Here is a funny oped piece from from a local paper. Funny, and yet somehow true. Strange to think white males will actually determine this election.

Haven't white males determined every election in American history?

There is one group no one has recognized, and it is the group that will decide the election: the Angry White Man. The Angry White Man comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America, from urban sophisticate to rural redneck, deep South to mountain West, left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.

Maybe the Angry White Man needs to smoke a joint and learn to be a Happy White Man? I make 20 to 30 % more for my labor than a White Woman or Black Man, no matter what kind of mood they're in. What's there to be so Angry about? (From my perspective, anyway?)

And sorry to digress momentarily, but your story in the Aspen Times makes a beautiful case for gun control.

The Angry White Man owns firearms, and [snip] and the thought of killing someone who needs killing really doesn’t bother him.

For fun, tonight I'm going to WalMart. First I'm going to ask them where the guns are, then when I have one in my hand, I'm going to ask the clerk where the anti depressants and anxiety medication is. Or, if jokes aren't getting the point across, a person who can only be described as "Angry" (with a capital a) who's itching to kill someone for sexual gratification, to let off a bit of steam from that raging anger, or whatever other emotional problem needs working out, is the definition of a person who should not have a weapon. Of any kind.

Now that I've read the entire article, I have to point out how ignorant it is, and pointedly racist. The entire thing is nothing but drivel glorifying the Emporer's New Clothes. The best part is how it kept painting Whitey as a victim, and yet making fun of people who see themselves as victims. Talk about cognitive dissonance!

Most important, the Angry White Man is pissed off. When his job site becomes flooded with illegal workers who don’t pay taxes and his wages drop like a stone, he gets righteously angry.

Since "illegals" means Mexicans, and not people who run red lights, whoever wrote this "article" for this "news" outlet needs to do some homework. Most immigrants from South of the Border pay taxes. In fact, they buy and rent social security numbers to get jobs, pay taxes using them, and the citizen who's SSN is being used gets a tax refund off the immigrant's hard work.

That said, you've been one of the more ardent supporters of Capitalism in this forum, so you should be thrilled that there's competition not just in the consumer market, but also in labor. If someone else is willing to do a job for a lower rate, that makes them the rightful winners under Capitalism. You can't set up a game, and then take your ball away when someone else is better at it than you are.

When his job gets shipped overseas, and he has to speak to some incomprehensible idiot in India for tech support, he simmers.

And yet this Angry White Idiot Man refuses to pay what American made goods cost. He's as much a part of the reason jobs are being sent to India as anyone else. He won't spend more than $17 on a pair of jeans from WalMart, and complains about jobs in other countries. He buys most of his goods from overseas. He expects everyone coming to America to learn English to make his phone calls more bearable, and yet when his consumerism pushes Dell's tech support to India, somehow, he expects people living in India to speak his accent in English.

This "Angry White Man" fellow is an inflexible dinosaur who's rightly being left behind in a global environment he's too Angry to become a part of. This Angry White Man refuses to help himself in the reality of today's world, wants protectionist laws to preserve his ignorant way of life, and the business community is leaving him behind.

Gotcha! Well, I'm glad you read the article. If you really think the article is racist, you should write a letter to the editor.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

That said, you've been one of the more ardent supporters of Capitalism in this forum, so you should be thrilled that there's competition not just in the consumer market, but also in labor. If someone else is willing to do a job for a lower rate, that makes them the rightful winners under Capitalism. You can't set up a game, and then take your ball away when someone else is better at it than you are.

You've missed the point. Illegal aliens are unfair competition and if you remember my Microsoft post, you'll remember how much I like unfair competition. I may be for Capitalism, but every system of governance needs rules, and those rules need to be followed. The SEC exists for the stock market. California hands out only so many bear tags in a year. If everyone who wanted to hunt bear was allowed to, there would be no bear. Their very presence is unfair to the people who were naturalized legally. What you propose caters to anarchy.

This is actually a fairly non-partisan issue. The majority of both parties want the borders secured. If we send the 12 million illegals back, you will see wages rise for labor jobs all on their own. So what if it costs you more to have your lawn chopped. There are a billion people in Africa would be willing to chop your lawn for a lot less than the illegals we currently have will do it for. That doesn't mean we should allow them in to do it.