Some honesty in the drivers license issue

jdanton · 11-08-2007, 04:24 AM

Again, last night, I see the question of drivers licenses for illegal immigrants discussed.

I believe this is a huge and necessary topic, but I also believe in honesty. I believe it was Lou Dobbs' show.

This is presented like the license NY plans on giving illegals will let them board a plane and vote. Like it's the very same drivers license all the legal New Yorkers get.

IT IS NOT! The proposed license would contain the words "NO FOR FEDERAL USE" and will not help one register to vote or get on a plane.

NY will be the 8th state to issue this lower grade license to illegals in an effort to solve a number of problems within their states connected to illegal immigrants.

Frankly, I don't have an opinion for or against this yet. I know the vast majority of Americans oppose it, but I am convinced the vast majority of Americans haven't had it fully explained. They are under the impression that the license given to this folks will be the same license everyone else has.

My complaint here is that when the issue comes up for debate on ANY talking head show, the first step should be a brief, but ACCURATE, description of the proposal: that we are talking about a lower grade license that will not let one board a plane or vote, but will let one drive with insurance and such.

If the discussion on this or any topic is not at least this honest, what good is it?

W.M.DEEEZ · 11-08-2007, 04:43 AM

Illegals are here to stay

They are driving, probably without insurance. The reason they are here illegally, is because it takes over a decade to become a citzen.

At least they will now be registered, have insurance.

Perhaps it will be a first step in updating an unundated system of naturalization, and make it easier for "illegals" to become citzens.

jdanton · 11-08-2007, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W.M.DEEEZ

Illegals are here to stay

They are driving, probably without insurance. The reason they are here illegally, is because it takes over a decade to become a citzen.

At least they will now be registered, have insurance.

Perhaps it will be a first step in updating an unundated system of naturalization, and make it easier for "illegals" to become citzens.

There is a bit "other side" to this issue.

My problem is that when a tv "news" show introduces the topic as simply issuing drivers licenses to illegal immigrants, it has not honestly described what is being proposed. Therefore the entire discussion is skewed. Therefore, public opinion is skewed.

If the media had any integrity, it would present the proposal honestly. Then have a discussion.

When Hillary proposed some health care changed back in '93, almost every media outlet misrepresented what she proposed before having the discussion, so those discussions were also dishonest.

WE DESERVE BETTER FROM OUR MEDIA.

The_Heretic · 11-08-2007, 06:35 AM

First off, it's Lou Dobbs. That guy's naturally going to lie about what sort of licence it is. I knew it wasn't the same when I first heard about it. That was a point of haggling Spitzer had to work out before he could get the state legislature to go along with it.

jdanton · 11-08-2007, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Heretic

First off, it's Lou Dobbs. That guy's naturally going to lie about what sort of licence it is. I knew it wasn't the same when I first heard about it. That was a point of haggling Spitzer had to work out before he could get the state legislature to go along with it.

As we discuss this, most people do not know the specifics of what is now being proposed. Most don't know this will the the 8th state to this or similar.

I don't care if it's CNN, FOX, or MSNBC. If they are going to have a discussion on something, that discussion should be about exactly what that something is.

Public opinion is formed by the media. If the media isn't accurate and honest in its representations, then the public is misinformed, which is worse than being uninformed, IMO.

The_Heretic · 11-08-2007, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdanton

As we discuss this, most people do not know the specifics of what is now being proposed. Most don't know this will the the 8th state to this or similar.

I don't care if it's CNN, FOX, or MSNBC. If they are going to have a discussion on something, that discussion should be about exactly what that something is.

You can't enforce honesty among pundit shows. Otherwise the news outlets would all have to shutdown until they got their shit together.

Quote:

Public opinion is formed by the media. If the media isn't accurate and honest in its representations, then the public is misinformed, which is worse than being uninformed, IMO.

From what I'm seeing among voters this drviers licence thing is small potatoes. They're so pissed off they may take their votes to third party or independent candidates. The so-called "top tier" candidates from both parties leave a great deal wanting, and that's making the electorate irritable. Key issues aren't being addressed, or- if they are, the way they're addressed is intellectually insulting and voters feel talked down to or back handed. This isn't something Guiliani or Clinton can fix for their own campaigns without suddenly losing the fincancial support of the corporations and special interests.

But because of the duopoly's open hostility and illegal activity aainst third parties and independent candidates I'm betting voter turnout will remain at 52% or less.

jdanton · 11-08-2007, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Heretic

You can't enforce honesty among pundit shows. Otherwise the news outlets would all have to shutdown until they got their shit together.

From what I'm seeing among voters this drviers licence thing is small potatoes. They're so pissed off they may take their votes to third party or independent candidates. The so-called "top tier" candidates from both parties leave a great deal wanting, and that's making the electorate irritable. Key issues aren't being addressed, or- if they are, the way they're addressed is intellectually insulting and voters feel talked down to or back handed. This isn't something Guiliani or Clinton can fix for their own campaigns without suddenly losing the fincancial support of the corporations and special interests.

But because of the duopoly's open hostility and illegal activity aainst third parties and independent candidates I'm betting voter turnout will remain at 52% or less.

I don't disagree with most of this. Again, however, I lay a lot of blame on the media. Be it a debate or an interview, one can only respond to the questions asked.

If the candidate were to ask the moderator or interview, "Why aren't you asking us about........," that candidate would be accused of changing the subject to avoid answering the question at hand.

Personally, I'd like to see a candidate ask why other questions about other issues are asked.

I also think the media does us all a disservice by trying to fit too many topics in too small a time frame.

With 8 candidates in a debate, the entire debate could be devoted to the economy, or global warming.

The_Heretic · 11-08-2007, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdanton

I don't disagree with most of this.

...because you're Hillary's water carrier, we know. Save it. Those who're capable of being suckered by Hillary have been suckered. you've run out of the gullible goldfish. the rest of us have sense enough not to be duped.

Quote:

Again, however, I lay a lot of blame on the media. Be it a debate or an interview, one can only respond to the questions asked.

You're STILL whining about that question!!? Get over it. She was tossed a straight forward question and SHE BLEW IT on double-speak. It stuns me when Guilinai accidentally gets something right, but if she trips up on a question about drivers lincences what'll happen if it's a real issue?

This problem of dishonest from Hillary isn't going to go away just because you apologists want it to. The right wingers were counting on you guys to prop up Hillary and now you're seeing why.

Quote:

If the candidate were to ask the moderator or interview, "Why aren't you asking us about........," that candidate would be accused of changing the subject to avoid answering the question at hand.

Obama did precisely that. See, he knew how not to fuck up and he knew to be honest about how he felt. Hillary has yet to follow his example and she won't.

Quote:

Personally, I'd like to see a candidate ask why other questions about other issues are asked.

I also think the media does us all a disservice by trying to fit too many topics in too small a time frame.

With all the debates we've had at some point the candidate has to take some responsibility. See, had 100% of questions given to Hillary been softballs instead of the current 98% you'd say the media was doing a great job. This is the kind of tactic we hear from extremist right wingers all the time, 'It's the media's fault.' boo-hoo. The media's no help, but then again, Hillary knew that from the start and- at first, counted on it. Now she's got to deal with the monster she helped create.

Quote:

With 8 candidates in a debate, the entire debate could be devoted to the economy, or global warming.

Maybe if your party had made a bigger issue of both this would've happened. But most of your party won't take serious steps to deal with environmental problems and their answers for the economy are mostly band-aid solutions. After that they just give us lip service but no results.

The_Heretic · 11-08-2007, 07:34 AM

Really, what the uck does it take for D.I.N.O.'s to take environmental issues seriously? Ohh, say an OIL SPILL IN SAN FRANSISCO BAY!!? Oh wait!

<<<HAPPENING NOW>>>

jdanton · 11-08-2007, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Heretic

...because you're Hillary's water carrier, we know. Save it. Those who're capable of being suckered by Hillary have been suckered. you've run out of the gullible goldfish. the rest of us have sense enough not to be duped.

You're STILL whining about that question!!? Get over it. She was tossed a straight forward question and SHE BLEW IT on double-speak. It stuns me when Guilinai accidentally gets something right, but if she trips up on a question about drivers lincences what'll happen if it's a real issue?

This problem of dishonest from Hillary isn't going to go away just because you apologists want it to. The right wingers were counting on you guys to prop up Hillary and now you're seeing why.

Obama did precisely that. See, he knew how not to fuck up and he knew to be honest about how he felt. Hillary has yet to follow his example and she won't.

With all the debates we've had at some point the candidate has to take some responsibility. See, had 100% of questions given to Hillary been softballs instead of the current 98% you'd say the media was doing a great job. This is the kind of tactic we hear from extremist right wingers all the time, 'It's the media's fault.' boo-hoo. The media's no help, but then again, Hillary knew that from the start and- at first, counted on it. Now she's got to deal with the monster she helped create.

Maybe if your party had made a bigger issue of both this would've happened. But most of your party won't take serious steps to deal with environmental problems and their answers for the economy are mostly band-aid solutions. After that they just give us lip service but no results.

You let your ego cloud your judgment. You complain about the issues not being addressed. I agree with that.

However, the candidates in interviews or debates get asked questions. Those questions determine what is discussed.

You blame the candidates for the questions the media asks them. I blame the media.

11-08-2007, 04:24 AM	#1 (permalink)
jdanton Puddy Tat Watch Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 3,806 My Mood: Thanks: 38 Thanked 51 Times in 38 Posts	Some honesty in the drivers license issue Again, last night, I see the question of drivers licenses for illegal immigrants discussed. I believe this is a huge and necessary topic, but I also believe in honesty. I believe it was Lou Dobbs' show. This is presented like the license NY plans on giving illegals will let them board a plane and vote. Like it's the very same drivers license all the legal New Yorkers get. IT IS NOT! The proposed license would contain the words "NO FOR FEDERAL USE" and will not help one register to vote or get on a plane. NY will be the 8th state to issue this lower grade license to illegals in an effort to solve a number of problems within their states connected to illegal immigrants. Frankly, I don't have an opinion for or against this yet. I know the vast majority of Americans oppose it, but I am convinced the vast majority of Americans haven't had it fully explained. They are under the impression that the license given to this folks will be the same license everyone else has. My complaint here is that when the issue comes up for debate on ANY talking head show, the first step should be a brief, but ACCURATE, description of the proposal: that we are talking about a lower grade license that will not let one board a plane or vote, but will let one drive with insurance and such. If the discussion on this or any topic is not at least this honest, what good is it? __________________ Author: Memoirs of a Sleepless Mind, a book you CAN judge by its cover.
	Top

11-08-2007, 04:43 AM	#2 (permalink)
W.M.DEEEZ I don't exist either Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,608 Thanks: 7 Thanked 50 Times in 38 Posts	Illegals are here to stay They are driving, probably without insurance. The reason they are here illegally, is because it takes over a decade to become a citzen. At least they will now be registered, have insurance. Perhaps it will be a first step in updating an unundated system of naturalization, and make it easier for "illegals" to become citzens.
	Top

11-08-2007, 06:35 AM	#4 (permalink)
The_Heretic Master of Quill-Fu Space Invaders Champion! Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Taylorsville, UT [stuck in the 20th century]. Posts: 7,051 My Mood: Blog Entries: 4 Thanks: 33 Thanked 130 Times in 97 Posts	First off, it's Lou Dobbs. That guy's naturally going to lie about what sort of licence it is. I knew it wasn't the same when I first heard about it. That was a point of haggling Spitzer had to work out before he could get the state legislature to go along with it. __________________ "They're all cattle just markin' time in the slaughterhouse line." -The Heretic, Quill-Fu Theater: Enter The Needle
	Top

11-08-2007, 07:34 AM	#9 (permalink)
The_Heretic Master of Quill-Fu Space Invaders Champion! Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Taylorsville, UT [stuck in the 20th century]. Posts: 7,051 My Mood: Blog Entries: 4 Thanks: 33 Thanked 130 Times in 97 Posts	Really, what the uck does it take for D.I.N.O.'s to take environmental issues seriously? Ohh, say an OIL SPILL IN SAN FRANSISCO BAY!!? Oh wait! <<<HAPPENING NOW>>> __________________ "They're all cattle just markin' time in the slaughterhouse line." -The Heretic, Quill-Fu Theater: Enter The Needle
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode