Comments on: Mitt Romney’s Illegal Alien Workers

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Mon, 04 Dec 2006 18:25:52 +0000

NG, here are the first couple of paragraphs of Malkin’s “defense” of Ms. Clinton:

Hillary Clinton is seeing pink. Code Pink. The unruly group of far-left female apologists for tyranny around the world, most infamous for prancing around in pastel lingerie to protest President Bush and the war on terror, has now launched a nationwide campaign against the New York senator because of her opposition to immediate troop withdrawals from Iraq.

But don’t weep for Hillary.

Code Pink is the group that championed military deserters, cheered Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, traipsed around the Jordan-Iraq border last year condemning America, prayed for the “people of Fallujah,” doled out $600,000 in aid to what they called “the other side” and is planning a New Year’s vacation to Cuba in solidarity with the Castro regime. Sen. Clinton couldn’t have wished for a better Christmas present than having these loony peaceniks barking about her faux moderate makeover. 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, here she comes! If she doesn’t trip on the way to her Senate re-election bid and the unhinged-dominated Democratic primaries, that is. (Two words, Hill: Skip. Iowa.)

By: Nimrod Gently

Nimrod Gently — Mon, 04 Dec 2006 13:45:04 +0000

I actually wanted a link there.

By: dr pedro

dr pedro — Sun, 03 Dec 2006 16:24:23 +0000

12/7/05

By: Nimrod Gently

Nimrod Gently — Sun, 03 Dec 2006 15:53:35 +0000

When?

By: dr pedro

dr pedro — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 21:06:34 +0000

Hell malkin defended Hillary Clinton against the depredations of code pink loonies for crying out loud….

and Ollie, a lot of you ARE unhinged. Malkin is just “speaking truth to power”…

By: Oliver Willis

Oliver Willis — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 18:21:24 +0000

The people you cite, Malkin and company just don’t “defend” Democrats. They’re too busy calling us “unhinged” and worse. To pretend otherwise is to play the idiot.

By: Marty

Marty — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 17:51:26 +0000

Ah, poor Oliver. Just because you don’t want to give anybody on the right credit for anything that you agree with, that doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

By: Oliver Willis

Oliver Willis — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 17:02:51 +0000

have defended Democrats in the past from badly founded criticism
This is just patently false.

By: Marty

Marty — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 15:50:49 +0000

Quaker- to answer your question, I think some right wing bloggers- would probably use the same argument I did in defending Romney in this type of case where a company was hired, and not an individual. Michelle Malkin, Rick Moran, Captain Ed, for example, have defended Democrats in the past from badly founded criticism when there were there were so many real policy issues that could be criticized.

Others would probably take the Oliver Willis route and make it a smear. Unfortunately that’s how things are going these days.

However, the story would be different in a case like Kimba Wood’s where the judge made an illegal hire herself. That would probably get no mercy from either side.

By: frameone

frameone — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 04:09:21 +0000

“By Oliver’s tortured logic, anyone who patronizes a business that employs illegal aliens is a hypocrite.”

Jesus, is this the stupidest comment of the week or what?

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 01:27:53 +0000

Feh.

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 01:27:26 +0000

william, you can learn more here. And in keeping with my complaint about sending us a biased link, I'll give you advance warning that the link above will take you to ThinkProgress. However, the embedded video clip is from the San Francisco ABC affiliate.

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 01:16:23 +0000

Wow, william. Thanks for that link. Now I’ll know not to trust that site any more.

For some reason, the author of the editorial has trouble distinguishing between “non-union” and “cheap, foreign” labor. He (or she) just can’t seem to tell the difference.

The author also seems to think that Ms. Pelosi should refuse to sell to companies that don’t hire union workers. I’ve never heard of any company that did that.

Really, if you’re trying to educate us, send us material that doesn’t carry the stink of a hit job, OK?

By: Oliver

Oliver — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 01:08:08 +0000

Yeah, a biased editorial is the same as hard fact. And I don’t seem to remember Speaker Pelosi say anything about unions, pro or con. And hiring non-union workers ain’t illegal, like the illegal immigrants that Mitt Romney hired to tend to his pink mansion.

By: william

william — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 00:52:27 +0000

Pelosi hires only non-union workers for her high-end wineries even as she receives the 2003 Ceasar Chavez award from the United Farm Workers...HYPOCRITE! She also hires only non-union workers for her hotels and restaurants...HYPOCRITE! http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=247191278714751

By: Oliver

Oliver — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 00:13:32 +0000

And I speak on authority on the house color phenomneon. I’ve lived in the wild color stats (FL, CA) as well as the more subtle states (MA, MD).

By: Oliver

Oliver — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 00:12:12 +0000

What Quaker said (thanks).

And my crack about Romney’s pink house was about the fact that one usually only sees house of such neon color in Florida or California. The fact that you saw it as a gay slam speaks more to your own internal biases.

By: dr pedro

dr pedro — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 00:09:35 +0000

Quacker see my quip about checking a green card at McDonalds…

My point is that I don’t hold ANY politician responsible for checking the bona fides on a worker for another company. If he HIRED the illegal himself, then they are responsible.

And Joey Numbnuts, yes it is someone elses responsiblity to determine the legality of the people they hire…the business hiring them

By: Bill L.

Bill L. — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 23:26:46 +0000

The point is that Romney,who has been working overtime to earn his wingnut bonafides by slamming gays and illegal immigrants, has undocumented workers caring for the lawn of his pink house. It’s practically a stereotype cartoon. That would be the very definition of hypocrisy, but kudos to everyone who noticed that the real issue is that illegal aliens are often referred to as “undocumented workers.”

K-U-D-O-S to you, good sir(s).

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 23:24:21 +0000

Let’s take tyfoc’s monkeyshines in the order they were presented:

Point one:

By Oliver’s tortured logic, anyone who patronizes a business that employs illegal aliens is a hypocrite.

No, a politician who want to wants to prohibit the state from doing business with companies that hire illegal workers, but who is perfectly willing to hire those same companies himself opens himself to charges of hypocricy.

Point two:

Where were the stories in the Boston Globe regarding Kerry’s landscapers in 2004?

The Globe–no friend of Mr. Kerry’s–was probably too busy examining Mr. Kerry’s family tree or parsing his quips about being Irish to be concerned about the matter.

Point three:

How quickly will the Boston Globe express its support of the little people, the 90+% of America who make their living as an operator or employee of a small business, after throwing this small business under the bus in order to smear one of its customers?

You’re referring to the company that hires illegal immigrants, right? I thought those were supposed to be the bad guys for conservatives.

Point four:

Isn’t the preferred term among the media for illegal aliens “undocumented workers?”

Varies by newsroom. If you come up with a copy of the Globe’s stylebook, do let us know.

Point five:

Oliver, did you just make a gay joke about Governor Romney’s house?

Haw! I believe that was OW’s imitation of a right-winger!”He looks French!“, “He uses Botox!”, “Windsurfing! Windsurfing!”

Does that about cover it, tyfoc? Now I have a question:

Am I the only one who smells bananas?