Freedom Riders

freedom

“If these children were from Canada, we would not be having this interview”

A busload of desperate refugee children were being transferred this week from overcrowded facilities in South Texas to a location in California. They were greeted by a white mob blocking the road to the processing center. Morons chanting “impeach Obama” forced the buses to turn away.

Welcome to the arms of America.

Jeb Bush was right when he spoke about immigration reform this spring. It has probably ended his political career. Let’s review the sane, rational, measured comments that probably disqualified him for the Republican nomination:

“But the way I look at this — and I’m going to say this, and it’ll be on tape and so be it. The way I look at this is someone who comes to our country because they couldn’t come legally, they come to our country because their families — the dad who loved their children — was worried that their children didn’t have food on the table. And they wanted to make sure their family was intact, and they crossed the border because they had no other means to work to be able to provide for their family. Yes, they broke the law, but it’s not a felony. It’s an act of love. It’s an act of commitment to your family. I honestly think that that is a different kind of crime that there should be a price paid, but it shouldn’t rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families.”

The racists who have hijacked our immigration policy like to claim that they embrace immigration so long as it done “legally” through the “proper channels.” This infuriating lie is the cousin of the deceptive rhetoric used in the gun control debate about “enforcing existing gun laws.”

Let’s remember a few details from the real world. For refugees, which is the status that many of these children will qualify for, this is the legal way. They are fleeing. Based on US and international law, they are being processed legally. When their status is determined, the law will determine how they are dealt with.

And for prospective immigrants to the US who are not refugees, there is no legal way. That’s the dumb reality behind the racist lies about immigration. That’s why so many people are working so hard to change the shape of our immigration laws in the face of resistance motivated by paranoia and deception.

There is no practical, workable way for people who do not have family in the US to immigrate here. Period. We have millions of illegal immigrants in the US because we have provided no realistic method to come here legally and no realistic means to punish those who exploit illegal migrants.

For almost a decade we have been tantalizingly close to ending this stupid, cruel, and utterly unnecessary standoff. Each time we get close, panicked mobs manage to shut the process down. Our first step, they say, has to be “securing the border.”

Unfortunately, “securing the border” in immigration rhetoric means “stopping brown people from coming here.” Have you tried to cross the border lately? We already have the most heavily militarized border of any free country on Earth not at war.

That’s why we can’t actually adopt sensible changes that would make our border crossings more orderly and stop the kind of senseless misery that our current legal limbo inspires. No law that would let people come here from Latin America legally will satisfy the racist fears of the mobs blocking those buses. They will pay any economic or moral price to protect what little remains of their cultural supremacy.

More sophisticated immigration reform opponents have cited the need to avoid attracting the “wrong kind” of immigrants. After all, those poor huddled masses don’t fund Internet startups. We want engineers and doctors.

That’s true, it’s legitimate, and that goal can be accomplished with a reasonable policy, but it’s also important to remember some things about those “less desirable” immigrants. That’s who we are. My ancestors didn’t come here because America craved their mad skills. With vanishingly few exceptions, neither did yours.

People with good jobs, solid skills, and lots of money living in stable successful countries very rarely become immigrants. Being a nation of immigrants means being a haven for people who are fleeing from crazy, screwed-up situations. It means welcoming people in desperate straits who have the grit, determination and relentless drive to make things better for their families. And guess what, a few dozen racist idiots are not going to stop people like that. We want people like that. We, as Americans, ARE people like that.

The folks standing in front of those buses are going to fail. That’s one of the more comforting realities about America. Whether next week or in a few years, America is going to adopt an immigration scheme that will embrace Latin American migrants and give them a path to citizenship. The economic and cultural incentives are too massive to ignore and the dangers are fantasy-based.

The political physics behind this are inevitable. All the remains to be seen is how long it will take and who will benefit. This 4th of July let’s celebrate the birthday of America, “The Mother of Exiles.”

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

 

Chris Ladd is a Texan living in the Chicago area. He has been involved in grassroots Republican politics for most of his life. He was a Republican precinct committeeman in suburban Chicago until he resigned from the party and his position after the 2016 Republican Convention. He can be reached at gopliferchicago at gmail dot com.

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Immigration
436 comments on “Freedom Riders
  1. Houston-Stay-at-Homer says:

    To emphasize 50’s comment about the future of the country…

    10 fingers, 10 toes…a big healthy boy was welcomed in as a new citizen tonight.

    Mom and baby are doing great. Dad is hanging in there, and the big brothers at home have no idea what is in store for them.

    Have a great weekend everyone.

    • fiftyohm says:

      Congratulations, Traveler!

    • bubbabobcat says:

      Congratulations Houston! He will be an outstanding young man with the likes of the Mr. and Mrs. raising him.

    • Intrigued says:

      Aww congrats HT!

    • flypusher says:

      Almost a “Yankee Doodle Dandy”!! Best wishes for your new addition!

    • kabuzz61 says:

      Good news. They are a blessing. Enjoy.

    • DanMan says:

      fly beat me to it. Congratulations

    • Bobo Amerigo says:

      HT, that’s great!

      The future is bright and brothers abound!

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        PS – After 3 generations of all girls, I met my great-nephew this past weekend. Great experience!

      • CaptSternn says:

        That reminds me of one of my cousins. He, of course, wanted a son, but he had a daughter. So they tried again, another daughter. He convinced his wife to have one more go at it and yep, another daughter. His wife said enough is enough, so she went to have her tubes tied, only she was pregnant again. And sure enough, it was another daughter.

        Maybe he will get a grandson soon, one daughter is now married and pregnant and another is getting married at the end of this month. I am going to laugh if he just winds up with a bunch of granddaughters. I am such a bad person sometimes. 😀

    • objv says:

      Congratulations to you and your wife!

    • Owl of Bellaire says:

      Huzzah!

    • texan5142 says:

      I am very happy for you and your family, congrats!

    • CaptSternn says:

      Congrats HT.

    • Crogged says:

      Congratulations. HT

    • Turtles Run says:

      Congrats to you and your family

    • objv says:

      Fun Fact: After reading the discussion on anchor baby below, I did a search on “anchor baby origin” and a bunch of baby name sites popped up in search results. It seems you can name your baby Anchor – a name with English or Scandinavian roots.

      After reading the definition, I see that I could also be called an “anchor baby” since it doesn’t matter if the parents are in the country legally or illegally. 🙂

    • John Galt says:

      Been out of town and out of touch for a few days and I’m not going to wade through 495 comments, but the first one is the best. Congrats, Homer!

      • CaptSternn says:

        Amen to that, John. I am glad that nobody posted anything above HT’s comment.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Yes Cappy, let’s just post this inflammatory totally unprompted personal attack shit in ANOTHER blog to pretend to be “classy”. You’re just a cluelessly loud and proud total dickwad.

        CaptSternn says:
        July 6, 2014 at 3:22 pm
        I suppose you are a very blissful person. I guess I shouldn’t be suprised [sic] somebody like bubbabobcat pulled you to the left and democrats.

  2. Intrigued says:

    The Freedom Riders voluntarily signed up to demonstrate peace among hostility and adversity despite the risk of injury and death. They are among the most respectable yet underrated protestors of that time. They deserve their own place in history without irrelevant comparisons that diminish their purpose and accomplishments.

    With that being said, the idiots who argue for the enforcement of current immigration laws but condone these protestors are nothing more than Ignorant, heartless, IDIOTS!

    • DanMan says:

      oh the irony, talk about obscuring the past

      anybody else remember when the child of destiny now known as Obama claimed the march to Selma in 65 inspired his parents to conceive him in 61?

      and now look what he is inspiring

  3. fiftyohm says:

    Just want to add, on this eve of the 4th, a happy Independence Day to all who post here. While I may not agree with half (of you assholes ;-)), we are Americans, all. We spend the time to do this because we actually care about the future of the nation – however divergent that vision might be.

    Good night, John Boy…

  4. flypusher says:

    So here is a blast from the past, the attempted immigration reform of 2007 (cosponsored by McCain and Kennedy). I’ve been quite clear that I was never a fan of GW Bush, but his backing of this bill is something I list as to his credit.

    http://www.opencongress.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007

    Now there are ideas here that I could quibble over- I’ve already stated that I think the proposals for the DREAMers are too lenient and how I would change them. I also think the idea releasing a detained alien with a notice to appear is wishful thinking at best. Nevertheless this was one of the more sensible things put forward as a solution, but these days we just can’t have nice things.

    • DanMan says:

      y’all know Ted got kicked out of Harvard for cheating? He ended making restitution by going through Army boot camp, washing out and getting daddy Joe to make a huge donation to get him back in.

      Later he vomited on the front row of the audience when he was on the podium getting inducted into the Owl Club.

      and he was done burnishing that awesome legacy. Too bad about Mary Jo.

  5. DanMan says:

    meh, which one of you rubes is going to break my record? not making a point shouldn’t count but keep pounding any

  6. texan5142 says:

    Well just great, the Dow hit 17000, dam you Obama!

    (Shakes fist in air)

    • Owl of Bellaire says:

      Obviously, it’s all a plot, to lull the capitalists into a stupor and let the communist hordes sneak down Wall Street some May Day for the coup.

      • texan5142 says:

        Sadly some one will think that is true , and the next thing ya know, it will be featured as a headline is some right wing nut job web site. It will start out like ” some would say” type article , that way they avoid liability…….just like “Fox News”.

    • Intrigued says:

      I know one of my stocks is up 10% from yesterday and is expected to double thanks in part to initiatives from the Obama administration. Damn Obama always trying to take my hard earned money.

  7. sad and tired in Houston says:

    Disgusting, self-righteous, nativist and possibly racist hypocritical fools the lot of them. Every person in this country is the child, grandchild or descendant of an immigrant or a person who was sent here against their will ( slaves and the people who were sent to the penal colonies in the south to serve out their terms as indentured servants ) – unless you are of full Native American heritage. Sadly that fact of our collective heritage seems to escape the majority of these very ugly and sad people. I am very ashamed of my fellow citizens at this point for all of the hatred and ugliness they spew out.

  8. texan5142 says:

    Militarize the border, give the 11 million a chance to become citizens only after they help build the “Great Wall of America” .

    • texan5142 says:

      Great Wall of America with moat full of piranha and gators.

      • flypusher says:

        Throw in some electric eels and you’ve got a deal!

      • texan5142 says:

        It would be a grand attraction, people from China would come visit our wall. If you build it, they will come , Field of Dreams proved that.

      • texan5142 says:

        Could have dinner train car that runs on top, be a great vacation destination for the kids. Water cannons on top and like at the county fair one could win a stuffed Teddy when one hits a person on the other side of the border. Would it be in bad taste to have Taco stands on top also?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Fund the wall by selling advertisements: better than billboards!

        Curve some sections of wall, both to make it harder to climb and to allow use by large parties as skate-parks!

        Build some sections out of fieldstone, with machiolations, etc., so they can be co-located with Renaissance festivals. Treat the other side of the border as land tilled by serfs or boiling with barbarian invaders, and allow patrons to try their archery skills and/or firing siege machinery at anyone in view.

      • texan5142 says:

        Sounds like a plan, it will be the new Disney Land of the south.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        High-speed rail between Brownsville and San Diego? Naah.

    • Bart-1 says:

      We don’t even need to “Militarize the border or de[prt them if we make our programs unabailable to them and make Everift a requirement ad fine the hell out of every business that is caught hiring those here illegally. Is that too complicated? It’s what almost every other vountry in the world foes.

      • texan5142 says:

        U having a stroke?

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Nah, it’s standard bartism. He is so anxious to dump his garbage (to use his own metaphor), he makes no sense whatsoever. He doesn’t proofread, spellcheck, read his own links,…

      • Bart-1 says:

        ha, Texan, no stroke.Bubba is actually RIGHT this time. I don’t use spell check or grammar check and the dang keys on this phone are too small to see or punch well! Makes for some very interesting typos though (i.e. “Givernment”). sorry if it made little sense. The need to militarize the border is unwarranted if we would just do what most countries do to those(businesses) who employ workers here illegally and make no programs meant for US citizens, paid for by US citizens unavailable to them. No jobs, no freebies = self deportation and a functional immigration system. What doesn’t make sense to me is when folks like Owl want to accuse those of using the legal system (Hobby Lobby/Christians) of being in the wrong while defending those illegally immigrating here. I’m sure he supported the Civil Rights movement which actually DID break the laws repeatedly. You can’t have it both ways unless you use Liberal logic though.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Most excellent points, Bart. Something Tutt and I talk about, they come here because we don’t enforce our laws regarding them nor the people that hire them or offer them housing. Take away the incentives and we won’t have much of a problem.

  9. desperado says:

    OK, we don’t seem to be getting anywhere, I think I have a solution. We give all the open carry nuts tranquilizer darts and dispatch them to all the prime gathering spots—cantinas, taco stands, quinceaneras, soccer games, Home Depot. The real ‘Muricans tranquilize all them fuzzy little furriners they can find, and then we call in Homeland Security to tag each one with a tracking device so we know where they are at all times. Here’s the really devious part. Along with the tranquilizing agent we add in some Depo Provera to kill their sex drive and keep those little buggers from reproducing.

    It makes about as much sense as building a 2000 mile wall and deporting 10 million people.

  10. Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

    Well, not unexpectedly, the more GOP/TP oriented folks are aligned with the “I’m all for immigration reform as long as we first secure the border and deport all the folks who came here illegally”.

    Wonderful. Put two logistical impossibilities in place before you are willing to discuss reform.

    We are never going to have a wall and moat between us and Mexico nor are we going to be able to systematically deport 10 to 20 million folks.

    Better economies and better conditions in Central America would be the best solution to your immigration problems, but we don’t have lots of control over that. We are better at destabilizing Central American countries than we are at stabilizing them.

    Alternatively, we could ruin the US economy so much that no one wants to come here. Take heart GOP/TPers, Obama is doing his best to accomplish that.

    If the only plan available requires the deportation of all the folks here illegally, then those folks are just going to continue to remain underground in with an underground economy, and your problems are not going to get solved.

    Heck, don’t grant citizenship. Give some special permanent residence status to those that meet some level of qualifications (no serious crimes, etc.), and let’s keep them from voting in elections (to stop Democrats from buying votes by giving away citizenship).

    Get a GOP person to spearhead this movement, and then those non-voting permanent resident adults will sing the praises of the GOP to their US citizen children, and the kids will vote GOP 18 years later.

    • flypusher says:

      “Wonderful. Put two logistical impossibilities in place before you are willing to discuss reform.”

      It’s as if someone were stacking the deck, but no, no one in the GOP would really want that! 😛

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Seal the border and deport all illegal immigrants before discussing immigration reform.

        Do more research to absolutely link global climate change to human activity, such that no dissenters remain, before doing anything about those human activities.

        Require that similar universally accepted evidence be available for evolution before it can be taught in schools beside “alternatives” such as creationism.

        Insist that terrorism be defeated everywhere before we can consider reductions in our military spending.

        Demand that taxes be cut *before* balancing the budget.

        Lewis Carroll’s Red Queen used to brag that “sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

        Modern Republicans demand that impossible things be *done* by someone else before they’ll bother to contemplate acting on their own. Do they believe that’s practical? Who knows.

        But it’s a convenient, though also venomously dishonest, lazy, and uncivic sort of excuse.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Secure the border, then talk about the people that are here and reforming immigration laws. So only one real condition.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…”secure the border” is a bit like “winning the war on terrorism”, something that has no metric and will never happen.

        You have folks suggesting that we need to completely seal the border. Shut it down.

        Barring a Stephen King-esq dome over the country, there just is not a mechanism to do that.

      • CaptSternn says:

        It can never bee 10% secure, HT. But it can be a whole lot better than it is now.

      • CaptSternn says:

        100%, that is.

      • CaptSternn says:

        HT, it is attitudes and claims like yours that tell us you are not really interested in immigration reform, just amnesty and more illegal immigration.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Yes Stern…practicality, reason, and physics generally suggests someone is not willing to take an issue seriously.

        Pandering platitudes with no realistic mechanism for accomplishment often are the hallmarks of a serious plan.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        The border can never be 10% secure. You may right, Cap.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Pandering platitudes? Has Owl hijacked your avatar, HT?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Is Tuttabella touting my regular rhetoric’s alliterative attitude?

    • kabuzz61 says:

      Again Homer you are resorting to bullshit. I have always stated the illegals that are here should get a work permit but if they want to become a citizen they have to go back and get in line to be fair to others. I have no idea why you choose to lie all of a sudden.

      A reasonable person would understand that states and counties cannot sustain illegals. You liberals really do think money grows on trees.

      The USA needs more people pulling the wagon than those in the wagon.

      You have cheapened yourself Homer.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Buzz…I’m very likely to lose sleep tonight over you thinking less of me.

        I would suggest, however, that you read some of the comments from your brethren and sistren above and below you regarding the deportation of folks here illegally.

        You can believe folks are fabricating such positions, but I’m seeing dark marks in the shapes of words and letters on my computer screen that might suggest otherwise.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Says the troll.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Homer, you pointed me out as saying that. Again, you are a condescending prick but I never thought a liar.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Buzz…I had not recognized that you were a “guest worker” type of dude, which probably is not far off from my views, but I’m not going to make them go home if they ever want to come back. No one would do that, and we would get back to where we are now.

        So you are correct, you are not part of the “deport them all” crowd, but you have to kind of admit, that is where many of your friends here are.

        Apologies for the misrepresentation of your deportation views.

        Now, let’s look a bit farther downward as we go into your anchor baby views.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Homer, the Hispanics coined the phrase anchor babies and encouraged 8 month pregnant Hispanics to cross the border so the baby is born in America thereby making it difficult to deport the mom. So, are you willing to apologize to conservatives?

        Also, I said if an illegal is here on a guest worker program but decides to become a citizen, they have to go back and start the process like everyone else. It is the only fair thing to do for the thousands that come into this country the right way.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        kabuzz, please provide some evidence that “anchor baby” is a Hispanic coinage (and, if so, explain why we don’t say “niño de ancla” instead).

        To my knowledge, the term began with Vietnamese boat people (which thus provides some context for the “anchor” part, which is otherwise a bit silly for land-locked migration).

        So perhaps this time you actually have some proof for your claims. Or maybe, as usual, you’ll just run away when called on your lies.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Oh Buzz…you are cute…so “Anchor Babies” originated with Hispanics, and thus it is not a dehumanizing, racist term knocked around by conservatives as they are proposing repealing the 14th amendment and fixing the “anchor baby” problem?

        See…this is where you start going off the deep in trying to defend it using the term. There is no defense.

        Then, I’m really, really curious about your ideas that Hispanics created the term. That is kind of curious since most people trace it back to what folks called the Vietnamese “anchor children” when we were having that refugee crisis.

        But sure, we can take your theory that Hispanics coined the term and run with it. Black folks can generally get away with saying the N-word, but I’m going to go with it being racist when you say the N-word.

        Most folks also recognize that “anchor babies” and “illegals” as a noun tend to be dehumanizing, but hey, you go right on defending this all while pointing out that the rest of us are racists.

      • CaptSternn says:

        The left is always looking for something new to by which to be offended. Again, it is not a term I use, but it is also not aimed at the child.

        Many on the left support the concept and complain that families would be split up because the child is a citizen and the parents are not, therefore none should be deported if they managed to come here and have a child, they become anchored here. That only encourages more to do it.

        The solution is simple, deport the entire family. The child can return when he or she turns 18 if they so choose. Maybe they can even then sponsor their parents coming here and working towards citizenship, as long as they were not here illegally at the time, like the Chinese “tourists”.

        So what do you think, HT? Should the child be an anchor that keeps the parents, or at least the mother, here in the U.S. or not?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        So, Sternn, you think that citizens under age 18 have no rights?

        Or is this another of those areas where your own, special-snowflake interpretation of the Constitution supersedes everyone else’s?

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Wow Stern…you folks are taking the time, thinking of ideas, and actually writing them on paper to defend the use of the term “anchor baby”. Pretty universally recognized (check the dictionary) as a derogatory term, but good luck with that.

        It the the defending of racist asshats that sometimes makes folks think you could possibly be a racist asshat yourself.

        “Hey, I don’t personally use the term, but I can certainly see why people would” really isn’t a great position to take.

        Let’s see, your position is that things like, “We need to stop all these anchor babies” is not aimed at the child. Hmmmm….OK.

        Yeah…it is the folks on the left going out of their way to be offended by some of your political brethren using racist, derogatory terms when describing an American citizen.

        I’m really kind of curious how the due process works to require the deportation of an American citizen who has committed no crimes or done anything worthy of deportation. Since the citizen’s “home country” is the US, I’m not even sure to where you would insist the child be deported. Heck, deportation wouldn’t even be the correct term. I think what you are proposing would better be classified as exile rather than deportation. That is a bit of an interesting position for someone of your political leanings to take.

        As if often your wont…you give a forced dichotomy as a choice, when the world is rarely so brown and white. I’m not all that fixated on the notion of deportation, and I think it is pretty tough to deport the parents but not the child. However, that is something of a choice or risk the parents are making when coming here and having a baby.

        At least for the Texas commentors, I would venture to say that most of here know someone who knows someone who would qualify as an “anchor baby” in your world. It could be a grand parent or a great grand parent or a cousin or a friend, but lots of folks know lots of folks who were born here of parents here illegally. Calling these folks “anchor babies” and talking about how they shouldn’t be here and how they should all be deported probably is going to cause some difficulty as you try to win the hearts and minds of these voters.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Owl, I be;ieve all human beings have rights. But you won’t even recognize some as even being human beings.

        HT, the parents here illegally should be deported. Do you think they should abandon their child? Or do you think the child should anchor them here? FYI, the term was not considered racist or derogatory until very recently. Same with illegal aliens, or illegalk immigrants. The left just has to find something by which they can be offended. Kind of lkike being called a “liberal”, next it will be “progressive”, then it will de “democrat”. Emotional whining and crying.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…if you want to go with the recency of derogatory…negro was in vogue not all that long ago, and hey, it is just those whiny liberals who won’t let you folks say all the fun words.

        Seriously, how hard is it for you folks to keep up with something like that. What, there are many 10 or 20 words that most folks could recognize as not being good things to say about other humans?

        Some would say, “Gee…I could see how someone could be offended by that”, or you could go with, “You whiny folks are just too sensitive and should suck it up”.

        Buddy, I can believe you when you talk about your core beliefs, but you are defending some bad crap here and defending it in a way that is similarly crappy.

        I know that attacking and complaining is more your thing, but slowing down and reading what I wrote would tell you how I feel about children born here of parents here illegally. Again, I’m not as fixated as you on deportation, and I recognize the folly of thinking you can deport everyone here illegally. Certainly is a horrible thing to send the parents home and keep the baby here, and it would have to be a gut wrenching decision for the parents to make. That is the risk taken when coming here illegally. I think that at least some would say that being a ward of the state in the US provides better opportunity than a slum in Nicaragua.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Really HT? Suddenly you want English only, you are offended by Spanish? You think it is just fine with calling a person “black” because that is the English word, but if you hear the word “black” in Spanish you find that offensive? I mean you do understand that “negro” is just Spanish for “black”, right?

        I guess now you will find the word “black” offensive in the English lanuage? Are you one of those people that get offended when you hear people talking in a language that is not English? Do you assume they are talking about you, saying negative things about you?

        Oh no! You used the word “illegally”. Shame on you. Didn’t you get the memo that you are supposed to say “undocumented” instead of “illegally”? What an offensive person you are, HT.

  11. desperado says:

    Just a quick update on our collapsing economy which is being being destroyed by the Kenyan, Marxist, Muslim usurper.

    +288,000 jobs in June.

    Unemployment down to 6.1%, lowest in nearly 6 years

    DJIA and S&P 500 at all-time highs.

    As you were.

  12. fiftyohm says:

    Well, for what it’s worth, here are my two cents:

    The harassing of children is reprehensible. These idiots are no different from the Occupy mob – deviod of intellectual and moral consistency. Our immigration laws are obsolete and in dire need of overhaul. We need immigrants. (Anyone looked at our demographics lately?). And Jeb Bush’s comments are in the right direction. But…

    I don’t think this crap with the protesters has racism at its core. There are very, very few Texans, (at least happy Texans), who are biased against Latin Americans. Now, Chicagoans? That’s another story, in my experience.

    I think it’s really about economics, (or a poor understanding of same), that brings out the mob. They’re worried about welfare, entitlements, food stamps, and other social costs. Yes, they are wrong on all of that, but to cast it as ‘racism’ is, I believe, inaccurate.

    • Turtles Run says:

      Fifty – forget the mob. I believe most here would consider their actions reprehensible. The tone from the far right which dominates this issue on Republican side forces many in the GOP that would ordinarily open to work and solve our immigration issue to instead remain silent or support the status quo. Any attempts to fix our immigration system with anything less than sealed off borders and mass deportations is labeled amnesty and cries of amnesty.

      This is a very vocal minority in the party but this vocal minority has been successful at using this issue to keep the GOP from addressing the issue. Look at what happened to Eric Cantor, David Brat ran on a platform of anti-immigration and it helped secure his victory in Virginia.

      How many time do we have to hear about undocumented immigrants with “cantaloupe-sized calves”, these people referred to as “wetbacks”, or making life so bad here that these people will self-deport. Imagine how bad these people want to make this country for undocumented immigrants that they would be willing to return to a war torn country and risk execution.

      Nativism is at the heart of this issue and it is ripping the GOP apart and at the same time nothing is getting done to resolve the issue.

      • DanMan says:

        cut and paste recycled democrat talking points…yawn

      • CaptSternn says:

        Being against illegal immigration is not the same as being anti-immigrant. Being for a constitutionally restricted federal government is not being anti-government. The left is either too ignorant to understand the differences, or they do understand the differences but can’t honestly address the issues so they just throw garbage at the wall and hope something sticks. Which is it for you, Turtles? Ignorance can be forgiven and corrected with information, but then again how many times does the information have to be presented before it finally gets through?

      • desperado says:

        “Being against illegal immigration is not the same as being anti-immigrant.”

        I would wager the people on those buses don’t share that view.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Of course, Sternn, your views on “constitutional restrictions” are a fringe-farcical travesty, both historically and practically. In effect, you *are* anti-government, or at least against the government which allows us to function as a unified nation in a 21st-century economy.

        Why should we expect you to be any more honest or realistic about immigration?

        Reality has a well-known liberal bias; that’s why so many conservatives prefer to spend their time elsewhere.

    • flypusher says:

      Definitely economics is a major driver, but it seems the mob mentality comes much more readily (they tck yer jerbs!!) when you throw a different race/ ethnicity into the mix.

    • Bart-1 says:

      Owl of Bellaire says:
      July 2, 2014 at 12:51 pm
      Your addiction to name-calling, even more than your brain-dead, fact-free rhetoric, reveals the hopelessness of your stupidity.

      Also, Mr Ladd, when can we expect to comment on the outrage in the Mississippi primary with anything resembling your comments when Establishment Chamber of Commerce Cantor was defeated? I expect NEVER. Even MSNBC is covering now. You aren’t. Enough said.
      http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/chris-mcdaniel-my-opponent-stole-last-weeks-runoff-election

      • flypusher says:

        It would be freaking hilarious if Childers ended up winning.

        If McDaniel’s people can find the proof that enough people voted in both primaries, they’ll have a leg to stand on. The “voter intent” angle will go nowhere. How would you enforce that without violating the principle of the secret ballot? If they don’t want any cross-over voters, then they need to change the state laws and require voters to register their preference.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Thank you for the response Fly (not that Chris will or you will about your claim that “people” claim that “people claim that people crossing our border is unprecedented” being unable to give me even ONE example to support your claim). Do you actually believe that Chris will come out supporting McDaniel if there is support, as those who have already publicly said there was, from Chris against an establishment GOP”lifer” like Cochran? Really?

      • texan5142 says:

        How cute, Bart is upset that the tea party racist did not win the primary.

      • flypusher says:

        Well Bart, if you are demanding a web link, you are sol. I draw that inference from many conversations I’ve had on the subject. Some people will talk about the wave of European immigration in a very self-righteous manner (THEY all came here legally). But no they didn’t, and I wonder how many Americans know about that bit of illegal border crossing from 100+ years ago.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Ahhhh bart-1/seriouscynic/usincrisis stamping his feet and “DEMANDING” responses to what HE wants to discuss on someone else’s blog.

        Yup, a typical wingnut. Me, me, me, me, MY way.

        Still haven’t matured a single second since your 12th birthday eh bart?

      • Bart-1 says:

        IOW fly, you don’t have any support for your claim whatsoever do you?

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Still lacking those mirrors eh Danny? You have some chutzpah to call anyone else immature. Sorry to have to state the obvious.

        As for bart “in no way impacts the 38% extended across of spectrum of the national workforce”, he decided to forgo a decently salaried job (voluntarily as he purportedly claimed) to work at Starbucks. He STOLE a semi-crap job from a deserving White kid.

        “I did those jobs you mentioned before high school.” Um what was that you JUST said in the same post about “anecdotal evidence”?

        “Was the Vietnamese worker legal? Bet he was. It’s relevant to the point you know.’ Duh. And MY point which not surprisingly flew right over you was that MY “anecdotal evidence” superseded your necdotal non evidence that “illegals” were stealing AC repair jobs.

        You can’t have a discussion without resorting to banalities that define you as such Danny. And spring for a damn mirror already.

      • flypusher says:

        Bart, you can believe what I have said I observed, or not. I couldn’t care less either way, and it changes nothing.

    • kabuzz61 says:

      Fifty, they are not ‘harassing’ the children. The mayor asked the feds to demonstrate that they have had a health check and are free from disease. The feds could not. The mayor did what he is elected to do and that is protect the people and the purse. Don’t, just don’t, get your information from Chris. It lacks almost everything in regards to the full picture.

  13. DanMan says:

    went down blog and caught a few comments I hadn’t seen. Yo Tutt, the Zin soaked bar room queen line is a riff on the opening of the Rolling Stone’s Honky Tonk Woman. I was inspired by doing a little research on Howard Zinn and saw the parallel of his writings with the talking points used so casually by the rucas posse. Check it out and you’ll see what I’m referring to. Their also casual acceptance of lies as a political tactic is pretty much right out of Saul Alinsky’s playbook.

    While I am fairly frugal unless DanMa’am is involved, my fiscal focus is on the nation’s finances. I have been able to operate under the fair rule of law and common sense for my station in life. Public school and state college graduate as are my kids. No loans, worked my way through my term and did well enough to pay for theirs.

    And like you, I moved back to the neighborhood I grew up in and enjoy remodeling my old house when the notion hits (DanMa’am). I will rub my usual attackers noses in their financial misery when their envy is used to justify their desire to tax producers. I doubt my wealth would be envied by anybody but a loser.

    • bubbabobcat says:

      Still so Damn insecure that you have to wrack your feeble brain and life for obscure references so you can appear (to yourself only) minimally “superior” Daaaaaanny?

      And the fact that you and bart have to overcompensate and bray incessantly about your financial “wealth” is but a sure definitive indication that you are both in fact not even close to being even financially comfortable nor secure.

      Hence your simple minded knee jerk scapegoating of those unfortunate “others” you feel you can denigrate without repercussion or appropriate consequences.

      Tres, tres pathetique.

      • DanMan says:

        well bubba, I have no delusions that am superior to you…lolz loser, thanks or the laugh

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Failed your sobriety test Danny? Inebriating your sorrows in a morose self pity party to wrap up the evening?

      • DanMan says:

        poor bubba

      • Bart-1 says:

        I retired at 53 Bubba, and not forced as you lied (again) about. How many people do you know who can do that without a Union? And, Owl thinks you aren’t addicted to name-calling shows his cluelessness as well. Your addiction to name-calling, even more than your brain-dead, fact-free rhetoric, reveals the hopelessness of your stupidity.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Bart, your pathetically insecure whiny chest beating is so tiresome I can just cut and paste the same response to your incessant bleating:

        “And the fact that you and bart have to overcompensate and bray incessantly about your financial “wealth” is but a sure definitive indication that you are both in fact not even close to being even financially comfortable nor secure.”

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Danny see discussion above re: banalities

        Who do you think cares hypocrite? No one I’m certain.

    • Bart-1 says:

      Danman, while I don’t encourage self-ingratiation, I will go ahead and address Bubba’s repeated lies since I am not the coward he is with nothing to hide.(i.e. His lie that I was “forced” to retire). When Aldine ISD was forced to initiate a “Reduction in Force” due to the high levels of government shortfalls, Middle School Counselors in 2011 were cut from 3 to 2. (2 years after the “Summer of Recovery of 2009”. The other 2 were the more recent hires and would be laid off in an environment where there were no schools hiring. (Ask Bubba’s Buddy who was an Elementary Counselor at the time in Galveston ISD.) I CHOSE to retire because they both had families to support and would take a huge career salary hit otherwise and my Retirement was fully funded at the time. A friend wanted me to take an Asst Manager’s job at his Starbucks (not some HS white kid’s job) which put my income back to its prior level. These Counselors actually sponsored a huge celebration for me (like 2 hours, quite embarrassing, and the whole school just for me when I retired). His B.S. knows no bounds and he feels free to make such accusations without knowing what he is talking about. As far as inconsistency, first they whine we conservatives take an “I’ve got mine, go get yours” attitudes, whine that we aren’t wealthy the next minute, even though they repeatedly cowardly refuse to compare their charitable support at their own expense made each year, or claim our objections to destructive policies are all based on “racism” and “greediness” when we are primarily concerned with fulfilling our responsibility (I know they hate that word) ans obligation to our children and grandchildren not to leave them saddled with unprecedented debt due to those policies. I believe he is symptomatic of the Liberals who either actually have incapacitated themselves mentally patting themselves on the back with these “OPM” policies, or they intend to hankrupt this country because they despise it so.

      • Bart-1 says:

        P.S. his name was Scott Barzilla. I don’t think he is one of the cowards who hides in anonymity and woulfn’t mind me dropping his name here.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Well Bart Pearston, isn’t that nice you made that decision for him?

      • bubbabobcat says:

        And bart-1/seriouscynic/usincrisis, don’t you DARE lecture me about cowardly hiding behind anonymity when you willfully created at least 3 simultaneous online ID’s and NEVER revealing that they were all you. And what, you somehow “accidentally” used those ID’s on the same damn blog and even talking to yourself pretending you were different people?

        And you were outed because you were a pretty damn stupid sockpuppet troll bully and couldn’t even keep track of which sockpuppet you were trolling from.

        So when the hell are you going to admit to that bart? It doesn’t matter. Everyone already knows you are a pathetic lying troll consorting with your fellow ilk. The smoking is there and has been there. No surprise whatsoever who your online “buddies” are.

        “Nothing to hide”. yeah, right.

        Asswipe.

      • DanMan says:

        You okay in my book bart. Poor bubba is a caricature as far as I’m concerned. Way back when despo masked as a regular ‘ol conservative poster to being invited into the Comical’s stable of readerbloggers and went hard left to attack Hillary several of us drove him over the edge by running over to his WordPress ‘Desperado’s Outpost’ blog and would use his comments there against him at his new gig.

        One of his favorite accusations was calling us sockpuppets. So a bunch of us changed our monikers to sockpuppet1, sockpuppet2 and so on. Then he started banning us while talking about how open he was so we’d hit other blogs and talk about him and Bob Cavner (el jefebob). One of them slipped and admitted to getting their talking points from Obama’s campaign.

        Pretty sure you were around then to witness his meltdown. Its all good. Nobody owes anybody anything here and our comments speak for themselves. despo and elboobybob had the same reliable bunch to fluff them and their pathetic scripted takes much like the rucas posse does here for our humble host.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Of cooooourse Danny Douche would excuse and condone bart’s despicable bullying behavior. That bart will never admit to despite the self induced smoking gun shot to his own foot.

        Now for the rest of the wingnut parade of obsequious willful blindness and circle jerk excusing of each other’s “scintillating character”.

  14. CaptSternn says:

    Well, this entry has exploded with comments. Guess your blog activity was down and you had to do something, so you threw out the grenade. Not with the immigration reform, but with all the accusations of racism. Yep, that gets things heated up in a hurry.

    Lets see, five days to get to 236 comments, granted 1 day to get to 183 comments (on one I thought would do better and last longer), four days to get 232 comments, another four days to get 292 comments, five days to get 359 comments, and just a few hours to get to 262 comments.

    Was that the goal here? As I was saying to Fly, you could have sparked an actual discussion of immigration issues and even reform if you hadn’t been screaming “RACISTS!” so much. Looks like actual discussion and debate were never the goal.

    And comparing the bussing of illegal aliens to the Freedom Riders … are you serious? Do you not have the least bit of understanding of the differences? People try to compare same-sex marriage to the civil rights movement, and they insult the people beaten and hosed in the civil rights movement for making that comparison. You insult the Freedom Riders for comparing U.S. Citizens to illegal aliens.

    No, if you really wanted to discuss immigration reform, you would not have pulled the pin and thrown out the grenade. Congrats on boosting the blog activity.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Well, I finally clicked on and opened your link to the CNN article. Took me a while because I was going against your accusations of racism. Turns out the link doesn’t support your accusations.

      “I just wish America would be America again because it’s not, and it’s not just pointed to the Hispanics,” Meeks said. “Everybody needs to go through the legal ways.”

      “Everybody that wants to come to this nation is entitled to, but they should come the right way,” Bob Cuccio told the news outlet.

      D’oh!

    • texan5142 says:

      It is ok Sternn, we know you are a conspiracy nut . Good job . Whose a good boy? Fetch !

      • CaptSternn says:

        Texan, you know, that actually reminds me of when I worked that factory job for almost ten years. There was a hispanic person that was the assistant foreman. He would get on the PA and call people like they were dogs, especially other hispanics that were there working on Green Cards.

        He tried that with me and I would not answer. That infuriated him.

        He was the guy that bought a crappy, cheap BMW, and could not stand another hispanic man that had an old Jaguar that parked close to his little cheap and crappy BMW. That is how insecure he was.

        Yes, you very much remind me of that person, not very much of a man at all.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Hey, you could even be as unmanly as Turtles and go whining to Tutt about me. That would not suprise me in the least.

      • texan5142 says:

        Well you remind me of a stinking pile of shit that does not realize that it stinks so i guess we are even.

      • texan5142 says:

        By the way, I do not think you are a dog, dogs are much better than you will ever be. I would never insult a dog by comparing them to you. You are just obedient like a trained dog with your talking points.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Captain, I thought Texan quit this site whining, etc. Seems he’s back on the sauce and back here. Bottle courage and juvenile postings.

      • texan5142 says:

        Good Christian kitty , now explain to your god why you went against him in thought, word and deed by judging someone and bearing false witness.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Speaking of all those evil white people …

    • CaptSternn says:

      I don’t think I need to continue.

    • goplifer says:

      “Well, this entry has exploded with comments…” Hmmm

      Top recent commenters:

      DanMan (of course): 160
      Owl of Bellaire: 157
      CaptSternn: 147

      No one else is close.

      That is all.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Owl? Really? I wouldn’t have expected that. But then I don’t keep count, and I don’t have access to the tools you have. I once did when I was web designer, and that was why I stopped trying to cater to Macinstosh and Netscape. Yes, that was almost a generation ago. I am showing my age.

        But since you are here and keeping up with things, answer me someting, if you will …

        Why would you not simply bring up a discussion on immigration reform if that was what you really wanted to discuss and debate, or watch such a discussion and debate over that matter, without screaming “RACIST!” in every other line or paragraph?

        Sometimes you throw out real grenades, then you do not participate or respond. Even when your blog entries are benign you do not particpate or respond.

        Are you or are you not interested in actual discussion? In actual debate? Or is this just a means for you to have a larger platform in media like the Chron.com? I know you have access to other outlets, but not sure where or if you would engage in actual discussion on those outlets. You have shut down comments on Chron.com.

        What is your purpose here? Why do you have a blog? Do you want discussion and debate? Or are you just trolling? Or is there some other goal you have? Will you, can you, answer that?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Really? Eek. Time to cut back a bit.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Quite the study in contrast. And human behavioral foibles.

        Chris tosses out irrefutable raw Rorschach data points.

        Cappy unsurprisingly rambles incoherently and as usual, inefficiently more than necessary (just to hear himself talk) but with the same general tiresome line of attack: “It’s your damn fault Chris! And anyone else’s but mine!”

        Owl: “Damn, *I* need to roll it back a bit.”

        You know, you wingnuts would be a lot happier (and possible ever so slightly more self aware) if you would just spring for the fifty bucks to ramble your nonsense to a professional instead of here for free to no one who cares.

      • objv says:

        Owl, go for it! You’re only three posts behind DanMan. You can’t let him beat you!

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…it is highly possible that Chris really does believe racism is a problem when it comes to immigration reform, and he is calling it out because he believes it needs to be called out.

        You disagree with that point, Buzz disagrees with that point, and 50 disagrees with that point, but a lot of folks think there is something to it.

        As soon as you hear the term “anchor baby” applied to a US citizen with all the rights and responsibilities of any other US citizen, that might be a clue that you should wonder about the person’s motives.

        To the point of your questioning a blogger about whether he is trying to get page views…well, crack addicts generally want more crack.

      • DanMan says:

        thanks, was a fun day

      • DanMan says:

        he’s plugged into Obama’s team and they’re tracking our comments Sternn

        I’m on the other side doing the same

      • DanMan says:

        remember Ellie Light?

      • CaptSternn says:

        HT, I don’t think it is just possible, more like probable, near certain. Everybody views the world from their own point of referance, so racists focus on race and they believe everything revolves around the color of a person’s skin and they can’t imagine that there are people in the world that are not racists as they are.

        Where does the term “anchor baby” come from? It isn’t a term I use, but remember the stories about the Chinese “tourists” coming here just about the time the mother will give birth? Yep, natural born U.S. Citizen. Do you ever hear that term applied to those Chinese families? What’s that? The answer is no? Well, maybe it isn’t so much about race after all. Imagine that.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…the fact that folks don’t necessarily refer to Chinese babies born here but do for Hispanic babies born here generally would suggest that it is a pretty much a racism thing.

      • rucasdad says:

        “Owl? Really? I wouldn’t have expected that. But then I don’t keep count…”

        “Lets see, five days to get to 236 comments, granted 1 day to get to 183 comments (on one I thought would do better and last longer), four days to get 232 comments, another four days to get 292 comments, five days to get 359 comments, and just a few hours to get to 262 comments.”

        Nope, you’re not keeping count at all.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Homer, it has been shown numerous times how racist Chris and you are. You see all things in view of color.

        Now when women who are 8 months pregnant sneak across the border, what do you think they are thinking?

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Buzz…I’m moderately sure I could read every comment you’ve made in the past few years and never see where you have accurately pointed out that I’m the racist.

        Oddly, it always seems to be the other folks who are racists, and you “I don’t see race anywhere” folks are pure as snow. If only everyone could be as colorblind.

        Now, with regard to your 8 month pregnant woman sneaking across the border.

        I suspect I have some guess at the idea why she would be doing that. She probably realizes that the future life of her new baby is going to be exponentially better if he/she is born in the US and is a US citizen.

        What does that have to do with using the term anchor baby.

    • Bart-1 says:

      I’m still waiting for Fly to name someone who claims “people sneaking across the border is unprecedented” as he claims.

  15. kabuzz61 says:

    Obama’s immigration crisis isn’t going as he planned so now the Homeland Security Director is warning some international flights that our security is being beefed up because of a terror threat. How convenient.

    Got to get the illegals off the headlines and a willing press will do it.

    • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

      Yes, “the illegals” is not at all a dehumanizing term…you’ve been known to rattle on about “anchor babies” in the past…you just don’t like these folks.

      Were I dude with a family trying to survive El Salvador, I have a hunch you might see us making the long trek to America by hook or by crook.

      Sure, many of you are better (or more manly) than am I, and you would fight the good fight to drastically change the entire country of El Salvador from within, but folks like me might weigh the pros and cons of what is best for my family, and head north.

      There but for the grace of god go I.

      My mom’s uterus happened to be on one side of a line drawn on a map when I was born. That had nothing to do with me or anything special about me. I was lucky in the grand cosmic lottery, and I realize lots of folks were not so lucky.

    • kabuzz61 says:

      Please show a reference where I used the phrase ‘anchor babies’. Homer, you have devolved into bullshit which is so unlike you. You must be losing the argument. Second time on one thread where you said I said something when I didn’t. Tsk! Maybe you started drinking too much and too early like Texan.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Buzz…we’ve been around this bend at least a half dozen times in what has to be at least a year or two (geez it has been way too long)…it is very possible that I’m wrong, but I have a very distinct memory of you saying, “well, that is what they are” when discussing the term anchor baby.

        Certainly possible that I am remembering a different person, but I do seem to recall it was you.

        With regard to your comment about my comment on your earlier comment, you wrote what you wrote…and it was a pretty poor thing to say…if you wrote poorly and it was not what you meant, that is not our fault.

  16. objv says:

    After WWII ended and Russia and Poland decided to take revenge for atrocities committed against them, my dad and his family fled East Prussia. He was one of the lucky ones to survive. An estimated two million German people who lived in Soviet occupied territories did not. Although the survivors escaped with their lives, they were hardly unscathed. My young aunts were raped by Russian soldiers – as were hundreds of thousands of other German women and girls.

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/a-time-of-retribution-paying-with-life-and-limb-for-the-crimes-of-nazi-germany-a-759737-3.html

    I realize my dad’s family was on the wrong side of the war and the Nazis had been brutal beyond belief, but suffering is suffering and it knows no nationality.
    My dad immigrated in the 1950s. He had to wait for years despite the fact that he had relatives in the US willing to sponsor him. I saw some of the paperwork connected with his immigration. His sponsors had to prove that they would support him for at least a year. They had to provide statements from their bank, salary information and even show what their house was worth. Although my dad was young (16), he also had to clear background checks as far as any war involvement.

    Personally, I do have quite a bit of sympathy for refugees. The world is full of people who have suffered and are undergoing persecution. I wish everyone could be helped.
    However, how should entry into this country be decided? In the past, at least in my father’s generation, immigration had conditions. Why all this argument about race? Why not follow immigration laws as they are written? I agree that some agreement has to be made as far as illegal immigrants already here how many from each country are allowed in, but without clear enforcement of laws our country will never be able to solve its problem with immigration.

    • Crogged says:

      If the US made it easy to become a citizen what bad things would happen other than too much soccer on television? Those ‘conditions’ were written for those times, 1946 is not 2014.

      • objv says:

        Crogged, I would say rules and conditions are even more important now. When my dad arrived in the 1950s, there were many, good manufacturing jobs available. My dad’s sponsors agreed that they would provide support for a year, but my dad was able to find a job right away.

        Nowadays, many jobs that used to provide a middle class lifestyle are gone. Immigrants without an education find themselves working jobs that pay poorly. A large proportion can’t support their families without government help. i fear illegal immigration will promote the growth of a large underclass that will not be able to achieve the American dream.

    • kabuzz61 says:

      My grandparents also came over from Slovakia in the late 30’s. They too had to have a sponsor and someone vouch and take care of them for one year if need be.

      What we have to keep in mind is there are thousands of people waiting in line to come here. They are playing by the rules and going through the proper channels. What are we to tell them when we let people just butt up in front of the line? We have to be a fair country that demonstrates we enforce out laws.

      • objv says:

        kabuzz, Here Dr Marc Siegel writes about health checks, his grandfather had when immigrating from Poland in 1903. Currently, our country is facing health and safety risks by warehousing and then releasing sick immigrants into the general population.

        http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/06/30/immigration-crisis-us-experiencing-major-public-health-crisis-too/?intcmp=trending

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Nope, I already posted a link from the AMA noting that the “health checks” were subjective and politicized to limit the type of immigrants “from certain regions” they did not want.

      • texan5142 says:

        The 30’s he’ll that means I am more American than the cat, my grandparents where here long before that.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        It always comes down to politics. It is beneficial to the dem’s to have thousands of illegals here to exploit for votes regardless is they bring contagions or not. It is just the way the system is played. We the people need to wake up our government.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        kabuzz, please offer proof that illegal aliens are voting.

        In reality, voter turn-out is lower among legal Hispanics than among just about any other group of registered voters, particularly in Texas.

      • Bart-1 says:

        yeah Kabuzz, just because Owl doesn’t provide support for his claims when asked directly doesn’t mean you can’t! Isn’t he the one (one of the main ones) hypocritically talking about our “hypocrisy”? Bart-1 says:
        July 2, 2014 at 5:06 pm
        Owl, where did you get those figures from. Quinnipiac says the poll had a margin of error of only 2.6%?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Jeez, Bart, I don’t read all the way down the entire comments stream every time I visit the blog. Way to get your knickers in a twist.

        Here are the actual poll questions and results, which back up my comments about its shoddy construction: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/us/us07022014_crosstabs_U73jabn.pdf

        So, kabuzz, now it’s your turn. Hello? Hellooooooooooo?

    • flypusher says:

      “Why not follow immigration laws as they are written? ”

      Because they are obviously not working. They need to be reformed/ updated, but there are vested interests across the political spectrum that obstruct that. A lot of people seem to be operating under the fantasy of an immigration system that never was- that when THEIR ancestors came over the laws were totally fair and everybody followed the law, unlike all those disrespectful people of today.

      • objv says:

        fly, the laws aren’t working because they aren’t being enforced, but I agree that nothing can ever be totally fair. I don’t think that the current wave of illegal immigrants are being particularly disrespectful. They are taking advantage of an opportunity in the system, and until that loophole is closed, they will continue to come.

        If we want to talk about fairness, what of the millions of people in other countries who have been waiting years to come here?

      • CaptSternn says:

        It isn’t that the laws are not working, it is about the fact that they are not being enforced.

      • flypusher says:

        “fly, the laws aren’t working because they aren’t being enforced,…”

        Wishful thinking, objv, and just not true. I worked at MD Anderson for a number if years, and saw first hand the results of immigration laws that make no sense. My time to post is limited here, so I’ll cite the most recent example of stupid immigration law; They decided to dissolve one of the basic research departments, which means that people move to other departments (if they are lucky). They’ve got a couple PhDs from Europe who have visas contingent upon being employed by THAT department. A reasonable person would say, “hey just do some paperwork and change the department on the form, how hard can that be?” Except no, according to our totally fair and logical immigration laws, there’s a very good chance that they will have to go back to their home countries, reapply for their visas, spending months away from their families and losing valuable research time. Our laws are crappy, outdated, unrealistic, and don’t even attempt to be fair. And that’s just a milder example of the unfairness.

      • objv says:

        fly, yes, changes should be made so that foreign workers can apply for new visas within the US, but are we talking temporary work visas or actual immigration here?

        My husband has had to work in two foreign countries and has had to apply for work visas specific to both job and duration both times. Believe it or not, other countries are also rather picky about who is permitted to work to ensure jobs aren’t taken from citizens.

        My brother-in-law was once stopped at the Canadian border and not permitted to enter because he told border agents that he was going to teach a seminar for a few days! Admittedly, he could have just told them he was on vacation, but I think you get the picture. Other countries are protective of their jobs and country’s security. Why can’t the US do the same without someone screaming about racism?

      • flypusher says:

        “…but are we talking temporary work visas or actual immigration here?”

        I’m talking both, because they are connected. Consider how many more lawbreakers can be created because the visa rules are so illogical. We do need to have that honest national discussion about who we are going to allow in, and for what reasons/ purposes, then change the laws to make that work more smoothly.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Good comment, OV. We most definately need rules on immigration, something the left thinks is racism even though the rules apply to all want to immigrate legally. I have no such stories about my adoptve family as it seems that all sides going back from my grandparents were already here by the time the colonies broke from the British empire, and some in my bloodline were here thousands of years before that.

      I do remember one case from when I was working down in Rosenberg, a young man came to work for the company from Brasile. He also had a sponsor, but shortly after he arrived he had to leave. His sponsor was sponsoring too many people. He was still unable to return by the time I left that company.

      Earlier in the day somebody mentioned that military service would be a way to gain citizenship (I think it might have even been Owl, of all people). I think that is a great idea, but not for anybody here illegally (unless maybe they were brought here as young children by no choice of their own, that could be negotiated on).

      There was a guy in my company in the army during Basic that was trying to do just that, working towards citizenship through service. Sadly he washed out, medical reasons. He devloped stress fractures in both legs, but he continued to march and run on broken legs in hopes of making it through and eventually gaining citizenship.

      Now we have people here, today, on this blog, that want to reward people with citizenship that have no respect for our laws, our system or our nation. I wonder if they could look that man in the eye?

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Not only what you stated but the illegals has no allegiance to our country. The left are fooling themselves.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        “The illegals has”?

        Snort!

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        What is this fixation you have with 22 weeks? That comes from you, babe, not me.

        And the hottest year *where*?

  17. […] Riders Freedom RidersA busload of desperate refugee children were being transferred this week from overcrowded facilities […]

  18. Crogged says:

    So, if you have been here ‘illegally’ for the last five years and have committed no felonious crime, except in hiding your status, pay five hundred dollars and forfeit whatever moneys earned in government programs under stolen, fictitious identity. In the next five years commit no felonies, pass the citizenship test and become a US citizen at the end of the five years. Add a provision that you can’t pull a one party vote lever in the next two following presidential election contest years since you are certain they are here for the ‘freebies’?

    • Owl of Bellaire says:

      End straight-ticket voting *period*. That would be the only way to ensure your prohibition, since the State can’t examine the content of a citizen’s ballot.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Um, no. If you are here illegally, go back to the nation of your origin and apply to come here legally. If you have stolen an identity, faked papers like social security cards and are known to be here illegally, go home and forget about coming back.

      • Crogged says:

        There is no circumstance in which someone could earn a ‘pardon’ under a law we could write, if we were so inclined?

      • CaptSternn says:

        We could, I do not support doing so. They do not respect our laws or our nation, they don’t belong here.

      • Crogged says:

        So the laws of immigration are due more respect than others, and if one is already a citizen we can choose which of those laws are due respect, without fear of losing citizenship. You give no credit to someone who willingly puts their life into a constant fear of loss, and instead view the action as selfish. Your idea of ‘respect’ seems self serving and a justification of privilege unavailable to other human beings.

      • CaptSternn says:

        A citize here that breaks our laws gets fined, or arrested and jailed, maybe sent to prison, maybe even gets the death penalty, depending on what laws he or she has broken.

      • Crogged says:

        These people risk it all to have the same and you don’t care. I get it, it seems like ‘cheating’ and that damn Cain is always getting away with it all…………..

      • CaptSternn says:

        They should work on coming here legally and then working towards getting their citizenship like so many others have done. You are slapping those folks in the face by even suggesting amnesty.

      • Crogged says:

        How are they ‘slapped in the face’? Are you implying they would say, “Dang, I could have lived here fearing for my status for years and gotten the same thing they did-I’m HURT!” Give them a hundred bucks for being good guys, if living right isn’t reward enough. You want to punish the worst off for their circumstances, rather than offer them anything to live for.

      • texan5142 says:

        Yes Crogged he does

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Sternn insists that it’s okay to change unjust laws, as in the Hobby Lobby case.

        Chris has pointed out that our current immigration laws are a mess.

        Yet Sternn demands that we keep to those same laws, not change them for the benefit of anyone caught in the cracks, and basically ship everyone home even though that’s practically and morally impossible.

        Sounds like hypocrisy is still a Republican value.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Ok Crogged, maybe we are making some progress here. You admit that illegal aliens are not living right. Yet you still want them rewarded. How does that make any sense? Do you want criminals here? People not living right? People that have nmo respect for our laws or our nation? You WANT that?

        Owl, Hobby Lobby did not get laws changed. The court ruled that existing laws or acts prohibited the Obama administration from forcing Hobby Lobby to pay for abortificants. Hobby Lobby used the legal process, something you obviously oppose. Not to mention your reading comprehension is consistenly bad since I have already said that our immigration laws could probably use some reforming.

  19. kabuzz61 says:

    Wow! How pitiful the left has become. A new low.

    Homer, I always thought of you as a grown up that was just ideologically wrong. Now I’m not sure. I had said some of the kid’s even have HIV. And you interpret that remark as something other than a fact. I have commented on other threads this week on this crisis and how our medical resources are being overwhelmed even those that we have for the military. These kids are being treated but at what cost??? Who is not being treated because of this Obama lead crisis? Who is paying for all of this??? These are serious questions that need answers.

    And for you who curse God and make fun of Christians, please don’t think your comments and lessons mean anything. The force is not in you.

    So okay, instead of dealing with this crisis, lets just yell racist, TEA Party, etc.

    You do know that when you come in this country legally, you are checked for health reasons as well as sponsorship. But you would have to respect the law to understand about that.

    • Crogged says:

      I have proposed ‘dealing’ with the crises, make it much easier to become a US citizen, despite your health status.

    • texan5142 says:

      Nor in you brother.

    • kabuzz61 says:

      Crogged, what about the thousands of potential immigrants standing in line right now, following the laws and procedures. What would you tell them if we allow illegals to bump up to the front of the line? We should demonstrate that the USA enforces the laws of this country instead of their first lesson being the USA is all talk and no action.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Perhaps we should change our immigration laws so that they work in the real world.

        Oh, right: conservatives don’t want to live there.

  20. bubbabobcat says:

    kabuzz61 reflexively hate rants:
    July 2, 2014 at 12:03 pm

    “Many have measles, chicken pox, strep, scabies, lice and some even have HIV.”

    The buzzies of the late 19th and early 20th centuries irrationally fear mongered the same hysterical shrieks about the Irish, Italians, Jews, Slavs, Russians, Poles,…you know, most of YOUR White ancestors.

    Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

    Especially for knee jerk wingnuts with only a functioning brain stem in their craniums and no mirrors in their bomb shelter hovels.

    • kabuzz61 says:

      Yes they did. When they came through legally. If they had a communicable disease, they were quarantined until healthy.

    • bubbabobcat says:

      “Influenced by scientific racism, the medical examination procedures differed for European, Latin American, and Asian immigrants.”

      Ironic what a hundred or so years transmorgrifies what or who the trendy bogeymen of the eras were/are:

      “Disease, health officials argued, was not so easily “read” in the “inscrutable” Asians, particularly the Chinese.”

      http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2008/04/mhst1-0804.html

    • bubbabobcat says:

      Read my link buzzy. For comprehension. Yer wrong. Again.

      It’s another political/racist tool. You know, like you.

  21. flypusher says:

    Here is a fascinating bit of perspective:

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5391395

    It seems that a century ago the US had a problem with immigrant smuggling across the Southern border, only they were people from Europe who thought they would be rejected at Ellis Island (also some scams dumping people who really wanted to go elsewhere). So I wonder how many of the screaming people just might have a little skeleton in their family closet- an ancestor who flouted the law and sneaked across the border? Such irony.

    • CaptSternn says:

      How is that relevant?

      • flypusher says:

        Because there are people who claim they’re all about enforcing the law and assume that people sneaking in undocumented is something unprecedented. So yes, a look at the past is very relevant.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Doesn’t have any relevancy.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        You don’t see it because then you’d have to be honest, Sternn. And you can’t have that.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Owl, the children of the Chinese “tourists” that are born here are U.S. Citizens. When they grow up, they have the option of coming back to the U.S. as citizens and taking advantage of all the opportunities being a citizen offers. Does that confuse you?

      • Bart-1 says:

        Fly who is claiming that people “sneaking in undocumented is unprecedented”? Care support that plural claim with even a singular example?

    • Anse says:

      It’s definitely perspective-broadening to study the myriad ways migration drove the evolution of our country. It’s a fact that many of the Anglos who came into Texas in the early 19th century did so in defiance of Mexican immigration laws.

      The fixation on the legal aspect of the problem is such a sham. We could make legal immigration easier, but the same people who insist that it’s all about the law would no doubt block those efforts.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Dan, are you saying that invited *any* and *all* Whites, under *any* circumstances and at *all* times?

        Or are you deliberately eliding and ignoring the point, as you do so often?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Actually, Mexico won its independence from Spain in 1821. The First Mexican Empire existed from 1821 to 1823, and in 1824 the Federal Constitution of the United Mexican States was enacted.

        So, apparently, Dan thinks we didn’t exist as a country before 1789.

        Mexico granted Texas a one-year exemption from the national edict of 1829 outlawing slavery, and then in 1830 Mexican President Anastasio Bustamante ordered that all slaves be freed and outlawed the immigration of U.S. citizens to Texas.

        Early Texans violated the law. That doesn’t make modern Texas a renegade state or an evil place, but it *does* demonstrate that we all have law-breakers in our past somewhere, even if we regard them (conveniently) as virtuous rather than wicked.

  22. Bart-1 says:

    And now you know why Jeb Bush, being the Establishment’s nominee like Mccain and Romney before him, has NO chance of winning with remarks like that.

    • Owl of Bellaire says:

      If a nominee isn’t favored by the “establishment”, then doesn’t that mean they’re favored by the “fringe” instead?

      Great way to win elections, there.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Jeb Bush calling everyone who supports Legal immigration “Liars” will ensure that he will not have the support of those on the so-called “fringe” who actually DO support the rule of law while probably not garnering those who don’t support it. Still awaiting Chris’s OUTRAGE over the Establishment GOP in Mississippi paying Democrats to support Cochran. Libs fail to be able to grasp that between the Establishment GOP types (Chamber of Commerce etc) and the Socialists in the Democratic Party, this country is going broke. Regardless of how much lipstick Chris tries to put on it with pithy little threads on how “The Optimists are winning”. It just shows that HE and the other Libs are out of step with the American Publc in his support for Obama’s agenda and failed foreign policies. BTW why not mention Obama’s forcing the Honduran government of Zelaya, responsible for the largest share of these “children”, to be reinstalled when he broke his own Constitution and rule of law when Obama first took office? Hmmmm…. http://www.solidarity-us.org/hondurascoup http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/2/obama-worst-president-wwii-new-poll-shows/

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Things change, Dan.

        From within your dead, intellectual stasis, you might not understand that.

        But it’s true.

      • Crogged says:

        Well she didn’t quit her day job as governor of Alaska, isn’t that an accomplishment?

    • flypusher says:

      Which far-righty has a prayer in the general election?

    • bubbabobcat says:

      Well bart, thank you for confirming that there is no room for compassion and rationality whatsoever in your warped, hate filled view of what the Republican party should be. Not that anyone with a half a brain or an ounce of decency needs any smoking gun… .

      • Bart-1 says:

        Jeb Bush calling everyone who supports Legal immigration “Liars” will ensure that he will not have the support of those on the so-called “fringe” who actually DO support the rule of law while probably not garnering those who don’t support it. Still awaiting Chris’s OUTRAGE over the Establishment GOP in Mississippi paying Democrats to support Cochran. Libs fail to be able to grasp that between the Establishment GOP types (Chamber of Commerce etc) and the Socialists in the Democratic Party, this country is going broke. Regardless of how much lipstick Chris tries to put on it with pithy little threads on how “The Optimists are winning”. It just shows that HE and the other Libs are out of step with the American Publc in his support for Obama’s agenda and failed foreign policies. BTW why not mention Obama’s forcing the Honduran government of Zelaya, responsible for the largest share of these “children”, to be reinstalled when he broke his own Constitution and rule of law when Obama first took office? Hmmmm…. http://www.solidarity-us.org/hondurascoup http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/2/obama-worst-president-wwii-new-poll-shows/

      • Bart-1 says:

        insults as usual from the intellectual libs who consider themselves superior. laughable

      • Bart-1 says:

        Owl of Bellaire says:
        July 2, 2014 at 12:51 pm
        Your addiction to name-calling, even more than your brain-dead, fact-free rhetoric, reveals the hopelessness of your stupidity.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        bubbabobcat hardly shows an “addiction” in the way that shallow, hapless DanMan does. DanMan can’t seem to bring himself to use a Democratic politician’s actual name if there’s a childishly simple-minded insult that he can drag to light inside his turgid, undeveloped skull.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Bart, there is no need to prove your hypocrisy over and over and over again, Even your buddies know it. They just choose to overlook it based on ideological affinity.

        Besides, it’s not an “insult” if you continually prove my point bart.

        Over and over and over again.

      • Bart-1 says:

        my “buddies”? go ahead and demonstrate that fact Bubba. As usual, complete B.S. from you. And Owl, to pretend Bubba isn’t addicted to insults and name calling makes you look either partisanly blinded or insane.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Um bart, WHO initiated the personal attacks and name calling in the previous post?

        Why, none other than the consummate whiny hypocrite bully bart-1/seriouscynic/usincrisis who mistakenly believed I was “banned” and he could bully unencumbered again.

        Nope, you can’t go back to your middle school again bart. So grow up already. Nice try.

      • Bart-1 says:

        hmm, don’t see any of my “buddies” supporting your bogus claim as usual Bubba.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Bart, all anyone has to do is go back to the previous blog and read the timelines of your comments vs mine. But lying has been your go to virtue eh bart? When not flailing hypocrisy left and right of course.

  23. texan5142 says:

    I see kabuz in showing us all his Christian upbringing with his post. For someone who claims to be Christian you are a vile man.

    • Bart-1 says:

      Texan, do you want the country to actually follow Biblical commands, or just cherry pick the parts you like? Just asking.

      • texan5142 says:

        Man you are way off. Derp.

      • desperado says:

        That’s not strange territory for Bart.

      • Bart-1 says:

        was that the best answer to my question you could come up with texan?

      • texan5142 says:

        Your “question” had nothing to do with my post, it is all you deserve.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Texan, dancing around a direct question in a manner only Eric Holder, Lois Lerner, or Fred Astaire could envy. Impressive!

      • texan5142 says:

        I am not a Christian that is why your question means nothing to me. Seperating of church and state, there is your answer.

      • texan5142 says:

        Plus there is no such thing as biblical laws, the bible is a fable.

      • texan5142 says:

        Seperation of church and state, my bad.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Owl, the term “submit” means to follow under the authority”. Under OUR country, which has no king BTW, Christians have both the RIGHT and the Scriptural command to challenge the authorities in a legal manner. Otherwise your view that not submitting to the authorities commands completely would be disproven by peter, Paul, and Jesus himself when called before magistrates themselves. You are obviously wrong. Your view that Hobby Lobby was not in compliance of our laws by suing the government (and supported by the SCOTUS BTW) is embarrassing.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Christians are taught to respect the rule of law, to obey the laws of the land. Guess that is just one thing of many you don’t know about Christians.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Catholics, on the other hand, do tend to support the occasional act of civil disobedience if it’s for a humane, social cause.

      • Turtles Run says:

        Tutt – Agreed on many fronts they lead the way on human rights issues – immireation reform and the death penalty.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…I would venture to say that the vast majority of folks streaming across our borders would readily identify as “Christian”, and you do not see them as respecting the law, but maybe this is another of those “No True Scotsman” issues

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Turtles: If there’s anything I have a serious problem with related to illegal immigration, it’s identity theft, which is treated with too cavalier an attitude by the perpetrators. I can’t say “everyone does it” but it seems pervasive.

        My own cousin, who has a name similar to mine and is close to me in age, once asked to “borrow” my birth certificate, and I refused. She and her immediate family didn’t speak to me for years after that, but, oh, well, too bad.

      • texan5142 says:

        Who talking rule of law, I am talking about how a confessed Christian describes the children in need. WWJD. You can feel the giddyness in the cats post as he describes the children. It is sickening . It is a if he enjoys the hardship they are going thru.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Sternn vacuously states, “Christians are taught to respect the rule of law, to obey the laws of the land.”

        Then why did Hobby Lobby bring suit, again?

        Oh, right. Hypocrisy is a Republican value.

      • texan5142 says:

        That is funny, like abortion and the bible they pick and choose.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Hobby Lobby went by the law of the land, and the court upheld it.

      • Anse says:

        Yes, Christians should respect the rule of law. They are implored to “submit to the governments of man, even unto the King.” That’s from Peter, I believe in the book of Acts. Unfortunately our Christians aren’t very submissive.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Anse, we the people are the soveriegn in this nation.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Watch Sternn flop around on his hypocritical hook.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Owl, in libbyloony logic is bringing suit NOT following the Law now? In this country that is EXACTLY what you do if you disagree with a law. What country do you live in?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Suing the government is most certainly not agreeing to “submit to the governments of man, even unto the King.”

        But I forgot that Christian doctrine is only true if it’s convenient, whether for making you money personally or excusing the hate you wish to exhibit toward others.

        Hypocrisy is a Republican value.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Filing a lawsuit is following the law of the land. Again, it is we, the people, that are te soveriegn government here. It is why we have things like trial by jury.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Christian doctrine is only applied when convenient would be Texan (an atheist) calling for Kabuzz to support what he thinks is Christian doctrine Owl. Filing lawsuit against the government IS the lawful tactic. Protesting its actions is repeatedly done in the NT by both Paul and Jesus. You believe they were in violation of their own doctrine now?

      • Bart-1 says:

        not to mention our entire country exists on such “Republican Hypocrisy” in Owl’s view because a bunch of mostly Christians not only didn’t submit to their government in 1776, they declared war on it. It is Independence Day after all.I guess Owl opposed that also.

  24. DanMan says:

    aww look at the rucas posse fall in line, so easy to do it seems cruel of me to make it happen so easily

  25. flypusher says:

    “We have millions of illegal immigrants in the US because we have provided no realistic method to come here legally and no realistic means to punish those who exploit illegal migrants.”

    QFT. But too many people would rather scream at children instead of screaming at their reps for failing to address those two prime causes.

    History is rhyming again- we have a 21st Century revival of the Know-Nothings going on.

    • CaptSternn says:

      Ask Cantor if people are not also going after their reps on this issue.

      The biggest problem we have in dealing with just about any issue is the left screaming “RASISTS!” all the time. Support the laws of this nation? RACIST! Oppose the PPACA? RACIST! Didn’t vote for Obama? RACIST! The reality of that shows how seriously weak the position of the left is. They really don’t have anything to actually stand on.

      Want to have an honest and open discussion about something? Drop the acuusations of racism. Lifer could have done that with this blog entry and maybe we could have started with real ideas of what we might do to reform our immigration laws. But no, of course not. He comes out the gates screaming “RACISTS!” And in the end, that really is his only point, and it doesn’t seem that he is at all interested in doing anything about immigration reform. That, or he just doesn’t have any respect at all for this nation or its laws.

    • flypusher says:

      “Ask Cantor if people are not also going after their reps on this issue.”

      And will he be replaced by someone who is going to work of fixing the defects in the current law or someone who is going to double down on the derp?

      Screaming about enforcing laws when said laws are defective/ inadequate is nothing more than throwing more monkey wrenches into the works.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Republicans have offered many times to discuss immigration reform, but conditions have to be met first. They got fooled before. It’s like making the deal with democrats to raise taxes if spending is also cut. Democrats promise to cut spending, taxes are raised, and spending never gets cut. Want to come to the table, then bring something other than false and baseless accusations.

      • flypusher says:

        The GOP is too busy trying to devour those of its own who deviate even a little from a far right stance on this issue. That’s not going to get anything meaningful done in terms of fixing inadequate laws.

      • CaptSternn says:

        But you think jumping up and down, pointing fingers and screaming “RACISTS!” is going to get something meaningful done?

      • flypusher says:

        Yeah, Chris offered his opinion that the people screaming at those children are racist. But most of his posting was about why the current immigration laws don’t work. The problem with you is that you get all huffy about that minor first part and use it for an excuse to ignore the second, more important part.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Hardly a minor point when he throws it out so many times, directly or indirectly. That pretty much eats up the entire entry, and other than getting traffic and a lot of comments, what has it done to actually bring up the issue for debate?

        Right, it didn’t. All he accomplished is to get the people here to start accusing others of being racists. No real debate about reforming our immigration laws or policies at all.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Fine, Sternn. What do you think we should do, both about the current problem and about future changes?

        In a practical, actual universe, mind you, not in the daydream realm where your constitutional interpretation reigns supreme.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        I don’t know stern…I sincerely did not realize (or at least did not remember) you were in favor of attempting to deport tens of millions of folks.

        I knew Buzz had gone down that rabbit hole, but I was not aware you were there too.

        I’m normally of the impression that folks on the other side of this issue recognize the futility in even thinking of the mechanism for deporting that many folks (and recognize the devastation it would cause to the economy), so I don’t worry to build that into my arguments.

        You, who can generally put verbs and nouns together in complete sentences and who is a moderately rational person, operates under the notion that such a thing is feasible.

        So, when discussing this in real life, I now know that I’m going to have to take the time to disassemble that piece of the argument.

        So, it does help move some things forward.

      • flypusher says:

        It only eats the entry in your mind, because you chose that. Do you honesty believe that among all the people who are screaming about immigration and refusing any rational discussion or compromise, that there is actually zero racism?

      • CaptSternn says:

        HT, do you think it would happen all at once? Is that why you don’t think it is feasable, maybe not even possible?

        Fly, I am sure there are some racists out there, racists on both sides. Focusing on that because one has no real argument to begin with destoys much of any possibility of ever having a discussion. Here we are now discussing that part of it instead of actually discussing any actual reform or changes.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Homer, I never stated we should deport ‘them’ all. Your words my man. Maybe a Fraudian slip?

      • flypusher says:

        “Fly, I am sure there are some racists out there, racists on both sides. ”

        Then perhaps you shouldn’t waste time getting so indignant over Chris mentioning something that is real. Some people are motivated by racism, and that is part of the problem.

        “Focusing on that because one has no real argument to begin with destoys much of any possibility of ever having a discussion. ”

        YOU are the one focusing on that and ignoring the rest of what Chris posted. Go look at the 2 sentences I quoted at the start of this thread. They do a nice concise job of explaining what the problem is. THAT is what is important.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Lifer focused on it many times over in his latest entry. But you don’t see a problem with it, even though doing so derailed the whole topic before the train ever got moving.

    • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

      Buzz…Stern specifically said he would deport everyone here illegally.

      You had not chimed in on this until now, but you and I discussed this issue many moons ago to the same conclusion.

      So, I’m not sure I know what you are talking about with “them” because that is no where in my comment, and I’m pretty sure you do not know what a Freudian Slip is but you might want to glance in a mirror.

    • flypusher says:

      The train is still there. Nobody is preventing you from discussing ways to update immigration laws except you.

  26. johnofgaunt75 says:

    BTW….well done Jeb Bush. The man was brave speaking up on this issue. A true leader.

    • Anse says:

      The moment when Rick Perry defended his support for the Texas version of the DREAM Act was probably the only moment when I ever felt a true sense of pride for our governor. It was a brave and decent thing to say to that lunatic debate crowd. There are glimmers of true decency in the GOP; it gives me hope.

      • johnofgaunt75 says:

        I don’t think Rick Perry is a bad person. There are many things I disagree with him on but he’s a decent guy. Not someone who I would want to lead my state or my nation mind you but that doesn’t mean he’s a bad person.

        Now…on the other hand…I think people like Tom Tancredo are vile.

      • flypusher says:

        Yeah, that was actually decent of Guv Goodhair.

        I’m fine with the notion if a DREAM act, although of the proposals I’ve seen, I think the standards are not high enough. I would set if up this way. If a “DREAMer” joins the military, then as soon as he/she completes that tour of duty (and has a good record), that person gets to take the oath of citizenship. Option 2 would be to graduate college within 6 years, and have a full-time job to go to after graduation. That person could then be a legal resident (green card or equivalent) and get in the line for citizenship if they choose.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        We’ve done it before.

        http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/filipinos.htm

        “Under the Nationality Act of 1940, aliens who served honorably in the armed forces for three years or more could be naturalized as US citizens without having to meet certain normal requirements of naturalization such as lawful admission into the United States for permanent residence. The Nationality Act of 1940, however, was repealed on 27 June 1952, effective 24 December 1952 by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 USC 1101 et seq) which contains many provisions similar to those of the 1940 Act, but in the case of an alien who served honorably in the armed forces for three years requires that he shall have been lawfully admitted for permanent residence. Under this law, aliens are normally admitted for permanent residence under the quota system.”

      • bubbabobcat says:

        In other words bart, in your myopic world “we don’t need no stinkin’ immigrants” except to die for us in combat and then when we are done using them as cannon fodder, lather, rinse, repeat.

        Mighty “Christian” of you bart. And not surprising of course.

      • Bart-1 says:

        For the slow to comprehend, (That’s you Bubba), stating the obvious that our immigration policies should be based on OUR COUNTRY’S NEEDS does NOT claim , “WE don’t need no stinkin’ immigrants”. classic Reductio ad absurdum. Not surprising from you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

    • Bart-1 says:

      Owl, that act was gearing up to fight a major war was it not? It was repealed as soon as the need for troops disappeared was it not? Apples to Oranges, or do you think we should start gearing up for another world war?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Bart, you’re saying we kept needing troops for WWII all the way through 1952?

        Wow. Conservative historical ignorance knows no bounds.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Flop around all you want bart. You are just proving my point further. They’re not “illegal” when we need them and then once we’re done using and abusing them to include their sacrificing their lives, we don’t need no stinkin’ illegals.

        Boy your ethical contortions and convolutions get more entertaining the more you twist on that vine.

      • Bart-1 says:

        they are Legal when there exists a law making their entry legal. Should be rather easy for most to figure out Bubba (even you). Totally consistent. Owl,The need for troops ran through the Korean War which ended in 1953 officially I believe. American troops were deployed there as well. You knew THAT didn’t you?

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Well bart the Korean War has officially NEVER ended at all to this day. Obviously you DIDN’T know that did you? But facts and accuracy have never been a major concern in your ignorant rants.

        And bart, so the “need for troops” for the Korean War was presciently predicted 5 years prior in 1945 when WW II ended and MILLIONS of combat tested soldiers were deactivated into civilian life because they were no longer needed? And they needed immigrant cannon fodder even though millions of recent combat experienced and proven men were available throughout the active combat years of the Korean War? And then the government rescinded the immigration law BEFORE full cessation of combat and implementation of the armistice? Makes perfect sense right bart? Only in your ignorant wingnut world.

        Bart’s wingnut “intelligence” on display again. You just can’t help yourself, can you bart?

        If nothing else, your idiocy is entertaining.

        Yes bart we ARE laughing AT you. Again.

      • Bart-1 says:

        bzz, wrong again nice try again. take your neds first next time though. http://www.bing.com/search?q=korean%20war&pc=cosp&ptag=A67B473443B42425CAFF&form=CONAPP&conlogo=CT3210127

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Didn’t read your own sources again bart? For comprehension or at all? Just lazily Googling your desired key words bart?

        “The negotiations at Panmunjom finally bore fruit in 1953 and an armistice went into effect on July 27. Though fighting ended, no formal peace treaty was concluded. Instead, both sides agreed to the creation of a demilitarized zone along the front.”

        Armistice, no formal end of war, like I said. And US troops are still dying there in conflict as recently as 1994 when a US helicopter was shot down by North Korea and one taken prisoner. Two US officers were hacked to death by North Korean soldiers in 1976 and I guess you never herad of the USS Pueblo being captured by North Korea 15 years after your purported “end of the Korean War”?

        And again from YOUR source bart, the official US history:

        “On July 27, 1953, the DPRK, PRC and UN signed an armistice (the ROK abstained) agreeing to a new border near the 38th parallel as the demarcation line between North and South Korea. Both sides would maintain and patrol a demilitarized zone (DMZ) surrounding that boundary line. The armistice was only a ceasefire agreement, not a formal peace treaty ending the war.”

        https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/korean-war-2

        And what is “ned”? I don’t have a 12 year old language translator.

        Bart-1/seriouscynic/usincrisis Proving over and over and over again he has the intelligence and maturity of a 12 year old. Even in “early retirement at 53”. Maybe in all the free time you can finally grow up and edify yourself for a change.

        Yes bart we are STILL laughing AT you. Again.

  27. Anse says:

    If race has nothing to do with this issue, then I’m not really sure why we argue about it. The United States government can establish immigration law as it sees fit. We can make legal immigration easier. We can retroactively put illegal immigrants on the path to citizenship. We can do any of those things we wish to do because how we choose to regulate immigration is up to us.

    But everybody knows this is about race. It can’t be about economics. If you are a free market capitalist, the idea that immigration (legal or otherwise) represents a threat to the labor market is absurd. It’s as if you’d say the labor market should have controls of some kind, as if the free competition between workers for jobs is something that should be regulated. Wage depression? Give me a break. If you are concerned about depressed wages, support a higher minimum wage.

    Just get the xenophobes talking and a host of other issues come up, all of them code for “we don’t want the icky brown people coming over here.”

    • CaptSternn says:

      As usual, I see a lot of projection going on. Seems you think of some people as “icky brown people”, so you believe all share that view. Only most don’t, especially most on the right. I guess we simply have more respect for the rule of law. Could we change the laws? Sure, but until then enforce what is on the books.

      • Anse says:

        Sternn, there is no way to search into your soul to know precisely what your motivations are. What we can say for certain is that this kind of xenophobia goes back in American history some 200+ years. I remember reading about how Ben Franklin lamented that the Germans moving into Pennsylvania would never learn English and learn to assimilate. And it’s been that way through every wave of immigrants: Chinese, Irish, Italians, East European Jews; every generation has raised the alarm. Every generation proclaims that our destruction is just around the corner as long we keep letting in those people. And all of it has been motivated by a deep distrust of anybody who isn’t white and Protestant.

        Everybody says, “well, that was then, but now it’s enough. We really can’t have any more.” And they’ve said it for 200 years. Here’s the truth, Sternn. America is not going to be the same as a result of this new wave of Latino immigrants. America is never the same after a new wave of immigration. And that’s a good thing. We should celebrate it. I’m sorry if the change is too much for you to handle, but you can trust that your kids and your grandkids will adjust just fine.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Did they come here through legal channels, Anse?

      • Anse says:

        Sternn, Chris already called you bozos out for that, and I don’t know what I can add to it except to agree that it’s 90 proof bull. We make the law. We can make it easier to immigrate here. We can put these folks on the path to citizenship, or we can deport them. It’s up to us.

        The legal angle is just a way for you to veil your hate as some kind of principled stand.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Yes, again, we could change the laws and I am not opposed to doing so, as long as those that come here illegally are deported and not given citizenship. Respect for our laws and the nation is very important. Have no respect for such things, then you don;t belong here.

      • Crogged says:

        Were men made for laws or laws made for men?

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…So, you are not saying we need to deport all those folks who came here illegally?

        You could not imagine a way that would make such a thing work in the US in 2014.

      • CaptSternn says:

        How do you eat an elephant, HT?

        One bite at a time.

        Arizona was onto dealing with it, going after those that employ or aid illegal aliens. The left had a coniption fit.

      • DanMan says:

        sure we can, enforce the laws our representatives swore to uphold

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        It’s hilarious how Sternn’s playground-grade reaction to any mention of racism or other unsavory subjects is immediately to accuse the person who brought it up of that trait, and claim pure innocence of any whiff of it himself.

        Why, it’s almost Rovian. Except we know how much smarter Rove is than Sternn.

        Which is, in its turn, damning with faint praise.

      • Tuttabella says:

        Anse, you begin with the excellent observation that “Sternn, there is no way to search into your soul to know precisely what your motivations are” and then your comment quickly devolves as you jump right into doing just that, making assumptions about his motivations: “The legal angle is just a way for you to veil your hate as some kind of principled stand” and “I’m sorry if the change is too much for you to handle, but you can trust that your kids and your grandkids will adjust just fine.”

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…just so that I can get a glimpse into your world…

        Do you really believe the “left had a fit” over cracking down on employers in Arizona? Do you not think it had something to do with the “driving while brown” and assorted other stuff?

      • CaptSternn says:

        Yes, HT, I do. The left doesn’t have any problem at all with people being asked for ID in Rhode Island.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…man…I hope it is at least sunny in your world too.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Tutt…I think I would disagree a bit. I think we can tell a whole heck of a lot about a person based on their history of comments.

        For instance, there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that Dan is a bigot who has some odd thoughts about homosexuals, and who is generally not a pleasant person with which to discuss an issue. I think we could pretty easily get broad, bi-partisan agreement on that issue.

        You absolutely know that I really like numbers and data and that I can be incredibly condescending to folks.

        Even if this is all just one big piece of performance art, and I’m a huge gun-lovin’, Tea Party supportin’ conservative, the fact that I take the time to put on the performance art probably tells you some unpleasant things about my personality.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        The only things I’ve been able to determine about Dan is that 1) He is very attached to his money, and he only has a problem with certain groups and individuals if they pose a threat to his finances; 2) He likes to make mischief and cause grief for “your side,” for promoting or defending anything or anyone who would pose a threat to his finances.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        tutt…the “only thing” you’ve been able to decipher from “queens” and “queers” is that someone is really concerned about their finances?

        Okie dokie.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…you might want to look into the details of the Rhode Island voter ID provisions before you get all Ann Coulter on us.

        You will then also recognize it isn’t very much at all like what you would like to see in Texas.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        As for Cap, you can tell a lot from his comments, but I can tell much more from knowing him personally.

      • CaptSternn says:

        HT, what does any of this discussion have to do with voter ID laws? I am speaking of the fact that the courts ruled in favore of Rhode Island police stopping people and asking for ID for any reason, or no reason at all. Arizona didn’t even take it that far.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Undoubtedly that is true Tutt…and true of all of us. The more information we have, the more informed our judgment.

        For folks who consistently are kind of an ass on here, I think it is pretty safe to say that they are likely to be kind of an ass in real life.

        Alternatively, they are a person who enjoys pretending to be an ass to get others riled up, and I’m not sure that is any different than actually just being an ass.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        As for you, HT, you may be condescending, but I think it’s safe to say it’s not intentional, and you seem to be a nice guy overall, so you get a pass.

        You are definitely tenacious and insistent with your facts and figures. I know repetition and reinforcement are the keys to learning, but I think it would be a good idea to branch out from the southwest part of town and choose other neighborhoods besides Bellaire and Sharpstown when making comparisons and contrasts, just to freshen up your argument.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        I get the impression Dan likes to refer to “your side” as queens and queers just to push your buttons, and not that he’s a homophobe.

        I can’t say I approve of this type of behavior, but Dan will be Dan, and Owl will be Owl, and Texan will continue to say “F” God, and life on this blog goes on. Not much any of us can do about that except to stop visiting this site.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Stern…I did not realize you were not talking about Rhode Islands voter ID laws, that were moderately recently passed, and proposed and defended by lots of liberals.

        I know nothing of the other Rhode Island issue, so won’t venture much of a guess, but I have a hunch you can figure out the different levels of “impact” that such a law might have in Arizona versus Rhode Island.

        For instance, pulling people over for traffic violations isn’t a bad thing. When your population is only 10% minority but 70% of the people you pull over for traffic violations are minorities, you might want to dig a bit deeper into that.

        Tutt…just this week I went with an example in West Virginia!

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Tutt, Owl is absolutely often an ass, and it seems to be more and more prevalent of late. Like the asses on the other side, it gets to the point that I don’t even read the comments.

        You raise an interesting and distressing point about Dan. I actually agree that Dan likes to refer to “queens” and “queers” in an attempt to push buttons in other people.

        I think that says some pretty unpleasant things about him, maybe even more than if he just said, “I don’t like gay people and don’t ever want to talk about gay folks”.

        At best, he thinks being gay is something about which to joke, and at worst he thinks being gay is somehow derogatory, which is how he attempts to use those terms.

        Neither of those things suggests anything positive.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Meh. I’ve been getting more and more annoyed by the conservative claque, and sometimes it seems that assholery is the only communication they understand. Perhaps that’s just a sign that I need a vacation, instead.

      • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

        Hey Stern…I cannot find anything online about Rhode Island police asking folks for IDs.

        Can you help a brother out and point me in the right direction?

    • johnofgaunt75 says:

      Stern is projecting again.

      Just because someone raises the potential racial basis of another this does not make them a racist. Was Martin Luther King a racist?

    • desperado says:

      Of course it racism. Look at the photo. If the crowd on the right had been around in 1963 they would have assumed the position of the white guys in the photo on the left. Different target, same attitude.

  28. kabuzz61 says:

    Again what Chris fails to site to fit his rant.

    The mayor of the town in question asked to see the health inspection records of those being dumped in his city. They failed to show a record. Many have measles, chicken pox, strep, scabies, lice and some even have HIV. But Mr. Ladd, the dishonest man he is decides to berate this mayor for doing his job. Shame on you Chris. This is a crisis and you take advantage of it to shout out your racist accusations whom no one believes but your echo chamber.

    At least you’re in the 21st century.

    The refugee memo has been disproven. When interviewed the illegals say the same exact thing and it turns out their families here in the USA told them to come and what to say.

    Is there any decency left in you?

    • Crogged says:

      So many are desperate AND sick, but you worry about ‘decency’ in developing the argument. The ‘illegals’ have no other way and this is Ghandi walking down your street, despite the security post at the subdivision entrance.

    • Anse says:

      “Many have measles, chicken pox, strep, scabies, lice and some even have HIV.”

      Icky brown people, am I right?

    • Houston-stay-at-Homer says:

      Buzz…so…by all means, let’s turn away the folks who are ill and in trouble.

      Buzz…your “and some even have HIV” comment is so mind-shatteringly bad that I’m struggling to figure out a response.

      So…let’s take your point…we have a kid, who has HIV, as well as lice (or whatever bed bug that ate through a huge chunk of your brain matter), and your answer is to turn him/her away?

      Then, lets go to the “and some even have HIV” as though that is the extra special cherry on top that should get them sent away. You are about a billion times more likely to get lice from one of these kids than you are to “catch HIV” from one of them.

      Man, I’m really hoping I’m misreading your comments here.

      I don’t generally hold your political opinions in very high esteem, and you certainly care not one bit about my opinion of you, but we’ve kind of found a new low here.

    • Owl of Bellaire says:

      kabuzz *demands*: “Is there any decency left in you?”

      Jesus says (Matthew 25:31-46):

      “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

      “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.

      “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

      “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

      “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

      “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

      “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

      “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

      But, of course, He didn’t *really* mean brown people.

      Or perhaps kabuzz isn’t a cat, but a goat.

      • Turtles Run says:

        Buzzy is going to have a brain aneurysm when he finds out Jesus is also a brown guy not the Norwegian version WASPs like to worship.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Owl, you do realize that Christianity commanded PERSONAL responsibility to help the poor through gifts to the church also right? Where is that mentioned in your sermon? What it DOESN’T do is make any suggestion whatsoever about the GOVERNMENT being responsible for it. When you only select parts of the Bible you do nobody any benefit.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Bart-1 offers the mealy-mouthed and self-contradictory insistence that “Christianity commanded PERSONAL responsibility to help the poor through gifts to the church also right?”

        Bart, dear, first of all, it isn’t PERSONAL if it turns out that it’s actually done through the Church with your mere donations. It’s only PERSONAL if you do it yourself. That would seem to be obvious to any rational adult, but I guess you need it pointed out.

        Second, we come to the conservative ignorance of history. You cannot rationally make comparison between the plunder-based (“Raubwirtschaft”) kleptocracies of the ancient world and the democratic, representative governments by consent of the governed that we have today. Of course, we shouldn’t expect much better from the faction in today’s politics that insists on ruling a twenty-first-century nation by the unexamined precepts of a Bronze Age storybook and the literal words of an eighteenth-century political prospectus.

        If Jesus the Christ were around today, do you honestly think he wouldn’t advocate for our cooperative, representative government to do what it could, as our delegated representative, to help the poor and suffering? If so, you’re no Christian.

      • Crogged says:

        Since the Bible doesn’t mention telephones, do you not use them? Is everything not addressed in the Bible ‘wrong’ in your eyes?

      • Bart-1 says:

        The “telephone” retort is what is hilarious. Government’s, churches, and the poor all existed then, as they still do. Total non-sequitir. Also Owl, Christianity commands personal acts of benevolence (also known as alms) as well as donations to the church to meet the needs of the poor. FYI, the two aren’t mutually exclusive as you pretend to assert. I would be willing to compare my own personal donations to my church as well as my acts of service to these specific groups with anyone here. Any takers? Thought not.

      • Crogged says:

        So is the fact that the Sermon doesn’t mention ‘government doing it’ a prohibition against government welfare? I don’t understand your point. In fact I seem to recall a particular teaching (Paul/Peter?) that the intention of the actor doesn’t matter if the act itself is charitable.

      • Turtles Run says:

        Bart/SC – The bible also does not claim the government cannot nor should not help the needy. I am pretty sure Jesus would favor any resource that is capable of helping the needy in a timely consistent manner.

      • CaptSternn says:

        No, Turtles, the Bible does not say government welfare programs are wrong. But supporting government welfare programs is not Christian charity that the Bible teaches. Besides, are you trying to make the U.S. into a theocracy?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Is supporting *Church* welfare programs Christian charity? Why or why not?

        I mean, theoretically you’re supposed to tithe 10% of your income to the Church. That sounds an awful lot like an income tax to me. And, theoretically, the Church decides what charitable activities to fund, perhaps with some input from you at parish meetings. That sounds an awful lot like representative government.

        So, really, only direct, personal involvement would be Christian charity. Anybody donating money to the Church for charitable purposes is a Satanic piker, or some such.

        Really, it’s just the reflexive and senseless hate of government from brain-dead conservatives that we see on display. And hypocrisy is still a Republican value.

      • CaptSternn says:

        Tithing is voluntary, as are other donations, and Baptists don’t have parishes.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Owl, please spare me your patronization (and don’t call me “dear” ever again.) I’m sorry you don’t understand the basic difference between voluntary GIVING (as in Charity, which turtles thinks tithing isn’t even that), and Taxation which is Forced, legal extraction. If you knew your Bible at all you, would see that the entire concept of Taxes never came from God while charitable, personal giving does. Instead of being “similar” in your view, they are in fact POLAR OPPOSITES. If you want to twist the commands of Jesus to suit your agenda (Government social programs) you are not alone. I never said that it is wrong to do that, nor did i say Jesus would be against it, Turtles. I didn’t introduce Biblical teachings at all. it was the Libs who did. I said , I believe I CLEARLY said to those who would insert Christian teachings into the immigration policy issue are unsupported by it in its use in government. Sorry, you can’t tell the difference between charitable giving and taxes, personal responsibility and corporate, and scriptural teachings on care for the poor and nonscriptural ones. Ask Bubba, he has assured me “He and Allah are cool”. Maybe he can tell you what the Koran requires.I also asked Anse directly if the use of Christian teachings in government policy is something he advocates, rejects, or picks and chooses as it fits his agenda. He declined to answer. What a surprise.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        What’s your problem bart? Now you want to rant against Muslims?

        Cappy himself said Allah, God, and Yahweh are one and the same. Argue with him.

        But you can’t accept anything but your own pathetic little myopic indoctrination can you bart?

        You keep attacking me unprompted and yet you whine incessantly about “decorum?

        Doesn’t matter what you call your God bart, your are just one big disappointment to Him.

        No one else cares about your nasty ass bart so have the decency to get it right with Allah at least. And here’s a clue bart: you’ve been doing it wrong all along so far.

      • Bart-1 says:

        I don’t agree with Capt Sternn, that Allah is the same as God. You do. As far as “unprovoked attacks”, just read the top post listed. You are the one who is fine with Allah, I am not. Why don’t you inform Owl on the commands of Islam toward charity? Because you can’t. You are just a serial liar as proven again. Name-calling response begins in 5..4..3..2..1..

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Bart since you are such a myopic hater you have obviously never been inside a Mosque and are unaware of the various donation boxes including one exclusively for helping with the poor so your “10% tithe” doesn’t get wasted on building monster churches.

        Nice try bart but you are still an informed hateful loser. Buh bye.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Correction: “UNinformed hateful loser”. But everyone knew that…

  29. desperado says:

    Well put, Chris (echo chamber, echo chamber arrrrrrgh!!!) and a sad, but entirely accurate, commentary on the state of the current Republican Party that such sane, rational, remarks as those made by Jeb Bush would be the death knell for his hopes of getting the Republican nomination. Some day, hopefully, people like you and Mr. Bush will prevail over the ‘build a wall and send ‘em all back where they came from’ crowd who I am sure will check in shortly if not sooner.

  30. CaptSternn says:

    Problem is, for you, that this isn;t about race. But that’s really all you can do, shout “RACISTS!” at the top of your lungs because you really have nothing solid to stand on. Racists focus on race.

    We certainly could use some reform of our immigration laws, make it easier, cheaper and quicker to come here legally. And we need to be tougher in enforcing our laws, both on those that come here ilegally or stay here illegally and those that help or hire people that are here illegally. That applies to everybody, not just those that come here from south of our border or those that help or hire only people from south of the border that come here or stay here illegally..

    But you are so blinded with bigotry, hatred and racism that you can’t think straight or see or even consider immigrants from other places in the world. Imagine that.

    • Crogged says:

      Why be ‘tougher’ on the unfortunate? What on earth does this prove? It’s simple, make it a few hundred bucks to be a US citizen, they get a social security number. Done.

      • Turtles Run says:

        Crogged – I have no issue wit the immigration reform bill but many of those coming here especially the children are as Chris stated :refugees” we need to address that issue immediately. If they have family here that are undocumented then what do we do with them,? Deport or let them stay with some form of legalized status?

        This issue is very complicated and so intertwined with other issues that single step approaches will not work. The solution needs to be comprehensive.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Deport them. What states have the resources? None. Use your head for once.

      • Crogged says:

        Why? They are making simple, desperate decisions to avoid bad fates. For how many years are we going to sit here and ponder what to do about the over 10 million ‘illegals’ who made their way here, despite what may come? Make it easy to become a citizen of this country, why not? What is the fear? If it is ‘respect for law’, we better hope they don’t notice the regards with which American citizens have for the ‘speed suggestion’ signs on our freeways….

    • Turtles Run says:

      When children that are born here are labeled as “anchor babies” (correct term is Americans) , and right winger commonly refer to all these people simply as Mexicans to be deported back there, and calls to shoot the “wetbacks” by Texas Senate candidates make your argument really weak.

      I could continue with the examples all day long.

      http://www.mysanantonio.com/default/article/South-Texas-Senate-hopeful-slammed-for-racial-slur-5255976.php

      • CaptSternn says:

        Good. He needed to be slammed for that. Guess what else, he didn’t win the primary.

      • Turtles Run says:

        Cappy – But it points out that you are wrong when you pretend a racist element is not involved here. The only cries of racism going on are those against actual occurrences of it. But that element of the anti-immigration camp has an out sized voice.

        So what would you suggest to solve the immigration crisis in this nation?

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Turtles it doesn’t prove anything of the sort. There are racists on both sides of the aisle. They are minimized/marginalized. Quit being afraid of the boogey man.

      • CaptSternn says:

        All it points out that one guy said something wrong. I could easily pull up something racist a democrat has said, and would that make you and all democrats racists?

        What would I suggest? I think I already did, secure the borders, make it easier to come here legally, grant more work visas and deport those that do not respect our laws and come here or stay here illegally.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        In that survey, of course, 73% of the respondents are white and 37% are from the South, even though the South only represents 16% of the total population of the United States.

        Obama finished fourth in the “best” question, behind Reagan, Clinton, and Kennedy, though I’m not surprised that faux-news site CNS fails to mention it.

        Moreover, the pollsters simply asked respondents who was the “best” of the twelve and who was the “worst”. They didn’t ask for rankings, so people who think Nixon was second-worst aren’t counted at all, even if that would vastly decrease that president’s standing.

        In other words, it’s a crap poll — exactly the kind of useless muckracking mush that modern conservatives love to fixate upon, since they don’t actually have anything sensible or useful to say.

      • Bart-1 says:

        Owl, where did you get those figures from. Quinnipiac says the poll had a margin of error of only 2.6%?
        The survey was conducted June 24-30 with 1,446 registered voters on land lines and cellphones. The margin for error is plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.

        Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/poll-obama-worst-president-since-wwii-108507.html#ixzz36LpKeU2P
        Here is the University’s own description of their polling methods. I’d love to see where your source is.
        http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2056

    • Anse says:

      Republicans think we’re dumb enough to believe that as long as you don’t use an explicit racial slur, you aren’t racist.

      • kabuzz61 says:

        Well you’re half right. We do think you are dumb. And remember, Chris is a republican.

    • DanMan says:

      Sternn, the left is going for a full press with D’Souza’s new movie coming out today. It deconstructs Howard Zinn’s misguided teachings he forwarded with his “The People’s History of the United States”. What Zinn did is pit every conceivable aggrieved group he could against the principals used by the founding fathers to form this nation. Almost all of our humble host’s postings are straight out of that book and his marching orders are to counter that movie as much as possible right now.

      The first notion is this nation was founded by white men for white men and every thing sorts out from that perspective. Zinn would take historical events and paint them to reflect his interpretation in order to destroy the capitalist system he so despised. Zinn was a democrat socialist working through academia and as such is regarded as a great historian. By fellow academians. It’s pretty much a parallel to Al Gore getting his Nobel peace prize and Roger Revelle Award because he started the gravy train of funding that blossomed into a $4.7billion/year industry dedicated to proving their theories of gorebull worming.

      The border situation going on right now relates to his teachings that imperial America stole the land of the western US from Mexico. He never mentioned that Mexico was completely beaten in a war they instigated. The US even occupied Mexico City and what was left of the Mexican government ultimately signed the Treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo in Hidalgo, north of the capital. Once those terms were agreed to, the US Army withdrew and returned that portion of the country of Mexico to the Mexican government. This horrible imperial nation GAVE BACK the land plus $15 million dollars. The original proposal to BUY the land outside of Texas (which had already won independence 12 years earlier) for $30 million is never mentioned either.

      He gins up native Americans with a similar ruse by claiming all their land was stolen from peaceful Indians who never saw it coming. He never mentions the Sioux took it from the Arapaho, the Arapaho took it from Navaho and so on. The treaty concepts were a departure from annihilating them outright like they had done to each other for centuries.

      Any group that is not white male is pitted against any white male that doesn’t ascribe to his views. The democrat party in its current arrangment is following his script explicitly. All groups of minorities, all women, all immigrants, gays, etc. are courted to join this coterie of victims. The rucas posse obviously adores the teachings of Mr. Zinn. Go check out that movie, it is quite fascinating and a real eye opener.

      • Anse says:

        “The first notion is this nation was founded by white men for white men and every thing sorts out from that perspective.”

        That is indisputably true.

      • Crogged says:

        Awwww, all those poor persecuted white male Christians and another two hours of semi-coherent paranoia from Dinesh D’Souza.

      • Anse says:

        Do you think Dinesh will host a viewing at his prison? Ought to go over great with that crowd.

      • DanMan says:

        I should say Zinn didn’t so much want to destroy the capitalist system as have his type of like minded socialist democrats control it. He truly believed, as do democrats right now, that everybody will still produce the same under the threat of retaliation if they don’t fall in line with having a ruling class that controls the creation of the wealth this nation is known for since its founding.

        Obama was handed a huge advantage with the development of the NSA he now controls and he changed those rules to his advantage even more and has been rebuked by the supreme court for over stepping. His first 9-0 loss at the SC that turtlehead claimed was from 2004 the other day to try to call out Kabuzz was a direct challenge to his over stepping the snooping tactics used by the FBI when a district court ruled the illegal tracking from a 2005 drug crime, decided guilty by a court in 2008 and then overturned by said district court in 2010 was challenged by his Justice Department in 2011. It took the SC until 2012 to smack him for bringing the 2011 challenge.

      • desperado says:

        Dinesh D’Souza’s movies only prove one thing. P.T. Barnum was right.

      • Anse says:

        Dan, you’ve gone off the rails. Go take your meds and come back after you’ve had a chance to vent a little bit. Go punch a pillow or kick a black kid or whatever it is rightwingers do to let off steam.

      • DanMan says:

        Any of you erudite progs care to share with us who Sarah Breedlove was and what her place in history is?

      • Crogged says:

        She is Citizen 2309 and another free rider in the Rucas Posse.

      • DanMan says:

        surely somebody in the rucas posse can google it can’t they?

      • Crogged says:

        Did it, ‘splain yourself.

      • Crogged says:

        I read what I found. You seem to have a(nother, neverending, conspiracy regarding libs and cons dating back to the 13th century) theory regarding her existence, let’s have at it.

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        Great, Dan. *One* Black woman managed to overcome difficult and deprived circumstances in her youth and adulthood to become a millionaire hair-products marketer. (Of course, she also helped establish the NAACP, which undoubtedly damns here in the eyes of the GOP.)

        Her story is inspiring. It’s also anecdotal. It’s inspiring *because* the outcome is rare, even if the initial conditions weren’t.

        Why are so many conservatives innumerate statistical idiots?

        Oh, right: because, if they weren’t, they probably wouldn’t be conservatives.

      • Turtles Run says:

        With all her millions could she drink from “Whites Only” water fountains, ride at the front of a bus, dare to insult a white person, or eat in “Whites Only” establishments? Did her money buy her equal treatment under the law?

      • Owl of Bellaire says:

        I’m sure you get off on the *idea* of spanking, Dan. It fits with your general philosophy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Goodreads

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 476 other followers

%d bloggers like this: