TakeYouToTasker

Are you trying to intentionally post progressively dumber arguments? It sure seems like you are. Or, how about actually making a real counter argument? Do you have it in you? I'm beginning to have some very strong doubts.

Dante puts it firmly at 3. The jury is still out on Baskin.

I'll take: "the dismissive non-argument of an intellectual coward" for 500, Alex. Care to explain how I'm wrong?

“The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.”

I had hoped I wouldn't need to get granular with this, but I'll go ahead and explain it in greater depth, because you apparently aren't getting it. The Hispanic community has many shared beliefs which lend themselves towards conservatism. A massive percentage of Hispanics are deeply motivated by their Christian faith, believe strongly in the importance of both nuclear and extended family, and advocate the importance of "hard work" and "self reliance". If you don't understand how the importation of these ideals can help the country, then I don't know what to tell you. As to the "Identity Politics", yes, the red left has been very effective in substituting racial disharmony for socio-economic disharmony after realizing, in the 1960's, that socio-economic disharmony was a non-starter in a country in which trenches-to-palace economic mobility was a real thing, and no effective caste system existed. They did this by creating an expansive social safety net which incentivized the non-nuclear family, and then by using coordinated race-baiting to intentionally mis-educate to the idea that vaccum snap-shot disparity is clear evidence of an exclusionary system. If you wish to capitulate to the left, embrace their inherent evil, go ethno-Nativist and fight a race war, by all means do so; but do it honestly, and declare yourself openly like Ozy. Also, prepare to be ridiculed by those real conservatives who see the individual rather than assign them a group.

The European conflicts, which are the subject matter of the paper you presented earlier, are due (largely) to the influx of a hostile non-Judeo-Christian population whose culture is driven by a 1500 year old Theocratic rule which is incompatible with Western culture and values. Black/white racial conflicts begin with America's "original sin", and would likely be nearly healed had Lyndon B. Johnson decided not to re-subjugate black Americans in the guise of political patronage. Hispanic/Nativist conflict is caused (largely) by the irrational fears of people whom are seeking to protect something they never had from another group of people who wouldn't have had the ability to take it away from them anyway; forcing the immigrant Hispanic community to live in isolation by denying them the ability to assimilate, all while complaining about their unwillingness to assimilate.

You aren't doing fine at all in terms of conveying information, or making an intelligible argument. In fact, you're making such a very poor case that even if you were 100% correct, no one would know it because you've presented it so damn poorly. I'm sitting here, willing to listen. Make your case, and do it better.

You blank post quoted me, and haven't responded to anything I wrote. Further, you're taking small sample size anecdotal evidence, and extrapolating it across the population of an entire nation of people; and then you're compounding that logical error by equating all Hispanics with Mexicans. Do better.

Of course not. They are both big government parties. Hence their long standing partnership working to protect them from minority parties which may disrupt the status quo.

I'm not asking you to re-write a book. I'm asking you to explain to me the fundamental differences between what Hispanics and largely Anglo/Slavic whites want. Then I'll ask you to source it... What you offered is a theoretical paper, which offers the (unproven) idea that heterogeneous populations can be either cooperative or divisive depending on how large the minority groups are; with the major negative implication of "critical mass" minority groups being isolated from the majority's economic advantage predicated on an unwillingness to assimilate. The paper, while interesting, isn't particularly relevant to the topic at hand, given that the overwhelming amount of harm is done to these immigrant communities themselves, by themselves; and that neither Magox nor anyone else here, is advocating making undocumented immigrants into citizens, but rather in offering them a path towards citizenship which would force them towards assimilation as opposed to what we have now, and enacting meaningful immigration reform to actually begin protecting our sovereign borders.

No, I want to you make your argument please. I'm not interested in you offering reading assignments. Make your case, and then support it with evidence, like I do.

Let's start here: What is so fundamentally different between what Hispanics want, and what largely Anglo/Slavic whites want?

I can think of at least two reasons right off of the top of my head: 1. It requires that all Latinos immediately become suspects having to prove their innocence, which is the antithesis of how any justice system opperating in a free society should work. 2. He believes if to be immoral to break up families, close down businesses, and uproot communities; sending them somewhere they have no lives and no prospects.

I think you've forgotten that we've already played against Matt Forte, David Johnson, LeGarrette Blount, and Todd Gurley.

He's clearly gotten much stronger, and the game seems to have finally slowed down for him.

They displayed an absolute lack of any sense of urgency. They ran off nearly half-a-minute any time they didn't call a time out. With any sense of urgency at all, they get two shots at the end zone after the Clay catch inside the 5. I'm not sure if it's on the sideline, or on Tyrod, or on some combination, but it's not a good look.

You're giving credit to Smith rather than the other special teams coaches because she's a woman? Good grief... Get a grip, Webster Gal.

This game, summarized by a three minute video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrMTLV2cR2Q

It is not the role of the Court to legislate.

LOL @ "Tyrod the Unready"

Con: that time he lined up behind the !@#$ing left guard and called for a snap, leading to a near turnover and massive loss of yards.

Around here we don't let our board mates fail on game day. Glad to hear you got the phone back.

McCoy: 150 yards rushing Taylor: 124 yards passing

Him, Felton, and the O-Line.

!@#$ing awesome.