally World wages.

BroncoBeavis
08-07-2013, 10:32 AM
http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-employees-pay

The average Walmart "associate," Wake Up Walmart reports, makes $11.75 an hour. That's $20,744 per year. Those wages are slightly below the national average for retail employees, which is $12.04 an hour.

Hmmm. Which to choose, which to choose.

Bent over picking berries all day in 90 degree heat, or standing around the Air Conditioned Electronics department with my thumb up my ass. Guess it's my inborn American Programming that drives me to one over the other. LOL

Rohirrim
08-07-2013, 11:15 AM
Just curious, were Democrats playing the victim when they blacklisted Fox News for their debates?

An equivalency between slanted coverage like NBC's and the out and out propaganda of Fox News exists only in the minds of Right Wingers. Every academic media expert I've seen considers Fox News the propaganda wing of the Republican Party. It's blatant. It's obvious. To try and argue that "Oh, the rest of media is just like that on the other side," is just ignorant bull****. It also happens to be one of the propaganda messages that Fox is continuously spewing out and that their sheep keep lapping up.

BroncoBeavis
08-07-2013, 12:07 PM
An equivalency between slanted coverage like NBC's and the out and out propaganda of Fox News exists only in the minds of Right Wingers. Every academic media expert I've seen considers Fox News the propaganda wing of the Republican Party. It's blatant. It's obvious. To try and argue that "Oh, the rest of media is just like that on the other side," is just ignorant bull****. It also happens to be one of the propaganda messages that Fox is continuously spewing out and that their sheep keep lapping up.

Keep smokin' that pipe, Roh :)

http://www.mrc.org/articles/nets-give-pro-abortion-wendy-davis-3-times-coverage-entire-gosnell-trial

Rigs11
08-07-2013, 01:02 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-employees-pay



Hmmm. Which to choose, which to choose.

Bent over picking berries all day in 90 degree heat, or standing around the Air Conditioned Electronics department with my thumb up my ass. Guess it's my inborn American Programming that drives me to one over the other. LOL

and yet you dipshets blame the mexicans. Gotta blame someone right?

Requiem
08-07-2013, 01:19 PM
Agricultural work in some capacity would be solid for everyone.

BroncoBeavis
08-07-2013, 01:31 PM
and yet you dipshets blame the mexicans. Gotta blame someone right?

I don't blame Mexicans at all. Just pointing out that the "Living Wage" argument doesn't reconcile well with the uncontrolled influx of 3rd world (sorry Baja :) ) labor.

In an honest labor market, in terms of honoring commitments made (like the minimum wage), there would be no way you could get away with paying someone anywhere near minimum wage to manually pick fruit all day. It's a suck job, and in a truly open market, you'd have to pay much higher wages to get it done.

But through the magic of illegal immigration, we implement a defacto caste system. And for the most part, big agriculture reaps what we sow.

nyuk nyuk
08-07-2013, 02:05 PM
You've obviously been brainwashed by the party of no. They want you to always have someone to blame.Tell me yuk yuk, who is going to build your fence? Americans or mexicans? It's funny that on one hand you say that people should get off their butts and work, yet on the other you blame immigrants for taking their jobs? make up your mind.

Thank you so kindly for parroting the liberal narrative. Teh party of no and sheeeet!!

Agencies in both the Clinton and Obama administrations have stated that mass immigration - legal not counting illegal - is lowering American wages and increasing American unemployment and harming the most vulnerable. This shouldn't take a degree in rocket science to notice. How do American workers benefit when historically high-paying jobs such as manufacturing are sent to China and cheaper labor is brought from Mexico and elsewhere?

My stance on mass migration hasn't changed one lick from when it formed when I was a Marxist. It damages the countries migrants leave and it damages the countries they migrate to. Needed brains and hands are leaving nations that need them to travel thousands of miles to be exploited for cheap labor and super profit. Period.

Clinton's Jordan Commission on immigration (http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/uscir/exesum94.pdf) came out to REDUCING legal immigration levels and enforcing the border. Both are called "radical," "racist," and "xenophobic" today, so I guess Bill Clinton's Democratic black lesbian feminist Congresswoman Barbara Jordan was both of those?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/TMywOal05s0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The xenophobic, racist black Democrat lesbian feminist also stated with regard to amnesty that,

The legalized have already received special treatment in obtaining amnesty. To further reward their earlier illegal entry by giving equal or higher priority to the entry of their relatives sends the wrong message at a time in which the U.S. must obtain greater control over unauthorized entry.

And God forbid,

Employers should demonstrate that they have engaged in appropriate attempts to find a qualified U.S. worker using normal company recruitment procedures that meet industry-wide standards and offering wages that are at least 5 percent above the prevailing wage.

AND now we have the Obama administration's Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation (http://www.albanytribune.com/20062013-gang-of-eight-immigration-bill-may-spell-disaster-for-us-workers%e2%80%8f-report/) release a report that the "gang of 8" amnesty (which IS what it is) would screw over American workers --

Taking into account all of those flows of new immigrants, CBO and JCT expect that a greater number of immigrants with lower skills than with higher skills would be added to the workforce, slightly pushing down the average wage for the labor force as a whole, other things being equal...

Such grant of legal status will likely disproportionately harm lower-skilled African-Americans by making it more difficult for them to obtain employment and depressing their wages when they do obtain employment.

Ach! And guess what? It's happening in Canada, too. (http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=8c257b6f-17eb-41f9-a575-6598f2927d88)


DUH really? We have to be told the flipping OBVIOUS?

/facepalm

nyuk nyuk
08-07-2013, 02:08 PM
I don't blame Mexicans at all. Just pointing out that the "Living Wage" argument doesn't reconcile well with the uncontrolled influx of 3rd world (sorry Baja :) ) labor.

In an honest labor market, in terms of honoring commitments made (like the minimum wage), there would be no way you could get away with paying someone anywhere near minimum wage to manually pick fruit all day. It's a suck job, and in a truly open market, you'd have to pay much higher wages to get it done.

But through the magic of illegal immigration, we implement a defacto caste system. And for the most part, big agriculture reaps what we sow.

We have the H2A Agricultural Visa program which requires migrant farm workers to be paid at least the federal minimum wage. Farm labor and illegal immigration are two different things, in spite of the amnesty lobby's efforts to conflate the two to erect the "but we'll starve" fear tactic.

Aside from that, why aren't we using able-bodied nonviolent criminals for this stuff? Liberal complaints, probably. The usual 'tards.

nyuk nyuk
08-07-2013, 02:10 PM
Agricultural work in some capacity would be solid for everyone.

Bingo, even if as a temporary summer job for teens. Modern Americans are all too often spoiled and lazy. Office workers should also be cleaning their own toilets.

Rigs11
08-07-2013, 02:18 PM
Thank you so kindly for parroting the liberal narrative. Teh party of no and sheeeet!!

Agencies in both the Clinton and Obama administrations have stated that mass immigration - legal not counting illegal - is lowering American wages and increasing American unemployment and harming the most vulnerable. This shouldn't take a degree in rocket science to notice. How do American workers benefit when historically high-paying jobs such as manufacturing are sent to China and cheaper labor is brought from Mexico and elsewhere?

My stance on mass migration hasn't changed one lick from when it formed when I was a Marxist. It damages the countries migrants leave and it damages the countries they migrate to. Needed brains and hands are leaving nations that need them to travel thousands of miles to be exploited for cheap labor and super profit. Period.

Clinton's Jordan Commission on immigration (http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/uscir/exesum94.pdf) came out to REDUCING legal immigration levels and enforcing the border. Both are called "radical," "racist," and "xenophobic" today, so I guess Bill Clinton's Democratic black lesbian feminist Congresswoman Barbara Jordan was both of those?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/TMywOal05s0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The xenophobic, racist black Democrat lesbian feminist also stated with regard to amnesty that,

The legalized have already received special treatment in obtaining amnesty. To further reward their earlier illegal entry by giving equal or higher priority to the entry of their relatives sends the wrong message at a time in which the U.S. must obtain greater control over unauthorized entry.

And God forbid,

Employers should demonstrate that they have engaged in appropriate attempts to find a qualified U.S. worker using normal company recruitment procedures that meet industry-wide standards and offering wages that are at least 5 percent above the prevailing wage.

AND now we have the Obama administration's Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation (http://www.albanytribune.com/20062013-gang-of-eight-immigration-bill-may-spell-disaster-for-us-workers%e2%80%8f-report/) release a report that the "gang of 8" amnesty (which IS what it is) would screw over American workers --

Taking into account all of those flows of new immigrants, CBO and JCT expect that a greater number of immigrants with lower skills than with higher skills would be added to the workforce, slightly pushing down the average wage for the labor force as a whole, other things being equal...

Such grant of legal status will likely disproportionately harm lower-skilled African-Americans by making it more difficult for them to obtain employment and depressing their wages when they do obtain employment.

Ach! And guess what? It's happening in Canada, too. (http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=8c257b6f-17eb-41f9-a575-6598f2927d88)


DUH really? We have to be told the flipping OBVIOUS?

/facepalm

from your link:

"Use of fences to reduce border violence and facilitate enforcement.
However, the Commission does not support the erection
of extraordinary physical barriers, such as unscaleable
walls, unless needed as a last resort to stop violence when
other means have proved ineffective. Fences have been used
effectively in San Diego to reduce border violence, deter illegal
aliens from running across the interstate highway"

As for the gang of 8 doomsday scenario:

First – what does the CBO report actually say about wages? The headline conclusion is that wages would be 0.1 percent lower in 2023 but 0.5 percent higher in 2033 than under current law:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/06/cbo_immigration_wage_effect.png

Rohirrim
08-07-2013, 03:53 PM
Agricultural work in some capacity would be solid for everyone.

That's what Mao thought. :~ohyah!:

nyuk nyuk
08-08-2013, 02:25 PM
First – what does the CBO report actually say about wages? The headline conclusion is that wages would be 0.1 percent lower in 2023 but 0.5 percent higher in 2033 than under current law:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/06/cbo_immigration_wage_effect.png

The Jordan commission never said to leave the border open, for one thing. Secondly, it and the more recent CBO have both agreed that American wages have been and are being depressed. What does this have to do with a speculative report on future wages and what about these speculations on future wages justifies the negative impact mass migration is having on them now? A carrot on a stick that someday in about 2 decades you'll make up for some of the ground you've lost in the past 30+ years?

nyuk nyuk
08-08-2013, 02:25 PM
That's what Mao thought. :~ohyah!:

So did Hitler IIRC.

orinjkrush
08-08-2013, 05:44 PM
"CNN Films is planning a feature-length documentary film on the former first lady, looking at her professional and personal life. It will be led by Oscar-winning director and producer Charles Ferguson and is expected to air in 2014.NBC has announced a miniseries called "Hillary," starring actress Diane Lane. No air date has been announced but it is timed to be released before the 2016 presidential election. NBC has said the four-hour miniseries will follow Clinton's life and career from 1998 to the present."

Sounds like the fix is in. The CFR is very, very happy!

Lets boil it down to a 30 sec review:

Wife of Arkansas Governor: Whitewater scandal;
Wife of Mister President: Foster murder, Travelgate and Lewinsky scandals;
Senator of New York: Strongly supported Iraq and Afghanistan invasions; supported establishment of Media Matters and Center for American Progress; supported bailout of too big to fail banks;
Secretary of State: Reset Russian relations; subject of Wikileaks expose; supported Afghanistan surge; Benghazi scandal. famous "what does it matter speech?"; convenient hospitalization;
Since: paid $200,000 PER speech.

Yeah, she's ready to lead us all.

peacepipe
08-08-2013, 07:12 PM
"CNN Films is planning a feature-length documentary film on the former first lady, looking at her professional and personal life. It will be led by Oscar-winning director and producer Charles Ferguson and is expected to air in 2014.NBC has announced a miniseries called "Hillary," starring actress Diane Lane. No air date has been announced but it is timed to be released before the 2016 presidential election. NBC has said the four-hour miniseries will follow Clinton's life and career from 1998 to the present."

Sounds like the fix is in. The CFR is very, very happy!

Lets boil it down to a 30 sec review:

Wife of Arkansas Governor: Whitewater scandal;
Wife of Mister President: Foster murder, Travelgate and Lewinsky scandals;
Senator of New York: Strongly supported Iraq and Afghanistan invasions; supported establishment of Media Matters and Center for American Progress; supported bailout of too big to fail banks;
Secretary of State: Reset Russian relations; subject of Wikileaks expose; supported Afghanistan surge; Benghazi scandal. famous "what does it matter speech?"; convenient hospitalization;
Since: paid $200,000 PER speech.

Yeah, she's ready to lead us all.
You're a cornucopia of right-wing fantasies.

Rohirrim
08-08-2013, 07:29 PM
"CNN Films is planning a feature-length documentary film on the former first lady, looking at her professional and personal life. It will be led by Oscar-winning director and producer Charles Ferguson and is expected to air in 2014.NBC has announced a miniseries called "Hillary," starring actress Diane Lane. No air date has been announced but it is timed to be released before the 2016 presidential election. NBC has said the four-hour miniseries will follow Clinton's life and career from 1998 to the present."

Sounds like the fix is in. The CFR is very, very happy!

Lets boil it down to a 30 sec review:

Wife of Arkansas Governor: Whitewater scandal;
Wife of Mister President: Foster murder, Travelgate and Lewinsky scandals;
Senator of New York: Strongly supported Iraq and Afghanistan invasions; supported establishment of Media Matters and Center for American Progress; supported bailout of too big to fail banks;
Secretary of State: Reset Russian relations; subject of Wikileaks expose; supported Afghanistan surge; Benghazi scandal. famous "what does it matter speech?"; convenient hospitalization;
Since: paid $200,000 PER speech.

Yeah, she's ready to lead us all.

I'm about as tired of the Clintons as I am of the Bushes.

orinjkrush
08-09-2013, 05:15 AM
I'm about as tired of the Clintons as I am of the Bushes.

QFT!

nyuk nyuk
08-10-2013, 10:34 AM
Read. Learn.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2013/jul/01/debbie-wasserman-schultz/more-border-security-and-patrols-under-obama-previ/

They said that in 86, hun. It should have already been done. The 86 amnesty is what brought us to this situation and now we're about to amnesty over 10 million more who came over expecting ice cream because we gave free ice cream to the 3 million that came here illegally before them.

Repatriation by whatever means is something Democrats refuse to even consider, thus perpetuating this problem. Instead we see them encouraging and rewarding it by giving out in state college tuition and drivers licenses for illegal aliens. How is that border control exactly? If they were actually interested in border control, they wouldn't be dangling carrots like that, ya think?

nyuk nyuk
08-10-2013, 10:36 AM
He and many other conservatives are under the delusion that there are Americans just lining up for those jobs. When the fact of the matter is that immigrant labor is the only demographic willing to do the work. At any price.

That certainly explains how this country became what it is. We have hundreds lining up at McDonalds franchises looking for a few jobs and somehow we're lazy?

Do yourself a favor and stop parroting corporate/La Raza propaganda about how lazy Americans are. You conflate laziness with employee purges in favor of lower-wage migrant labor. Very cute.

Rigs11
08-16-2013, 11:50 AM
WaaaaaaaaaaaaROFL! There goes your coverage..Oh well at least they voted on something worthwileROFL!


Republicans vote to bar CNN, NBC News from partnering in '16 debates

The GOP’s governing body approved a resolution on Friday barring NBC News and CNN from partnering with the Republican National Committee in hosting 2016 presidential primary debates.

Members of the RNC, gathered in Boston for their Summer Meeting voted to bar NBC News and CNN from participating in 2016 debates due to forthcoming projects about Hillary Clinton planned by both network. They approved the resolution by a voice vote.

The resolution states that the RNC would not "partner with (CNN or NBC) in the 2016 presidential primary debates nor sanction any primary debates they sponsor."



http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/16/20052566-republicans-vote-to-bar-cnn-nbc-news-from-partnering-in-16-debates?lite

houghtam
08-16-2013, 12:13 PM
That certainly explains how this country became what it is. We have hundreds lining up at McDonalds franchises looking for a few jobs and somehow we're lazy?

Do yourself a favor and stop parroting corporate/La Raza propaganda about how lazy Americans are. You conflate laziness with employee purges in favor of lower-wage migrant labor. Very cute.

LOL

You ever watch C-SPAN?

Rigs11
08-16-2013, 01:23 PM
LOL

You ever watch C-SPAN?

seems like the righties are constantly contradicting themselves. on one hand they state that food stamps and welfare are bad, yet when you point out that some americans aren't taking jobs they decry that fact and blame it on the illegals.:spit: