Word limits? We don't need no stinking word limits. Just make another comment. I'm still not sure what you are saying, but I'll respond to what I think you are saying:

Political tendencies of millions of people do matter. I'd love to have Santiago as my neighbor too, but the country couldn't  handle 12 -20 million of them living next door and voting for Villagrosa as the next President. Goldwater may have been a conservative from a border state but that was 12-20 million illegal immigrants ago.

Meaning what? Please, what is the point of this, I don't understand.

I like this guy, but he makes a couple of mistakes. He makes the case for the Republican Party's history, but this undermines his switch. Why then was he once a Democrat? He needed to explain this if he was going to hit the Lincoln/slavery MLK thing so hard. I always hate music when applied to a speech, it makes me feel as though the speaker is trying to manipulate my emotions - which is exactly what music is used for. 

He makes a great case for individualism and how the Dems exploit black folk with programs. That was the best part. 

I am no more wary of a pol who switches parties than one who doesn't, but should (i.e. Arlen Specter Colin Powell). 

Mendel,

There is a tautological problem though. Tribalism that is near-impossible to break because the argument that is used both overtly and covertly, is that since Republicans don't have many black folk voting for them, they must be racist, or at least they must not have 'our' interests in mind. This is self perpetuating. When Republicans 'try' to gain these votes, because they are losing elections, it looks like even more like a sham and pandering, not really caring, etc.

I am quite sure that Republicans will never get the credit they seek from Hispanics because of this immigration bill. First, the very fact that some Republicans are against it will be used against as evidence of general 'Republican' sentiment as is the case now. That's all they need. Second, it will be percieved as cynical and desperate pandering. Third, it won't really solve underlying problems and will create a lot more hassle for Hispanics, which will sucessfully be blamed on Republicans or Republican elements.

I wonder why, given that you seem to go to bars a lot, that you don't cultivate a relationship to a bartender or bartenders, or are you travelling?  I'm not dating but I do sometimes have a particular way I like my Guiness - I try not to be boorish, but sometimes young bartenders and waitresses (and the management) can be rather arrogant. I should pay more for my beer but they don't have to learn how to serve it properly? (which can ruin the flavor, BTW). I'm a very good tipper, but I often think that after I tell them something - again, very nicely, they think, there goes my tip and I get the cold-shoulder. Now I'm in a dilemma. The service is now poor. A low tip would be perceived by the bartender as owing to their lack of knowledge and maffirmation that I was unhappy with them since I deigned to inform them of something, when that wasn't it. It was their attitude after the discussion. I usually end up tipping well anyway, and I don't especially like myself for it.

No, because there are plenty of Europeans who are Democrats. Also, those minorities who do vote Republican are individualists first, tribalism is way down on their list.  As well, there are no Republicans (or very few) who don't want minorities to join their tribe of individualists. No one is wishing the 10% of blacks and the 30% of Hispanics to vgo away. In fact we want more of them, but we don't want them as a collective, we want them as individuals who agree that the individual is fundamental. I would love for everyone to feel like they are an individual and pursue individual (not collective) rights. But there are people who feel that without the collective they are vulnerable and/or without power.

However if you think like a tribalist everything looks like a tribe. So that's what they are doing: projecting their concepts onto Republicans. 

Worthwhile to remember there were always people who were threatened by progress. I find some of today's complaints absurd, too. Like  how people aren't connecting in person because of Facebook, or how matchmaking is so prevalent online (as opposed to what, arranged marriages? singles bars?)

Yet, I will submit this humorous video as something of a rebuttal. 

Tribalim trumps politics for most of these people. In order to be Republican, one must recognize - and believe in - the sovreignity of the individual. 

The case for voting Republican is more difficult to make. The Hispanics who have come here illegally are a subset that is less educated, compounding the problem.

You are right. It is absolute bunk that they are naturally Republican. They share values generally, but that doesn't seem to carry much weight in the voting booth.

Democrats, with the aid of too many Republicans, have destroyed familial bonds and values, and some of these Republicans now desire to import a fresh set of innocents. They too will soon become corrupted. 

Please aquaintance me, is more accurate. I have close to 700 aquaintances - and about 12 friends.

We Don't Just Disagree, We disagree About The Disagreement The fact that they don't agree with us - that there should be individual and separate solutions, doesn't create the same problems for us conservatives because that is how we see things already. We not only accept dissent, we expect disagreement and celebrate differences of opinion. 

This is why they feel so justified in being downright nasty to conservatives. We don't want to join them, and we are the obstacle toward the Utopian togetherness we should all share. To compound the issue, they don't like the angry feelings they get as a result of this rejection, because their feelings of anger conflicts with their wish for togetherness. The anger we *provoke* in them is evidence their model is wrong, thus making things exponentially more frustrating. They have this anger and they have to deny it to maintain their idealistic illusions. The next step is projecting these feelings onto us.

This is why there is a difference in intensity. Conservatives respect the need for disagreement (they may not agree with specifics) while collectivist togetherness types don't respect disagreement at all. Disagreement is an obstacle to their utopia.

Absolutely true. It is a pathology. We make the mistake in thinking they operate out of some objective search for the truth or even more practical solutions.

And what of the sacred "handicapped" parking spaces? (disclaimer: I never park in them)

I have never, ever seen "not enough" spaces of this kind. In some cases I walk through a whole acre of open handicapped parking spaces every day. Those 30  reserved spaces - the prime spaces - are there all day and they are barely used. So these spaces go largely unused while everyone else is deprived of them forever.

And how many 'handicapped' people really need these spaces? Doesn't anyone ever consider how much fraud there is at all levels of this newfound privilege? I would bet that at least 25% is fraudulent, and  that figure is growing and will surpass 50% in another 10 years or so.

I have never seen someone who doesn't have a sticker park in one of those spots either. I have seen some people who seem to walk perfectly well have the credentialed sticker and hang-tag.

I've lived an entire year in downtown Cairo, and I have visited Puerto Rico. Cairo makes PR look like Switzerland. But let me get this straight. You don't live here, you live there. You want to apply these rules to us because parking is so chaotic and frustrating there. 

Sometimes I long for the days when my biggest annoyances come from other golfers.

So I returned from shopping to discover my car gone. Do you have any idea what it is like to have to go across Philadelphia on public transportation to the impound lot, wait hours in some funky trailer and pay hundreds of dollars to the city of Philadelphia? 

I'm all for Walnut Street having an extra lane for rush hour, but couldn't they make it more clear by signage or some other way? Of course those hardest hit by this are tourists. 

But they aren't keeping traffic lanes free or doing any of those things, they are reporting an infraction. Where I live and have lived, I can tell you that you can't get away with doing any of those things for even a few minutes. Infractions are met with severe punishments. Park in a handicapped space, even though there is a sea of empty blue spaces, it's $200 where I live.

I've never done that, but I have misread a parking sign on a road that had meters and a line of other parked cars. It seems the sign says after 4pm no standing tow zone. That's on Walnut Stree in Philadelphia. I'm not the only one who made (makes) this mistake. A onvoy of city tow trucks line up to haul cars away every weekday. Wouldn't it be prudent to make the signs more prominent of mount an awareness campaign? 

By the way, the last ticket I got was from parking in a municipal lot with meters. I was shocked to see a ticket on my windshiled as I was sure I covered the time. Well, I had backed into the space. That was my offense. There was a small sign -not on or near the meter, but somewhere on the lot. Must park head-in. I suppose this was to facilitate the ticket writers from having to get out of their jitneys to write down the license numbers, except New jersey now has plates mandatory on both front and back. But why change the other related laws when revenue can be generated? $40

I now avoid shopping in that town. Too expensive.