Jan Mickelson propses slavery for illegals

[LifelongHawk]

and claims he is serious, responding to a caller with "what's the matter with slavery?" "You may think I'm pulling your leg, I'm not." Mickelson told the caller his plan was "moral," "legal," and "politically doable"

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/08/19/ia-radio-host-jan-mickelson-enslave-undocumente/205020

and then in follow-up interview says he isn't really serious, sort of. Thinks ultimately we won't need to have many slaves, just 1 or 2 very public examples of indentured servitude, which along with interstate signs (including on southern border with Kansas) will cause every illegal to leave the state pronto.

He's really impressed with the power of signs. Sure the non-English speaking undocumenteds in Marshalltown will start packing the day after the signs go up in Council Bluffs and Davenport.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/08/19/iowa-radio-host-stands-by-plan-to-enslave-undoc/205046

Apparently he is focusing on how do we get rid of them rather than what do we do with them, but geez. First thought it was more of a Swift "modest proposal" and the other shoe would drop somehow, but apparently not.

Any listeners? Did he comment today? Is he just a freak, or is there another explanation?

 

[cigaretteman]

I only got a couple of comments when I posted this yesterday

http://iowa.forums.rivals.com/threa...ocumented-immigrants-unless-they-leave.30453/

 

[theIowaHawk]

I only got a couple of comments when I posted this yesterday

http://iowa.forums.rivals.com/threa...ocumented-immigrants-unless-they-leave.30453/

Yes, but by all accounts you just suck. Most of us largely ignore you, and I'm not even a conservative.

 

[Huey Grey]

Yes, but by all accounts you just suck. Most of us largely ignore you, and I'm not even a conservative.

Way to douche it up there, Squirtie.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I don't like the guy, think his viewpoint is skewed and largely idiotic, but let me try to pick out some points.

He basically says that "we" are already "slaves", because we are indentured to debt and paying for our food and kids and everything else, which is a ridiculous mischaracterization of slavery. Bringing a worker over from, say, China, then requiring them to live somewhere specific, like a boarding house, in which they pay you rent, and you deduct it from their income, and you force them to work at your restaurant until their "fee" is paid off is indentured servitude. Citizens of the US, regardless of their debt are not indentured, they are not slaves, despite the idiotic hyperbole.

But, his point on it being slavery isn't quite as ridiculous as it sounds at first reading. He compares it to Sheriff Joe's "tent village," where they are required to work. What is the difference? Well, those people are in jail, they are incarcerated. How big of a difference is that really? Can we lock up all convicted illegals and then make them work?

The way he makes his point is strangely idiotic, but really it is just rhetoric.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Way to douche it up there, Squirtie.

Well, in fairness, you suck right along with him. Don't think you wouldn't be one of the first posters voted off the island.

 

[aflachawk]

Yes, but by all accounts you just suck. Most of us largely ignore you, and I'm not even a conservative.

He is certainly correct about people trying to ignore your posts. They are almost always devoid of any real thought. Just posts derived from talking points you receive in your inbox. You almost never respond to any posts in substantive ways. Usually just more Thoughtless attacks. The truth is sometimes an unwanted bitch but there it is in its most unvarnished way