Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 70
  1. #41  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    41,884
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailey View Post
    I really look foward to the smack downs you preform on Nova. There aught to be a law against pwning him the way you do time after time....
    You would think Nova would quit at some point, I think he enjoys the humiliation.
    How is obama working out for you?
    http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/5d569df9-186a-477b-a665-3ea8a8b9b655_zpse9003e54.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #42  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Chavez was a polarizing figure who has contributed to the ongoing strife that we are enduring with illegal Mexican immigration.

    And many see him as the organizer of a labor cartel and a proponent of amnesty for illegals who has caused many of the immigration problems that you claim to be upset by. He's also a polarizing figure for the reasons that I cited. American naval vessels should not be named after men whose lives were spent undermining America.
    Unless I missed a part of his biolgraphy, Chavez and the UFW were actually against illegal immigration because it drove down the price of labor and the ability of the union to negotiate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #43  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailey View Post
    I really look foward to the smack downs you preform on Nova. There aught to be a law against pwning him the way you do time after time....
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    You would think Nova would quit at some point, I think he enjoys the humiliation.
    And, it gets better. See below.
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Unless I missed a part of his biolgraphy, Chavez and the UFW were actually against illegal immigration because it drove down the price of labor and the ability of the union to negotiate.
    No, they were just against illegals that they didn't control. From Wikipedia:

    The UFW during Chávez's tenure was committed to restricting immigration. Chávez and Dolores Huerta, cofounder and president of the UFW, fought the Bracero Program that existed from 1942 to 1964. Their opposition stemmed from their belief that the program undermined US workers and exploited the migrant workers. Since the Bracero program ensured a constant supply of cheap immigrant labor for growers, immigrants could not protest any infringement of their rights, lest they be fired and replaced. Their efforts contributed to Congress ending the Bracero Program in 1964. In 1973, the UFW was one of the first labor unions to oppose proposed employer sanctions that would have prohibited hiring undocumented immigrants. Later during the 1980s, while Chávez was still working alongside Huerta, he was key in getting the amnesty provisions into the 1986 federal immigration act.[19]

    On a few occasions, concerns that undocumented migrant labor would undermine UFW strike campaigns led to a number of controversial events, which the UFW describes as anti-strikebreaking events, but which have also been interpreted as being anti-immigrant. In 1969, Chávez and members of the UFW marched through the Imperial and Coachella Valleys to the border of Mexico to protest growers' use of undocumented immigrants as strikebreakers. Joining him on the march were both Reverend Ralph Abernathy and US Senator Walter Mondale.[20] In its early years, Chávez and the UFW went so far as to report undocumented immigrants who served as strikebreaking replacement workers, as well as those who refused to unionize, to the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
    So, what we have here is Chavez opposing a guest worker program that controlled immigration, working for amnesty for illegals, but reporting those illegals who wouldn't unionize or worked when he told them to strike to the INS. In other words, Chavez had no problem with illegals, he just had a problem with illegals who wouldn't follow his dictates. Not so much a hero of the downtrodden as a cynical manipulator who used the power of the federal government to impose his control on vulnerable migrant workers in order to enhance his power.

    Some "civil rights leader and champion of the working man" you've got there.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #44  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Some "civil rights leader and champion of the working man" you've got there.
    Do you not get that it doesn't matter what you or I think about him? You're intent on disproving this to me, when all I have said was that millions of people view Chavez as a civil rights leader and champion of the working man. You already know how I feel about immigration, illegal and legal. I wish it had stopped two generations ago, and then I wouldn't be arguing with you about it.

    You think that Ronald Reagan and George Bush should have ships named after them- I'm more selective than that.
    Last edited by Novaheart; 02-18-2012 at 01:22 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #45  
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809
    Millions thought Stalin was the end all, be all too. Of course, thats all they knew. Or should i say 'conditioned' to know.
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #46  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Do you not get that it doesn't matter what you or I think about him? You're intent on disproving this to me, when all I have said was that millions of people view Chavez as a civil rights leader and champion of the working man. You already know how I feel about immigration, illegal and legal. I wish it had stopped two generations ago, and then I wouldn't be arguing with you about it.

    You think that Ronald Reagan and George Bush should have ships named after them- I'm more selective than that.
    execpt it's part of the naming convention to have Carriers named after Presidents. Cliton has one as will GWB and (sadly) Obama.
    "Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings..." Patrick Henry
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #47  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Woodland Park, Colorado, United States
    Posts
    8,563
    Quote Originally Posted by fettpett View Post
    execpt it's part of the naming convention to have Carriers named after Presidents. Cliton has one as will GWB and (sadly) Obama.
    Freudian slip? Is it the USS Blowjob?
    and (sadly) Obama.
    Let me guess, the USS Snowjob? No? What about the USS Blowhard? We could have twin carriers with similar names:
    The USS Blowjob and Snowjob or,
    The USS Blowjob and Blowhard.
    :eek:
    Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.
    C. S. Lewis
    Do not ever say that the desire to "do good" by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives. (Are you listening Barry)?:mad:
    Ayn Rand
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #48  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Do you not get that it doesn't matter what you or I think about him? You're intent on disproving this to me, when all I have said was that millions of people view Chavez as a civil rights leader and champion of the working man. You already know how I feel about immigration, illegal and legal. I wish it had stopped two generations ago, and then I wouldn't be arguing with you about it.
    No, what you don't get is that while it doesn't matter what you or I think of Chavez, or what the elite media and left think of him, the rules governing the naming of ships don't allow for it. The SECNAV broke the rules in order to name a ship after a leftist icon. He never served in the armed forces or in a government post, nor was he of any service to the United States military in any way. His name doesn't belong on a United States Naval vessel. If a private company wants to name a ship after him, that's their business (in fact, it would be appropriate for a ferry across the Rio Grande that dodges immigration checkpoints), but the naming of US ships is our business.

    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    You think that Ronald Reagan and George Bush should have ships named after them- I'm more selective than that.
    I hate to tell you this, but they were presidents. Sadly, as Fett pointed out, so are Obama and Clinton, and there's a ship named for the latter, although given his conduct in office, it would have been more appropriate to name a pleasure boat after him, maybe an R&R ship. Some future Democratic SECNAV may decide to name a ship after Obama, although given the cuts that he's imposed, it will be a while before we have any ships to name, so it may take a while, but those are the rules. Whatever it is that they name after him should be expensive, gaudy and ineffectual, like its namesake.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #49  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    ..........The SECNAV broke the rules in order to name a ship after a leftist icon................... but the naming of US ships is our business.


    I hate to tell you this, but they were presidents. Sadly, as Fett pointed out, so are Obama and Clinton, .
    And there you have the entire issue in a nutshell. You say he broke the rules, but in your own WIKI article (which I had already read but beat me with a stick had not memorized the life of Chavez) you note the exceptions which have been made. There have been plenty of exceptions. Even you agreed that the rules were not hard and fast.

    So we have some examples of exceptions. We also have the actual history of naming US vessels which included naming for the King Of Wessex.

    Your official complaint appears to be twofold: that politics is in the naming process and that the sailors should have veto power over the Secretary.

    Unless we are going to have as many ships of the presidential class as there have been presidents, then choosing which presidents to honor will be political. Talk about a slap in the face- to name ships after Lincoln and Grant? And you're pissed about some lettuce picker?

    BTW, I would like to see an important vessel named for Queen Elizabeth I, the most important woman in the history of the US and the mother country alike.
    Last edited by Novaheart; 02-18-2012 at 12:21 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #50  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    No, what you don't get is that while it doesn't matter what you or I think of Chavez, or what the elite media and left think of him, the rules governing the naming of ships don't allow for it. The SECNAV broke the rules in order to name a ship after a leftist icon. He never served in the armed forces or in a government post, nor was he of any service to the United States military in any way. His name doesn't belong on a United States Naval vessel. If a private company wants to name a ship after him, that's their business (in fact, it would be appropriate for a ferry across the Rio Grande that dodges immigration checkpoints), but the naming of US ships is our business.


    I hate to tell you this, but they were presidents. Sadly, as Fett pointed out, so are Obama and Clinton, and there's a ship named for the latter, although given his conduct in office, it would have been more appropriate to name a pleasure boat after him, maybe an R&R ship. Some future Democratic SECNAV may decide to name a ship after Obama, although given the cuts that he's imposed, it will be a while before we have any ships to name, so it may take a while, but those are the rules. Whatever it is that they name after him should be expensive, gaudy and ineffectual, like its namesake.
    Actually, Chavez did serve 2 years in the Navy, but Hispanics could only paint or clean
    "Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings..." Patrick Henry
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •