Julia, no offense to you personally, but I always found it very convenient that people like to have fiscally responsible Republicans running their town, city even state, but elect Democratic presidents and senators. City of New York votes 80% to 90% democratic in presidential elections but just prolonged to 20 (!) years the era in which Republicans have been elected. Bloomber have switched to Independent before the last election but it does not cancel 4 straight elections in which a Republican was elected a mayor. Look at the bluest states' recent governors - California - Arnie, Massachusetts - Romney, New York - Pataki.

OK, where is inconsistency? if you have a lousy democrat, it doesn't make him good, and vice versa, just because of party name in front of his name. Isn't this a good thing? Elect people on merit? Where did I ever say I personally will never vote for a good Rep candidate for higher office? I hated Bush JR and his whole administration, but there were excellent Rep presidents. I think of myself as sophisticated enough not to стричь всех под одну гребенку.

Julia, as I said, nothing personal, I'm not even talking about you here, but why super blue states elect GOP governors and Dem. presidents?

Oleg, my theory for that phenomenon is that state elections are covered by state and local press to a bigger extent than by national liberal press. People get heavier assault by the biased national press during presidential elections.
Just a thought...
BTW, California Governator got elected on his fame, not on his party affiliation.

Imagine this type of scenario just for a second. Suppose you're ateacher and a Hispanic kid is there whose family is illegal. What areyou going to do? Suppose you're a doctor and you have an obese patienton welfare who wants to lose weight. What are you going to do? Ineither case are you going to despise them and tell them that they'reun-American and cause the problems for this country and if not for themthis country would have been much better off, -or help themnonetheless?
Strange question. If the patient is seeking your help, as a doctor you must help him/her. And so they do... And the illegals drain the system...
Still do not get the question...

ThoughtI see a better outcome for the illegal kid who is attending Americanschool than for an illigal alien adult patient: a conservative teacher can instill in this kid love forAmerica, love for rule of law, appreciation for personalresponsibility, hard work, accountability, desire to strive forachievement. Such a teacher can shape this child into a responsible adult, who mostlikely won't become obese slob on welfare. (v)

I think that if that kid is born in the US, he/she is American and should have all the benefits and responsibilities that any American has. If the kid is not a US citizen, he/she should either be deported (after a court order) or issued a visa, depending on individual circumstances. There is nothing wrong with education of non-US citizens, there are plenty of exchange programs run by schools and universities.
If the kid is American, but his/her parents are illigal immigrants, they should be deported.

Svetlana, despite what you may want to believe legalizing soft drugs is not a personal issue for me, but a personal liberty issue in general.
I would say legalizing poker would be a personal issue for me.

listen, you can't agree with someone 100% all the time..
are you saying poker is illegal? and why?

I have no clue WHY it's illegal, but it is.. outside of the casinos in NV and indian reservations.
It's also illegal to play it on-line ( thank to former president Bush ).
They view is as "gambling", which is super-retarded..

yeah, it's crazy...at least it should be left up to the states...
they claimed it was impossible to regulate it..dunno...

on-line gambling is a part of interstate commerce, so they can/should regulate it.
banning it is just stupid. but we are talk about our government - they are not the brightest people in general.

here is the scoop:
On October 13, 2006, President Bush officially signed into law the Safe Port Act, a bill aimed at enhancing security at U.S. ports.[8] Attached to the Safe Port Act was a provision known as the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act(UIGEA). According to the UIGEA, "unlawful internet gambling" means toplace, receive, or otherwise knowingly transmit a bet or wager by meansof the internet where such bet is unlawful under any law in the Statein which the bet is initiated, received, or otherwise made. Thus, theUIGEA prohibits online gambling sites from performing transactions withAmerican financial institutions.
I this the current state of things is that a bunch of Dem senators are getting ready a bill to overturn UIGEA and Obama is supportive of it.

These people were not educated here, they did not use any social resources of this country prior to their arrival and will not use any after their retirement. Same for grandchildren. Isn't it only fair that those elderly who were robbed off their pensions by Mother Russia will receive a little portion of the benefits that their children and grandchildren earned but never used?
-----------------------------------------------------
never used? are you saying their children and grandchildren will never attend any public schools, will not reveive any financial aid, and will not collect medicare or social security benefits - since their share has already been paid out to their parents/grandparents?

Bloomber have switched to Independent before the last election but it does not cancel 4 straight elections in which a Republican was elected a mayor
----------------------------------------------------------------
and prior to running for office, he was a lifelong democrat

Lina, the amount of income taxes, sales taxes, commuter taxes, property taxes, etc. that these people will pay to the state will be far greater than any amount that they will dip in to.

just because they're not "dipping into" the taxes paid, doesn't mean they're not directly benefiting from them... taxes cover more than just ssi payments, medicaid, and foodstamps. why should theybe entitled toa greater tax benefit than any other tax payer?

why should theybe entitled toa greater tax benefit than any other tax payer?
Did they start using new "special" ink in NY Times? All of you libs are getting stranger by day. Did I say anything about greater tax benefits? If you don't know what I am talking about, then don't cut'n'paste anything that you want to argue with.

Did I say anything about greater tax benefits? If you don't know what I am talking about, then don't cut'n'paste anything that you want to argue with.
----------------------------------------------------------------
I know exactly what you're talking about... if you and Joe the Americanpay the exact same amount of taxes over your lifetimes, but only your parents received public aid (hypothetically) - which one of you gets a bigger bang for their buck?
I'm not even mentioning the taxpayer subsidized pension... although that too seems rather hypocritical.

My parents have worked for 18 years each. They get pensions that they earned. They get medical coverage from the companies that they worked for. Their parents were not around to come with us. Our family is not even an example. I was relating to Julia's comments about hypocrisy of FSU immigrants becoming conservative while sucking a big government tit from the other side.

what is the argument?
does someone here argue that we should not have a social safety net for people of retirement age?

Mike, read my two posts starting with the one posted @ Вчера 22:38, currently on page 9. There is no argument just my reason why FSU immigrants have every right to have freedom of political stand.

Oleg, that's why I said hypothetically, since I'm not familiar with your family's situation...

btw, some african americans have practically the same argument - they feel they're entitled to various public benefits, and even reparations,because their ancestors helped build this contry without being adequately compensated, not to mention, raped, tortured, and killed... it would appear that they and the conservatives from the FSU have a great deal in common - a strong sense of entitlement.

Oleg, is any of this liberal/conservative issue? Again, my question is again, does anyone argue against basic social benefits to people of retirement age?

This is why you are one & only champion of The Great Twist Contest. Mia Wallace нервно курит в углу. (md) (md) (md) (md) Надо же было такое придумать. (md) (md) (md) (md)

My previous message was to Lina. Mike, any topic has ability to deviate from its name, this one became about teachers recently, for example. I am not talking about ANY social issues, just don't call me a hypocrite because my fellow immigrant's grandma received Medicare and I dare to call myself a Conservative.

I dont see any great twist - it's all rather straightforward... conservatives from the FSU are against any form of public assistance, except when it comes to their own relatives (and even themselves). the hypocrisy should be rather obvious to most.

ok, searched some more, and the reason for banning it (poker) on-line was the money laundering problem that goes with it...
the SAFE PORT Act was a continuation of the Wire Act (2020) which didn't ban on-line poker initially...I guess they viewed it as a national security measure..
btw, it's banned in a lot of other countries too..for some reason..

The only downside to talking out of your ass is that you can wake up your tampon.

And the greatest hypocrisy? Talking to someone's ass to try to talk sense into it.

Oleg, my theory for that phenomenon is that state elections are coveredby state and local press to a bigger extent than by national liberalpress. People get heavier assault by the biased national press duringpresidential elections.
and I also have a different take on this kind of phenomena..it all depends on the state population too...like it was explained to me by someone from SD, where a large portion of population is of German dissent, and Germans have a strong sense of socialism...so they vote democrat for Senate/House (because they love farm subsidies, and republican for President (because they favor strong national security)..

Svetlana, the money laundering problem is BECAUSE it's illegal :)
If it was legal and regulated the problem would go away, as all the transaction would become reportable and auditable.
The same way abortion was a much bigger problem when it was illegal - a lot more death, complications, crime around it, etc.

here..that was the claim...how could launder money if it's illegal? don't you have to do it through a legal venue?
********en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_gambling
In March 2003, Deputy Assistant Attorney General John G. Malcolmtestified before the Senate Banking Committee regarding the specialproblems presented by online gambling.[11] A major concern of the United States Department of Justice is online money laundering.The anonymous nature of the Internet and the use of encryption make itespecially difficult to trace online money laundering transactions.

Again, it's anonymous BECAUSE it's illegal.
If legal US entities were able to do that they would make them collect SSNs for example.. like they do with on-line banking.
Once something is legal it cane be regulated and taxes.
When it's illegal you have no idea what's going on.. and people still use on-line poker sites.. but you just created 2 million criminals.

Oleg, i am still not sure what the argument is..
would anyone want to deny any legal immigrant old person basic social benefits? Any any modern ( even uber-conservatives ) against any social welfare?

Yeah, Oleg, why don't drop everything you're doing and explain in great detail to increasingly cranky Mike what the argument WAS and reiterate what he or she saidin the last 94 posts AND how what you meant to say was misinterpreted and misunderstood and now you have to explain yourself ALL OVER AGAIN to interlocutors whose greatest arguments begin with "I still don't understand how you..."

1. no, I don't know of any conservative, prominent or otherwise, whowould want to deny safety nets for elderly LEGAL immigrants...I thinkBrighton supports republicans because of the national security concerns :-)
2. I am not saying banning is the way to go and didn't create ownproblems...I was just showing that back in 2003, when on-line poker wasstill legal, because it was difficult for them to monitor internetactivities and people who participated, and it involved a lot of cash flow, they argued it was hardto monitor and banned it..

Ol'ga, lol..
i believe the point some people were trying to make was:
"how can ex USSR people be conservative when their grandparents are getting social benefits"
I believe instead of arguing how much their children contribute the appropriate response is:
"conservatives support social benefits to older retired citizens and legal aliens"

I'm sure there are some... but what about those that complain about the evils of labor unions (and I don't entirely disagree), and accuse liberals of primarily holding public sector jobs and not knowing anything about competing in the real market, while they themselves reap the benefits of government guaranteed, taxpayer subsidized teacher pensions.

:-D
I had a similiar reaction...no, more like |-( ...but I was patiently waiting for someone to respond..:-)