Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Comments

  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,207
    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:
    Sounds like Trump is replacing Obama as the food stamp president.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,839 Standard Supporter

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,207
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
  • Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 26,949

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
    Careful
  • dfleadflea Member Posts: 7,233
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    Ironic.

  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,839 Standard Supporter

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
    Yet hide it you did. But then SPLC is right up your alley. Much like the street fair of the same name.

    From the linked article: "Steven Camarota, director of research at the center and author of the report". The article had an opposing viewpoint as well. You probably missed that.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    I love illegal immigrants. Me and the dems love cheap labor to serve us. House cleaning, land scaping, cooking, fucking. All for peanuts. Keep em coming I say.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,207

    I love illegal immigrants. Me and the dems love cheap labor to serve us. House cleaning, land scaping, cooking, fucking. All for peanuts. Keep em coming I say.

    My line. Get your own.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781

    I love illegal immigrants. Me and the dems love cheap labor to serve us. House cleaning, land scaping, cooking, fucking. All for peanuts. Keep em coming I say.

    My line. Get your own.
    It’s not a stretch. Common sense
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,207
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
    Yet hide it you did. But then SPLC is right up your alley. Much like the street fair of the same name.

    From the linked article: "Steven Camarota, director of research at the center and author of the report". The article had an opposing viewpoint as well. You probably missed that.
    Nope. Didn't miss anything. And hardly need the SPLC to tell me about John Tanton, founder and philosophical foundation of the CIS, FAIR, English First and many other related orgs. The most charitable and balanced piece I've read on Tanton was in the Detroit News last year, and that was a nice summary of the man and his mission. It reveals his passing interest in eugenics, concerns that hispanics can't be educated and have a built-in tendency toward bribery and dishonesty, and other interesting related views.

    Regardless of whether you agree with that shit or not, that is the founder and thought leader of those organizations, which cleverly try to pass themselves off as academically neutral. Which forces the question: why don't they just grab their balls and spell out their real agenda, instead of trying to appear as something else?

    They are, at best, anti-immigration. Which is fine, but don't ask me to read their research as scholarly and without agenda. Their founder and thought leader was an amateur anthropologist who had some really stupid hillbilly views.

    That is all. SPLC has nothing to do with it, but nice attempt to deflect from the point that you rely on the CIC for your point.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,207

    I love illegal immigrants. Me and the dems love cheap labor to serve us. House cleaning, land scaping, cooking, fucking. All for peanuts. Keep em coming I say.

    My line. Get your own.
    It’s not a stretch. Common sense
    It's a stretch for you because you're a dumb fuck. HtH
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,207

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
    Careful
    I know. Missing semicolon. Damn this phone!
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,839 Standard Supporter

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
    Yet hide it you did. But then SPLC is right up your alley. Much like the street fair of the same name.

    From the linked article: "Steven Camarota, director of research at the center and author of the report". The article had an opposing viewpoint as well. You probably missed that.
    Nope. Didn't miss anything. And hardly need the SPLC to tell me about John Tanton, founder and philosophical foundation of the CIS, FAIR, English First and many other related orgs. The most charitable and balanced piece I've read on Tanton was in the Detroit News last year, and that was a nice summary of the man and his mission. It reveals his passing interest in eugenics, concerns that hispanics can't be educated and have a built-in tendency toward bribery and dishonesty, and other interesting related views.

    Regardless of whether you agree with that shit or not, that is the founder and thought leader of those organizations, which cleverly try to pass themselves off as academically neutral. Which forces the question: why don't they just grab their balls and spell out their real agenda, instead of trying to appear as something else?

    They are, at best, anti-immigration. Which is fine, but don't ask me to read their research as scholarly and without agenda. Their founder and thought leader was an amateur anthropologist who had some really stupid hillbilly views.

    That is all. SPLC has nothing to do with it, but nice attempt to deflect from the point that you rely on the CIC for your point.

    Never heard of the guy you're talking about just posted a link to the USA Today article. Pretty simple really.

    Eugenics? Planned Parenthood founder Margret Sanger who liked Hitler and said she was doing it to keep the black population in check. Idolized by the left.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,207
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
    Yet hide it you did. But then SPLC is right up your alley. Much like the street fair of the same name.

    From the linked article: "Steven Camarota, director of research at the center and author of the report". The article had an opposing viewpoint as well. You probably missed that.
    Nope. Didn't miss anything. And hardly need the SPLC to tell me about John Tanton, founder and philosophical foundation of the CIS, FAIR, English First and many other related orgs. The most charitable and balanced piece I've read on Tanton was in the Detroit News last year, and that was a nice summary of the man and his mission. It reveals his passing interest in eugenics, concerns that hispanics can't be educated and have a built-in tendency toward bribery and dishonesty, and other interesting related views.

    Regardless of whether you agree with that shit or not, that is the founder and thought leader of those organizations, which cleverly try to pass themselves off as academically neutral. Which forces the question: why don't they just grab their balls and spell out their real agenda, instead of trying to appear as something else?

    They are, at best, anti-immigration. Which is fine, but don't ask me to read their research as scholarly and without agenda. Their founder and thought leader was an amateur anthropologist who had some really stupid hillbilly views.

    That is all. SPLC has nothing to do with it, but nice attempt to deflect from the point that you rely on the CIC for your point.

    Never heard of the guy you're talking about just posted a link to the USA Today article. Pretty simple really.

    Eugenics? Planned Parenthood founder Margret Sanger who liked Hitler and said she was doing it to keep the black population in check. Idolized by the left.
    As often as you cite CIS, you should read about the guy. Actually, it isn't easy to put into him in one political category (like me). For example, now that you mention Pitchfork's favorite loser issue (abortion), Tanton was in fact associated with Planned Parenthood at one time, and also with the Sierra Club. In any event, left, right or something else, he is old and out of it (and may in fact be dead for all I know), but is the guy behind CIS and FAIR and other related organizations.

    Like I said, he's flown under the radar, but he's also been covered, and the Detroit News piece on him is probably the most fair take I've seen. The NYTs piece isn't too bad, given that they call him for what he is/was mostly. But he's a Michigan guy and the DN tried to cover all the angles, and depending on your beliefs some of them were ugly. It ran last year; you'll have no trouble finding it. I would not cite or rely on CIS and affiliated data without knowing more about Tanton. Up to you of course, but his fingerprints are all over all of those groups.

    Finally, you're not going to get under my skin picking on the left. There's a lot not to like. But being a cherry picker is no way to go through life, and we are not talking about abortion at the moment. Focus.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,839 Standard Supporter
    edited June 2018

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
    Yet hide it you did. But then SPLC is right up your alley. Much like the street fair of the same name.

    From the linked article: "Steven Camarota, director of research at the center and author of the report". The article had an opposing viewpoint as well. You probably missed that.
    Nope. Didn't miss anything. And hardly need the SPLC to tell me about John Tanton, founder and philosophical foundation of the CIS, FAIR, English First and many other related orgs. The most charitable and balanced piece I've read on Tanton was in the Detroit News last year, and that was a nice summary of the man and his mission. It reveals his passing interest in eugenics, concerns that hispanics can't be educated and have a built-in tendency toward bribery and dishonesty, and other interesting related views.

    Regardless of whether you agree with that shit or not, that is the founder and thought leader of those organizations, which cleverly try to pass themselves off as academically neutral. Which forces the question: why don't they just grab their balls and spell out their real agenda, instead of trying to appear as something else?

    They are, at best, anti-immigration. Which is fine, but don't ask me to read their research as scholarly and without agenda. Their founder and thought leader was an amateur anthropologist who had some really stupid hillbilly views.

    That is all. SPLC has nothing to do with it, but nice attempt to deflect from the point that you rely on the CIC for your point.

    Never heard of the guy you're talking about just posted a link to the USA Today article. Pretty simple really.

    Eugenics? Planned Parenthood founder Margret Sanger who liked Hitler and said she was doing it to keep the black population in check. Idolized by the left.
    As often as you cite CIS, you should read about the guy. Actually, it isn't easy to put into him in one political category (like me). For example, now that you mention Pitchfork's favorite loser issue (abortion), Tanton was in fact associated with Planned Parenthood at one time, and also with the Sierra Club. In any event, left, right or something else, he is old and out of it (and may in fact be dead for all I know), but is the guy behind CIS and FAIR and other related organizations.

    Like I said, he's flown under the radar, but he's also been covered, and the Detroit News piece on him is probably the most fair take I've seen. The NYTs piece isn't too bad, given that they call him for what he is/was mostly. But he's a Michigan guy and the DN tried to cover all the angles, and depending on your beliefs some of them were ugly. It ran last year; you'll have no trouble finding it. I would not cite or rely on CIS and affiliated data without knowing more about Tanton. Up to you of course, but his fingerprints are all over all of those groups.

    Finally, you're not going to get under my skin picking on the left. There's a lot not to like. But being a cherry picker is no way to go through life, and we are not talking about abortion at the moment. Focus.
    I just posted the article, when did I cite CIS previously? Never heard of 'em. Maybe you have me confused with someone else.

    I just like to point out the total hypocrisy on the left. Happens on the right as well but usually connected to millions of deaths.
  • Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 26,949
    I don't think I've ever banged an illegal immigrant

    Didn't know that was common
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,207
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:
    Nice try, hiding the CIS behind at USA Today title.

    Founded in 1985 by John Tanton, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has gone on to become the go-to think tank for the anti-immigrant movement with its reports and staffers often cited by media and anti-immigrant politicians. CIS’s much-touted tagline is “low immigration, pro-immigrant,” but the organization has a decades-long history of circulating racist writers, while also associating with white nationalists.

    You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you.

    That's why you'll always be average.
    It's USA Today. Liberal rag. Came up while looking at news. I do not normally read USA Today. Where does it say the numbers are wrong? And who wrote your quotes? When you quote a source might be worth including.

    I looked up your quote. You act like the Southern Poverty Law Center is anything other than a communist satellite.

    "You start with the answer you want, and find sources that will give it to you." Much?
    1. Read the article you linked again. No, I don't. Founded by Tanton, who has a long and distinguished history and earned reputation that hardly needs amplifying. If you don't know who he is and why he has no credibility with anyone with a soul, then you shouldn't be arguing this with me ... or anyone.

    2. USA Today is a rag for people who can barely read. Not surprised to find you there. The article is basically a quote piece for the CIS, an off-shoot of FAIR. If I'm ever basing my argument on "research" done by an organization with an axe to grind, I'll tell you; I don't need to hide my sources.

    3. I'll quote however I wish, and won't take drafting advice from someone who barely has command over his native language. HtH
    Yet hide it you did. But then SPLC is right up your alley. Much like the street fair of the same name.

    From the linked article: "Steven Camarota, director of research at the center and author of the report". The article had an opposing viewpoint as well. You probably missed that.
    Nope. Didn't miss anything. And hardly need the SPLC to tell me about John Tanton, founder and philosophical foundation of the CIS, FAIR, English First and many other related orgs. The most charitable and balanced piece I've read on Tanton was in the Detroit News last year, and that was a nice summary of the man and his mission. It reveals his passing interest in eugenics, concerns that hispanics can't be educated and have a built-in tendency toward bribery and dishonesty, and other interesting related views.

    Regardless of whether you agree with that shit or not, that is the founder and thought leader of those organizations, which cleverly try to pass themselves off as academically neutral. Which forces the question: why don't they just grab their balls and spell out their real agenda, instead of trying to appear as something else?

    They are, at best, anti-immigration. Which is fine, but don't ask me to read their research as scholarly and without agenda. Their founder and thought leader was an amateur anthropologist who had some really stupid hillbilly views.

    That is all. SPLC has nothing to do with it, but nice attempt to deflect from the point that you rely on the CIC for your point.

    Never heard of the guy you're talking about just posted a link to the USA Today article. Pretty simple really.

    Eugenics? Planned Parenthood founder Margret Sanger who liked Hitler and said she was doing it to keep the black population in check. Idolized by the left.
    As often as you cite CIS, you should read about the guy. Actually, it isn't easy to put into him in one political category (like me). For example, now that you mention Pitchfork's favorite loser issue (abortion), Tanton was in fact associated with Planned Parenthood at one time, and also with the Sierra Club. In any event, left, right or something else, he is old and out of it (and may in fact be dead for all I know), but is the guy behind CIS and FAIR and other related organizations.

    Like I said, he's flown under the radar, but he's also been covered, and the Detroit News piece on him is probably the most fair take I've seen. The NYTs piece isn't too bad, given that they call him for what he is/was mostly. But he's a Michigan guy and the DN tried to cover all the angles, and depending on your beliefs some of them were ugly. It ran last year; you'll have no trouble finding it. I would not cite or rely on CIS and affiliated data without knowing more about Tanton. Up to you of course, but his fingerprints are all over all of those groups.

    Finally, you're not going to get under my skin picking on the left. There's a lot not to like. But being a cherry picker is no way to go through life, and we are not talking about abortion at the moment. Focus.
    I just posted the article, when did I cite CIS previously? Never heard of 'em. Maybe you have me confused with someone else.

    I just like to point out the total hypocrisy on the left. Happens on the right as well but usually connected to millions of deaths.
    No confusion; this isn't the first tim we've had this exchange. In any event, that's who is behind some of the numbers you're citing.

    I'll concede it is a somewhat chintresting piece, albeit one you cherry picked for a good headline. The conservative Latina made some good poonts.
Sign In or Register to comment.