Printable View
Yes, I feel so much better now that I understand blue was not supporting the premise of that book but was using it this way...Quote:
Originally Posted by sparks19
So...he was making fun of people who complain about too many Latin American immigrants in California.Quote:
Now the term is used to kind of make fun of that attitude
That is what you are saying...right?
And can you help with this reference...? Perhaps it is another well-known event I missed?Quote:
Kalifornians
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
I don't know... perhaps he was copying richard. I don't know. I'm not into analyzing hidden meanings in posts :) I just noticed he made mention of the book so I figured that's what he was referring to.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ....................
Never Ending Story. I liked the movie much better! :eek:
Haven't seen that movie in AGES. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
How ridiculous, How could I possibly PMS?:D
---------------
Let me educate (as if I could teach anyone anything!) the masses.
It Cah Lee Fuh Nee Ah, Californication or the Land of the Easily Amused.
I have a prob with all my compadres y familia que estan aqui contra las leyes.....But until I run for office, I don't hold much hope from anything getting done.
One thing that constantly amazes me is the the the desire for 'equal rights' for illegal aliens.
For some people it's a PITA and the laws need to be enforced, until you need to have your lawn pulled or some construction work done and you are too effing cheap to get a contractor.
So you drive over to Home Depot and pick up a few guys, pay them 10 bucks and hour and then panic when it comes to getting them lunch -proper etiquette deems that you serve drinks and toss out a few sandwiches- Don't do the "I'll get them some Taco Bell!" That is more insulting to us becuase we use real carne in our food....not some soy based BS that has never seen the inside of an abbatoir.
As far as the spelling of Our Great State, who really cares? We are the butt of many jokes, we have learned to roll with it. We are too busy texting and tanning.
In the last page of posts I have been named as a part to this thread.
Yeah, I'm a American of Mex descent, Yes I have had relatives who's residence here is suspect (And I say to them, get legal! You cause too many problems when the man picks you up and the family freaks out!)
As far as the Kalifornia mention-Also a movie with that brat pack actor----
Books are great! Ray Bradbury made money off of burning them and in a pinch you can use them as firestarter or Toilet paper in a pinch.:confused:
Oh, Karen.
I do have to correct you. Hollywood and Lost Angeles are states........Of mind-it's one big goofy jumble of crazy people.......:D:eek:
Now, All of you get off my cloud and let me go back to my novelas, tortillas Y carnitas.
I love you all!
Some people use the K to reference a communist state, the Communist State of Kalifornia. The movie is pretty good as well.
For Mexifornia to be racist, Mexican, as in a resident of Mexico, would have to be a race. Have you never met a blond hair blue eyed Mexican? Next your going to tell me there are no black Mexicans. And before you try, I do not hate Mexicans or anybody else because of their country of origin.
WC and UE as stated by others are not handouts regaurdless of who, employee or the employer, pays. They are earned benifit of employment.
Back to the topic...
In an effort to fund a childrens insurance program on the backs of smokers, the children are going to be the big losers here. People are going to quit and the black market sales of tobacco products are going to jump dramaticaly, both of which will decrease tax revenue.
I read today in the new issue of TIME Magazine that the first tax on cigarettes was in 1864.
I guess we'll have to blame it on Abraham Lincoln...:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
No. We blame the House of Congress of 1864, the POTUS dosent write tax laws.:rolleyes: Now if you can find Lincoln ran on a no new taxes campaign you might be onto something.
Did TIME restrict their research to cigarette taxes? The first tax on tobacco was in 1794, it "was enacted, modified, suspended and repealed, with small, if any, effect upon federal revenues".
The next tax was in 1862 levied on cigars, and goes from there.
The tax increase now isnt restricted to cigarettes, its all tobacco products.
:cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
Nice work Dan. Magnificent use of the historical method.
<golf clap>
Not bad for somebody who did not take use of your public education. ;)
I'd think a history text is a better reference than Time. But that's just me.