Sorry, I am not sure what you mean beyond the rethorics. Are you claiming that in efficiently dealing with his correspondance he becomes unfit to be a Governor?
Spending 1 minute to make a decision does not free him from the responsibility for the decision. But I would certainly not expect him to recall every 1-minute decision he has made 6 years ago.
As for him not volunteering the information (and not wanting to talk much about it when the topic is brought up), it is only natural. Just like anyone, he likes to talk of things that portray him in a good light, and he prefers not to accentuate his only not-so-good decision (one of hundreds of thousands of decisions).
Actually, read the first paragraph here (do not worry about the second one).
But it's the second paragraph that bothers me, not the first.
He wrote a letter to the parole board and called it a letter. What's a lie?
The lie is that a) it wasn't 10 or 15 years, it was 6, and b) it wasn't "a letter", it was 2 letters.
Yes, both of these can be explained away to some extent, but as I said "All seems too sleazy for my taste". Smells of "depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is". Brrrrr.
To my taste, his explanation is an order of magnitude less sleazy than the use of this non-issue by the opposing compaign. That's not even brrr, it's bleeeh.
And aside from all that, my biggest political concern these days is the drain illegal immigration is having on our resources. What what I understand, Patric is all for giving them instate tuition.
Same as with your argument about Patrick's inattention above, it's a point I saw coming. Also similar to the above, it's a decent argument. Still, the particular issue of college tuition is a peculiar one. The illegals who are sufficiently ambitious to desire it aren't the ones who will end up a burden.
got it right. I don't see how your response addresses that concern. In addition, first the tuition, then driver's licenses, that.. who knows. It's a step in the direction opposite of where I think we need to be going.
I understand your argument that instate tuition is a step in the wrong direction. What I am saying is that an illegal immigrant who goes to college here will more than likely do well, get a profession, become legal, pay taxes and contribute just like most (not all) legal residents. He would be in a much better position to contribute and much less likely to end up draining resources.
bublik64 once asked me why Republicans sound to me like they'd eat babies for lunch. Your type of argument provides a good example. "Let's make them FEEL unwelcome." It's not likely to be effective in controlling illegal immigration, but it sure has a mean-spirited streak to it.
an illegal immigrant who goes to college here will more than likely do well, get a profession, become legal, pay taxes and contribute just like most (not all) legal residents. He would be in a much better position to contribute and much less likely to end up draining resources
First of all, illegal immigrants often have trouble getting into/going to college because they are often too poor to be able to afford it (a heartbreaking example of this was given in an episode of Morgan Spurlock's 30 Days). A plausible reason why in-state tuition assistance could be a very good thing
( ... )
I'm not saying anything about making them "feel unwelcome". My view is that since they are illegal in the first place, how can they be given any rights or privileges? The easier you make it to be illegal, the more illegals you'll get. I think we should try to do things which will reduce the number of illegal immigrants, not increase it.
It's about not giving more reason for more and more illegals to come here for more and more benefits - I do want to make lawbreakers feel unwelcome. You wouldn't give in-state tuition to international students here legally, so why should you encourage and praise illegal behavior?
So you think that trying to stand up for someone's rights, even if he is accused of a murder, is a bad thing?
Reply
Spending 1 minute to make a decision does not free him from the responsibility for the decision. But I would certainly not expect him to recall every 1-minute decision he has made 6 years ago.
As for him not volunteering the information (and not wanting to talk much about it when the topic is brought up), it is only natural. Just like anyone, he likes to talk of things that portray him in a good light, and he prefers not to accentuate his only not-so-good decision (one of hundreds of thousands of decisions).
Reply
But it's the second paragraph that bothers me, not the first.
He wrote a letter to the parole board and called it a letter. What's a lie?
The lie is that a) it wasn't 10 or 15 years, it was 6, and b) it wasn't "a letter", it was 2 letters.
Yes, both of these can be explained away to some extent, but as I said "All seems too sleazy for my taste". Smells of "depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is". Brrrrr.
Reply
Reply
It was just one letter sent twice (not two different letters). Quite possibly he forgot that he asked to resend it.
Let'e merge this into: http://bublik64.livejournal.com/54409.html?thread=317577#t317577
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
bublik64 once asked me why Republicans sound to me like they'd eat babies for lunch. Your type of argument provides a good example. "Let's make them FEEL unwelcome." It's not likely to be effective in controlling illegal immigration, but it sure has a mean-spirited streak to it.
Reply
First of all, illegal immigrants often have trouble getting into/going to college because they are often too poor to be able to afford it (a heartbreaking example of this was given in an episode of Morgan Spurlock's 30 Days). A plausible reason why in-state tuition assistance could be a very good thing ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment