Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Thursday, January 17, 2019

By Christi Parsons, Brian Bennett and Lisa Mascaro, Tribune Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — Even as President Barack Obama grapples with the crisis of immigrant children arriving at the Southwest border, White House officials are laying the groundwork for a large-scale expansion of immigrant rights that would come by executive action within weeks.

Officials signaled strongly Friday that Obama’s move would shield from deportation large numbers of immigrants living in the country illegally, as advocacy groups have demanded.

Roughly 5 million of the estimated 11 million people who entered the country without legal authorization or overstayed their visas could be protected under a leading option the White House is considering, according to officials who discussed the proposals on condition of anonymity.

Obama said last month that because Congress had failed to act on comprehensive immigration reform, he would take executive action to “fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own.”

That move will come by the end of the summer, White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer told reporters Friday. Some officials had advocated waiting until after the November midterm election.

Any such move would prompt a major clash with congressional Republicans, and at least some White House officials appeared to relish the prospect that the GOP might overreach in its response and act in a politically self-destructive manner.

When the decision is announced, it will “increase the angry reactions from Republicans,” Pfeiffer said.

“I would not discount the possibility” that Republicans would seek to impeach Obama over his next immigration moves, he said, adding that House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-OH) had “opened the door to impeachment” by his plans to sue Obama for allegedly exceeding his executive authority.

Pfeiffer made his comments at a breakfast for reporters sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor.

Boehner repeatedly has ruled out calls for impeachment proceedings, and his lawsuit against Obama has been widely seen as an effort to provide an alternative for Republicans infuriated by what they see as too much unilateral action by the president.

But the open references to impeachment at the White House on Friday suggest that administration officials are trying to shape the political battleground in advance — portraying Republicans as obstructionist before launching a broad-sweeping executive action on a front where conservative sensitivities are particularly keen: immigration policy.

The White House is entertaining a range of possibilities that would speed up deportations in some cases but forestall them in many others.

Obama could use his executive powers to expedite deportations in response to the current border crisis, in an effort to clear the large numbers of unaccompanied minors gathering daily in the Rio Grande Valley in south Texas.

At the same time, he seems likely to act to prevent deportations of many of the immigrants already living, working and raising children in the U.S.

One option would allow immigrants who are parents of U.S. citizens to apply for temporary legal status which would let them work legally in the U.S. Because children born in the country automatically receive U.S. citizenship, that option could affect about 5 million people, researchers estimate.

A second option would be to allow temporary legal status for the parents of young people already granted deportation deferrals by the Obama administration. That would affect a smaller, but still sizable, number of people.

So far, more than 520,000 people have received permits to stay and work in the U.S. under the administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which was created in 2012 for young people who were brought to the U.S. as children.

Leading Republicans, including Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, already have called for ending the deferred action program, and any move to expand it by including parents would be certain to draw a furious response from conservatives.

Wary of the president’s potential course of action, Republicans were both irritated by Pfeiffer’s threat and critical of what they saw as an effort to stir up Democratic voters and financial donors.

The campaign arm of the House Democratic leadership began a fundraising drive featuring Pfeiffer’s impeachment forecast within hours of his making it.

“We have a humanitarian crisis at our border, and the White House is making matters worse with inattention and mixed signals,” said Boehner’s spokesman, Michael Steel.

“It is telling, and sad, that a senior White House official is focused on political games, rather than helping these kids and securing the border,” he said.

As his aides worked on the longer-term immigration plan, Obama on Friday met at the White House with the presidents of Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, hoping to enlist their help in stemming the flow of young migrants.

An estimated 57,000 unaccompanied minors, mostly from Central America, have crossed into the U.S. from Mexico since last October.

Obama told the presidents that children who don’t have “proper claims” to admission to the U.S. will have to go back home.

Aides said the leaders also agreed on the need to address poverty and violence in Central America.

“The American people and my administration have great compassion for these children,” Obama told reporters, with the other presidents at his side. “But I also emphasized to my friends that we have to deter a continuing influx of children putting themselves at risk.”

How to do that — and how to pay for it — continued to stymie Congress.

Republicans, who balked at the administration’s request for $3.7 billion to increase the number of deportation courts, bolster border security and care for the children who have arrived, proposed a scaled-back plan Friday for less than $1 billion. Senate Democrats have proposed $2.7 billion. Neither is expected to win support from both chambers.

With Congress only a few days from its long August break, money is running out to care for the youths and process their immigration cases.

Border Patrol agents have been working overtime, and Customs and Border Protection has racked up large bills to provide food and transportation to handle the influx.

If Congress doesn’t approve more spending, agency officials will have to divert money from programs that speed up cross-border trade and cargo, Customs and Border Protection chief Gil Kerlikowske said in a C-SPAN interview.

Money, though, is only part of the problem.

House Republicans have insisted on amending a 2008 law that guarantees hearings before unaccompanied children can be returned to their home countries. Senate Democrats mostly oppose that idea.

The White House has sent mixed messages, initially saying Congress should change the law, then backing down after opposition from Senate Democrats. White House officials now say Congress should approve the additional funds first.

Republicans have also been split on immigration, with many conservatives arguing that Congress should not act because the administration cannot be trusted to enforce the immigration laws.

But a majority of GOP lawmakers appeared prepared to break ranks with the conservatives and move ahead for a vote next week.

“The vast majority of our members want to solve this and do it in a targeted way that actually addresses the problem,” Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), the incoming GOP whip, said after a closed session Friday of House Republicans.

Under the House Republican proposal, Congress would reimburse states for deploying National Guard troops, as Republican Gov. Rick Perry of Texas has done, and speed up processing of the children’s immigration claims. The House proposal would also allow law enforcement personnel to operate on public lands beyond what is now allowed, a long-standing issue in some border states.

“If we do nothing, the president is going to blame us for doing nothing,” said Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN). “We have to step up and show we’re going to do this in an orderly, lawful, compassionate way.”

AFP Photo/Jewel Samad

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 4

323 responses to “White House Working On Plan To Expand Immigrant Rights”

  1. Dominick Vila says:

    If this is true, this proposal, if it is not implemented correctly and pragmatically, could destroy our chances to keep the Senate in November and would impact the outcome of the 2016 election.
    The sad truth is that with the exception of abortion and gun control, nothing enrages the right wing – and some centrists – more than illegal immigration.
    A broad proposal, to compensate for the deliberate congressional inaction, could be very damaging to Democrats. Anything beyond recognizing the constitutional right to citizenship for children born in the USA, and revising Bush’s 2008 immigration law to remove ambiguity, would be unacceptable to a large number of Americans…and they are among the most committed voters. Even a desperately needed solution – such as McCain’s “guest worker” program – would be offensive to those whose “solution” is limited to deportation or worse.
    The Affordable Care Act, which is based on an ultra-conservative concept, was offensive to the right wing because it was proposed and implemented by a man they hate. An Executive Order to circumvent congressional inaction on the issue of immigration, would result in the biggest political backlash in history, and would make the threats of impeachment look benign by comparison.

    • highpckts says:

      The right will sue or impeach regardless of what the President does! They is no level they will not sink to to do this!!

      • Dominick Vila says:

        Considering their dismal record, and the fact that they have not proposed anything tangible to strengthen our economy, create jobs, or improve the standard of living of ALL Americans, the only thing left is to make up “scandals” to cast an illusion of wrong doing where none exists. It remains to be seen, whether or not mainstream Americans buy the garbage the GOP is selling.

        • highpckts says:

          I know quite a few that do buy it if for no other reason than an intense dislike of a black man in office!!

          • Dominick Vila says:

            So do I.

          • BiteMeLiberals says:

            Either you like Obama or you are a racist….. shut the fuck up libtard!

          • highpckts says:

            Oh now that’s what we are talking about! A brain the size of a pea and doesn’t even know how to use that! Name calling is all you have left!!

          • BiteMeLiberals says:

            “intense dislike of a black man” You said it right? It has nothing to do with his inability to lead. King Obama hates America! If you can’t see it than you deserve to be called a libtard.

          • highpckts says:

            Well I doubt you could give facts for why you think Obama hates America!! Facts are something you don’t deal in!!

        • Russell Byrd says:

          I think the Pubs are crazy enough to impeach Obama, but I think the main intention was to once again deflect the nation from a progressive course and pander to the idiot right-wackers. I really think that if they do actually impeach, that the political fallout could be fatal. It will never pass the Senate. That is why the near sane Pubs want to wait to 2014. They are sure they are going to win everything again.

          • BiteMeLiberals says:

            Remember King Obama still has the race card up his sleeve.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Is that the card he uses to trump your racism? Hmm?

            You can’t even stay on one subject and you can’t even have a discussion without bringing up Obama. Now why on Earth would we ever consider you a racist? ROTFL!

    • angelsinca says:

      …nothing enrages the right wing – and some centrists – more than illegal immigration.

      Incorrect assertions from the left easily exceed your incorrect assertion.

      The Affordable Care Act, which is based on an ultra-conservative concept, was offensive to the right wing because it was proposed and implemented by a man they hate.

      Wrong again Dominic. The offensive part of the ACA is the veil of deceit that surrounds it. From its carefully guarded passage to its inaccurate promises made in order to avert its complete rejection, the scheme has little to do with the ‘the man they hate”. Even YOU attempt to reject it, labeling it an ‘ultra-conservative concept’ (another inaccuracy).

      • Russell Byrd says:

        No, it is just the right’s racism as demonstrated in the continued, unwelcome violations of the terms of service, by a notorious cretin troll.

        You hate anything that may help others. Your fake christianity is absolutely ludicrous. You are nothing but full of hate for anything that Christ taught.

        As well, you hate that black man in the White House.

        • Dominick Vila says:

          In Angel’s case it is probably not racism, he is Cuban. His opinions are influenced by ideology and the experiences he endured in his homeland before being welcomed to the USA with open arms.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Dominick, in my dealings with people in Central & South America, color often does matter. Often, not in the same way as here, yet it does matter. In those countries, being successful and acting “white” mitigates a lot of the stigma of having a darker skin. Yet, those that fail at “whitening” are often treated just as shabbily as people of color are here. Actually, it is often worse, because there are no clear cut color barriers, and so, as far as I know, little or no legal prohibitions. Unless you go to Haiti, where I think that calling a man “boy” still gets you a serious prison sentence.

            As an afterthought, the situation is really the same in this country, with a slight difference. Though there are certainly still some racist Democrats, and an occasional racist Liberal, most of the racists are quite proven to be right-wing. I have observed, that the “new” politically correct right-winger will often tolerate, and even venerate, the occasional black that is successful. The criteria is that they look, and especially, act and speak like their white ideal. If they denigrate their own race, then they are seen as acceptable. Yet, add a few too many blacks, or other minorities to the mix, and they get real uncomfortable.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Discrimination in most Latin American countries is influenced more by social class than ethnicity. Unfortunately, since the upper class was limited originally to Spanish conquerors and their descendents, the rest of the population, which is often the majority, remains ostracized. There are countries, such as Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Chile where those barriers are rapidly disappearing, and there are some, such as Bolivia, where the oppressed have risen to the top.
            Needless to say, discrimination, regardless of root causes, is wrong and should be unacceptable for every civilized person in the 21st century.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            If I may continue here and add to my accompanying post, I am a little surprised that angel is Cuban. He has never indicated that to me, but that is really no surprise.

            Angel claims to be a Seventh Day Adventist, and has so on several occasions to me. As well, and this would be sad for anyone else, but angel recently let slip that he had been homeless for about six months. This was a statement he made less than six months ago. Of course at the time he said that, he was doing better.

            Now, again, as to being Cuban, angel told several of us, on several occasions, that he was in an inter-racial relationship. He did this in my opinion to deflect from his hateful statements against Obama and blacks in general. He always claimed that “her” family was totally supportive of his views, and his “mission” here. Which is a conumdrum. If he is Cuban, does he consider himself white? For me personally it really would not matter, but was his partner black? Does he consider this from an ethnic point of view, i.e. Hispanic, Latino?

          • Dominick Vila says:

            My hobby, since I retired, has been genealogy, which as you probably already know, includes familiarity with the etymology
            of surnames. The roots of the surname Sinca can be traced to a province of Spain called Lerida, in Catalonia, near the French border. Sinca is not a very common surname by the way. Angel is a relatively common first name in Spain and Latin America. My claim that Angel is Cuban, or at least part Cuban, was based on my familiarity with Spanish names, and his reactions to certain topics.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            BTW, I don’t think Angel opposes Obama because the latter is black. His hatred is influenced by ideology and the experiences that so many Cubans experienced at the hands of the Castro brothers. Most view the GOP as 100% anti-communist, and any party or individual that opposes the GOP as socialist or communist. They are still fighting the cold war, and the Castro brothers…

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I see your point. Yet, I cannot fathom why he thinks a party that would literally sell this whole country, all the while spouting off slogans of “freedom,” would do anything for Cuba. Not that the Democrats are pure, but the GOP and the business interests that they are enslaved to, only want to get capitalism into Cuba. As far as they are concerned, Cuba should once again become the profit center they designed it to be, and to Hell with the Cuban people.

            I am not exactly in love with Castro, but finally understanding the truth, leaves me seeing him in a much more favorable light, and admiring of what they did accomplish in Cuba with the little they had, and have. In other words, in spite of “US.”

            Many forget that Baptista was originally welcomed as a liberator when the government was overthrown in 1933? and he was elected President (instead of just running a puppet government) in 1940. I know the Constitution that he gave Cuba was seen as remarkable. However, he slowly disintegrated into a monster when he returned to power in the 1950’s. And we helped keep him propped up in power.

            That did not bode well in U.S.-Cuban relations. Even so, do you recall the episode where Castro came to America seeking financial aid? He met with, guess who, V.P. Richard Nixon. Nixon informed Eisenhower that Castro was just a “damn commie,” and Castro left with nothing. I had to look up the following link, and I am not personally familiar with it, but it seems to be rather reasonable and unbiased:

            http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/castro-visits-the-united-states

            WE drove Castro to the Russians. Cuba was a dictatorship under the thumb of American companies and capitalists, and especially, when it came to bringing in money, the Mob. The people that fled Cuba to the U.S. were not wealthy as Americans understand the term, but they were mostly well off. Most of them were either professionals that were just as apt to be against Batista, or they worked good jobs running the local interests for their American masters. The latter are the people that fled Cuba. And, though you may very well disagree, consider for instance, that most of the reason they left was hatred of that 90% of the common people and pure economic politics. I do not defend the worst of the Castro brothers, but the people that emigrated were not in physical danger if they had cooperated with the regime. They just could not for economic reasons, or just would not for ideological reasons. My sole point here is they were actually less deserving than many of the immigrants that those such as angel and bowen are so angry about.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Castro did remarkable things in the areas of education, healthcare, and the arts, but some of those socio – economic improvements had a big price tag attached to them.
            There is no justification for incarceration, torture, political persecution or murder, regardless of ideology.
            Castro did try to obtain help from the USA immediately after his victory, but like you said, his calls for assistance were rejected and left him with no choice but to seek help elsewhere. Our fears of communism and socialism have caused us more problem that whatever little we have to show for our paranoia. When are we going to recognize that we are the most powerful nation in the world, both economically and militarily? When are we going to recognize the intervening in the internal affairs of other nations is against our purported values, and that the best approach is to respect the decisions and opinions of others? I wonder how the families of those young soldiers sacrificed in Vietnam feel when they go to the local WalMart and buy clothes Made in Vietnam…

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Sad isn’t it, but you are so profoundly true. I used to see myself as an American patriot, but one with common sense, compassion, and a sense of fair play, but patriotism in humanity in general, and in this Nation in particular is far too often “. . . the last refuge of the scoundrel” as Mr. Johnson said.

            Your last bit really was spot on. We fought what was really an unjust war, for Vietnam and for ourselves, and now we have literally sold out for a few bucks. Was all that anti-Communist rhetoric ever worth a hill of beans. All that blood for what?

            I do apologize for my attempt to rival the Encyclopedia Britannica, but I thought about a proposal for a book. When are ardent red-baiter, the right-hand man of Joe McCarthy, the refuser of Castro, went to China and made nice with the Communist Chinese, can you see a story possibility in the fact that we sent a stand-in. A Red Chinese double, a plant, for our own President. What Nixon did seemed admirable, but hardly was in character. Maybe, it was the promise of all those profits that propelled him and his backers to make those deals.

            I am not going to write such a book, but I cannot understand why someone has not made a movie of this. Like a variation on the Manchurian candidate.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            The only difference between then and now is that instead of talking about the “domino effect”, we now talk about radical Islam planning to impose sharia law on us.
            History is full of deals. Re-establishing diplomatic and trade relations with China was part of the whole deal. Iran-Contra following the release of the Iranian hostages was suspicious. W letting Saudi Arabia off the hook after 9/11 was probably not a coincidence.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Was it Dulles that refused to shake the Chinese emissaries hand, and nearly singlehandedly ruined our relations with China? My point is, our relations with China should never have been as bad as they were, and we were more responsible than not for that reality. At the time of Nixon’s visit and agreement, I thought something great had happened. Yet, I am not as certain after seeing the average American’s future go down the drain for huge profits from cheap Chinese goods that almost entirely go to a few mega-buck fatcats.

            I think, Iran-Contra was just an opportunity that arose to launder dirty money to finance the Reagan Administration’s “wet work.” From what I have been led to believe, their was no real Contra resistance. Just some dumb kids hired cheap and a lot of smoke and mirrors designed to keep the Sandinista’s on edge and imbalanced.

            My belief on Saudi Arabia is that the real guilty party was irrelevant to Dick Cheney. He wanted a war and was willing to do anything to get it. He went one better than the Vietnam conflict in the respect that he had the fully formed notion to personally profit from the waste in blood and treasure before the first shot was fired.

            Like the Shah, the only reason King Abdullah, like Fahd and Khalid before him, is still in power is the backing the backing his regime gets from us. I admit that I find the inevitable takeover by Muslim fundamentalists, or Wahhabists rather unpalatable, I still find it rather immoral that we find we must force a regime onto a people. Though, in this case, it would definitely not be in our best interests to let the alternative happen. I failed to make my point here, but simply, the Cheney driven Bush administration had no intention of even considering sanctions against certain elements in Saudi Arabia. Of course, I am sure the Saudis have an American trained secret police in place to deal with their dissidents.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I agree. It should be clear to everyone by now that Cheney’s top priority was the invasion of Iraq. He wanted to get even with Saddam, after the latter rejected the contract bids that he and Rumsfeld submitted on behalf of Halliburton and Bechtel, and gave them instead of Russian and French companies. Needless to say, the probability of making a lot of money from this crusade was also a factor. As for who was responsible for 9/11, that tragedy soon became an instrument for Cheney and his ilk to legitimize their acts. Let’s not forget W’s admission, a few years after 9/11, when he said that getting OBL was not a big deal. Sort of reminds me of Reagan’s claim, after 271 U.S. Marines were slaughtered in Lebanon, to the effect that what was happening there was not our war! I guess there is a pattern somewhere in there…

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I think there is a pattern there, though I think the Cheney’ of this world work to make this as obscure as possible. Thanks for reminding me about Cheney’s business dealings with Iraq, pre-war. I had forgotten that aspect, and it just makes his behavior all the more damning.

            Considering Cheney, I think that he demonstrates what has been wrong with our Republic. Any decent, forward thinking people would have stood Cheney against a wall within days of the Iraq War starting. And yet, he is still with us, bad mouthing on like nothing happened.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Forgive me for continuing, but the point why I hate trolls so much, is very simple. They only come to disrupt. Which is obvious to both of us. Yet, concentrating on angel, would give a classic case.

            Angel had stated to me directly, several years ago, that he has come to “educate” us and “shut down these blogs.” I have grown sick of his motor mouth no quality posting that is only designed to discourage discussion. That is why I began to post. (I have been here from the beginning, but for several years I only read the articles and followed the discussions.) I saw too many good conversations disrupted and watched too many good and interesting people disappear.

            Angel has also called Memo, and Mother Jones, “minor liberal blogs.” That is why that is one of my constant themes. I always ask, if Memo is so “minor,” why does someone so special hang out here. Why waste his talents here, when he could be a star in Breibart.

            Once, I actually made an effort to make peace with angel. I actually reached out and tried to establish a friendly discussion with him. What did I get, a long lecture on how right he always was and how stupid I had been to resist his brilliance. Well, a couple of shots of that and war began in earnest.

            I also have on quite a number of occasions, witnessed angel thanking posters for throwing in the towel. That angers me to no end. That is why I must say that we should NOT ignore loathsome resident trolls, but we should take every opportunity to make their lives miserable. Angel comes here to engage in a sick self-love over his sick ideals. By allowing him to always have the last word, he gets his orgasmic desires fulfilled. If you resist, he must have the last word, so he goes into spasms. When he is frustrated enough, he will disappear for a time. Angel definitely is not a paid shill. He really does take this to heart. So, if sterotypes are actually true, then he could very easily be a Cuban.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I worked with several Cubans during my 40 years at NASA. Most had engineering degrees, their work ethics were impeccable, and eve though I disagreed with some of their political opinions, and voting preferences, we were good friends and got along fine. Bear in mind that their opinions and behavior are often influenced by the penurious treatment inflicted upon them by the Castro brothers. Most of the Cubans I met were middle class or upper middle class people, who lost everything they had when the Castro brothers won the revolution. One of the doctors treating my wife for problems related to arthritis and Schoegren’s is from Cuba, and we had a very positive impression of him. My guess about Angel’s ethnicity was influenced by my familiarity with ethnicity, and because most of them – not all – still embrace far right policies as a result of the problems they endured. It was not meant to be demeaning.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I am sorry Dominick, but “it was not meant to be demeaning,” kind of lost me there. You did not say anything demeaning, or at least I could not find it. I understand exactly what you are saying.

            Moving on to angel’s ethnicity, did you know that Miguel Angel is the third most popular baby name in Mexico. At least in a statistical composite since 1930. I had to look it up. I had no idea. Angel, given alone, did not make the top 30 of baby names, but my point is, Angel is not a rare name in Latin America. As well, “inca” says to me that he is located in California. Though that is proof of nothing, it greatly increases the possibility that angel is from Mexico. But again, it is not proof, angel could be from Trafalmadore for all I know. So Cuba could very well be right, mostly due to his opinions.

            The biggest problem I have with angel is his lying and badgering of posters. He will make an entire series of posts abusing someone and their opinion, for no other reason than to get that last word. The greatest problem however, is his intentional misuse, and intentional misinterpretation of basic facts. Such as Obama “cutting line” at an event. Why would that even be news? Would any President, even G.W. Bush stand in a line for food for an hour? As little as I think of Bush, I can guarantee if he was at my event, he would go to the top of the line pronto. So, why is this news? As a passing remark, when these right-wackos disrespect Obama, this is usually the only real evidence they can come up with of his wrong doing. Something made up, or trivial.

            As well, angel will argue the EXACT opposite point of view in the same blog with different people. Sometimes he lies so much he even forgets which ones. With angel, it is not about discussing. Like all trolls it is literally about either arguing, harassing, and disrupting, or you must kiss his rear. I fear that this is all sick entertainment for him. These crazy wack-jobs have said for years that we liberals will run when we are put under pressure. That is one of the reasons I stand up to him so strongly, though I have been asked to stop. That is another discussion of course, but I want him not only to earn his sick jollies, but to understand that his blogging orgasm may not be so fulfilling. I even stopped several times posting to him, because his “wittle feelin’s” are so fragile, but he cannot resist stirring the pot.

            Thanks for the reply. Your thoughts are always of interest. A final thought in closing. Do you think angel could just be an Angels fan that lives in CA? 🙂

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I think he is a Marlins fan…
            🙂

          • Russell Byrd says:

            🙂 Strange isn’t it. Some people that seem to very nearly be monsters, do share some human characteristics with us.

            It just occurred to me that “inca” is Inca. Probably not, but it shows I am definitely apt to miss the obvious. 🙂

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I forgot to add, that if ethnicity were a factor, Cubans are probably my favorite people. I have never met one I did not like. Of course, I can say the same thing about Marines and Texans. 🙂 Not to slight them, but a lot of those are not “my kind of people.” Not to slight anyone, but it is impossible to get along with radical people long term. As an aside, even their own families are often divided and in turmoil. They either side with the “bully,” or they become an outcast.

            Yet, I do always have a problem with the haughty. I came to the realization years ago, that hard work is meaningless without luck and connectios. Some, but very few, ever really make it entirely on their own. Those at the “top” that cannot see what is happening, or what they are doing, to the poor or even just to the average person, will never get my sympathy.

            Wow, sorry Dominick, I once again set out to right two sentences, and I wrote a small essay.

            A line that was supposedly said about Dizzy Dean, the St. Louis Cardinals pitcher, “he talks a lot, and says very little.” Well, there we have it.

            Of course, Dean was attributed with saying, “”The doctors x-rayed my head and found nothing.” Been there, done that.

            And he said,””The good Lord was good to me. He gave me a strong body, a good right arm, and a weak mind.” Darn, it looks like I got screwed. LOL!

            Have a good time, Dominick.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I enjoyed reading your posts. I also get frustrated when I read outrageous comments, as well as when President Obama caves in to an opposition who never corresponds and that considers bipartisanship tantamount to unconditional surrender, and governance an irritant to overcome without giving the impression that they are not doing what most Americans expect our elected officials to do.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            And I have enjoyed yours. In fact, you are usually one to watch for in a thread. Sorry, but that seems to be a little condescending, but it is true. We have far too much “no content” posting in these blogs. I am partly guilty of this, but I do try to put a little flair into most of my posts. Unlike the humorless trolls.

            I too am somewhat disappointed with Obama, but that is a method of operation that the right-wing has crowed about over the years. The term being “waiting for them to blink.” Well, I think we should be a lot more obstinate. As an historian, history has taught me that far too many times when a beleaguered city or garrison, or group of soldiers in the field surrenders, they wind up being massacred. So why give in. An example is rather important to this day. During one of the Crusades (3rd?), Richard the Lionhearted agreed to spare the town of Acre, but killed his hostages when Saladin was late in completing the agreed terms. Of course, Richard never completed any of what he agreed to. To this day, though there is dispute as to what actually motivated the massacre, this is taught by Imams as an example of the perfidy that Christians are capable of. Right or wrong, people have died for this massacre to this very day.

            For Obama, there really is no reason to negotiate. He is never going to get anything in return, as in my example above. As well, regardless of what they claim, the racism that Obama has faced is very plain. We could discuss the extent, but not the fact that it is there. One thing I do admire about Obama though, even if I were rather bigoted myself, i would still have to admire Obama’s self-control in the face of this constant, continued onslaught. I am sure that I would have gone “postal” long ago.

            I may be off base here, but consider this. I believe the Teapots are maybe 10% at most, but they are able to win primaries because of low turn-out. It seems these haters always have angst and always turn out to swell the ballot box. Then, in the general election, Repub scare tactics, and these days outright voter suppression keeps many voters away. In contrast, the rank and file Repub voters then show up and vote for the Teapotty candidate either because of propagandized hatred and fear of “liberals,” though they do not even know what that really is, or because they are total mindless drones that have always voted that way. I don’t think most Repubs even look at their candidates.

            Did you know that in my jurisdiction, there are a lot more straight ticket Repub voters that Democrats. Pubs use to arrogantly sneer at the fact that many Democrats used to vote straight ticket. I did not use to, but I DO now. Regardless of quality, sending any Repub to office just reinforces the evil that they do. If Jesus Christ was elected on the Repub slate, which is unlikely he would be running for them, but if he were, the party machinery would have him changed into a fire breathing hellion in short order.

            Dominick, I seem to be rambling even worse than before, so I will bid you a good night.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I also live in a heavily Republican district.
            I am convinced that the reason Republicans accuse Dems of things like voting along party lines is to hide their inflexible orthodoxy and voting patterns. When I was in MD I use to vote for Connie Morella, a moderate Republican, for Congress. Not any more. I now vote blue, and proud of it. I guess I owe the GOP a big thank you…

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I’m with you Dominick. I used to vote for any moderate Republican that seemed well qualified for the office. Yet now, even if a moderate Repub can survive the Teapot fire storms, I cannot vote for them at all. Like I say, Jesus Christ would not even get near a present day Repub, but rhetorically, if he were to win an election as a Repub, the party machinery would turn him into a hateful demon in just a couple of days. That, or he would be a pariah in that party with a Teabug bull’s-eye on his back.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I hope you do not delete my posts out of hand, but do give them a read. Having said that, the most egregious thing angel has done, at least the most overt, involved his “reporting” me to the FBI.

            To be brief, he always claims I am threatening him. Well, I do occasionally border on that, but I have never threatened him, or his family, with any harm. It is just one of those panic buttons angel pushes when he knows he has nothing else. Like I have said, he just can’t ignore anything.

            Well, to be very brief, angel proudly told me he had reported me to the FBI that very afternoon. He even posted the generic response letter to show as proof. I admit I was taken aback somewhat, but I was not really worried. What is odd, the confirmation letter was dated the “day before”! I have not consulted my files, but I have a copy and I logged the dates and times. My point here is, angel is willing to use any subterfuge to keep his lies rolling. Including, purporting to file a report, which is most certainly fake (and punishable by law) and misuse an FBI in an extortive manner. Which is a violation of Federal code, though admittedly, I have forgotten the exact index number. I will point out, that it is a bone of contention between me and angel, but I am smart enough and easy going enough, to not bother even exploring the possibility of charges.

            If I must say, I am tired of watching angel claim to be religious, though admittedly he does not often bring up that point. Yet, in other blogs, he harasses people that have strong religous beliefs. True beliefs, unlike his “I can never lie, because I am always forgiven” nonsense. Or should I say, his “hate” thy neighbor outlook.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I enjoy your posts, and those of several others participants in this forum.
            What you said in this post is of particular interest to me. A couple of years ago, when a neighbor saw a van parked across from my house, she approached the van and asked one of the two men in it what were they doing. One of them responded that they were on a surveillance operation, and not to worry about their presence. A day or two later they left as furtively as they had arrived. I never gave it a second thought, mostly because I don’t have anything to hide, but your comment is making me think that that incident was not as benign as it seemed at the time.
            Anyway, with the possible exception of not picking up my pooch’s poop as a result of a recent surgery, I doubt they got much out of me if that who they were after.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I do apologize for the lengthy, repetitive posts, and as I find I could write a lot more, I will make this my last post to you today.

            Generally, I find our trolls just come to prove that they have real self-worth, but more importantly, they come to be entertained. If we give them a couple of limp responses, they will continue to come back for more of the “winning” good feeling they seek so much.

            I do not know for sure that angel is even a man. On two occasions he made a special effort to “play” as a woman. Though, I do believe “he” is a man, at least sort of, but nothing angel says can be trusted.

            As for angel’s views as a Cuban, being a pathological liar does not seem to necessarily be a Cuban trait. However, I digress. I have worked with a number of Cuban immigrants. As well, because of that job connection, I used to donate my time to their small community here, taking care of their computer problems. Paychecks being small, and regulations tight, email was the preferred way to stay in touch with family back in Cuba. These were not your gentile upper-middle class immigrants that came here in the 1960’s. I did not know the origin of most of these people, and I did not ask, but I will tell you about one that was my helper in the factory I worked in at the time. (I may have a master’s degree, but I have worked a lot of menial jobs. In fact, I have done just about everything one can do in one’s life, except hold any high position. And I do work for government again in my “declinng” years.)
            Anyway, his name was Justo, and his family had won a lottery to come to the United States (circa 1995). He had been an “advisor” in Angola, in other words, he had been an officer in the Cuban Army.

            We worked in a rather abusive environment, physically, mentally, and emotionally. The management’s treatment of their staff was very poor, and actually cost them production. But, as I was told directly, they believed an angry, unhappy, and scared worker would produce more. As the unofficial spokesman for the crew, I repied that would work only for a few minutes. I was not popular.

            Unfortunately, Justo was assigned to me. I mean unfortunate for him. He was a very good worker, and I pushed hard, not only to produce for my employer, but also to avoid the rain of abuse. Often, when I looked a Justo and asked him to do something more, I saw a certain sad, defeated look. I think he knew he could not rebel, or he would lose his job and his families income. The point here Dominick, he had never experienced anything like this in Cuba. He was totally unprepared for the reality of America.

            I could continue, but I will try to wrap this up in a couple of paragraphs. Justo, and a large number of immigrants that worked for us, often felt that America was almost as bad as where they had left. Theoretically safer, yeah, well that is another discussion, but economically they were no better off. Jobs that paid nothing and were hard to find. Rents that were way to high for what they got in return. Expensive food, no medical care.

            Justo for instance, would have gotten a subsidized apartment at the very least in Cuba. He would have gotten food assistance, and his whole family was covered by a health service that is actually better than our own. It would be much, much better, if we removed the economic blocks on Cuba. You probably know that Cuba has the highest percentage of college graduates in the Caribbean. Though right-wingers hate Castro, and Cuba, and scoff at anything Cuban, all one has to do is take into acount the difficulties Cuba has, and then compare that island to our little paradise of Puerto Rico. I think we should be ashamed.

            We had a man from Iraq, a young man that was huge. By looking at him you would never have guessed that he was from Iraq. He was a refugee from the 1991 war. We had a Puerto Rican, a military veteran, and of course a citizen. We had a Bosnian, nominally a muslim, though you would never have known it. To be brief, they all hated America. Both the Puerto Rican, and the Bosnian left. The Puerto Rican went home, the Bosnian went back to Germany where he had previously fled to. The Iraqi did not have any options.

            The thing Dominick, the Cubans that have, in my mind, done so much damage to this nation, are the “hard-working” (hard scheming business types) that fled Castro. They had, and still have, nothing in common with 90% of the Cuban people. They push right-wing issues, and were largely responsible for Bush getting into office. If they had not raised so much hell over the Elian Gonzales issue, then Gore would have won anyway. They inspired the Bay of PIgs, and though it is an entirely different discussion, my conclusion is they were responsible for Kennedy’s death. (Not as a people of course, but a few individuals.) These people do not represent the average Cuban.

            Of course, I still love my country, though I don’t think I would be willing to die for it any more. The capitalists, the wealthy, the manipulators, the high-level untouchable thieves, an exploitative foreign policies and domesic business models have soured me. I have come to totally agee with Smedley Darlington Butler.

            The American experience is not the same for these people, but I know some become very successful and the others often endure it for their families future.

      • Russell Byrd says:

        Ever notice how conversation dies when angelstench is around. Of course, as I have carefully documented, he is only here to “educate” and “shut down these blogs.” HIS WORDS, documented!

        He also calls these “minor liberal blogs,” but he persists in trashing a place that he claims is beneath him.

        One thing on which you can rely with angelstench, he LIES even when the truth would sound better. I think he just wants to hear lies told.

  2. itsfun says:

    Our fathers have fought and died for the rights we have EARNED. Now we have politicians that want to give those rights to ILLEGAL immigrants and make us pay for them. Rights are not something that are given, but are earned. We left royalty rule to get these rights. Now we have a president that thinks he is royalty and ignores our laws and makes his own.

    • highpckts says:

      Really?? And where were your ancestors from! There are no true “white” native Americans!! Did you earn your “rights”? I think not! If you were born here you inherited them with no work on your underserving self!!

      • James Bowen says:

        White Americans who were born here to families who have been here for generations are just as native as anyone else. Even American Indians have ancestors who immigrated here. Humans are not native to the western hemisphere. We cannot let in everyone who wants to come here. We don’t have the resources.

        • highpckts says:

          Good thing we didn’t say that when your ancestors came here!! No resources? so I take it you are behind the EPA and all green companies that are trying to save this planet and our resources??

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I doubt it. In fact, he probably does not mind the damage that is being done to our environment, the attempt to turn national parks into privately owned ranches, and all the other excesses supported by the right wing.
            What he, and most people like him, are against is the influx of people who don’t look like he does. Interestingly, they don’t seem to have a problem with the tens of thousands of professionals from India, Pakistan, and other countries who come to the USA and get the best jobs our economy has to offer…or learn how to fly planes into buildings and kill fellow Americans. Their concern is limited to short, brown people, who speak Spanish, and make a living picking fruits and veggies.

          • James Bowen says:

            Wow, you are so off the mark here I don’t know where to start. I strongly support government regulations designed to limit pollution. And I strongly oppose excessive immigration from India and China and anywhere else. We need to eliminate most guest worker programs, student visas, and reduce legal permanent immigration by >90%. Cheap labor affects all occupations, not just the one where the influx is.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            How are you going to eliminate non-existent guest worker programs? That concept was offered as a solution by Sen. McCain. When it became clear that he was going to lose his seat, he changed course and became a champion of higher fences. His proposal was not implemented for two reasons, Republicans did not like it, and Democrats did not like it because it transformed people into second class citizens.

          • James Bowen says:

            Non-existent? How about H-1B, H-2A, and H-2B for starters? Those are the big ones, there are several others. All together, we bring in about 700,000 guest workers each year, and that is on top of the 1.1 million new green cards we issue each year. Bottom line: we already have a very large guest worker program, and the saying that we need a guest worker program is a very disingenuous tactic to try to get Americans to fork over more of their jobs to aliens who are willing to work for lower wages and don’t have the same legal protections and rights.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Just a bully looking for the last word again. No information, no truth. Just bullying, harassment, and racism. Sad. . .

          • angelsinca says:

            Take notice if you will, that every single word of harassment and intimidation by YOU, Byrd, ends the discussion in that thread. Every time.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You just couldn’t let it go, could you.

            I am proud that every time I post harassment and intimidation by a lying, bullying, cretin like you ends.

            You know dirtbag. I have never ended a discussion in any thread. That is what you have claimed to be doing and it is what you have done.

            Telling me one of your lies is useless. I am not at all harmed, and you are still a liar. So, crawl back into your self-loathing closet with your boy’s cellmate named Bubba.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You have close to twice as many posts as you have up votes. Even your own screwheads don’t like you.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            How about that popularity test again? Why don’t we ask about who shuts down conversation.

            I only strive for the last word in order to destroy your sick joy at having it yourself. That is the only real reason you are here.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            The term “guest worker” is understood as the proposal made by Sen. McCain to grant legal RESIDENCY to illegal immigrants to allow them to work, and pay taxes, without the rights and privileges afforded to LEGAL IMMIGRANTS who enter the country with the appropriate visas (such as H1B, H2B, etc). Our entry visa system favors professionals, and the spouses and children of American citizens. It is extremely difficult for unskilled or semi-skilled workers to get an entry visa to the USA.
            The women and children from Central America are in a category similar to the Cuban refugees, who enjoy asylum , and a fast track to legal status and citizenship, thanks to the legislation propose and signed by President Reagan.
            BTW, LEGAL immigrants entering the USA with an entry visa are given a “green card” that identifies them as LEGAL residents. Your claim that 700.000 “guest workers” (I presume you are talking about legal immigrants) plus 1.1 million green cards is patently FALSE, inasmuch as the 700,000 LEGAL immigrants (what you euphemistically refer to as guest workers) are given a green card. The two go hand in hand, you cannot get a green card without having entered the USA with a H1B, H2B or any other form of entry visa.

          • James Bowen says:

            This is absolutely not false. See the following: http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/immigration-statistics/yearbook/2011/ois_yb_2011.pdf. The details for guest workers are on page 70 of the pdf. These are guest workers in every sense of the word. They are temporary, not permanent residents, and we grant more than 700,000 temporary worker permits to H-1B, H-2A, and H-2B workers (the latter two of which are unskilled worker visas). Green card holders are permanent residents, and we admit more than a million of them each year. The Central Americans do not have a right to a hearing unless they are victims of trafficking, and these kids are not. The Cuban law needs to be revoked.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Visa Description

            H1A Temporary employment visa

            H1B Persons in specialty occupations that require a
            college or advanced degree; artists, entertainers, athletes and fashion models of distinguished merit and ability (may include persons assisting
            in their performances)

            H2A Temporary or seasonal agricultural workers

            H2B Persons filling temporary jobs that cannot be filled by US citizens or residents

            H3 Professional job trainees in an American company or in the US office of a foreign company

            H4 Spouse and children of H visa applicants. Work is not authorized for this visa type.

            Other types visas include tourist visas, student visas, temporary visas granted to persons wishing have medical care in the USA, etc.

          • James Bowen says:

            Yes, the ones who are authorized to work are the guest workers.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Good info on the McCain-Kennedy guest worker program solution:

            http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/John_McCain_Immigration.htm

          • James Bowen says:

            What McCain wants to do is essentially greatly expand the guest worker programs we already have.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I realize we are talking semantics, but we do not have a “guest worker” program like what McCain offered as a solution to the illegal immigration problem.
            Many of our visas are, in effect, permanent permits that allow foreigners to live and work in the USA as permanent residents. They pave the way for those LEGAL immigrants to apply for naturalization, at which time they become naturalized U.S. citizens with the same rights and privileges as everyone else, except for one: they are not eligible to become President since our Constitution reserves that privilege to “natural born citizens” (Ted Cruz notwithstanding).

          • James Bowen says:

            The point is that we already have very large guest worker programs, and the fact that these guest workers may become permanent shows how permissive our system already is. McCain wants to make our system even more permissive, and those who advocate cracking down on illegal immigration generally want to reduce legal immigration as well, i.e. make our system more restrictive.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Again, using semantics lead nowhere. We do not have numerous guest worker programs in place. Our Immigration and Naturalization agency has had a visa system in place, for many decades, that allow foreigners to enter the USA legally for various lengths of time, and for different reasons, to satisfy demand, to achieve other goals, and to address the rights of some of our American born citizens. Some visas are temporary and are issued to foreign students and tourists wishing to study in the USA or visit the USA. Others are issued to the foreign spouses of American born citizens. Others are issued for a pre-specified period of time that usually matches the contracts that foreign professionals sign with American corporations or government agencies where their services are welcomed. Some are issued to allow foreign businessmen to participate in meetings and business transactions in the USA.
            Last, but not least, some are indefinite in nature, and allow foreigners to remain in the USA as long as they wish, and afford them a path to citizenship if they wish to become American citizens. I suppose we could consider them “guests”, but since many of those in the categories mentioned above do not work in the USA, and in the case of students and tourists, are prevented from working in the USA, the term “guest worker” has never been used officially by any government agency.
            The term “Guest Worker” was used – officially – by Sens. McCain and Kennedy for a proposal that would allow illegal immigrants to work, and pay taxes, in the USA without the benefits of permanent residency (green card), and without any of the rights and privileges enjoyed by American born and naturalized citizens.
            Clearly, you don’t believe in the issuance of visas to foreigners, in the legal or illegal entry of foreigners, and you don’t support potential solutions to a problem that has plagued the USA for decades. Our business community and our government opine otherwise, and that’s the reason this issue is unlikely to be resolved for many years to come.

          • James Bowen says:

            Those H visa workers are temporary by design, and those workers do not have the rights and privileges of American citizens. Those are by definition guest workers.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I accessed the link you provided, which has a lot of good information and accurate statistics, but could not find anything even remotely similar to the McCain-Kennedy “Guest Worker Program” solution to the illegal immigration problem. I read everything on page 70, as you suggested, and could not find any references to the guest worker program proposal.
            The refugees from Central America may or may not qualify for asylum, but without a formal hearing, with lawyers present and a judge making the final decision, based on evidence rather than emotions, that is impossible to tell.

          • James Bowen says:

            Page 70 of the pdf lists the number of H-1B’s, H-2A’s, and H-2B’s that were admitted to the U.S. for the five years leading up to 2011. They number about 700,000 when added up. These visa holders are here contingent upon these temporary visas and may not switch jobs while they are here lest they lose their work authorization.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I realize we are talking semantics on the issue of “guest workers”, but I think it is important to be as accurate as possible to avoid confusion.
            Indeed, hundreds of thousands of legal immigrants, most of them professionals, have been entering the USA, for the past several decades, with the appropriate visas to fill vacancies that, ideally, should be filled by Americans. Unfortunately, we do not have enough medical doctors, nurses, physicists, chemists, engineers and other professionals to fill all the vacancies our economy generates. With that in mind, our employers are left with the dilemma of either hiring foreign professionals, outsourcing, or doing without.
            The visa system we are currently using has been in place for the better part of the last century. It is not something new.
            Our options are to motivate our children to pursue careers in the field of hard sciences and technology, where most of our professional opportunities reside, reform our immigration laws to ensure they address our needs, and develop a system with the necessary oversight to ensure immigrants working in the USA pay taxes and abide by our laws.

          • James Bowen says:

            I am a physicist, and I can tell you first hand that the suggestion that we do not have enough STEM workers is totally false. Newly-minted physics Ph.D.’s consider themselves lucky if they can land a temporary job as a postdoc earning $30K per year. Many of my classmates who wanted to go to grad school and had good grades were not able to get in. It is more difficult to get into a physics graduate program than it is to get into law school. On top of that, the U.S. has to a large degree disinvested in basic research–reducing the jobs and career options available for scientists. The saying that we don’t have enough comes from big business that profits from cheap labor. A shortage of medical doctors and nurses is more accurate, but that is not for lack of interest–it is for lack of medical schools. Legal immigration, both temporary and permanent, needs to be slashed in order to give our own citizens opportunities, opportunities that our citizens are very interested in, contrary to the smearing they get from big business execs who want more cheap labor.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Believe or not, I agree with much of what you said, especially the part about lack of help and opportunities for American students pursuing careers in the field of hard sciences. I think that is really pathetic and short sighted. Helping Americans trying to major in fields where there is demand would reduce our dependence on foreign talent, but that is not going to happen overnight.
            Another area that needs attention is the embarrassing percentage of American kids that drop out of high school. These problems ought to be at the very top of our priorities.
            My eldest son use to work for a very large software company. The salaries they pay, and the benefit packages they offer, are unbelievable. When that company began to work on a software security project that required not only advanced college degrees, but extensive experience, they had no choice but to move that specific operation to Canada, where foreign professionals are welcomed and are available.
            Yes, it would be great to have enough talent at home to satisfy demand, but it will be a few years – if ever- before that happens.
            Bear in mind that countries usually benefit from the influx of foreign professionals. The problem is when our own are displaced by newcomers.
            Anyway, congratulations and good luck with your career.

          • James Bowen says:

            The best way to steer Americans in the direction of demand is via wages and shortages, which would increase with shortages, but having permissive visa programs hijacks that process. And there are not really any fields, save for perhaps medicine, where there is much demand right now. It truly is an employers’ market for labor presently, and more work visas would just make that more so. There have been several news stories in recent months about age discrimination in the computer industry, where anyone over 35 is viewed as less than optimal in job applications. In other words, there is such a glut of computer and IT workers that it truly has become a throwaway labor market for them. My personal experience is that whenever one talks about labor shortages, the opposite is true.

            Thank you for your well wishes. I appreciate them.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Dominick, you are dealing with a psychotic personality here. He has an ego the size of a bus, and delusions of grandeur that may one day result in his committal. Nothing you can say, no matter how well documented or sincere will ever be considered by this waste of flesh. He will keep posting until he gets the last word. He thrives on that.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Wow, you are so off the mark here I think you need to be detained for mental health evaluation.

          • James Bowen says:

            So a desire to preserve ecological health is off the mark? I don’t think so.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Except, that argument was disposed of near 3000 posts ago. No one here gives a damn, and certainly not me. You are just greenlining, like your racist hero.

            By the way, what does any of this have to do with Fizz-icks?

          • James Bowen says:

            Again, rants and raves do not dispose of arguments. Given that that is mostly what you have done, you have not disposed of anything.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Where is the rant or rave, dipsh*t?’

            Even if I do rant, it is because you have never made an argument. Certainly not a coherent argument. And never shown anything but false and invalid data.

          • James Bowen says:

            All of the data I have shown you is valid and coherent, as are the demonstrations I have made.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

            A debunked lie repeated has no increased weight. You will make an excellent researcher in your field. Of course, I jest! LMAO!

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Maybe, I am wrong to a slight extent. You have made one argument inadvertently, AND proven it. You have proven that you are a racist. Plain and simple, yet you deny like the liar you always are.

            LMAO!

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I guess the Navy did not need anymore semen being abused, did they. Oops!

          • Russell Byrd says:

            One of the repeated memes of Jim Bozo is the claim that not expelling all illegals is “selfish.” Yes, selfish. I kind of understand what he is trying to say, but that only makes him seem all the sicker.

          • James Bowen says:

            Yes, I am totally behind the EPA and the green companies, as well as nuclear power since that is the only practical way we currently have at our disposal to reduce greenhouse gases.

            And when my ancestors came here, we were a frontier nation. That is no longer the case.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            When your ancestors came here, we were still shearing them by hand.

        • Russell Byrd says:

          R-A-C-I-S-T rhetoric to justify what cannot be justified.

          The weakness in your argument is the fact that we all are immigrants. YOU ADMITTED SO!

          • James Bowen says:

            U.S. and Canadian population growth need to be halted. Since that is entirely due to immigration, immigration needs to be reduced.

          • James Bowen says:

            George Will is a cheap labor mouthpiece, and those who profit from cheap labor are the driving force behind the push for more immigration.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            So the certain mouth of a urinal keeps saying. In the end the point is he is one of yours, and no friend of mine/ours.

          • James Bowen says:

            He’s certainly not one of ours.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Yes, HE IS. Now Bozo, go on a tear for another 100 posts. I will never agree, and I will never give in. Letting you have your way is just too much for common decency to withstand.

            YOU RACIST LIAR. Oops, I left out treasonous, as well as about a dozen other adjectives.

          • James Bowen says:

            He is not an immigration restrictionist. That is what I am talking about.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You are a disgusting dickhead. That little playtoy title is just bullshit. “Immigration restrictionist” is just a contrived way of saying “blatant racist.”

            You cannot even tell the truth in your “slogans.”

            At least Will has some redeeming value. 🙂

          • Russell Byrd says:

            And dirtbag, George Will is not exactly a bleeding heart liberal.

          • James Bowen says:

            He is a cheap labor mouthpiece, and the cheap labor-loving big business lobby has always been the driving force behind increasing immigration.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            According to a man that would rather lie than tell the truth. You are just a cheap mouth . . . piece. Oh, I guess I am ranting again. ROTFL!

    • jmprint says:

      And now you think you are king of the hill, nope, we are all immigrants at one point or another. Due process is the law. You are ignoring the law, not the president.

      • James Bowen says:

        The President is charged with enforcing the laws, not changing them if he disapproves of them. The law is that these people do not have the right or the privilege to be here, and should be compelled to leave. Yes, we might all be descended from immigrants, but that does not change the fact that we cannot take in everyone who wants to come here.

        • johninPCFL says:

          What the law actually says is that these CHILDREN have the right to have a hearing before a judge to determine whether they should be allowed to stay. Immediate deportation to anyone who says “I’d like asylum, please” is illegal.

          • James Bowen says:

            The only ones who have a right to a hearing are the ones who are victims of trafficking. Those who just claim refugee status and request asylum do not necessarily have the right to a hearing. The Border Patrol first must determine if there could be validity to their claim. If they decide there is not, they may be deported immediately.

          • Allan Richardson says:

            The law states that a JUDGE, not a Border Patrol officer, has to make that determination. Therefore, they MUST stay here, in SOMEONE’S care, until a case can come before that judge. Anything less is itself violating the 2008 bipartisan PRE-OBAMA law.

            By analogy, a police officer can arrest you and CHARGE you with violating some law, but only a COURT can convict and punish you legally.

          • James Bowen says:

            See the following: http://cis.org/2008-trafficking-law-inapplicable-current-border-crisis. The 2008 only applies when kids are being trafficked, and these kids are not being trafficked. Law enforcement is trusted to make a determination as to what laws have been violated and which haven’t.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Law enforcement can only detain on suspicion. To do what you propose could not only cost a law enforcement officer his job, but could result in criminal prosecution. ONLY a judge can make that determination. And don’t bother with your inevitable, obvious lies, I KNOW what I am talking about.

          • James Bowen says:

            So, you are saying that law enforcement personnel cannot make judgements as to which laws are being violated? That is utter nonsense. The Border Patrol is authorized to make an initial determination as to whether there is any merit to asylum requests.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Still lying Dimbozo. WE BOTH KNOW that is not what I said. Law enforcement has no punitive powers whatsoever. Trying to once again spin your failed racist argument is just more nonsense.

          • James Bowen says:

            This is not punitive.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Stop lying, it is punitive. Calling the Sun blue and the sky red will not change the facts.

          • James Bowen says:

            Deciding immigration status is not punitive, it is administrative in nature.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            BY A JUDGE! Once again you disprove your own argument and expose your racist theories for what they are.

          • James Bowen says:

            No, not necessarily by a judge. The law that Congress passed in 1996 allows unauthorized aliens to be deported without due process.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            ???? 2008!!!!!!!!! Verstehen?

            Anyway, you are still wrong and you still lie. I never actually told you what I actually do for a living, did I? It matters. . . .

          • James Bowen says:

            The 2008 law applies to trafficking victims only and did not overturn the 1996 law. If you are suggesting you are a lawyer, you should know this.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Your wrong. . .

            This is a discussion, not a dictation. So, I will no longer make a pretense of discussion.

            How much farther through your day would you be if you had not bothered with that bit of stupid and lying to me? Hmm?

          • Russell Byrd says:

            ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL! ROTFL!

            Really? When you are caught constantly lying, and when your no information rants are entirely based on a discredited, invalid, vile, and evil site, what do you reach for to defend the next post.

            THE SAME discredited, invalid, vile, and evil site, levered into another maze of lies. WOW.

            What is the point? NO one but a very few trolls is impressed. There is almost no audience to appreciate your splooge of a post if they were receptive. And I am neither impressed, nor will I ever agree with any of your lies and no information posts.

            So again, what is the point?

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Why don’t you become a border patrol agent. Then do what you claim to be the law, AND wind up in jail yourself. Or dead.

          • James Bowen says:

            In this hypothetical situation, I would not wind up in jail. I would be doing my job.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You would wind up in jail, unless there was a conspiracy to cover up your crime. Which conspiracy would be a much more serious crime than the original infraction. As well, once again, you would probably wind up dead. And rightly so.

            You would have no right to “dispose” of a miscreant. Only a court can do that. Interpret the law, yes, but assign “punishment,” NO!

            So go on another 100 post tear. I do not care, I will always be here.

          • James Bowen says:

            Again, determining immigration status is an administrative matter, not a criminal one. Law enforcement may do this.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            CHA–CHIING, we have a winner. ” . . . determining immigration status is an administrative matter, not a criminal one. RIGHT, this is a decision for an administrative law judge, NOT law enforcement.

            THANK YOU!!!! LMAO! at your narrow-minded ignorance and arrogance. As I said, they walk hand in hand.

            This discussion is at an end. I realize, that you will belabor this for years, but it is over.

          • James Bowen says:

            The immigration enforcement law that passed on 30 September 1996 allows unauthorized aliens to be deported without due process. That means law enforcement may make the decision about their immigration status.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Which was totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand. As well, the law does not exactly say what you want it to anyway. Yet, you just have to deflect from the real subject as often as you deflect from the truth.

          • James Bowen says:

            The point is there is law on the books that allows illegals to be deported without due process, meaning that all of these surgers can be deported expeditiously.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            The real point is, that lie was destroyed in action. Your case was . . . dismissed. AND you tacitly agreed by your four days of silence. You do not have the right to pick and choose.

            Oddly, whenever I get a little soft-hearted for such a hapless troll as you, you want to come back and get obnoxious again. You just are not very bright.

          • James Bowen says:

            Congress passed a law in 1996 that allows illegals to be summarily deported without a hearing.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You already admitted that you are a liar now, by failing to post any protest for four straight days. You have no right to turn this on and off at will.

            As well, your bullshit was destroyed many, many times before. No one here, and especially me, is the least bit interested, or impressed, with your constant lies. So, be a dickhead if you must, but you do not impress anyone with any favorable opinion of your intelligence or integrity.

          • James Bowen says:

            We can’t afford to take them all in.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            We cannot afford you, but we could use some good people to replace you.

          • James Bowen says:

            People? We can’t even sustain our current population, let alone more.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Irrelevant drivel that sustains a racist liar.

          • James Bowen says:

            How are we going to indefinitely sustain our numbers?

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Ignored.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I will say once more, I would rather have working immigrants that are really desirous of American citizenship, than I would a fat bastard that just soaks up taxpayer money and quite obviously will never do anything for this Nation. No, screw the Navy service. You did that because it was advantageous. Obviously, not for love of country. And you did it on easy, easy sea duty, the easiest possible, and the rest of your time you spent in port, or probably out abusing someone you think you can pick on. I am sure as an officer you never even wiped down your own quarters. I did, but I did not have to. You probably only reluctantly wiped your own ass.

            As you said in one of your first posts. The whine about not being able to get an easy, and fantastically good paying job because of all the immigrants. You gave the game away right there. So, you became a fake academic. Pfft!

          • James Bowen says:

            We can’t take in everyone who wants to come here. We don’t have the resources.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You know shithead, you can block your profile all you want, but you are dead easy to find. First, you are not very clever, and second, you gyrate to anyplace you can abuse people with your unwelcome racist bullshit. Really, like I said, I only troll trolls, and that is you. I don’t give a damn what you do in some fruit cake mental ward like Freitfart.
            You know, your heroes like King, only win election because the vast majority of people stay home, and the ones that do vote, throw their vote away on hating any other option, whether good or bad. I will predict, that if this immigration thing blows up in his face, then King will soon be gone to. And if your idol Brat wins, I can bet he will be around just one term. Most of the people that voted for him have no idea what they have elected, they just hated Cantor. That district, if the majority had voted, would have been happy to keep Cantor. Brat just does not have what they really want in a candidate, and any sane person should predict that there will be a reaction, unless Brat really works to the moderate Pub that district really wants. Not likely. Not likely that Brat will do any work at all.

          • James Bowen says:

            Americans, so far as they pay attention, strongly oppose illegal immigration, and in recent weeks more have been paying attention. If King loses, it will not be because of his stance on immigration. Cantor lost because Brat painted him as working against their interests, and used immigration as the prime example.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            So, ONCE AGAIN, you admit that you and your racist pals are a tiny minority. You fail constantly to prove your agenda. In contrast, I don’t have an agenda, unless you consider showing you to be a low moral, racist liar is an agenda. You desperately are trying to continually prove your agenda. I need do nothing but resist. Win-win for me. At best, if is lose-get close to even for you. BUT yet, as an egotistical, self-deluding bastard, liar, racist, and troll, you just cannot stop.

            Once again, as I proved, and YOU DID TO, Brat never painted anything. In fact, if the repuke rank and file were to wake up and lose the bigotry, they would realize the their so-called burnt out shell of a party offers them nothing, and is in fact working against their interests.

          • James Bowen says:

            Everything I have seen points to Brat having painted Cantor as unrepresentative of his district’s interest, and using immigration as the prime example. You have failed to show any evidence for your far-fetched theory, despite being challenged numerous times.

            As I have said before, there are a lot more Americans who oppose giving legal status to illegals and expanding immigration than support it, and in the last two months that number has been growing to include many who had been indifferent due to the border surge.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Everything you have “seen” is filtered through your racist stupidity. Which, as your argument has been destroyed every time, just counts as arrogant, intentional ignorance, and therefore is of no import.

          • James Bowen says:

            This Congressman is correct here.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            So, he is a racist like you. Well, we both already knew that.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Why don’t you become a border patrol agent. Then do what you claim to be the law, AND wind up in jail yourself. Or dead.

          • James Bowen says:

            If I was a Border Patrol agent, I would not wind up in jail for determining someone’s immigration status. I would be doing my job.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            D-E-A-D, is what you would be. . . .

          • Russell Byrd says:

            If, as you claim, illegal immigration is a crime, then any action against that crime is punitive. The simplest of logic and common sense. Of course, as racists like you always lie, then why should anyone be surprised when you intentionally give a false answer.

          • James Bowen says:

            Being in the country illegally is a violation of the law, but it is not a crime, and deportation is not a punishment. Crossing the border without inspection is a crime, however. It is estimated that about 60% of illegal aliens have done this. Using a false or stolen SSN to obtain work is a felony, and most illegal aliens have done this.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You just RECANTED everything you have said. Given a chance to tell the truth, you just can’t. What is it with you fuckstick racists.

          • James Bowen says:

            I have never said anything otherwise. I have said illegal aliens are criminals, which is true of almost all of them. They would not be able to make a living in this country if they weren’t.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You just said last night that ” is a violation of the law, but it is not a crime, and deportation is not a punishment.”

            You have reneged on your posting obligations repeatedly. You have forfeited all your rights. As well, you have been proven to be a liar in every post. You do not discuss, you demand compliance. You have proven you are a racist.

            And to top it off, you have personally proven MY arguments at least eight times. You are an abusive cocksucker, but you do not otherwise have anything relevant to say.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            NOT EVIDENCE, right-wing crypto-racist website.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Wrong again, racist Dimbozo. The Border Patrol has no right to make legal judgements. I KNOW that is true. You know you WANT it to be true. Falsehood is just as good as truth to you. No, lies are even better in your eyes. They get you what you want. Is that why the Navy did away with you? Did they “suggest” that maybe you take your extra promotion and head on down the road? Did they? I know they did! ROTFL!

            You will never make it anywhere if you cannot quit wearing your racism on your sleeve. Oooooooohhh! Another rant. Man, what a whiner you are.

            Look how easy it is to find you, even with a private profile. Why don’t you take your dog and pony show to Freitfart where it belongs?

          • James Bowen says:

            So, you are saying that law enforcement personnel cannot make judgements
            as to which laws are being violated? That is utter nonsense. The
            Border Patrol is authorized to make an initial determination as to
            whether there is any merit to asylum requests. If police required a judge to tell them everything, they would not be able to do their jobs. See the following: http://cis.org/2008-trafficking-law-inapplicable-current-border-crisis.

        • highpckts says:

          When you have a congress that refuses to act and holds other programs as hostage in order to get this done, then the President can use his executive powers! He still hasn’t caught up with GW Bush!!

          • James Bowen says:

            Congress is obliged to pass a budget, but they are not obliged to pass new laws just because the President wants them. In fact, the idea that they are is totally in contradiction to the principle of checks and balances. The President is of course permitted to issue executive orders, but not if they are in contradiction to laws passed by Congress. Given illegal aliens amnesty clearly does contradict existing law passed by Congress.

          • highpckts says:

            Check the law created by Bush! These kids are due their day in court!!

          • James Bowen says:

            Only if they are victims if trafficking. These kids are not.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Once again, law enforcement cannot make what are judicial decisions. Regardless, of how big a nut it gives you.

          • James Bowen says:

            This is not a judicial decision.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            That is why I call you a liar and can prove same. YOU will say anything to have your way. Yet, you are once again wrong. A law enforcement officer brings suspects in for processing. He may have leeway as to where to take them, such as juvenile detention. BUT, he does not decide their fate, EVER. That is proscribed by law. One of these days you may shoot your mouth off and find out the penalty for exceeding your authority. Which is NONE! LMAO!

            So, the fate of a prisoner is a judicial decision. Especially so, since the Bush 2008 regulation. Sorry. but it is to bad, and just so sad!

          • James Bowen says:

            This is to determine immigration status, not to convict of a crime. In this matter, law enforcement may decide what the situation is. If they decide trafficking is a possibility, then the aliens in question are required to have a hearing.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Mealy mouth spin to deflect from the lies you have already told and the racism you are a proponent of.

            Oops, another rant. . . . LOL!

          • Russell Byrd says:

            This guy is a total ass. I have been posting to him for about 3000 posts. NO evidence you post is ever recognized as such. All this shit wants is total agreement with his program of racism. This guy knows everything. He has an ego the size of a barge, and delusions of grandeur that cannot be believed. And LIE faster than the proverbial dog can trot. This guy tried to force me to believe that an equation from his racist guru ruled the world. This guy is sick and very, very sad.

            My last word on this is, HE will never get that last word that gives him some kind of sick orgasm.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            They are required to do their jobs as they swore to do when they took their oath.

            Just more of that pro-radical right wing stupid that you are famous for.

        • jmprint says:

          James Brown if you don’t want him to break the law, then stop asking for deportation, you idiot the law is the law. The Lord provides for the needy and those who help, so if you don’t trust in God then you are the one with the problem.

          • James Bowen says:

            Actually, it is totally legal for them to be deported right away. See the following: http://cis.org/2008-trafficking-law-inapplicable-current-border-crisis. These kids are being smuggled, not trafficked, which makes the 2008 law inapplicable here.

          • jmprint says:

            They are not being smuggled they are coming here because they are being persecuted in their homeland, and are asking for help, totally applicable.

          • James Bowen says:

            The burden of proof is on them in the matter of persecution, not us. That 2008 law only applies to human trafficking victims. I see no evidence that they are the target of persecution.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You didn’t get the last word. Na-na-nana-nah!

            Regardless of burden of proof, a FAIR HEARING is required. So, once again you are not only wrong, but you are willing to bully and lie to get your way. Sorry, but that game is over.

          • James Bowen says:

            A hearing is only required if they are being trafficked, which is not the case here.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            A hearing is required to determine if trafficking exists. Law enforcement does not have the right to decide.

            The above is entirely the truth, in spite of the fact that you are totally wrong on every other point.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Discredited, racist website that only posts articles that suit there racist agenda. In other words, the truth and the law have no meaning for that mob.

            Therefore, false, discredited, and invalid. Which is all you ever post.

          • James Bowen says:

            Again, they use publicly available government and economic data to do their studies. Nothing false, discredited, or invalid about that.

          • jmprint says:

            Where is the proof, they have traveled over 1000 miles to get here, under extreme circumstances, to the arms of you ilk, do you think they would do this for the fun of it? Nobody wants to leave a good, and safe home or life. Don’t be so blind, these are kids. God’s children.

          • James Bowen says:

            They are teenagers. They are coming here because conditions are better here, no question about it. However, we cannot take in everyone who wants a better life. There is no evidence that they have been specifically targeted for persecution there.

          • jmprint says:

            No most are children under ten.

          • James Bowen says:

            That is nonsense. The great majority of them are teenagers.

          • jmprint says:

            No, it is the truth here is a quote from an eleven year old ““The big people force the children to take their clothes off and also make them sell bad things, and if they don’t do it, they rape them or they kill them,” Nodwin said.

          • jmprint says:

            It reads: An unprecedented number of unaccompanied minors illegally entering the U.S. are younger than 12! What do you expected them to do?

          • James Bowen says:

            But most of them, including the border surgers, are not. Whether they are or are not, they need to be deported.

            P.S. Flagging this comment was an accident. Sorry about that.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I flagged that racist mis-information for real.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You just cannot quit, can you. You leave a trail of lies and racism wherever you go. That is why I enjoy busting your chops so much. You really are insane . . . in a rather dangerous way.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            No, it is not.

            Notice a pattern here. Motor mouth posts in a chain to subdue dissent and squelch free speech. I am here now, so I guess the fun is over.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You continue to post discredited information from a crypto-racist website. I won’t waste time with non-information. Find something that actual humans wrote.

          • James Bowen says:

            They use existing law and government data to do their analyses. That is as creditable and reliable as it gets.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I should bill you for service fees and royalties on the edit:

            “They” cherry pick and misrepresent “law and government data to do their analyses. That is” to support an irrational and contrived racist argument.

            No need to thank me. LMAO!

          • James Bowen says:

            I think not. Their analyses simply confirm such common sense concepts that illegal aliens are in fact law breakers and that having more labor depresses wages, and they use publicly available data to do it.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You are as sick as you are evil and even more stupid than that.

            COMMON SENSE would tell anyone normal that someone crossing the border is only a law breaker because we put an artificial barrier in place.

            At least, have the COMMON SENSE to argue the necessity for the barrier. Someone that comes here for a better life, or is scared, or hungry, has NOT FORMED the requisite INTENT TO COMMIT A CRIME! This is a status crime, and not the same thing.

            You on the other hand might very well accused of treason in a very practical sense. Which is a punishable crime.

          • James Bowen says:

            Sneaking across the border, i.e. entry without inspection, is in fact a crime. It is a Federal misdemeanor. A repeat offense is a felony.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            So, you finally admit that is just a status crime. No criminal harm has been committed, and no criminal intent is involved.

            Silence implies consent. Thank you.

            Treason however, is a very real crime punishable by death. . . . 🙂

          • James Bowen says:

            A misdemeanor is in fact a crime. As for what you are saying about treason, that is a message that needs to be communicated to those amnesty supporters who are aiding and abetting a foreign invasion.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            A misdemeanor is in fact a crime, for which most people are not detained and never imprisoned. Thanks for the opener.

            As for treason, those that wish to destroy the fabric of this country, are guilty of treason. The is no escaping that fact.

          • James Bowen says:

            You said that “No criminal harm has been committed…”. Since entry without inspection is a misdemeanor, that is in fact false.

            Those who push to legalize illegal aliens and greatly expand legal immigration wish to destroy the fabric of this nation.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Dear James “Cognitive Dissonance” Dumbowen, you only hear what little of a conversation that benefits your narrow, untruthful, racist spiel. What I said was, “status crime.” We have artificially made certain behavior a crime. If those same laws were in place when this nation was formed, then I would not have to worry about having a conversation with your fat, ugly, lying, emotionally disturbed self. . . .

            It is not the same thing obviously, but it is similar to making the picking of navel lint a crime. We decided to do so for other reasons. It does not equate with real crimes like robbery, murder, or rape. or being a dangerous Quisling such as yourself.

          • James Bowen says:

            That is absurd. All crimes are only crimes because government authority says they are. In order for there to be a crime, there has to be a law, and all laws are human social and political constructs. Therefore, entry without inspection is every bit as much of a crime as any other crime. Not considered as severe, yes, but still a crime.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Then you are just a dishonest racist moron that only lives to bellow his lies through his fat flapping lips.

            You will not make a teacher at all. And certainly not a researcher. I was about to send a letter to your department, but now I am going to have to halt until I get time to ask them, “exactly why is this dishonest, nitwit even in any program at Kansas Univerisity.” You either are there because of money, or you must be giving blow jobs to the department chair. It is obviously not on merit.

            If you feel insulted, then stop being insulting with your academic and intellectual dishonesty. Even many undergrads understands exactly what I have said. Why can’t you? Well, once again, it is because of your academic and intellectual dishonesty. So, again, why do you do it? Any chance that I would agree with a liar has always been nil. And now, I do not even intend to address your individual lies, but we will be here this time for at least a year, and more if necessary. I already know and can relate that eventually you will run. You will block my posts and try to act like I do not exist, but I wlll always find a way to fill your inbox. Your dishonesty alone, requires a response.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            NOT EVIDENCE, DIRTBAG. That is an :”opinion” from a crypto-racist website. NOT FACT, just more reassuring bluster for racists like you.

          • James Bowen says:

            This is an analysis by a study group that knows what they are talking about. Perhaps it would ultimately take a court ruling to decide this, but the point of this is that the Administration should not be applying this to these border surgers at present.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            According to a LIAR and RACIST. Therefore, the racist prattles of a group that is beloved by a LIAR and RACIST has no meaning, AND is entirely OFF-TOPIC here.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Refer to what I said, nitwit.

          • James Bowen says:

            I did, and my comment is an appropriate response to it.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You always claim, but you never do. So you are in fact a LIAR. . . .

    • Vincent Harriman says:

      Sorry, but our rights are given, not earned. They are given by the Constitution, you did nothing to earn it, other than being born here. People born in other countries are also given the right to become American citizens. Granted there are undocumented people here. Giving them a chance to become counted, and later, the chance to become a citizen, is a separate problem.

      • itsfun says:

        Are you saying our forefathers did not earn the rights we have? The constitution was earned not given to Americans.

        • jmprint says:

          No they did not earn it anymore then the rest of the people that fought for freedom, they were in position to write the constitution for the people.

          • itsfun says:

            My whole point was our freedom and rights were fought for and earned by all those who fought for freedom. Revolutionary war, world war I, world war II, Korea, Vietnam, and all the soldiers fighting now. If I left any of our veterans out I apologize.

          • jmprint says:

            Please explain how helping human beings is infringing on your rights?

          • itsfun says:

            my financial rights. My right to feel safe from gangs. my right to feel safe from criminals. If you or anyone else wants to house and feed and educate and give medical care feel free to do so, just don’t expect me to pay for ILLEGALS.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            My rights as a citizen are infringed upon as long as your wondrous corporations can masquerade as living breathing human beings. Of course, you are all for this, RIGHT?

          • itsfun says:

            Not sure what your point is, but isn’t a small business different than a large corporation? I think these corporations have living breathing human beings managing them and earning livings to feed their families,educate them, provide medical care, a loving home, etc.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Thanks for proving my point.

            ” I think these corporations have living breathing human beings managing them and earning livings to feed their families,educate them, provide medical care, a loving home, etc.

            RIGHT! And everyone of those people has exactly the same rights as you or I. NOT THE CORPORATION, that exists only on paper. By allowing a non-living, inanimate object to have therights of a citizen, especially when they command millions of times more money that the average citizen, we are giving these people TWICE the rights of you or I. Of course, most of you trolling shills represent the very root of the evil that is killing this country.

            THANK you.

            Capitalism, and this has nothing to do with any other form of “system,” works when the producers, i.e. the workers, can produce enough to satisfy the rampant greed of the capitalists, AND still not starve to death. That is the way it has always been. Unfortunately, when considering our standard of living, that is no longer the case.

          • itsfun says:

            Still not sure what you are getting at. Don’t know why you seem to hate corporations that are paying taxes, feeding families, etc. What happens to these taxes and families if the government regulates them out of business?

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Your just posting to get that precious last word. Really, you are just being obtuse. The point is obvious. EVERY person in that corporation has the same rights as we do. A corporation is not a living human being.

            Giving the CEO of a company his rights as a citizen, and then giving him rights as a company, and with millions of dollars is obviously double dipping on rights.

            The majority of the Nation understands this. You only fail to do so because all this big corporate money buys public opinion to support your obnoxious platform. It is that simple. If corporations gave all their money to the Democrats, you would be livid. Yet, I would still have the same view. In other words, you change depending on the advantage it gives you. I follow what is right.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            YOU DO UNDERSTAND! You are just trying to wear out this conversation by being obtuse.

            As far as feeding families, corporations depend on workers to produce just as much as families do for income. THAT IS THE TRUTH. Big money in corporations have always tried to make their employees beholden to them. BUT, without producers, the owners have nothing and they are nothing. This is not communism, it is not socialism, it is common sense and observable fact.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            No one is regulating anyone out of business. The laws can be hard on small business owners, but corporate America is making out like a big dog. Don’t bother arguing. The profits posted by corporate America and the gains by the wealthiest Americans belie any denial of that truth.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I have made three posts that, as usual, destroy your meager argument. At least to anyone that has a brain and cares about this Nation.

            So, go ahead and spew. You get the last word on this one. Only your fellow trolls will agree or have sympathy for you.

            It must almost hurt to be so evil and stupid. Of course, you do have an evil outlook, but I admit that you are smart enough to know the truth. You just don’t see how the truth benefits you. But, mark my words, you can’t keep supporting corporate interests and survive while the average person’s standard of living is headed for the toilet.

            Even that square head Bowen knows that one. The average Rumpbuggercon voter is coming to despise corporate America even more than we do. Unfortunately, for them and us, the hierarchy in Washington is not interested in what the people really think.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            If you make all the money, then you should pay all the taxes! My effective tax rate is higher than old Mitt’s, and I made squat for profit last year. And worse this year. DONE!

          • Russell Byrd says:

            . . . corporations can masquerade as living breathing human beings.

            Don’t insult your own intelligence that way. YOU KNOW exactly what I am talking about, or you need to be back in nursery school.

        • Vincent Harriman says:

          You may say that they earned the right. By winning the Revolutionary War, our words, not the English viewpoint, they were able to form a government to their liking. They chose a democratic republic and wrote the Constitution.

          And may I add this, and in doing so, I am not denigrating all those who have served in the military of the United States, that the soldiers have not no greater claim to keeping our rights any more than voters or our elected those representatives. We’ve all had an equal share in keeping those rights by exercising them.

          The Spanish American War helped us establish an empire. Those who fought in WW2, and I had relatives die in it, may have kept us from having German as our native language. The other wars have done nothing to maintain our freedoms, other than to give US business access to more areas, no matter how you want to spin it.

          The current problem with children at our border is an humanitarian crisis. They are not illegal, as they give themselves up as soon as they know that they are on US soil. Tying this problem to illegal immigration is just politics, and does nothing to alleviate either the broken immigration system we now have or the plight of the children.

          • itsfun says:

            They are illegal, they are coming into this country illegally. They are coming here with Obama written on their shoes, saying Obama will take care of us. How many are gang people? How many are carrying diseases? How many have you offered to take into your home and feed, educate, give medical care, buy cloths for, etc. My guess is none, you just expect the American tax payer to pay for them.

          • itsfun says:

            The immigration system is not broken, the laws are not being enforced by our administration. The border control agents are told to stay in their office and not patrol the borders. The way you just dumped on the veterans shows you never served this country.

          • Vincent Harriman says:

            Not that it makes any difference, but I never did serve. I applied to the Coast Guard Academy, but while I was smart enough, I was not team oriented enough. And the local secretary of the selective service asked if I wanted a free trip to a southeast asian country, I declined, and she wrote a deferment.
            We just trashed Iraq. No one from Iraq had attacked us. How did our wrecking of that country strengthen our constitutional rights? Personally, I think we lost all our rights with the passage of the patriot act, except for being able to participate in a popularity contest every couple of years. Most of the contestants, on either side, are no way close to being leaders.
            Again, I had friends die in Vietnam. How did our fighting there help guarantee our freedoms? Ho Chi Minh never attacked us, or even thought about it.
            The fact that our government decided to squander American lives in most of our wars have done nothing to enhance our freedoms. Blame our government for the waste, not me for pointing it out.
            As for taking anyone into my home, on my small income, I can barely take care of myself. However, a few minutes of our military budget would care for these children, and I have been a taxpayer for 50 years.

  3. James Bowen says:

    This is unacceptable. Illegal aliens have no right to be here and should be compelled to leave. The reason the border surge is happening is because there is now a perception that we do not enforce our immigration laws.

    • jmprint says:

      Then call your congressmen and tell them to pass immigration reform NOW!

      • James Bowen says:

        I have been. I have been asking her to oppose amnesty and support bills that reduce legal immigration and crack down on illegal immigration.

        • jmprint says:

          Great more grid lock!

          • James Bowen says:

            Congress should never pass something just for the sake of doing something. Our system is designed to make new laws difficult to pass, for good reason.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You are RIGHT for once. They should never pass your racist program just to satisfy a minority of white racist male America! You 10 percenters have done far too much harm already.

          • James Bowen says:

            Even if it is only ten percent who oppose immigration anarchy, that is still a lot more than the 0.5% that support it.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            In what part of your overly ample ass did you pull that (fake) statistic out of? Hmm?

          • James Bowen says:

            I base that on web visitation ratings, feedback to Congress, and comment threads where the two sides stack up at about that ratio.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Then you just admitted you LIE. You never accept the truth when it interferes with your racism.

            Which means, you never accept the truth.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            http://www.splcenter.org/publications/the-nativist-lobby-three-faces-of-intolerance/cis-the-
            I did what I said I would not do your work for you, but here is just the first half a dozen. These are not selections, but literally the first half a dozen. Whine about the SPLC all you want, but they are not only morally correct, BUT they also win allmost all their cases. Therefore, they KNOW and FOLLOW the law. Unlike a criminal like you. So STFU! This will always be referred to, but never repeated, AGAIN!

            independent-think-tank
            http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/the-nativist-lobby-three-faces-of-intolerance
            http://www.splcenter.org/blog/?s=Center+for+Immigration+Studies

            from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Immigration_Studies
            “Media reports have questioned the accuracy of its factual assertions and its claim to nonpartisanship and noted its ties to extremist groups.”

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/center-for-immigration-studies/
            http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/15/inside-the-center-for-immigration-studies-the-immigration-false-fact-think-tank.html

          • James Bowen says:

            I commend you for finally posting something relevant to the subject at hand. However, the SPLC is a dubious resource. They have come under scrutiny from charity watchdogs who have indicated they are a for-profit organization that masquerades as a non-profit civil rights law group. From what I see, these sources mostly rely on other think tanks for their studies. The Center for Immigration Studies, while it certainly does have a particular policy position, relies on existing law and data that comes from government departments and agencies. The latter is more trustworthy than the former.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I tell you to go f*ck yourself for your lies and bullshit. Whether I am on topic or not, is just an artificial construct in your mind. In other words, you have no connection to reality. You just work the current LIE into the picture.

            All you had to say about this is known to be a lie, and why did you bother, as I had already predicted that you would lie.

            You are a racist. And to cowardly to admit it. You want civil war, like any common variety treasonous criminal does. There is no argument you can make. That you are a bully, racist, harasser, liar, breaker of the terms of service, off-topic poster, right-wackjob radical, troll, and all around asshole cannot be denied. Go ahead, but I will just keep telling you what you are.

            Is this you, or have you stolen this guy’s identity. Unfortunately, the picture shows a guy that nearly screams fat slob racist, but I am open to discussion:

            Bowen, James
            4088 Malott Hall
            j294b619@ku.edu

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Is this you, racist? It appears to be public data available to anyone, therefore not actionable.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            HEY ASSHOLE!!!!

            YOUR SITE ranks at 31,216, in the U.S. Worse than 176k worldwide.

            Dailykos ranks 481 in the U.S. and 2035 worldwide.

            Very popular site you go to. People that are pro-immigration reform go to DailyKos. Racists go the “center for immigration studies.”

            Off the top of my head, immigration reformers outnumber your racist 70 +/-! Spin all you want, but you are DONE.

            Now do you understand why I insult you, because you insult me, our Nation, the bloggers here, and the entire human race. So go suck off some dogs, fatlip!

          • James Bowen says:

            The Daily Kos is a general website that deals with many issues besides immigration, and people go there don’t go solely for immigration matters. Nonetheless, if you want to make this comparison, let’s compare that to the Drudge Report, where many who oppose immigration expansion go. Last month, the Drudge Report had 4,139,274 visitors, while the Daily Kos had 2,224,827 visitors. Now let’s compare NumbersUSA, a restrictionist organization, to some organizations dedicated solely or heavily to immigration expansion for last month.

            NumbersUSA: 432,185

            U.S. Chamber of Commerce: 69,178
            La Raza: “low data” (i.e. negligible)
            America’s Voice: “low data”
            SEIU: 106,524

            As you can see, the pro-amnesty websites are trounced here by the restrictionist website.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            More false data from a lying bully. I can beat your data with a number of sites. Why bother, reason is not your strong point.

            As for DailyKos, a large number of articles do pertain to immigration, and it is not a “pro-restrictionist” website. As for “restrictionist,” that is another bit of lying bullshit to sanitize what you are actually aiming at.

            Does anyone here except a couple of trolls agree with any of your points? Hmm?

          • James Bowen says:

            A large number may pertain to immigration at Daily Kos, but certainly not all–immigration is just a small fraction of the subject matter presented there. Where is the data you speak of? I think you do not have it and it is not there. I have shown you accurate data here that clearly shows that the restrictionist sites are far, far more popular than the expansionist sites.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Invalid response, and redundantly invalid nonsense proving absolutely NOTHING.

            JUST ANOTHER DUMBOZO RANT. More bullying and harassing that proves the writer is a total a-hole. NO information, NO truth.

            Data was provided and rejected, which is not a right that you possess to do. . . .

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Tell any lie that you want, “restrictionist sites”are not popular at all. Your rationale is they MUST be popular, because you MUST ALWAYS BE RIGHT! And “expansionist” is a coy term fashioned by disgusting c*cks*cker racists to deflect from the truth.

            Just more Dimbozo ranting!

          • James Bowen says:

            NumbersUSA: 432,185

            U.S. Chamber of Commerce: 69,178
            La Raza: “low data” (i.e. negligible)
            America’s Voice: “low data”
            SEIU: 106,524

            ‘Tell any lie that you want, “restrictionist sites”are not popular at all.” These numbers for June 2014 say otherwise.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Actually Dimbozo, I do not mind you stealing my technique, you have shown a remarkable lack of originality of thought.

            The facts however, are the same, “Tell any lie that you want, “restrictionist sites”are not popular at all.” Based on the facts that I have already given.

            Yeah, rant, rant, whine, rant, whine, “there wasn’t any facts.” Well, maybe someday, you will actually grow up and quit having the hate fits. Tantrums are unbecoming to adults.

          • James Bowen says:

            Again, these figures say otherwise, and as I showed in another post, Alexa’s ratings, though less reliable, is consistent with these.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            No, they are not. That is across the board for your post. It is really a shame that you are such a sociopathic narcissist.

          • James Bowen says:

            They are. Check the post again, and if you don’t believe me, you are welcome to go verify it.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            No, they are not correct figures. Are you so stupid to refuse to realize that a rotten source is feeding you false information. I have access to that information directly. It happens to be what I do.

            So, all your post is bullshit. That is across the board for your post. It is really a shame that you are such a sociopathic narcissist.

          • James Bowen says:

            I guess you are going to make me post them yet again. Here are the ones from compete.com (numbers of unique visitors in June).

            NumbersUSA: 432,185

            U.S. Chamber of Commerce: 69,178
            La Raza: “low data” (i.e. negligible)
            America’s Voice: “low data”
            SEIU: 106,524

            Here are the most recent Alexa U.S. rankings (lower being a higher rank).

            NumbersUSA: 10,434

            U.S. Chamber of Commerce: 42,197
            La Raza: 87,446America’s Voice: 185,937
            SEIU: 113,092

            There you have it: two different sources that mostly agree with each other. If you have any evidence to the contrary, show it. I think it very likely that you don’t, given that these are from two big website ratings groups.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I am not making you do anything. If I could, it would be to take a header off of Maggot Hall. We would have one less racist.

            And your false figures do not get more veracity by constant repetitive posting. Wrong the first time, wrong this time, wrong always. Only the insane think that will change.

          • James Bowen says:

            Again, here are the ones from compete.com (numbers of unique visitors in June).

            NumbersUSA: 432,185

            U.S. Chamber of Commerce: 69,178
            La Raza: “low data” (i.e. negligible)
            America’s Voice: “low data”
            SEIU: 106,524

            Here are the most recent Alexa U.S. rankings (lower being a higher rank).

            NumbersUSA: 10,434

            U.S. Chamber of Commerce: 42,197
            La Raza: 87,446America’s Voice: 185,937
            SEIU: 113,092

            Go check them yourself and you will see they are not false. They can be found at http://www.alexa.com and http://www.compete.com

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Here again, is my “kiss my ass,” for the repetitive posting of false data from a known racist site. Bad, manipulated data, used to promote racism does not get better by repetition.

            And that data is not found at Alexa. I ALREADY posted that data, and you claimed Alexa’s data was not only false, but the site was poor. Now, you claim to be using it. Which lie is it that you are promoting now.

            Dimbozo, you are so immature for your age you do not even understand the concept of keeping your lies straight.

          • James Bowen says:

            This is from Alexa. Alexa is not as reliable as compete.com, but you seemed to give it credence, so here it is. And while its numbers are different, its general trend does in fact agree with the more reliable compete.com. None of this is false, and you can easily verify it by checking the ratings of the websites I have listed on both of these sites.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Just more excuses for your deeply ingrained dishonesty, and egotistical superiority complex.

            I told you what would happen.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You made a claim that you were not an atheist. A false claim I am sure, but one that does not really bother me. What bothers me is, you can be an atheist, but unlike most, you do not have the humanist moral compass to restrain you sociopathic tendencies. That is a problem.

            This IS AN ISSUE.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            What is funny, dipshit? At Daily Kos, you would already have been banned. Don’t bother bringing up my “insults.” I would never have had need to do any at Daily Kos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Russell Byrd says:

            After reading your data with a little bit of a critical eye, I realize that you just intentionally lied out of your ass. That or you are ready for a mental hospital.

            When you are in Maggot Hall, do you have a nurse feed and bathe you? How stupid are you really?

            Thanks for proving the opposite of what you intended.
            AGAIN!

          • jmprint says:

            If they had passed the immigration law, we wouldn’t be having this influx of people coming in, and I’m more then sure that it would have stimulate the economy more to the positive side.

          • James Bowen says:

            Are you kidding? If they pass this immigration bill, we would have virtually no limits to immigration, and we would be seeing a lot more come in, both legally and illegally. It is precisely because people in Central America think that we no longer enforce our immigration laws that they are coming. The only people that such an influx would stimulate the economy for, other than the immigrants themselves, is those who stand to profit from cheap labor. The rest of us would be stuck with the bill in the form of reduced wages and salaries, more pressure on infrastructure, more competition in the marketplace for commodities, etc.

          • jmprint says:

            You are wrong, ease up! These people can be more productive then you can ever imagine.

          • James Bowen says:

            No, I am correct. Our resource base and our land area is finite. More people means more mouths to feed, no matter how productive they are.

        • Russell Byrd says:

          More racism and no fix! Brilliant!

    • jmprint says:

      People fought and died in wars, Jesus died on the cross, all for our freedom. Every body’s freedom, not just the privileged.

      • angelsinca says:

        Jesus didn’t die on the cross for ‘our freedom’. Please hijack a different vehicle to push your talking point.

        • Russell Byrd says:

          No, obviously, he did not die for you at all. You reject him totally. All Jesus is to you is a slogan to beat someone over the head with.

          Tell me, did Jesus teach turning the other cheek?
          Tell me, did Jesus teach charity above all else?
          Do you realize that Jesus was “undocumented.?”

          Read the Bible, as bad as it is, you surely do not have one christian bone in your body.

        • Russell Byrd says:

          Actually, he did die for our freedom. You just don’t know anything about the beliefs you try to fake so much. And fake, is all you are!

          • angelsinca says:

            If you can’t even show enough respect to use the correct proper pronoun, you don’t deserve to understand the truth of His sacrifice. You remain a fool, Byrd.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Half the time, you don’t either. It was a slight omission.

            However, why should I care what a blaspheming, Hellbound liar has to say? Hmm?

            You are really not too bright. Everytime you tell one of your little bullshit gems, I trump it. So, PLONK! Down the sh*tter you go again.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Giving you complete peace was just not good enough for you, was it? So be it, blasphemer.

        • jmprint says:

          Most certainly did die for our freedom of sin. Freedom is freedom in any shade and color.

    • Dominick Vila says:

      The law is being applied consistent with the criteria established by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency, which is influenced by laws passed by Congress in 2000 and 2008:

      “Although the legal definition of human trafficking is complex, the simple meaning of it is not. It occurs when a person is induced by
      force, fraud or coercion to:

      Work under the total or near-total control of another person or organization (slavery or involuntary servitude)

      Forced to pay off a loan by working instead of paying money, for an agreed-upon or unclear period of time (debt bondage) or even without an agreement as to the timeframe (peonage)

      Perform a sex act for money or anything of value (if under 18, force, fraud or coercion is not required)

      According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, although many people think of the sex trade when they think of human trafficking,
      this crime also occurs in such labor situations as:

      Domestic servitude
      Labor in a prison-like factory
      Migrant agricultural work”

      President Obama’s decision to grant a hearing to asylum seekers from Central America is consistent with the letter of the law. Asking him, or any other President to deliberately break or ignore the law because a segment of our population disagrees with it, is not the way to go. Don’t forget that the man who proposed immigration law reform was none other than President Obama, and that the people who refused to change it are the ones who are now incensed by what our immigration laws say.

      • James Bowen says:

        See the following: http://cis.org/2008-trafficking-law-inapplicable-current-border-crisis. You are talking of situations where kids are being forced into something against their will. That is not the case with these kids. They are not being trafficked, so the 2008 law does not apply. President Obama’s proposed “reforms” went in the opposite direction of the reform that is needed. S.744 increases immigration, and reform which would truly benefit American citizens would greatly reduce it. Doing nothing is far preferable to passing that nation-wrecking bill.

        • Dominick Vila says:

          What the 2000 and 2008 immigration laws require is a hearing for anyone seeking asylum. It is up to the immigration officials to determine the veracity of the claims that are being made.

        • Russell Byrd says:

          You do not know the law. In fact, you do not know much of anything.

          I still remember your aside to our mutual “friend,” where you expressed an implied threat against me. Well, as far as I am concerned, they can boil you down for blubber. Nothing you say has any force, and YOU only survive at all because no one will go to Kansas University to kill you. Get it, you are a total waste of flesh. You would not make ALPO.

          • James Bowen says:

            Maybe I don’t know the law, but the people I cite here sure do.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            You destroyed your own point. ROTFL!

          • James Bowen says:

            I am not afraid to admit it when I don’t know much about something. I therefore cited people who do know a lot about this subject.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR!

            You know everything according to you. Odd, isn’t it, that a RACIST like you would run to the nearest crypto-racist site to get authority for what you ALREADY BELIEVE!!! INVALID!

          • James Bowen says:

            Their analyses are based on existing law and data from government agencies. That’s as valid as it gets.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            That is nothing but a totally manufactured fluff.

            LIES are all you ever say. That’s as INvalid as it gets.

            Your site is a know racist sympathizer site. In fact about 10-30% of the articles are overt in racist content. Therefore, INVALID!

          • James Bowen says:

            They use existing legal code, DHS data, USCIS data, IRS data, local law enforcement data, US Census data, etc. for their studies and articles. That is all as valid as it gets, and none of it is racist.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            I doubt that, though I admit they do sometimes throw around some stats. Some of those might well be true, but most are quite suspicious.

            In any case, if you misconstrue the most valid facts to prove a point, and all your intentions are is to promote racism (obvious to a healthy mind), then all you would have done is too tell evil, vicious lies.

            Which you, and your racist mouthpieces do!

          • James Bowen says:

            Those sources I mention are the ones they specifically cite, and they use these to support common sense concepts such that having more workers puts downward pressure on wages and that illegal immigrants are in fact violating the law.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            Let us forget the explanatory verbiage. Racist site uses selected data to support racist conclusion.

            That is all that need to be said.

          • James Bowen says:

            Give me evidence that they use selected data. Give me some evidence that they are racist. Other than those dubious sources you listed, I’d guess you won’t be able to.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            What constitutes evidence for you?

            An edict from the God you do not believe in?

            That is why I set you up the other day for several observers to see. I even made seven dollars off of you. I never normally gamble, but some could not believe you were that stupid and arrogant and ignorant and bullying and trolling and delusional and racist and evil and untruthful and off-topic and a waste of bandwidth and the general waste of skin that I had claimed.

            But boy, you really had my back on that series of posts. You made me look like a bloody Kreskin. Thanks.

    • Russell Byrd says:

      No, like I proved to you before, they are hungry and desperate. Screw your racist, whiny mantra. It is meaningless.

      • James Bowen says:

        Just look at the pictures of these kids. They are obviously not starving. They would not be coming if they didn’t think they would get to stay. You haven’t proved anything–you haven’t even submitted anything of relevance.

        • Russell Byrd says:

          Your “whine” is flatter than three day old Champagne. You are a racist that sees only what you want to see, and nothing else. You have no point, you never had a point, and you never will have a point. Why don’t you do a swan dive off of Malott Hall. I don’t care if it kills you, but I hope it will knock some sense into you.

        • Russell Byrd says:

          You know James, I can tell you are a sociopath because you have absolutely no sense of humor. Take a big laxative. I think you are so full of shit, that a good dump might do wonders for you, physically, mentally, and emotionally. 🙂

  4. ralphkr says:

    I am sorry, Dominick and all you other pro-amnesty supporters but all I can think about how utterly unfair amnesty is. It is as if you had a large group of people have been waiting in line patiently for hours or days for tickets to a function (legal immigration) when there is this sudden influx of people cutting in at the front of the line (illegal immigrants) and buying up all the tickets (amnesty).

    • angelsinca says:

      Understood, as this president is no stranger to cutting in front of the line.

      • Russell Byrd says:

        The President is doing what is right for the country in spite of the vicious evil of the right wing. Obviously, you are the only one that has no patience. As well, patience to the right-wackos is just an invitation to death.

      • Russell Byrd says:

        Can an individual that bullies, harasses, and lies in nearly every sentence he posts go to Heaven? Do you think that is what you will receive? Do you think that is what you will deserve?

        I hope and pray there is a Hell, because you will probably make it to the very lowest level on arrival.

        • angelsinca says:

          What does your insanely personal comment have to do with “cutting in front of the line”? Try to stay on topic, attack dog.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            ME stay on topic. From the queen of OFF-TOPIC. What a joke. And what a joke you are.

            What does it have to do with cutting in line. It addresses the fact that you have racist hate for that black man in the White House. You take every opportunity to LIE constantly.

            AND STILL:

            Can an individual that bullies, harasses, and lies in nearly every sentence he posts go to Heaven? Do you think that is what you will receive? Do you think that is what you will deserve?

            I hope and pray there is a Hell, because you will probably make it to the very lowest level on arrival.

            How does your reply address my post?

          • Russell Byrd says:

            How does your reply address my post?

            I like “attack dog.” An attack dog’s job is to keep VERMIN away. So, that is somewhat complimentary, . . . VERMIN.

      • ralphkr says:

        That is interesting, angelsinca, since that is the exact opposite of my biggest criticism of President Obama. He seems to think that he should treat Washington politics as the same as university politics and always strive for compromise, unity, and agreement instead of just doing the right thing and the devil take the hindmost..

      • jmprint says:

        Now are you talking about lies that have been said or do you have any solid facts.

          • Russell Byrd says:

            If this article is to be used to assault Obama, you have once again chose poorly. It does not support you.

            “Since presidents apparently have schedules to keep, Obama cut to the
            front of the hours-long line — then bought lunch for those behind him
            as a thank-you.”

            Presidents have always gone to the front of the line, AND respectful American, i.e. REAL AMERICAN citizens are proud that he does!

          • Russell Byrd says:

            If you were a REAL AMERICAN. If this article is to be used to assault Obama, you have once again chose poorly. It does not support you.

            “Since presidents apparently have schedules to keep, Obama cut to the front of the hours-long line — then bought lunch for those behind him as a thank-you.”

            Presidents have always gone to the front of the line, AND respectful American, i.e. REAL AMERICAN citizens are proud that he does!

          • Russell Byrd says:

            If you were a even remotely a REAL AMERICAN. If this article is to be used to assault Obama, you have once again chosen poorly. It does not support
            you.

            “Since presidents apparently have schedules to keep, Obama cut to the front of the hours-long line — then bought lunch for those behind him as a thank-you.”

            Presidents have always gone to the front of the line, AND respectful American, i.e. REAL AMERICAN citizens are proud that he does!

            HE EVEN BOUGHT THEM LUNCH! GEEZ! What do you really want?

          • jmprint says:

            And that bothers you?

          • angelsinca says:

            Not as much as being called a liar for mentioning it.

      • Russell Byrd says:

        If you were at all a REAL AMERICAN. If this article is to be used to assault Obama, you have once again chosen poorly. It does not support you.

        “Since presidents apparently have schedules
        to keep, Obama cut to the front of the hours-long line — then bought lunch for those behind him as a thank-you.”

        Presidents have always gone to the front of the line, AND respectful American, i.e. REAL AMERICAN citizens are proud that he does!

        HE EVEN BOUGHT THEM LUNCH! GEEZ! What do you really want?

    • Dominick Vila says:

      Ralph, asylum seekers and immigration and two distinctly different issues. Yes, both are foreigners coming from other countries, but that is where the similarity ends. People seeking asylum are, at least in theory, victims of persecution and conditions so dire that they have no choice but to leave their homelands to survive. Immigrants are, for the most part, people seeking economic prosperity or opportunities.
      The problem with the Central American women and children seeking asylum in the USA is that many of them are pursuing the same goals as the immigrants from Mexico, who after years of waiting for an entry visa, and realizing they will never get one, decide to jump fences, crawl through tunnels, or swim across the Rio Grande.
      Another problem is the fact that the 2000 and 2008 immigration laws obligate the Federal government to grant asylum seekers a hearing. The precedent established by President Reagan when he proposed and signed the wet foot-dry foot legislation add a new dimension to a complex and, clearly, controversial issue.

      • ralphkr says:

        I certainly agree with you, Dominick, but I was posting about amnesty for illegal immigrants which, as you stated, is an entirely different issue from asylum seekers and the law clearly states that juveniles from countries other than Canada & Mexico are legally entitled to a hearing before a judge and can NOT be returned to their home countries before said hearing to determine their status. Older laws state that asylum seekers, what ever their age, have the right to a hearing before being deported. Those who are merely here for financial reasons do not have that protection and may be deported immediately. Those who received amnesty the last time and those who are trying for amnesty now are here for financial reasons and are “jumping the line” for legal immigration.

        • Dominick Vila says:

          I understand. The funniest part of the GOP outrage on this issue is that (1) it is not new, (2) the law that requires a hearing for asylum seekers from non-contiguous countries was signed by former President Bush, (3) the only amnesty granted to illegal immigrants was granted by none other than the Gipper, (4) the precedent concerning how refugees must be treated was established by Reagan when he signed the wet foot-dry foot legislation, and (5) the largest number of deportations has taken place while President Obama was in office.
          I guess the party with the worst record in history – and no vision – has no choice but to make up examples of presidential over reach…while asking the president to break the law!

  5. FAMULLAR says:

    The European Union has made a significant breakthrough in its economic relationship with Africa by concluding two regional trade deals encompassing 22 countries, including Nigeria and South Africa, the continent’s largest economies.

    The deals were each signed within a week of each other, after ten years of negotiations. Together they constitute a move towards the declared aim of both the EU and Africa that trade should be a centrepiece of their relationship.

    They go well beyond the traditional trade agenda of tariffs and quotas, and include clauses covering investment and opening up services markets. These so-called economic partnership agreements (EPAs) also incorporate provisions on good governance and development-related elements that reflect the status of many of the partners as less-developed countries.

  6. LaRae Bailey says:

    I find it hard to understand why the people of this country are so willing to give our country away to be turned into another third world country. with the unemployment rate what it is, the high tax rates, and the millions of illegals here why the people do not get it? the only thing any of the politicians give a damn about is the next election and keeping their seats instead of the common sense things needing to be done to save our country. both sides blame the other, when in truth, both sides are guilty as hell of allowing obama to destroy us from within.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.