Harry Reid said what?!?!
From the man who described millions of illegal alien border crossers and visa-overstayers and deportation fugitives as “undocumented Americans” comes a new set of open-borders nitwittery, via Las Vegas 8NewsNow reporter Nathan Baca. Watch Harry Reid claim that there are no illegal aliens working in the construction business in Nevada. Nada, says Dingy Harry:
“When you go to the unemployment office there’s many U.S. citizens who are unemployed construction workers and they don’t have jobs because right now, some of those construction companies find it easier to hire undocumented workers,” said Reporter Nathan Baca.
“I think that any information you have in that regard is absolutely without foundation,” responded Reid.
But a Pew Hispanic Center study shows 17-percent of all construction workers are in the United States illegally. Reid says not in Nevada. “That may be some place, but it’s not here in Nevada.”
But their latest 2009 numbers show Nevada is the state with the highest percentage of “unauthorized immigrants” in the labor force.
Reid goes on to defend his opposition to the federal E-Verify program with more open-border babbling about the need for “comprehensive immigration reform.” We can’t have “piecemeal” enforcement, he argues, until we have wholesale illegal alien amnesty!
Related: Here’s more on that Pew report Reid pretends doesn’t exist.
Related: The Las Vegas Review Journal slaps around President Obama, who was in town to raise money for Reid.
Related: Flashback…2007…from the DHS/ICE website…
“llegal aliens arrested in connection with work at U.S. military installations; Worksite investigations in Nevada, Virginia and Georgia discover illegal workers at critical infrastructure sites”…
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested dozens of illegal aliens in Nevada, Virginia and Georgia this week in connection with work being done by contractors at three military installations. Two men face federal charges of harboring illegal aliens. Several aliens face federal charges for possession of fraudulent identity documents and re-entering the country after deportation.
“These arrests reflect the federal government’s commitment to protecting our nation’s critical infrastructure sites and targeting those who promote illegal hiring schemes,” said Assistant Secretary for ICE Julie L. Myers. “Since its inception in 2003, ICE has launched numerous investigations that led to hundreds of arrests at military installations, power and chemical plants and other sensitive facilities.”
Thursday, ICE agents and Nellis Air Force Base security officers arrested two illegal aliens at Creech AFB in Indian Springs, Nev., who were employed by a masonry construction company to construct avionics buildings. One of those arrested, a Nicaragua national, is a member of MS-13, considered to be one of the most dangerous gangs operating in America. The worksite investigation into their hiring is ongoing.
Dear Nevada, please remove Harry Reid from Washington and banish him to Planet Clueless permanently.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Fast and Furious showdown: Holder/Obama defend bloody culture of contempt; Update: Fortress Holder, Stonewall City; vid clips added, Dems advise, “Don’t answer”
February 2, 2012 09:16 AM by Michelle Malkin
158 CommentsObama and Jan Brewer Have Words on Airport Tarmac; Update: Brewer Book Sales Skyrocket
January 25, 2012 09:54 PM by Doug Powers
165 Comments
Gingrich channels open-borders SEIU; Rubio rebukes; Update:Newt retreats
January 25, 2012 10:56 AM by Michelle Malkin
155 Comments
Obama heads to Disney World to push looser visa policies
January 17, 2012 01:14 PM by Michelle Malkin
95 Comments
Obama’s “Razist” Lobbyist Moves Up
January 13, 2012 06:29 AM by Michelle Malkin
233 CommentsThe Year in Obama Scandals — and Scandal Deniers
December 28, 2011 12:04 PM by Michelle Malkin
122 Comments
The murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry: One year ago today
December 14, 2011 11:11 AM by Michelle Malkin
70 Comments
Harry Reid: Millionaire Job Creators are Like Unicorns
December 12, 2011 07:41 PM by Doug Powers
175 Comments
Supreme Court to Decide Arizona Immigration Law
December 12, 2011 01:18 PM by Doug Powers
57 Comments
Categories: Harry Reid,Immigration
Riehl World View
» Whitney Houston: If I should stay I would only be in your wayPatterico
» Rick Santorum and the two playbooksGateway Pundit
» Barack The BenevolentRiehl World View
» Romney's Blood Is Blue, Not ConservativePundit & Pundette
» King Barack vs. the Nonconformists
Harry went on to say there was no sand in the desert and the myth that people gamble in Vegas is in fact just a myth. Harry Reed is too stupid to be a in politics. If the people of Nevada vote this socialist idiot back into office they deserve whatever they get.
Michelle said:
Whereas, Reid said:
Reid never said that there were no illegal aliens working in the construction business in Nevada.
The man needs to retire to the front porch rocking chair.
But there are Undocumented Americans working the construction buiness. Doh!
granite said:
So what he is saying is – that the 17% does not apply to Nevada but he is implying that that number could be less than 17%. So it looks like the highest average is in Nevada but Harry says no – so in his pea brain I suppose its 16.9999999…..% I get it.
That’s not the same thing! Journalists suppose and conjecture like that all the time. (You have a tendency to take things too literal – sometimes.)
Slick Willie Clinton was good at obfuscating, confusing, diverting, and the rest of verbal sleight-of-hand.
Toward the end of his second term, I finally realized (as I’ve posted before) that Clinton was like the fast-talking wise-ass kid in school who took something of yours – a pen, some money, a magazine…whatever.
You learn from your friends that the wise-ass has been heard bragging about how he took your stuff.
You see wise-ass at a particular time when he does not have your pen, or whatever, on his person.
You confront wise-ass, and ask him, “Do you have my pen?”
He answers calmly, “No”.
You tell him, “You’re lying. I know that you took it.”
He replies, “I’m not lying. You didn’t ask me if I took it. You asked me if I have it, which I don’t. You didn’t ask the right question.”
Whereupon, you justifiably knock wise-ass on his a$$.
I had wood floors installed….installer was US Citizen (I asked). The two guys who showed up to evaluate how much sealer to bring the next day could barely speak English. I called the store where I unfortunately purchased this contract and told them NOT to send an illegal to my house to apply the sealer or I would not pay…and they threatened to sue me. The next day, two guys who showed me their licenses, said, in perfect English, that they were there because the company switched the schedule. Now, isn’t that interesting?
The dementia is strong in this one.
granite said:
The great thing is, people are waking up and looking and listening. Harry is his own walking Advert for anyone but him as a Senator from Nevada.
All I’m showing is that Michelle did not get arrange all minutiae perfectly.
I am not criticizing her for it.
She accurately conveys her message, which is that Reid is dismissing the illegal alien problem.
Apologies….
No. She flat out made up something. Or has major reading comprehension issues.
But I do agree you are not criticizing her for it. That much is evident.
So sad that some individuals make it their life’s pursuit to look for the mote in their neighbor’s eye, while refusing to remove the beam in their own.
No, a logical projection from your promise yesterday to not vote for either Fiorina or Whitman. Either a positive vote or an abstention equals a vote for the Democrat.
I suppose that is the closest we could ever hope to expect from you in way of criticizing MM.
ANY information is wrong. The “information” says that American construction workers are unemployed because illegals are being hired.
Harry tells him ANY information he has is wrong. Therefore his information on illegals working in construction is wrong.
If it was just one illegal hired, Harry says its wrong meaning there are none.
If it was millions of illegals hired, Harry says its wrong meaning there are none. He could not have meant there were some illegals because he said any information on illegals working was wrong. That can only mean there are none.
Parsing can be done both ways.
I don’t think I was ever supporting what Reid actually said. I was simply pointing out what he most certainly didn’t say.
We must get Reid and his ilk out of Congress. November can not come soon enough.
Not necessarily. It is a vote to accept whatever the citizens who actually vote decide.
If Governor Moonbeam wins, then it was a vote for him. If Whitman wins, then an abstention or otherwise discarded vote was a vote for her.
There are no other actual choices.
I love Pretsel Logic. You know, Steely Dan!
I think he did say that. What do you think he said?
He was disputing the 17% figure given by the reporter. He certainly did not say there weren’t any illegals working in construction in Nevada. That is a silly strawman.
Of course. I could have phrased it better, but the fact is that an abstention serves only the purposes of the Democrats, given that I don’t seriously believe that Phil is going to actually vote for either Dem. One less vote for the only viable opponent is still in effect a vote for the Dem. Recall that one of the reasons that Obama now rules is the fact that so many people were angry with Bush and didn’t like McCain, so they didn’t bother to vote, or at least it was so reported at the time.
He focused on that number rather than focus on the fact jobs were indeed lost to illegals in construction. He also provided no proof that the number was wrong.
Most local reporters regard their credibility highly (or at least appear to, until they make it to the national level). Are you suggesting that reporter just pulled those figures out of thin air because they made good copy? Because I haven’t found a thing on-line to support Reid’s contrary views.
“But a Pew Hispanic Center study shows 17-percent of all construction workers are in the United States illegally. Reid says not in Nevada. “That may be some place, but it’s not here in Nevada.”
So, Harry is in the how many shades of gray mode?
No. But the reporter cited a study which gave a national number, when asking a Nevada-specific question, which is exactly the point Reid was making when he said “That may be some place, but it’s not here in Nevada.” Now, Reid may be wrong in saying “not here in Nevada.” In fact, he probably is, given that state’s overall illegal immigrant employment rate. But again, that is wholly different from saying there are no illegal construction workers in NV.
This is coming from a guy who thinks Obama isn’t confrontational enough toward the minority party. Reality perception surely isn’t one of Reid’s strengths.
Harry Reid is in politics because he is to stupid to do anything else. Is that a reflection on the voters? Hell yes, you can redeem yourselves in November.
The nice thing about hiring illegal aliens is the lack of paperwork.
Hiring honest americans means subjecting yourself the heavy burden of quarterlies, along with the tax payments. Also documenting hours worked, withholding, L&I etc…
Illegals cost half as much to hire EVEN IF THEY ARE PAID THE SAME WAGE.
Government needs to get a clue.
I’d say this qualifies Reid as a #43 on the Periodic Table of Swearing.
http://www.geekologie.com/image.php?path=/2010/07/13/periodic-table-of-swearing-full.jpg
Please, someone, whisper in Comrade Reid’s ear there are thousands of us across the country that refuse to spend a dime in NV until they clean up their act. If it puts one American out of a job I’m not going to reward them by holding my nose and visiting the state – no matter how cheap it is.
USN RET–that chart makes me a Heavy Metal, and mrcakes ‘pissed up’. Awesome.
You had to add the word silly as an insult. Another unfortunate liberal response when the facts don’t fit the narrative. Insult. I am expecting the blame Bush rant next.
In the blurb above, he used the word ANY before the 17% was brought up so he could not be referring to the 17% number. You can’t respond to something that has not yet been said.
It looked to me that he was responding to the comment about construction companies hiring illegal workers. not that 17% of construction workers are illegal. Read below.
I see “in that regard” as regarding the sentence above the reply, not the sentence below the reply. But maybe I am just being silly.
No, he prefers to blame Reagan.
T Bone,
What exactly, did he use the word “any” in reference to? If you actually read the quote you would know it certainly wasn’t in regard to there not being any illegal construction workers in Nevada.
Again, not defending the statement he ACTUALLY made, but there is no way unless you are either flat out lying, can’t read, or are being “silly” that you can say he claimed there were no illegal construction workers in Nevada. Take your pick as to which one applies to you, T Bone and let me apologize in advance for calling you whichever you choose.
More insults. Apparently you didn’t read it correctly. I know I did. Let me spell it out again.
Reid said:
in response to this statement. Not any other statement.
Try to comprehend what you are reading without injecting any liberal bias. Seriously.
Reid was NOT talking about the 17% figure with that statement. His reply to the 17% came later when he said “not in Nevada”.
To paraphrase the important part:
1. The reporter said construction companies hire undocumented workers instead of American citizens.
2. Reid said any (which also means all) information he (the reporter) has that construction companies are hiring undocumented workers instead of American citizens is absolutely without foundation (not true).
That means Harry said the reporters statement about construction companies hiring illegals is not true, which means that Harry said construction companies are not doing it.
I find it very hard to believe a statement like that, and the guy followed it up with some statistics that Harry then refuted as “not in Nevada”.
If you want to see it you can. I spelled it out pretty clearly I think. If you choose not to, you are the one arguing the “strawman”.
chapoutier, it might be a bit aggressive to claim that Reid stated Nevada has no undocumented workers in the construction industry, but it’s not unreasonable to infer that he meant that after being backed into a corner by the interviewer.
No f’ing kidding. I never said he was. I honestly don’t get your hang up on what statement Reid was referring to when, whether before or after the use of a certain word, etcetera etcetera… NOWHERE in any statement did Reid say there were no illegals working construction. At best, and I am not conceding that this is actually what he was saying, his comment about there being “no foundation” would be implying that he doesn’t think that any american workers have been shoved out in favor of illegals. You do understand the very fundamental difference between saying that and saying there are no illegal construction workers, right?
Well…no…of course you don’t. Otherwise you wouldn’t be wasting my time with yet another post with yet another tortured and inane “interpretation” of Reid’s remarks. To put it another way, if it takes you 5 sentences to try to explain what someone said, chances are they probably didn’t actually say it and you are simply reacting like Pavlov’s dog to Michelle’s dinner bell.
If you don’t want me to insult your posts, T-Bone, don’t make it so easy for me to do so.
Regardless of the semantics Reid used, the reporter was trying to ask him about American citizens out of work because illegals are being hired instead and Reid was trying to tell him that it is not happening or trying to downplay its significance.
The unemployed worker in Nevada knows that it is true and for that person who can’t get a job to pay the bills, it is very significant. I am pretty sure there is more than one worker there who is unemployed because an illegal was hired instead. Their elected representative doesn’t think its happening or is an issue worthy of discussion.
That is the issue, not the strawman of what stat or what word was used in response or how MM didn’t quote him verbatim. MM did correctly identify the underlying issue, and knows she doesn’t need my help to defend or expand on her point.
Please tell us what you think he was actually saying?
It is an absloutely tortured and water thin inference, corkie. You would need to make about a half dozen assumptions to get to the conclusion that Reid said there are no illegal construction workers, not the least of which is no one would be so stupid as to say something which is so blindingly obvious and provable.
November comes soon Harry. Buh bye.
Ummm, no. MM specifically made this post about how silly it was for Reid to say there were no illegal construction workers in NV.
The freaking title of the post is “Harry Reid said what?!?!” And then made her false claim and then, reemphasizes that was her point in the very next sentence when she says “Nada says Dingy Harry”.
You do know what “nada” means, right T-Bone?
Either that:
1)it is unfounded that there are many unemployed american construction workers at unemployment offices;
2) it is unfounded that US construction workers are being displaced by illegals;
3) it is unfounded that illegals are easier to hire; or
4) a combination of 1,2 and/or 3.
All of those have the advantage of actually being in the statement he was referring to.
Well, I think Reid was stupid enough to go way out on a limb to avoid stating anything negative, but we can disagree on whether or not he is stupid enough to go that far out. I think he might be.
But I’ll objectively consider your interpretation of what Reid meant.
Btw, what wine did you drink with dinner tonight?
Oh its not easy for you. It is excruciatingly difficult for you. Otherwise you wouldn’t be wasting my time with with yet another post with yet another tortured and inane “interpretation” of Reid’s remarks. To put it another way, if it takes you 5 sentences to try to explain what someone said, chances are they probably said something else and you are simply reacting like Pavlov’s dog to Reids dinner bell.
You really think Harry believes that not one single American citizen construction worker in Nevada has been shoved out by an illegal being hired instead?
The only way that could happen is if there were no illegals hired. NADA. Just like MM said. The first illegal hired would shove out one American citizen construction worker. Unless you are arguing that all construction workers in Nevada are illegal or there are no unemployed American citizen construction workers in Nevada which would be almost impossible to believe.
It’s ok to admit that I am right. It might be good for you.
And none of those aren’t stupid.
I’m fine with interpreting his statement to be making any combination of those claims.
And I am fine with it too. What I am not fine with is making up stupid things someone said when you have a smorgasboard of actual stupid things right in front of you.
Well, it will be interesting if he decides to issue a statement about what he meant. Using any of your suggestions will definitely make him look stupid, and trying to come up with something different might make him seem dishonest.
If nobody else picks up this story, then he’s probably better off ignoring it.
Whoops , now you are doing what you accuse MM of doing. I don’t see where she said that. Oh she implied it with words like what??? and Nada. She didn’t actually say it. Right. Well, Harry made an implied statement also.
I think that is certainly a lot more plausible than him saying there are NO illegal construction workers. Many people buy the whole “doing jobs Americans won’t”, which that interpretation of his statement would more or less be a derivation of.
Also, it has the advantage of being logically tied to the ACTUAL STATEMENT HE WAS RESPONDING TO!
See, the difference is that I am using Michelle’s actual statements to back up my implication. I suppose that it is possible MM was actually making a greater point about St. Anselm’s ontological argument for God and that we should really take “Harry Reid” to be “Guanilo of Marmoutiers” and Baca to be Anselm himself, and I suppose the Pew Study could be referring to Descarte’s Fifth Meditation.
But…you know…that would be stupid when her point was crystal clear.
In any event, Michelle isn’t the only one who interpreted Reid’s remarks that way.
If it did, I’d go with my #3 (it is unfounded that illegals are easier to hire) and run with it, claiming that I meant that the American worker is the best in the world, no potential language barrier, tend to have more roots and therefore less turnover, yada yada yada…and is therefore easier to hire, if by hire you mean hire, use and retain.
I don’t think that would be a good idea for Harry for two reasons.
1. Most Americans would know he was lying about his intent. That explanation doesn’t fit with the conversation at all.
2. Crazy lefties would call him a racist for claiming that language and roots make someone easier to hire.
Come on chappy hang it up.Your way out in left field on this one.
He’s not clueless on the issue. He knows what’s going on. He supports illegals being here. He’s just lying when he says they are not in Nevada holding construction jobs.
NJ has the same issue. Go anywhere construction projects are underway. In particular, home building. You will see persons on the job that more than likely are illegals. If you were to go to the pick up sites, you would see contractor vans picking up groups of illegals every single morning. I know this for a fact. I see it.
Meanwhile, there are young people looking for work who used to be carpenters, plumbers, masons, roofers and made a decent living at it and now can not find work because contractors are hiring illegals…. paying them cash under the table and paying them less than what an American citizen used to get paid for that same job.
I know the contractors who do it. They say they have to because they can’t compete in bids unless they pay illegals in cash and avoid the various taxes.
They also hire illegals that present fraudulent documents. Those get paychecks with taxes withheld. But the IDs they are fake. The employers know it but they chose not to do anything about it. It’s partly the case that they can’t do anything about. They claim there’s no avenue to pursue anything as far as they know.
I’ve been told this by landscapers and general contractors.
I tell them they should try hiring people who are here legally. Start a trend and advertise it. The reply? “People don’t care. They just want the cost of the work as cheap as possible.”
I beg to differ. Many people do care. A lot of them are the people that can’t find work or know others in that boat.
If you’re a contractor doing this, you should be ashamed.
No, BruceB, his parsing, grammatical argument is correct.
The same way the wise-ass who got smacked in the face and knocked on his a$$ because of his smartass answer in my hypothetical example above was correct as far as parsing and grammar are concerned.
A dishonest soul, craftily using words that themselves are not incorrect.
So, the poster is not in left field as far as his craftily used words are concerned.
No one should waste time arguing points of grammar, antecedents, sentence structure, etc., with this individual; who, as a lawyer, knows that any arguments from other posters to the grammar point(s) he makes will be incorrect.
What he seems always to do:
Avoid arguing against the spirit, the meaning, the political position of a post from Michelle or Doug.
Seize upon a minimal grammatical error, ambiguity, or inconsistency; and “argue” that this error invalidates the post.
Ridicule and insult posters who are not as expert as he at grammar.
In the example of this thread, this individual, as far as I could tell, never argued against the point of Michelle’s post by declaring his support of what Reid and the rest of the dangerous America-haters have done, and are trying to do, to our country.
Instead, he found a grammatical inconsistency, and drove the thread off course, onto this grammatical tangent.
But, I have not seen him declare what his own position(s) is(are) on thread topics, nor argue in support of his position(s), in support of his worldview.
That tells us a lot, and indicates that his worldview, sadly, is to be pitied; it is likely beyond saving.
His arrogance should be ignored.
His use of insults should not be resented, nor retaliated against; it should be laughed at, as nothing more than the sputterings of an immature, frustrated child.
What we should hope and strive for is that he and his like-minded socialists/elitists/collectivists/know-it-alls/opposite worldview-holders/America-haters are prevented from further damaging our wonderful country – and soon.
Wait, can you explain to me how me saying he did not say anything close to what MM accused him of is either “parsing” or grammatical”? No. It is you all that are forced to parse and redefine Harry’s statement to back up what you have already been told is “The Truth” by your benevolent overlord. And, like good little lap dogs, you comply.
Considering how many times you cite this story, it sounds like you were known as an easy mark for the smart ass kids growing up. You might want to seek professional help in letting go of the past.
Ummm…again, can you please point out where I argued any of those? It was T-Bone that was doing all that. I simply said that Herry neither directly said what MM accused him of saying nor did he indirectly do so in response to a statement since none of those statements contained what MM accused Harry of saying> I am sorry if that is too “smart ass” or “grammatical” for you.
Why would I do that when I get so much pleasure from the handwringing and histrionics I get to see all you go through?
Again, I don’t know what they taught you in school when you attended, but it certainly was not the defintion of “grammatical.” Maybe you missed it when you were giving your pencil to that kid.
This thread’s topic is that Harry Reid allegedly said he doesn’t think there are any illegal construction workers in Nevada. I have said exactly what I feel on that topic and have not strayed off course once, except maybe to say I want the Bills to win the Super Bowl. Or…if you want to consider the topic what Harry Reid ACTUALLY said, then you can find several posts where I criticize his statements. Seriously, are you even reading this thread? Or are you just cutting and pasting your same, hackneyed criricisms of me from a previous one?
So…in trying to keep this argument on this thread and form drifting off onto others, why don’t I ask all my critics in the peanut to gallery to:
1) summarize my alleged “grammatical argument”;
2) show exactly, where and how, Harry Reid said there were no, none, nada illegal construction workers in Nevada. You should be able to do so in one sentence or so, otherwise you are parsing and making a “smart ass” argument.
See # 143
1. The reporter said construction companies hire undocumented workers instead of American citizens.
2. Reid said any (which also means all) information he (the reporter) has that construction companies are hiring undocumented workers instead of American citizens is absolutely without foundation (not true).
That means Harry said the reporters statement about construction companies hiring illegals is not true, which means that Harry said construction companies are not doing it.
You are just wrong on this but are hung on up some kind of word think.
1. Reid said ANY information was wrong.
2. The information was that illegals push Americans out of jobs.
3. Reid is saying that information is wrong and ANY information the reporter has is wrong.
4. Therefore Reid is saying there are no illegals pushing Americans out of jobs.
5. That can only happen if there are no illegals. NADA.
I know you understand. Its really simple. It just kills you to lose an argument. Michelles point in this blog is a valid logical assumption based on what Harry Reid said in the article she linked to. You can have your logical assumption that differs but that does not invalidate MM’s point. Your use of insults is a sign of weakness. Its an tactic that people resort to when their argument is failing. You don’t need to do that. You can do better.
The reporter made many statements. I pointed out three possible ones. For you to choose only one is your own editorilaizing.
Reid said that something the reporter said was without foundation. He did not elaborate or specify. Any implication that he did is your editorializing.
Again, you have zero basis for assuming this is what Harry meant other than your own editorializing and assumptions.
No he didn’t. He said any information on “that”, which could be one or more of several things, none of which was the statement that there are no illegal construction workers in NV, was unfounded.
As well as some other possibilities.
Aaaand here it is. The logical leap wider than the Grand Canyon. But I am not even going to address the flaw in your reasoning and instead focus on the fact that even if you are absolutely right that no Americans being pushed out of a job could only happen if there were no illegals (which by the way, is wrong), that STILL DOES NOT MEAN THAT IS WHAT HARRY REID SAID OR MEANT TO SAY! You do understand the difference between someone actually SAYING something and someone else concluding that such a statement would have certain implications, right? Please oh please tell me you can grasp so simple a distinction as that?
Again, the fact that you have to make so many assumptions to fit Harry’s square word’s into your round ideological peg undermines your entire argument. I am not the one using “logical assumptions” to arrive at my conclusion of what Reid did or did not say. I am, shockingly, using HIS OWN WORDS! Try it sometime. You might like it, and can save your precious few firing synapses for more pressing tasks, like coloing between the lines.
And that topic of “insults”, I suffer more gratuitious insults at the hands of fools than anyone else here. I am sorry if you do not think I play nice, but at least I have the good sense to wrap my insults around an actual argument, a courtesy which is often not extended to me. If it makes you feel better, I encourage you to email Malkin and try to have me banned. You would not be the first to try.
So, in conclusion…stuff it.
Right, but you didn’t take any logical leaps about MM’s post. You can’t have it both ways.
I understand exactly what he said, what he inferred and what MM posted about. You are the one having difficulty understanding his statement. You want it to be something else.
I read what MM posted and agree with her conclusions. IMHO, you read something else and are trying to disparage her conclusion.
You are probably not getting to many takers here, certainly not me. You could try Daily KOS. There are a lot of braniacs over there who you may find some rapport with. I understand they are good at insults too so you would fit in well. Your insults are expected when your argument is weak. They roll right off of me because I know where they originate from and why. I do have some sympathy for your plight but in the long run, don’t really care. Repeat after me, Its only a blog.
What “logical leap” did I take, exactly in concluding that she claimed Reid said there were no illegal construction workers in NV? Do I really have to point out AGAIN where she said (and I quote):
You are right. I can’t have it both ways. Which is why, when asseessing both MM’s post and Reid’s own statement I focused on what they actually said, rather than what you did which is focus on what you want to believe they said and then reverse engineer a semantical and logical argument to fit it.
Her conclusion is, on its face, wrong. And the only way it is even remotely defensible is if you engage in more mental contortions and leaps to conclusions than a Cirque du Soliel truope, as you have admirably shown. You can choose to support what is at worst, disingenuous and, at best lazy reading and reporting. I do not.
Because he did.
No, he responded to a statement that the statement wasn’t true. In order for Reid to be correct, no illegals can be working. Straight up.
Your opinion , not mine. It pretty easy to see it if you want to. You have wrapped yourself around your argument so tightly, you have choked your senses.
No, he did not. Simple as that. I am sorry you have deluded yourself into believing whatever tripe MM feeds you.
No, it is not “straight up.” It involves at least 2 baseless assumptions about what Reid was referring to, mixed in with an unsubstanitated conclusion, leading to a self serving logical premise, all washed down with a suspension of reality that Reid or anyone would actually say something so silly.
But enough of this. You, and MM are wrong. Maybe someday, when you learn to think for yourself, you will come to realize it. Until that day, I am wasting my time explaining the same what-should-be-self-evident point over and over again.
I do think for myself. Its’s your thinking thats wrong. You can explain all day. You read it one way. MM, myself and a host of other people read it another. Its only baseless to you because you have an agenda and an axe to grind. Don’t be so myopic and believe all the tripe Harry Reid sells you. Harry knew what he meant to infer and I got it.
Just how tall do you plan on building that strawman, anyway?
From the standpoint of most of us here, you’ve taken a pretty innocuous observation/supposition/assumption by MM – the smallest and least accusatory point in her argument, because it must be subjectively inferred – and built it into one humdinger of a distraction.
I mean, you’ve kept us all busy and very much entertained with your extreme reactions and hyperventilations to a harmless statement on MM’s part, but don’t cha’ kinda think you’re defending the indefensible – Harry Reid – and that provided time, he would/will deny there are illegals working construction in Nevada?
WHAT!!!! She built the whole freaking post around the strawman she built against Reid? Just look at the freaking title of the post? How can you possibly say that it was the “smallest” and “least accusatory” point? Are you crazy?
At least now you are admitting that he didn’t say it. Now he only “meant to infer” it. That is about 3 degrees of separation away from actually saying something.
Baby stpes, T Bone…baby steps.
Word gamers can take any sentence and turn it on its head. Context, environment, transcription vs video. All sentences have inference. You are concluding that is not what he said. I conclude that is what he is saying. Same words, different conclusion.
What you are wrong about is attacking MM’s conclusion (and mine). Harry can’t say that any information on illegals taking jobs from Americans is without foundation without inferring that there are no illegals taking jobs from Americans. That is a a very logical conclusion. You can conclude any number of things from his statement. The fact that some conclude differently from you doesn’t make them wrong. You are not the concluder in chief, even if you think you are.
Sure you can. Even accepting your premise and conclusion, a speaker could simply be ignorant about the link between the two or could simply be saying there is no foundation to the statement, which is entirely different from saying the underlying premise is or is not true in an absolute sense. In neither of those cases can it, in any reasonable sense, be said that one claimed there were no illegal construction workers.
Keep your flag flying, my man! Keep your flag flyin’ -
Inference
Inference
Sure it can. You are just not being reasonable.
I infer nothing. I simply point out the obvious fact that he did not say what you claim he did. If he had, you could easily cite it. But you are forced to give multipe paragraph long dissertations on his what you glean to be his true intent and the logical conclusion of this and the obviuos inference of that…. which merely proves that he did not say it. Which you finally admitted 8 posts ago. Don’t regress, kiddo. I think we’re making real progress here.
You had to infer something to reach your conclusion. He could have meant any number of things per your own posts. You are claiming he didn’t infer one particular thing, which means you have concluded he inferred something else. Youu don’t know what that is but you are positive its not what I concluded.
I conclude he inferred what MM concluded, therefore he did say it. You are somehow looking for some exact word for word quote which you know is not how language works and is a distraction from the true meaning of his statement. Some meanings are conveyed without words.
Words is words. Meaning is meaning. It all depends on what the meaning of “is” is. I see a meaning and understand what he said. You don’t really see a meaning, you are just sure that it wasn’t my meaning. That doesn’t really make my conclusion wrong.
The reporter said illegals are taking American jobs. Harry said they are not.
Actually, no. I didn’t. Believe it or not, I am able to read and process words as they are written.
So you take everything literally? I don’t know many people who do that. Most people process things a little more thoroughly in order to properly interpret what they read or hear.
We have a constitution that was written in literal terms but people are constantly interpreting what it says and what it means. People reach lots of different conclusions about its meaning.
The Koran was written by Allah himself but Islamic scholars have written large volumes of work such as the Hadith and the Sunni to interpret it. Bin Laden seems to take some of it literally. You can see the problems that has caused.
It seems it would be difficult, if not impossible, to take everything literally word for word with no room for interpretation of context and other relevant factors like you are suggesting should be done here.
There is a difference between taking everything literally and taking the plain meaning of someone’s words when there is no reason to not to. If you don’t know the difference between that, better to spend your time off this blog and in some remedial courses on reading comp. Actually, we’ve already established you would be better off doing that. This is just more evidence.
You are just making the rules up as you go along. How convenient for you. No reason to reach a different conclusion? Nothing wrong with my reading or my eyes and ears when I watched the video. It was plain to me as well. Your wanting it to be different does not make it so. Making your own rules to apply to everyone else and more insults is just more evidence of the weakness of your argument.
Kind of like you are making up Reid’s words as you go along?
Oh wait no. That is ACTUALLY happening. My mistake.
On July 14th, 2010 at 9:48 pm, T-Bone said:
T-bone:
Do not waste your time with the parser-in-chief.
As I said earlier on this thread, your posting sparring partner is correct in saying Reid never said that there are no illegal aliens working in the construction business in Nevada.
That is all he is correct about; but he is correct about that, nonetheless.
So, besides the fact that you are likely never, ever to get the last word with your worldview-challenged sparring partner; he is grammatically correct.
From what I read, Reid never said that there are no illegal aliens working in the construction business in Nevada.
Better to ask the parser and impulsive insulter whether he agrees politically and worldview-wise with Reid; whether he supports the destruction of our wonderful country…and why.
Challenge him to post something substantial, something significant, regarding the existential agony that the fascists/socialists are putting our country through; rather than to merely offer the rest of us his predictable tangent-producing, nit-picking comments on minimally meaningful, smaller-than-minutiae details.
Challenge him to comment on the meaning, on the substance of Michelle’s post, on the horrible damage that the fascists/socialists that are in power are doing to our country; instead of his providing us with peanut-gallery comments on a minimal flaw in the form of Michelle’s post.
Again, granite, please summarize my “grammatical” argument. I don’t think you know what that word means. At least you haven’t shown us you do here.
She lied about or at least was grossly negligent in reporting about what Harry Reid said, which “misstatement” was the entire premise of her post.
Only a bufoon or a lackey would say that is “minimal.”
I know Liberals like to just go along with what the Pelosi propaganda is. They don’t like people thinking for themselves like Gary Gibbs just did.
Some people like to think about what is said, use their intelligence to really look at it and determine what the meaning is. We use context, we understand the background of who the speaker is, we analyze, we use critical thinking skills.
Your rule is apparently to not think about things but to just go with the literal words with no context, no thought behind it, just take them at their word. No critical thinking is allowed. Put on the tin foil hat and be a robot.
No thanks. I prefer to make my own judgements as to what people are saying. I am intelligent enough to do so and your critisicm of that is without foundation. Thats why I can see exactly what Harry was saying. It was a very logical conclusion to come to. Illegals taking American jobs in Nevada is without foundation. It just doesn’t happen. For it not to happen means there are no illegals. I get it.
I saw the video. Harry was dismissive of the reporter. He didn’t want to answer those questions because he doesn’t like the truth about illegals taking American jobs to come out. He just tried to tell him it doesn’t happen to make him go away. It was a stupid elitist statement.
Many, many, many, people were smart enough to pick up on that. Even Reid had to backtrack and clarify his remarks because he knew they most certainly left that impression on the listener. You just don’t want it to be so and it doesn’t have to be for you. For MM and myself, when we applied our intelligence and listened to his comment in context of the question, we understand thats what he was saying.
Sorry that bugs you that we heard something different than you. It doesn’t mean we are wrong. I would urge you to think a little more than just take words literally but I know you already do. You just didn’t like MMs conclusion here and wrongly attacked it.
1) Please link to this backtrack where he specifically states that he did not say there were no illegal alien construction workers in NV.
2) Just because some people of influence (like MM) got it wrong and it spread like wildfire amongst the slavering masses (like you) doesn’t mean that it was objectively any less wrong a statement to claim he made.
Per his self imposed rule set, he is not allowed to think past the literal words that Michelle wrote. If its not clear , then it means nothing. No one is allowed to read anything into it that isn’t explicity stated. Underlying meanings can not be commented on. Substance is not part of the discussion , only the literal word, which is not subject to any critical review or in depth analysis. The my way or the highway approach to communication.
Unless its Boooosh.
No…this would be per your tortured, and ultimately incorrect, interpretation of what I said.
You do seem to have a problem with that. I hope for your family’s sake it is not catchy.
Michelle didn’t get it wrong. You just don’t like her conclusion. People can have independent thoughts. We do not have to reach the same conclusions you do. This is still a free country so far. You do not control our minds and hopefully never will..
But cannot make up what people say.
But can analyze what people say and make conclusions.
By “analyze” you mean engage in some “5 degrees of separation” from what they actually said, right?
That must be what you mean.
If thats what you do when you analyze.
Back in 1993, Harry actually believed in law enforcement:
http://therealharryreid.org/immigration1993.html
But now, not so much:
http://therealharryreid.org/