Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
ripple wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
ripple wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:

This is a fun game.


Anyone with half a brain understands the meaning of what he wrote and why he phrased it that way. Duffy was just being Duffy. If you want to chime in too and try to split hairs, have at it. But it's not worth discussing.

Come on BLep, get your head together. The leftist has spoken, your furtherance of this is worthless and a nuisance.

You're too stupid to understand that the left is smarter than you.


I guess the irony of your link was lost on you.

I'm not sure it was ironic.

Her being blasted for a perceived racist comment has very little to do with the fact that BLeP is too dumb to understand that you're so much smarter than him.

I was just trying to help him out. It's tough not knowing how stupid you are. I would know. Or do I?


I guess you're intent on proving the theory right. Ingraham was insinuating James was dumb. Hence the irony of you posting a link to Ingraham saying Democrats think Republicans are dumb. I didn't think I would have to spell it out, but there you go.
See I was dumb after all. Thankfully you're here to point it out for me.
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [ripple] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ripple wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
ripple wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
ripple wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:

This is a fun game.


Anyone with half a brain understands the meaning of what he wrote and why he phrased it that way. Duffy was just being Duffy. If you want to chime in too and try to split hairs, have at it. But it's not worth discussing.

Come on BLep, get your head together. The leftist has spoken, your furtherance of this is worthless and a nuisance.

You're too stupid to understand that the left is smarter than you.


I guess the irony of your link was lost on you.

I'm not sure it was ironic.

Her being blasted for a perceived racist comment has very little to do with the fact that BLeP is too dumb to understand that you're so much smarter than him.

I was just trying to help him out. It's tough not knowing how stupid you are. I would know. Or do I?


I guess you're intent on proving the theory right. Ingraham was insinuating James was dumb. Hence the irony of you posting a link to Ingraham saying Democrats think Republicans are dumb. I didn't think I would have to spell it out, but there you go.

See I was dumb after all. Thankfully you're here to point it out for me.

You're welcome ;)
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:


As Ken said, he said SOME are legal citizens. There was an implication there. Perhaps too subtle for some.


You don't need to be a legal citizen to work legally. Just because you think he's implying something doesn't mean that he is.


And just because Duffy thinks he's being clever, doesn't mean he's not being an ass.


Ok then. Given that you completely disregarded what I wrote, I will assume that implies that you have no response and are wrong.

This is a fun game.

Anyone with half a brain understands the meaning of what he wrote and why he phrased it that way. Duffy was just being Duffy. If you want to chime in too and try to split hairs, have at it. But it's not worth discussing.

I meant exactly what I wrote.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:


As Ken said, he said SOME are legal citizens. There was an implication there. Perhaps too subtle for some.


You don't need to be a legal citizen to work legally. Just because you think he's implying something doesn't mean that he is.


And just because Duffy thinks he's being clever, doesn't mean he's not being an ass.


Ok then. Given that you completely disregarded what I wrote, I will assume that implies that you have no response and are wrong.

This is a fun game.


Anyone with half a brain understands the meaning of what he wrote and why he phrased it that way. Duffy was just being Duffy. If you want to chime in too and try to split hairs, have at it. But it's not worth discussing.


I meant exactly what I wrote.

I have no doubt.
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
Duffy wrote:

I didn’t see anything in Eric’s post that said he hires illegal workers.


"A number of my employees are DACA, some are legal citizens, etc."

DACA immigrants are illegal immigrants, by definition. They were just given a temporary reprieve, which Trump has revoked.

If he didn't hire illegal workers, why specify that some are legal citizens? That *obviously* means that others aren't.

Maybe you just didn't read his post fully.[/quote

To clarify all of the confusion, we have a number of DACA employees, and some Hispanics who are legal citizens - meaning aside from the DACA workers. We don't intentionally hire, and try to stay away from people who I know or suspect is illegal. Have I ever had an illegal immigrant work for me? Absolutely, Back in the late 90s and early 2000's, a significant number of my workers were. Even now, there is a possibility that we have some using illegal documents, etc. I guess. We have been visited a time or two by government workers seeking our records and workforce info. We've never had a problem. And if it matters, we are a small farm.
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:


As Ken said, he said SOME are legal citizens. There was an implication there. Perhaps too subtle for some.


You don't need to be a legal citizen to work legally. Just because you think he's implying something doesn't mean that he is.


And just because Duffy thinks he's being clever, doesn't mean he's not being an ass.


Ok then. Given that you completely disregarded what I wrote, I will assume that implies that you have no response and are wrong.

This is a fun game.


Anyone with half a brain understands the meaning of what he wrote and why he phrased it that way. Duffy was just being Duffy. If you want to chime in too and try to split hairs, have at it. But it's not worth discussing.


I meant exactly what I wrote.

I have no doubt.

Really? Then why write this?

Quote:
Anyone with half a brain understands the meaning of what he wrote and why he phrased it that way.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:


As Ken said, he said SOME are legal citizens. There was an implication there. Perhaps too subtle for some.


You don't need to be a legal citizen to work legally. Just because you think he's implying something doesn't mean that he is.


And just because Duffy thinks he's being clever, doesn't mean he's not being an ass.


Ok then. Given that you completely disregarded what I wrote, I will assume that implies that you have no response and are wrong.

This is a fun game.


Anyone with half a brain understands the meaning of what he wrote and why he phrased it that way. Duffy was just being Duffy. If you want to chime in too and try to split hairs, have at it. But it's not worth discussing.


I meant exactly what I wrote.

I have no doubt.

Really? Then why write this?

Quote:
Anyone with half a brain understands the meaning of what he wrote and why he phrased it that way.

Either a) you have half a brain, or b) you were acting as if you have half a brain. I suspect the latter but can't be sure.
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I said that the farmer dude didn’t say he hired illegal workers.

He came on here and said specifically that he tries not to hire illegal workers (basically confirming what I said).

You say that I must implying something else (something that have yet to say what it is that you think I’m implying) and you have also insisted that the farmer most certainly hires illegal workers and I have half a brain.

What is it that you think I meant when I said the farmer didn’t say he hired illegal workers?

Please just answer that instead of just saying I’m dumb or don’t understand subtly.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
I said that the farmer dude didn’t say he hired illegal workers.

He came on here and said specifically that he tries not to hire illegal workers (basically confirming what I said).

You say that I must implying something else (something that have yet to say what it is that you think I’m implying) and you have also insisted that the farmer most certainly hires illegal workers and I have half a brain.

What is it that you think I meant when I said the farmer didn’t say he hired illegal workers?

Please just answer that instead of just saying I’m dumb or don’t understand subtly.

Seems like he came back and clarified what I said, which was that he has hired illegal workers. I really have no idea what point you're trying to make. Why don't you just say what you want to say.
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
Duffy wrote:
I said that the farmer dude didn’t say he hired illegal workers.

He came on here and said specifically that he tries not to hire illegal workers (basically confirming what I said).

You say that I must implying something else (something that have yet to say what it is that you think I’m implying) and you have also insisted that the farmer most certainly hires illegal workers and I have half a brain.

What is it that you think I meant when I said the farmer didn’t say he hired illegal workers?

Please just answer that instead of just saying I’m dumb or don’t understand subtly.

Seems like he came back and clarified what I said, which was that he has hired illegal workers. I really have no idea what point you're trying to make. Why don't you just say what you want to say.

He doesn’t hire illegal workers on purpose. The point I was making was that you don’t need to have people working here illegally. That was a counter point to a poster who was basically using this farmer’s post to “prove” that we do need illegal workers.

He did come back and clarify saying that the vast majority of his workers are legally allowed to work and that he does everything he can to not hire illegal workers.

If you can’t see that obvious point (hell, BLeP got it) then I can’t help you.

I’ve come to the conclusion here that you aren’t even trying to make a point, you’re just trying to score points.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Duffy wrote:
I said that the farmer dude didn’t say he hired illegal workers.

He came on here and said specifically that he tries not to hire illegal workers (basically confirming what I said).

You say that I must implying something else (something that have yet to say what it is that you think I’m implying) and you have also insisted that the farmer most certainly hires illegal workers and I have half a brain.

What is it that you think I meant when I said the farmer didn’t say he hired illegal workers?

Please just answer that instead of just saying I’m dumb or don’t understand subtly.

Seems like he came back and clarified what I said, which was that he has hired illegal workers. I really have no idea what point you're trying to make. Why don't you just say what you want to say.

He doesn’t hire illegal workers on purpose. The point I was making was that you don’t need to have people working here illegally. That was a counter point to a poster who was basically using this farmer’s post to “prove” that we do need illegal workers.

He did come back and clarify saying that the vast majority of his workers are legally allowed to work and that he does everything he can to not hire illegal workers.

If you can’t see that obvious point (hell, BLeP got it) then I can’t help you.

I’ve come to the conclusion here that you aren’t even trying to make a point, you’re just trying to score points.

Pot, meet black kettle ...

Why didn't you just say that in the first place?
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
this thread was a reply to another thread. if you didn't see the other thread, i could understand why you think the first post was stark, i.e., you didn't get the "joke". that would make sense. that would explain how you feel as you do. but i don't know whether that's the case, because i've asked you 3 times what the bad behavior was to which you take issue and it's pretty clear i'm not going to hear what it was.

1.) The OP -- which you acknowledge -- but now say is a "joke". Whatever that means.
2.) The next post, where you described the other thread as a "typical fantasy circle jerk from immigration hardliners".
3.) The next post which described the same thread as " the almost-daily typical immigrant and people-of-color attack" on this site.

Near as I can tell, none of this is because the people commenting in the offending thread are really immigration hardliners, or attacking immigrants or people of color -- and you certainly didn't offer supporting evidence. They simply hadn't included the point you made. That's a pretty lame excuse for the ad hominem.

Keep in mind that this is the typical response to just "shut up" here in the LR when you're not the owner of the site (or an ideological ally)...

Harbinger wrote:
Spiridon Louis wrote:
Harbinger wrote:
I didn't read it that way.

Shut up!

Go fuck yourself.
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [SH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SH wrote:
Quote:
this thread was a reply to another thread. if you didn't see the other thread, i could understand why you think the first post was stark, i.e., you didn't get the "joke". that would make sense. that would explain how you feel as you do. but i don't know whether that's the case, because i've asked you 3 times what the bad behavior was to which you take issue and it's pretty clear i'm not going to hear what it was.


1.) The OP -- which you acknowledge -- but now say is a "joke". Whatever that means.
2.) The next post, where you described the other thread as a "typical fantasy circle jerk from immigration hardliners".
3.) The next post which described the same thread as " the almost-daily typical immigrant and people-of-color attack" on this site.

Near as I can tell, none of this is because the people commenting in the offending thread are really immigration hardliners, or attacking immigrants or people of color -- and you certainly didn't offer supporting evidence. They simply hadn't included the point you made. That's a pretty lame excuse for the ad hominem.

Keep in mind that this is the typical response to just "shut up" here in the LR when you're not the owner of the site (or an ideological ally)...

Harbinger wrote:
Spiridon Louis wrote:
Harbinger wrote:
I didn't read it that way.

Shut up!

Go fuck yourself.

the first post used a device. a jocular device. you create a thread that is exceedingly similar to a similar thread. i take you at your word you've never seen this before in the LR. or on any other forum. you're the only one! but, i don't like to call people liars, so, i'll just believe you that you're entirely naive to that paradigm.

"typical fantasy circle jerk from immigration hardliners". how else would you like me to put it? help me wordsmith this in a way that expresses this phenomenon similarly clearly, but in a way that comports with the style and mood you've come to expect when reading in the lavender room.

"the almost-daily typical immigrant and people-of-color attack on this site." we have an almost daily typical immigrant and people-of-color attack on this forum. how do you want me to descibe the almost-daily typical immigrant and people-of-color attack on this forum? this is what we have. this is the onerous speech it's my distaste to host. about 70 percent of the threads i pull are the attacks on immigrants you don't see. but you see enough to know it's true. it's declined as of late, because the person responsible for these threads appears to be off the payroll since the election ended. but that's what we've had here.

where were your delicate sensibilities when these daily threads were posted? your feelings weren't hurt. indeed, you lustily partook.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
the first post used a device. a jocular device. you create a thread that is exceedingly similar to a similar thread. i take you at your word you've never seen this before in the LR. or on any other forum. you're the only one! but, i don't like to call people liars, so, i'll just believe you that you're entirely naive to that paradigm.


The first post included the directive to shut up if we didn't accept your ridiculous logical fallacy of bifurcation. The jocular device is irrelevant, and something I never mentioned. So how are you taking my word that I've never seen it before? I don't like to call people liars either, so I'll just believe that when you twist my words and make stuff up it isn't intentional.

Quote:
"typical fantasy circle jerk from immigration hardliners". how else would you like me to put it? help me wordsmith this in a way that expresses this phenomenon similarly clearly, but in a way that comports with the style and mood you've come to expect when reading in the lavender room.


I just reread that thread -- the thread you were reacting to. Name the immigration hardliners there. Name the attackers of immigrants and people of color. What posts constitute the circle jerk?
Last edited by: SH: Dec 9, 18 5:55
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [SH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Good luck bro.. I'm noticing a pattern here. It's impossible to make a rational point when the responder plugs their ears and screams liar/idiot. Not worth it.
Quote Reply
Re: This Will Stir Some Controversy: 100% of US Households Access Food From Non-Citizens Claiming the EITC [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ah, but this is why I hunt my own meat.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Quote Reply

Prev Next