We all know the face of real terror. Nick Berg getting his head sawed off by a knife wielding Islamist, suicide bombers laying waste to mass transit in Israel, the World Trade Towers collapsing on the morning of 09/11/01. That is real terror.
But, to Reuters, enforcing U.S. immigration laws is terror.
The title of the Reuters piece sets the tone for the overwrought sentiment infused throughout the whole article: "California Latinos fearful after immigration raids".
Words like "fearful", "shock", "afraid" and "terrified" are sprinkled all through the article leaving the impression that something mean and violent is occurring to these poor people. One would think that we are rounding up Mexican and Central and South Americans who are in this country illegally and herding them off to torture camps or to some Holocaust redux.
But, what we are really doing is enforcing our duly constituted laws. What we are really doing is rounding up people who broke our laws in coming here and but sending them back to their own country. What we are really doing is enforcing a reasonable expectation that an immigrant to our country does so under the rules.
The only "fear" these people have is that they will lose their free pass to American social programs, free schooling and health care. Their only "shock" is in the fact that someone is at last actually trying to enforce some of our normally neglected immigration laws.
Another thing that bears pointing out from the headline for the Reuters article is the inclusion of "California" as a identifying tag for these "Latinos" that are in such fear.
No, Reuters, they are not "California" Latinos. They are illegal Latinos. They do not belong to California, they do not belong in California and they should not be identified as being Californians.
Then the coup de grace comes later down in the piece. It is the eeevil Bush again...
RAIDS AS BUSH BACKS OVERHAUL
Yes, it WAS in all caps.
A supposed "community worker" who runs a "day labor program" was quoted as being in "shock" over the raids.
"We hadn't seen anything like this here before, and it came as a shock. The police didn't just take people with deportation orders, they took anybody ... guys who were just hanging out in the street and even from a Jack in the Box restaurant ... and now people are afraid to go out," he added.
Apparently this "community worker" that runs an employment program for illegals and helps them break our laws is "shocked" that US officials might want to actually enforce a law once in a great while.
I'm heart broken for him.
In any case, when juxtaposed with the real terror we face today, this article smacks of demagogy and is a perfect example of wild-eyed polemics masquerading as "journalism" that Reuters so commonly employs.
These days, we often joke that Reuters is more interested in supporting Islamic extremists than in doing any real reporting. We often call them al Reuters as a result. This report offers us an example of their other precedent tag. We should not forget they are also el Reuters.
They should really just be called anti-American.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
All illegals, no matter where
January 26, 2007 - 06:12 ET by Right Wing Attack DogAll illegals, no matter where they are from should be arrested, imprisoned, and be used for labor to build the fence to keep them out that should have been built before this problem became a problem. They will stop breaking our laws to get here when they are denied the benefits they come here to steal to start with. The "community worker" should have join them in building the fence and also return with them where they came from when the fence is complete. Thanks for sharing Warner Todd!
right wing
January 26, 2007 - 08:36 ET by cjkinseyWhat have illegals done to you, seriously?
What would a fence do, do you remember history and the Maginot wall?
What are those benefits they are here to steal? You are large on rhetoric, let's try some specifics.
http://iamnotsosure....
What have illegals done to
January 26, 2007 - 08:51 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsWhat have illegals done to you, seriously?
Devalued the worth of labor, for one.
What would a fence do
Keep the ILLEGAL intruders out, for one.
What are those benefits they are here to steal?
Health care, for one.
Seriously, if you strongly feel ILLEGALS deserve to be here, then you would have no problem putting a sign in your yard welcoming all, leaving your doors unlocked so anyone who needs a meal, a bed, a bathroom, can feel free to enter at will, just like ILLEGALS do to our country. Oh, don't forget to list your car's make, model and license plate and leave your keys in it too.
Want your elected reps to know what you think? Go to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/, it's real easy.
Are you really that blind?
January 26, 2007 - 09:32 ET by EllisWyattWhat have illegals done to you, seriously?
Why does it matter whether illegal aliens have done something to me personally? By looking the other way at illegal immigration, our government is opening the door for all kinds of criminals and terrorists to break into the country and wreak havoc.
What would a fence do, do you remember history and the Maginot wall?
A fence would at least slow down the number of illegal aliens that are coming into the country. Once we get the flow of illegal aliens under control, we will have an easier time dealing with those who are already here. As for history, I know that the fall of the Roman Empire began when the Germanic and Gothic tribes started to intrude into Roman terrority. Rome's failure to stop the incursions emboldened these tribes, which in turn led to even more incursions, and so on.
What are those benefits they are here to steal?
Where do I start? The free public education that is supposed to be for US citizens? The free medical care that hospitals are MANDATED to provide? The welfare, medicare and Social Security benefits they receive?
How do you expect this country to survive when (1) we can't even protect the integrity of our borders, (2) we're allowing our common langauge (English) to be eroded, (3) many new immigrants and aliens refuse to assimilate and (4) we're giving away billions of dollars in benefits to people who aren't paying taxes? Any one of these things individually is a grave threat to our republic. All four together are a cancer that is metastasizing.
If you're not outraged at the media, you haven't been paying attention.
What have illegals done to me
January 26, 2007 - 10:26 ET by BDWhat have illegals done to me?
Hmmm.... Here in the San Pedro River Valley, in order to distract the border patrol, these supposedly harmless illegals who only wish to improve our society with their work regularly start grass fires. These fires pull Border Patrolmen away from one area in order to respond to these fires.
A neighbor of ours recently lost his semi tractor to illegals who started it on fire to perfrom just such a distraction.
Likewise, Illegals used to perform home invasions in Naco and Palominas, stealing everything they could at gunpoint and then vaulted back over the barbed wire fence into Mexico and safety. Even if presented with video evidence of the identities of the perps, the graft ridden culture of Mexico sees just such home invasions as at best a "Gringo Problem" and at worst, justified.
I guess you viewpoint on the situation depends on your proximity. You are probably on the other side of the planet from it compared to those of us in Cochise County.
Hey BD - I now where your com
January 26, 2007 - 10:40 ET by RunningBeerHey BD - I now where your coming from... literally. I'm a native from Maricopa County. Our problem here is bad but if you live along the border in Cochise County, I feal your pain.
I can't believe Rep. Kyrsten Sinema - D Phoenix is introducing a bill that would make the minutemen "domestic terrorists." Where do these idiotic politicians come from?
runningbeer-Where do these idiotic politicians come from?"
January 26, 2007 - 10:47 ET by misterbillrunningbeer-"Where do these idiotic politicians come from?" Do not be deceived, these are not Americans. These politicians are Mexicans with American citizenship. They betray our country with their every act. They seek to build their suupport group by bypassing the laws of America and helping people to come here illegally and then they will have more folks to vote for them. The actions are dangerous and unAmerican. They should be impeached!
America first.
Yeah, we have always said tha
January 26, 2007 - 11:17 ET by BDYeah, we have always said that if Scottsdale were being overrun on a nightly basis like Naco or Hereford is, than the Governor would establish a free fire zone along "The Line."
You guys have your own problems though with the CrimAliens (Criminal Aliens) ripping off everything that moves...
Yup! Had my '99 truck stolen
January 26, 2007 - 13:31 ET by RunningBeerYup! Had my '99 truck stolen in 2000. Recovered south of Benson when a deputy pulled it over 2 weeks later. The illegals on board scrambled into the night. They'd been using it to pick up crossers in the desert. $3100 in damage.
Yup again! 7 days after buying my '06 truck they tried to steal it again. Auto fuel shutoff stopped 'em cold and when they saw me coming they ran like rabbits. $1950 in damage.
Yeah, but we have not SUFFERE
January 26, 2007 - 15:00 ET by BDYeah, but we have not SUFFERED because of illegal immigration, right?
Has anyone mentioned that 90%
January 26, 2007 - 15:09 ET by Clear thinkerHas anyone mentioned that 90% of all outstanding warrants for murder in LA County are for illegals.
Nah... no harm done!
get your facts straight. It w
January 26, 2007 - 10:42 ET by TeamAmericaget your facts straight. It was the Maginot line not thr Maginot wall. Please do not compare America's abilty to defend it's borders with the ineptitude of the French!
What have illegals done to yo
January 26, 2007 - 10:49 ET by bassndudeWhat have illegals done to you,....They have formed gangs and roam the cities, kill our citizens and bring drugs to the street.
What would a fence do? Hopefully it would electrocute every one on the Mexican side that touched it.
The Maginot wall has no place in this discussion. That it is not a literal wall, nor is it a fence, nor was it designed just to keep aliens from crossing a border illegaly. However, if you are in favor of such an obstacle, and firing canons and machine guns at the illegals as they try to cross, I could be talked into such a thing. But that dont speak well for your liberal credentials.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
sorry to say this
January 26, 2007 - 15:56 ET by tumbler_2007Gee, fellas! I'm so sorry to say this once more:
I think youz guys are all crazy. You have no proof this streak of lawlessness is all illegal alien-based.
The street gangs, for instance; and the bad behavior of many young Mexican-Americans of the barrio-- has very little to do with the majority of Mexicans who cross over illegally. No one even knows how many there are. You can be sure much of this outlandish criminal activity is the work of American citizens. I think BD in his haste to condemn illegals attributes all of it to Mexican peones on their way to farm labor jobs in our interior. But can he prove they're all perpetrators? No, all he does is vent his animosity. No proof, nothing concrete --just baying at the moon.
As for his over-the-top hatred, we all know misterbill isn't famous here for his restrained rhetoric. He's an old-time nihilist; of that breed who used to proudly say: "The only good Indian is a dead Indian." --If all we have is HIS word for it, you can go back to square one, regarding the illegal immigration problem. He routinely lies. He has no self-control, and is constantly on a mission to vent his bitterness. Where's the last temperat post misterbill submitted? Everything he bleats is set up, cheap shot, pompous BS and lies.
Don't count on his version of the truth. He personifies the biblical type called by Christ, "The blind leading the blind; to land in a ditch."
Fumbler...your full of it. Yo
January 26, 2007 - 16:03 ET by bassndudeFumbler...your full of it. You wake up on the wrong side of the rock this morning?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
answering Bassndrool
January 26, 2007 - 16:08 ET by tumbler_2007Call me Tumbler; or I'll address you as Bass 'n Drool; a fitting monicker for your type. I repeat: "Youz guys are crazy!" Hahaha!
Ooooohhh! Fumbler....and then
January 26, 2007 - 16:13 ET by bassndudeOoooohhh! Fumbler....and then I will what? Melt???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Call me what you will....we both still know Im right and your wrong....HA HA HA HA HE HE HE HO HO...
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Do you have proof it wasn't c
January 26, 2007 - 16:05 ET by florida_chadDo you have proof it wasn't criminals from Mexico?
that's just it, chad from boca
January 26, 2007 - 16:27 ET by tumbler_2007I have as much proof as you have. None, except the ethnological appearances of all these firebugs, thugs and ratpacks. I suppose there have to be some guilty illegals doing some of the damage. Not all, it would seem.
BTW-- for those who decry the god-awful mess which is Mexico's elected gov't-- any of you see the news item two days back?
President Calderone of Mexico extradited 14 of the drug cartels' mafiosos over to our federal authorities where they'll face numerous charges associated with the traffic through Mexico of all South American drug exports. That's dope-runners, to youz guys of limited mental capacity.
I never saw a peep here about that; mainly because all of you are still fixated on the corrupt governmental bureaucracy that used to be in past days down there. Just yestiddy one of the bull mooses here was trumpeting with his hand pulling on his cyber-crotch, about the graft-ridden Mexican gov't-- and our "graft-free society" here in the Immaculate States of America.
Go figure. Much as America gives to the world, and the marvelous people we are- --corruption in our gov't dwarves almost all the graft in Central & South America. We ought to face it. But, after all. We're mostly white men here! Meaning our crap doesn't smell. Ours is sweet perfume! Our women are all virgins and our towers are all Ivory. Down there, everybody's dark, you know.
Tumbler...Why do you persist?
January 26, 2007 - 16:38 ET by Clear thinkerTumbler...
Why do you persist? You have nothing to gain but grief.
The vast majority of posters here know you are wrong, so why won't you at least consider what everyone is trying to teach you? The truth can be enlightening.
I'm gonna regret even asking him...sigh!
As we all know, those who are
January 26, 2007 - 17:11 ET by BDAs we all know, those who are willing to violate ONE law, are more apt to violate additional laws- including more serious ones.
When will you get it that half of these wonderful Peasants you revere are NOT soooooo worthy? They violated the law.
If they were Scotsmen wearing kilts illegally landing in boats on the coast of Maine, Norwegians illegally crossing the great lakes, Japanese illegally crossing the North Pacific- I WOULD STILL THINK LESS OF THEM AND DEMAND THEIR PROSECUTION, INPRISONMENT AND EVENTUAL DEPORTATION.
But I fear you will not say the same reference the hallowed hispanic worker.
Here's BD Wendell Holmes
January 26, 2007 - 17:31 ET by tumbler_2007"Those who are willing to violate ONE law, are more apt to violate additional laws including more serious ones."
Is that a fact? Maybe you should write a book about this soft-core psychobabble, BD. Of course, in the footnotes be sure to explain how NEVER, ever have you broken a law. You only bleat like a stuck pig about it; since you have this racist agenda to defend. I see you as very hypocritical, since you lavish enormous praise on our immigration statutes, and such sacrosanct law.
But you ignore whose owners of Arizona came before. First white men dealt in genocide to obtain passage through Indian lands. Later, white men invaded Texas, a Mexican possession duly documented and recognized by all the world's nations. Then by manifest destiny you attacked that sovereign nation to our south, devested her of lawful ownership of various southwestern states belonging to Mexico. The Gadsen Purchase was a deal swung by the aggressors against a peaceful neighbor. It was duly recorded by law, from Washington DC, not from a Mexican judiciary.
Where was your LAW then? What about rapacious American white men? Do you think they had some fetish, as you have, about NOT violating laws? Or did they stop after one violation; in contrast with those you denounce now? Who appoints judges like you? Not our present government, I'm sure. Certainly no heavenly court. You, BD, are self-appointed defender of your pet law. And you're a blowhard.
False history??
January 26, 2007 - 18:07 ET by misterbillFor your reading pleasure.
"While the Aztec account of the Spanish Conquest of Mexico does not basically change the facts we are already familiar with, it does detail brutality and massacres on the part of the Spaniards that historians have simply glossed over."
Are these the "white men who invaded"? Oh, I see, if it was invasion by an Hispanic army, it's just a normal episode in life, but God help us if it's an American!
Aztecs were commiting atrocities too
January 26, 2007 - 18:34 ET by Carl KolchakWhile the Aztec account of the Spanish Conquest of Mexico does not basically change the facts we are already familiar with, it does detail brutality and massacres on the part of the Spaniards that historians have simply glossed over."
Are these the "white men who invaded"? Oh, I see, if it was invasion by an Hispanic army, it's just a normal episode in life, but God help us if it's an American
If you get your history from a left wing college professor, they'll tell you that the Conquistadors and the whites are the worst people ever, and that everything was peace, love and understanding before they arrived in the New World. Now there were atrocities committed by the Conquistadors and the whites, but the Mayans, Aztecs, Incas. etc all were committing atrocities prior to the arrival of the Conquistadors or whites.
Central America and South America really wasn't any different than other parts of the world before the Conquistadors or whites came. Prior to Cortez defeating the Aztecs, the Aztecs used to commit atrocities against other tribes. They used to conduct Flower Wars and go kick other tribes butt, and take prisoners to be used as living sacrifices. In fact Cortez allied himself with other tribes who saw the Aztecs as oppresors. Cortez married an Indian princess named Malinche after the Aztecs were defeated mixing Spanish and Indian blood. The Mayans were war mongering people and used to kick other people's butts too. The Aztecs, Mayans, Incas, etc all used to kick other tribes butt to build up their empire, so it's not like they were perfect people who never did anything wrong.
"There's blood in the street, it's up to my ankles" 'Peace Frog'
Carl I may be misunderstanding
January 26, 2007 - 18:46 ET by misterbillCarl I may be misunderstanding your post. I know of the other atrocities. My post was to challenge Tumbler's charge that it was the wicked white man taking land away from the Mexicans. I merely wished to show that it is not exclusively the white man. Because of all of your other posts, I am assuming your post was to help enlighten us on the savagery of man rather than to take sides.
Yeah that was my point
January 26, 2007 - 18:58 ET by Carl Kolchak, I am assuming your post was to help enlighten us on the savagery of man rather than to take sides.
Yeah, that was pretty much what I was trying to do. We could talk world history atrocities from sun up to sundown, and probably couldn't even begin to scratch the surface. I was recently reading a book about early English history, and learned about a female warrior named Bodecia who took on the Romans in Britain. After her husband died, the Romans attacked her and her fellow tribespeople. After the treatment of her and her people by the Romans, they built a huge alliance of other tribes and took on the Romans. London was destroyed by her army and the book I read estimated that tens of thousands of people were brutally murdered. The Romans had left the city because it had no basic defense and warned the remaining people to leave, however many decided to stay. Based on recorded history and archeological findings they have determined that most of the people suffered a gruesome death. Many were mutilated or had their heads chopped off. So in reading this book you see the Romans committing atrocities, and then the people getting fed up and attacking the Romans and committing atrocities in return. You can see evidence of atrocities all throughout world no matter where you want to look. Finally her army of 80,000 was defeated by a much smaller better equipped and better trained Roman army.
"There's blood in the streets, it's up to my ankles" 'Peace Frog'
King Arthur
January 26, 2007 - 19:08 ET by misterbillKing Arthur
The version with Clive Owen has a similar story line re: the Romans in England. In spite of man's cruelty, I find them incredibly good reading. I am also a long time History Channel fan. Over the Christmas holiday I read one by Harris that took place during Pliny the Elder's time. It was about the aqueduct system of Rome and the eruption of Vesuvius. Not as exciting as a story about a Roman legion but quite informative. If you can remember the title of the Bodecia book, please let me know. My kind of gore!
PS Pompeii by Robert Harris was the book.
Carl, mb...The History Channe
January 26, 2007 - 19:43 ET by BlondeCarl, mb...
The History Channel ran an interesting piece on Bodecia last weekend. And mb, I WAS reminded of the Clive Owen version of the Arthur legend by the HC show.
The Artuhur legend a fascinating tale, based, no doubt on some sort of historical fact, buried in the unknown, rumor, innuendo, romanticism...in short....endless fun.
A nice little side post to the usual NB trollers. Thanks.
Blonde
January 27, 2007 - 01:15 ET by Carl KolchakBlonde, how was the History Channel show on Boadicea?
Carl,I thought it was a fair
January 27, 2007 - 01:25 ET by BlondeCarl,
I thought it was a fair representation.
I just happened to hit it as I was channel surfing.
But, IIRC, her people were overcome by the Romans, and all sorts of "atrocities" followed. But she was a warrior queen, and managed to unite the tribes in her specific area to take on the Romans.
Just so you know....she was depicted as a redhead in this version. As if that's somehow pertinent. I'd never seen this topic before on the HC.
Did it talk much about the destruction of London
January 27, 2007 - 01:28 ET by Carl KolchakOn the part you watched did it get into the destruction of London by her and her army? From the book I read, they really did a number on the inhabitants and the city itself.
"London calling to the far away towns, now war is declared" 'London Calling'
CK,I didn't catch the whole t
January 27, 2007 - 01:44 ET by BlondeCK,
I didn't catch the whole thing. Unfortunately.
I saw it from where the Romans overtook her territory...(atrocities)...and then how she united all of the surrounding tribes.
She was a "warrior queen"...and how it was unsual.
I'd imagine you could find it on the History Channel...I saw it last weekend, and they replay things numerous times.
It was fascinating, and I'm glad to have seen the reference to it here.
Cheers, Carl!
Cheers to you too
January 27, 2007 - 01:49 ET by Carl KolchakCheers to you too, I have some Hefe Weizen tonight. Lot's of wheat in that, and lots of nutrients. I have absolutely no idea why beer commercials don't emphasize the nutritional benefit of drinking beer. There are lots of good B vitamins in beer, and B vitamins are very good for you. You just need to make sure you keep it in moderation, or else it's extremly bad for your brain and liver.
"You want to go where everybody knows your name" 'Cheers theme song'
Name of the book
January 27, 2007 - 01:10 ET by Carl KolchakThe name of the book I was reading was "In Search of the Dark Ages" by Michael Wood. Very interesting as I had never heard of her before. I also learned that London was a Roman creation, and that London is as old as it is. I would love to hear more about King Arthur, as he is also discussed in this book.
"London calling to the far away towns, now war is declared" 'London Calling'
carl -- Londinium was set
January 27, 2007 - 14:58 ET by Jack Bauercarl -- Londinium was settled by the Romans in 43 A.D.
That would be 10 years after the cruxification of Christ, if my arithmetic is correct.
2000th anniversary in a mere 35 years!
King Arthur was about 800 years after London's founding.
And the Pilgrims didn't depart England's shore for the New World until almost 1600 years after London's settlement.
dear carl kolchak
January 27, 2007 - 14:44 ET by tumbler_2007Your assessment of Mexican history before & during the Spanish conquest is dead right. However, it really has not been "glossed over" by historians. I have personal knowledge of Mexican rank and file denigration & outright hatred for the Gacypines, Cortez's conquistadores. Mainly because of the torture tactics used against the emperor Cuahtemoc; forcing him to turn over treasures to them. It was, in fact very brutal.
As a consequence, every great benefit that Central American Indains have been granted by western conquerors is downplayed shamelessly. Particularly the arrival of Christianity, enabling them to emerge out of total heathenism with all its atrocity.
As to the "challenge" posed by misterbill; it's hogwash. Because, in stark contrast to the horrors suffered here by Indians of the west at the hands of the newcomers, Mexico didn't undergo a concerted reduction of its population by genocide. The people survived the Conquest and were Christianized; even intermarrying with the Spanish. Today we see in Mexico a hybrid people so genetically improved, the Mestizos; that they truly excel in just about any undertaking. This people really has never received the credit it deserves.
If we observe their unique prowess and stamina in sports and the prize-ring, or the marvelous talent of their artists and architects; great capacity for learning in the scientific field, and above all the graciousness of their nature; always approachable, hospitable and deeply spiritual in daily life-- only the mean-spirited will deny their greatness as a people.
Whereas in our country many Indian tribes still suffer, are marginalized , and have even gone extinct. They were almost everywhere treated without pity. Today, white and multicultural communities thrive in our southwest. While on reservations our Indians suffer. This week I was called by the Navajo Outreach people of Apache Juction Arizona; to help the tribes around there and New Mexico with a donation. Winter is never easy for them. They live isolated and often lack heating fuel and food. They never knew what land ownership meant in the olden day. No concept of private property; they thought the earth was just to walk on. Until the white man taught them, by taking everything away.
You and I know, Carl-- what the law of the jungle is. We're caucasians; but for all the good we've accomplished here, there have been atrocious crimes committed against relatively helpless people. Guns made all the difference and NO-- very few were intermarried with. Mostly Oklahoma tribes who were exploited by avaricious anglo-Americans. They married "squaws" so they could OWN the tribal lands (reservations). A huge oil reserve.
Many people like Will Rogers, for instance-- proudly proclaimed being "part Cherokee"-- But if it hadn't been for OIL, some families wouldn't have intermarried at all. Cherokees would not have been welcomed in a white family.
Soooo, the mestizo in all the
January 27, 2007 - 14:56 ET by BDSoooo, the mestizo in all their "Greatness" should be allowed to violate our laws....
But the Scots, Norske's, Thai's, Chinese, Japanese, Afrikaners, et al should not be allowed to violate our laws- they are not so gerat and have not been as "Put upon" by the man.....
I have never violated the law
January 27, 2007 - 14:53 ET by BDI have never violated the law of another country. Nor have a I committed an offense against our immigration laws.
I have violated traffic laws (misdemeanor) , and therefore am likely to do so again. Catching on?
You have not mentioned why Hispanics should be given the right to violate our rights but that Norwegians, Scots, Japanese, Burmese, Chinese, and others should not? Why is this?
I am not a racist. In fact, I am a Scot. If a band of scotsmen began performing the illegal landing in kilts on the shores of Maine as I specified before, I would treat them exactly as I would the Mexicans, Guatamalans, Peruvians et al coming up from the south. I would punish them as harshly as the mexicans. How am I a racist?
So only the US performed genocide against the native american population? You better tell that to Geronimo's descendants from the Chiricahua Apache who were nearly wiped out in Sonora and Chihuahua by Mexican soldiers in the 1880's. SO much so that they fled into the US.
Oh, refernce the earlier inhabitants of the Arizona New Mexico area. Theya re all now proud US citizens. Go to Taos Pueblo and see the numbers of American flags on the car bumpers, or USMC stickers on car windows. Try hanging out on the Res Near Kayenta. I think half of the cars there have a "Proud Father of a US Marine" on the car.
Likewise, should we hold our head in shame because we broke away from Britain? How about the areas along the Cnadian border which we acquired from Britain. French land siezed follwoing Revolutionary war?
By the way, when was the Gadsden Purchase acquired? Several years after the war when we no longer had troops in Mexico. Mexico wished to dispose of land it thought of as USELESS....
Funny, we seem to be able to make this USELESS land flower....
A BD Primer
January 27, 2007 - 15:21 ET by tumbler_2007Let me see: "You have not mentioned why Hispanics should be given the right to violate our rights but that Norwegians, Scots, Japanese, Burmese, Chinese, and others should not? Why is this?"
Just calm your ego-- nobody's been given a right to violate your "rights" You have no rights which ever are violated by an hispanic. Maybe you meant our "laws"--?
OK; when have I ever said here-- WHERE? that we should give illegals from Mexico or anyplace--? The right to violate our laws? Find my statement, please, BD.
You invent things to accuse me of. You don't believe in facts, which is why I often dispute your word. Furthermore, You're proud of your Scots heritage? I'm proud of MINE. I descend from a Spanish field marshall who helped settle the Rio Grande Valley and founded Santa Fe, the capital of NM. Before the landing of the Mayflower at Plymouth Rock! I'm an American now, YES, thanks to the Gadsen Purchase. You may find it amusing that Mexico sold the territories. They don't find it amusing in Mexico, trust me. It was highway robbery. On account of our "manifest destiny." But by the grace of God, it's made me an American, and a loyal one.
I do not play the apologist for illegal immigrants. I argue for their humanity, against white supremacists in my country. (Or do you deny we have them all over this country? If you're in AZ, surely you've heard a few white men demonizing "those greasers. Just as the same types once terrorized black people. ) Human nature being what it is.
What is it you wish to deprecate about Tumbler now? Too liberal? I deprecate your sorry low-level intelligence. (Smile.)
Sorry about hte confusion, ye
January 29, 2007 - 10:47 ET by BDSorry about hte confusion, yes you are correct, it is the right to violate our LAWS.
So, I am willing to chuck all kilt wearing scotsmen who enter the US illegally out of the country, but you are not willing to do so to the illegals from south of the border because of "Their humanity"?
I have never heard anyone refer to "Those Greasers" as you put it. The term we use when referring to them simply refers to their legal standing ergo, "Illegals" which is not racist in nature. I could be referring to any of the racial groups I used before (Norske's, Swedes, Japanese etc.)
While I have not heard any racial epitaphs used against our bretheran from the south of the border, I have heard the racists from La Raza and Chicano's por La Causa rant about my racial heritage in their protests.
Regarding the Gadsden purchase. Yes, and the French are still upset that they sold the Louisian purchase as well, what is your point? Your point that we forced them to sell that particular area does not hold water any more than if we asked Mexico to sell Agua Prieta or Baja California today. We have no troops occuppying either place and Mexico could legally and logically refuse. Mexico saw a way to cheaply profit from land they did not value at that time and took it.
Have I used a racial epitaph to resopond to you Tumbler? I think doth protest tooo much.
Hey Tumbler, you should have
January 26, 2007 - 16:09 ET by bassndudeHey Tumbler, you should have wrote:
Gee, fellas! I'm so sorry to say this once more:
I think youz guys are all crazy. You have no proof this streak of lawlessness is all criminal alien-based.
The street gangs, for instance; and the bad behavior of many young Mexican-Americans of the barrio-- has very little to do with the majority of Mexicans who cross over criminaly. No one even knows how many there are. I think BD in his haste to condemn criminals attributes all of it to Mexican peones on their way to farm labor jobs in our interior. But can he prove they're all perpetrators? No, all he does is vent his animosity. No proof, nothing concrete --just baying at the moon.
As for his over-the-top hatred, we all know misterbill isn't famous here for his restrained rhetoric. He's an old-time nihilist; of that breed who used to proudly say: "The only good Indian is a dead Indian." --If all we have is HIS word for it, you can go back to square one, regarding the criminal immigration problem. He routinely lies. He has no self-control, and is constantly on a mission to vent his bitterness. Where's the last temperat post misterbill submitted? Everything he bleats is set up, cheap shot, pompous BS and lies.
Don't count on his version of the truth. He personifies the biblical type called by Christ, "The blind leading the blind; to land in a ditch."
See? When you use correct terms, it really helps to put things into their proper perspective.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
As we all know, those who are
January 26, 2007 - 17:07 ET by BDAs we all know, those who are willing to violate ONE law, are more apt to violate additional laws- including more serious ones.
When will you get it that half of these wonderful Peasants you revere are NOT soooooo worthy? They violated the law.
If they were Scotsmen wearing kilts illegally landing in boats on the coast of Maine, Norwegians illegally crossing the great lakes, Japanese illegally crossing the North Pacific- I WOULD STILL THINK LESS OF THEM AND DEMAND THEIR PROSECUTION, INPRISONMENT AND EVENTUAL DEPORTATION.
But I fear you will not say the same reference the hallowed hispanic worker. Why is that?
Other than parargraphs two and three
January 26, 2007 - 17:52 ET by misterbillOther than paragraphs two and three of your diatribe, was there anything else you wanted to critique? Gee, Numbnut, don't hold back. Tell me how you really feel about me.
Sorry, I drooled all over myself while I was tying, no self-control you know. I really wasn't going to address you anymore, but you are more fun than a pinata surrounded by children with sticks. Little do they know the pinata(you) is stuffed with horseshit! Stalker!!!!!!!!!!!
PS If the only good Indian is a dead Indian, then I have quite a few good Indians in my family.So, taht wa abad try on your part. PS why did you have the braceros stop rubbing their excrement on the lettuce and spinach? Did you distract people enough so that you can go back to your profitable coyote business?? Here are some photos of you in the old days!
PS additional info
January 26, 2007 - 17:58 ET by misterbillPS Stumbler's other site here.
there's il cornuto
January 26, 2007 - 18:30 ET by tumbler_2007I told you friends: He lies frequently and boldly.
I told you friends:
January 26, 2007 - 18:41 ET by misterbillWould all of Crumbler's friends hold up their hands?? Thank you CJ. What? No one else?? Oh!
Please stop talking to yourself.
"What have illegals do
January 26, 2007 - 12:06 ET by ckc1227"What have illegals done to you, seriously?"
They kill about 9,000 Americans a year, 3 times the number of American soldiers killed in 4 years fighting a war in Iraq.
Liberalism is the philosophy of the stupid.
CJ...Not to long ago I had a
January 26, 2007 - 15:06 ET by Clear thinkerCJ...
Not to long ago I had a half interest in a large trailer park here in NC. I sold my interest after 8 trailers were stolen and moved to parks where the tenants were predominantly illegals. The funniest theft was when they stole over 10,000 square ft of newly installed sod.
Nah... no harm done!
Yeah, we had a group recently
January 26, 2007 - 15:21 ET by BDYeah, we had a group recently arrested stealing decorative rock from peoples front yards to sell to other people.
They were released on bail and across the border within minutes.....
As Sonny Bono asked, "Wh
January 26, 2007 - 06:21 ET byAs Sonny Bono asked, "What do they not get about the word, Illegal?"
Debra...
"We should not forget they ar
January 26, 2007 - 06:27 ET by Nortonalec"We should not forget they are also el Reuters." Is it "el" or "la"?
Nortonalec
Debra
January 26, 2007 - 08:43 ET by cjkinseyWhat I don't get is what the word is meant to describe? Are they illegally human?
Many people have come to this country, in diverse ways, what we need to do is consider each of them individually. Create a scenario when they get here that does not make it easy for them to find work unless they are accepted and "processed" for entry, by creating and enforcing strong laws against companies that hire people that don't live here properly.
How do you feel about Alberto Gonzalez, the attorney general?
http://iamnotsosure....
Nice attempt at a dodge. The
January 26, 2007 - 10:21 ET by Indiana JoeNice attempt at a dodge. The term is "illegal immigrants." What part of that don't you get? Immigrants who enter the country by bypassing the legal means provided? If you don't understand that, then there's no point debating with you.
Sounds like you advocate making no attempt to stem the inflow, just try to catch them once they're here... and maybe not even bother with that, hmm? Transfer the "crime" from the perpetrators to companies that hire them? Then you can scream that they're being discriminated against in the job market.
Sounds like another illegal immigrant apologist we've seen here. You wouldn't happen to be him, would you? Notice that you're a "new" poster here.
And what does Alberto Gonzalez have to do with it? Did HE come here illegally? Or are you making the same comparison made by that other poster I referred to: changing the debate from one of law enforcement to one of racism.
Anyone else see these parallels?
Yes I see the parallels IJ
January 26, 2007 - 10:51 ET by SportPoliticsYes I see the parallels IJ, but it's just the small "L" indoctrination problem.
The freaks website says it all, have a look from the profile link.
By the way for cjkinsey, so we can get it out of the way:
I am a racist biggoted war mongering neocon fire bible blood and brimstone executioner of the innocent, fake xtian, and a FoxNews watcher, and Rush fan, and a closet homophobe, and anything else I forgot to include from your liberal freak indoctrination training seminars.
Hey SP, may I join the club?
January 26, 2007 - 16:57 ET by tgibbsjrHey SP, may I join the club? Sounds like my cup o' tea.
come off it, Indy
January 26, 2007 - 16:44 ET by tumbler_2007Nobody is debating law enforcement here. NOT ONE post. All I've ever seen is racist and white supremacist hate speech. Where are we debating? From your side it's a constant carping and fury at every post I submit. You brand me an "apologist" even when I support the capture and deportation--- Indeed I've suggested prison terms for repeat offenders! That's not apology or support for illegal immigrants. You fellows are stuck on stupid. Many here are flagrantly racist. Many would like to KILL unarmed men and women!
That's what your side is calling "debate". I make reasonable posts, and for that I'm accused of being in favor of law-breaking. Apologist my ass! You're an apologist for race-baiters, white supremacists and killers. (How do ya like them bananas?)
I'M debating law enforcement
January 26, 2007 - 19:24 ET by Indiana JoeI'M debating law enforcement here! As are most others. YOU'RE, as usual, turning it into a racist diatribe. Of course all you've "ever seen is racist and white supremacist hate speech." You're blinkered. And you simply lie. Period.
You don't read the posts, the ones about burgled houses, stolen or burned vehicles, stolen trailers, stolen rocks, stolen SOD!!! Must ALL be lies, right? To you, illegal immigrants are all ANGELS! And you completely ignore the simple fact that entering the country ILLEGALLY is a CRIME! You advocate "prison terms" for them? How many letters have you written your congressman suggesting this? Where is your "Lock up illegal immigrants" movement headquartered? What is this statement but a red herring? Just another lie.
You've claimed in the past to be in favor of capturing illegal immigrants IN this country, but are AGAINST any and all attempts to keep them from ENTERING illegally in the first place. So, I will once again ask you this ANALOGY: Explain the logic of being in favor of trapping and removing mice from your house while being against closing off the means by which they enter to begin with.
You are the biggest racist here. The ONLY one who ever brings the RACE of these PARTICULAR illegal immigrants into the discussion. And who constantly bashes any and all who disagree as "race-baiters, white supremacists and killers." And you wonder why you generate "carping and fury?" Who's "stuck on stupid" now?
Your "bananas" mean nothing to me... nada, zip, zilch, zero..., just like the odds of any logic or sense from you.
you debate but never prove
January 26, 2007 - 19:40 ET by tumbler_2007".. posts, the ones about burgled houses, stolen or burned vehicles, stolen trailers, stolen rocks, stolen SOD!!! Must ALL be lies, right? To you, illegal immigrants are all ANGELS!"
Who ever proves these offenses are commited by illegal aliens altogether? You simply assume it has to be them. But if they get away, who can say if they're all illegal aliens? I'm willing to see the evidence, without all your caterwalling. But it's HATE SPEECH I'm debating, and there's plenty of it in this place.
American thieves are all ANGELS. They wouldn't steal your property? (Yeah, but white folks never steal. The bad guys are dark, OK?) OH-- now I see.
Check out something
January 26, 2007 - 19:49 ET by tumbler_2007Go to the top of this thread;
See how this loon talks: "All illegals, no matter where they are from should be arrested, imprisoned, and be used for labor to build the fence to keep them out that should have been built before this problem became a problem." Is this debate? Has he no clue to what he's proposing; that it's illegal? Slave labor is illegal. (Oh, yeah-- But not about Mexican slave labor. Yeah.) Then, look at the moron right under his post: He says "They devalue our wages." Is that DEBATE? Give me a break.
Tumbler...I am one of those p
January 26, 2007 - 19:51 ET by Clear thinkerTumbler...
I am one of those people that gave an example, why, because it happened to me. And why did I bother to post that example in a thread about illegals.... because the thieves were ILLEGALS.
Stop calling me a liar or I will track you down and send you back to Mexico!
are you an idiot, C T ???
January 26, 2007 - 19:55 ET by tumbler_2007Stop calling me a liar or I will track you down and send you back to Mexico!
What a tough guy! You ARE a Liar. --Now you want to send an American citizen -"BACK"--to Mexico? How bout if I send you to hell? I don't come from Mexico, Putz! Who cares about your freakin' SOD? Hahaha!
Your stupid illegal buddies c
January 26, 2007 - 20:03 ET by Clear thinkerYour stupid illegal buddies cared enough about my sod to steal it.
I don't beleive you are an American citizen any more than I beleive you have a brain.
Peace!
Clear,This is the problem in
January 26, 2007 - 20:05 ET by BlondeClear,
This is the problem in the country today.
We have the liberals bending over backwards to accomodate the illegals. Provide them with schools, medical care, housing, legal representation (thank you ACLU)....
All the while at the expense of us ordinary, tax paying citizens, giving us the big finger in the face.
I have had it with this issue. As you know, I'm a Floridian, and I truly believe my home state has been enhanced by the flow of LEGAL immigration. It's a great place to live....we have all kinds of "festivals" here.
But this "reconquista" thing has got to be stopped, dead in it's tracks.
And what is up with the Governator? Sheesh.
I'm sorry to hear about your problems with the illegal criminals. I'd be furious if someone stole not only my trailers, but my SOD! Crap...that's expensive.
Blonde...The items stolen was
January 26, 2007 - 20:17 ET by Clear thinkerBlonde...
The items stolen was just a small setback. What really pissed me off was when I went to court and....surprise-surprise... none of the illegals showed for court.
FYI... If you happen to live close to Jacksonville there is a very active chapter of the ACLU. I think they have open meetings once a month. It might be fun to go to one of these meetings and sit in the front row and make faces.
Actually, Clear,I am in the S
January 26, 2007 - 20:23 ET by BlondeActually, Clear,
I am in the SMSA (Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, IIRC) of Fort Lauderdale.
Jax is, um....well, never mind.
I'd have been furious about the sod. Seriously.
I hate garden thieves.
As usual....the pols totally miss the point. They are such sluts. Hand in hand with the media whores. Strutting their stuff for the attention and adulation. I think I may have to take a page out of S'man Spiff's book....and leave it alone for a while.
I am totally disgusted.
Blonde...Your anger is being
January 26, 2007 - 20:39 ET by Clear thinkerBlonde...
Your anger is being shared by millions of Americans. If and when Tom Tancredo actually throws his hat in the ring for 08' the rest of the politicians will suddenly 'get it'. I'm convinced that he will get a groundswell of support from people like you and I that are tired of supporting illegals.
Clear,I hope so.I am appalled
January 26, 2007 - 20:47 ET by BlondeClear,
I hope so.
I am appalled by the lack of common sense I see in the "presidential candidates".
I think Newt is the one "right on point" conservative in the dialogue. But he has too much baggage, and he knows it, to have a creditable run at the White House. But I hope he has a huge effect and affect on the debate of conservative ideation during the run-up.
Someone posted something interesting last nite...about who was "ahead" in the early stages of the 1992 race. (Who are these people?) At this stage of the game, it's name recognition only. Same thing applies here.
Giuliani and McCain are the early favorites. Balderdash. Fifteen months from now the entire dialogue will be on other names, other faces (and hopefully Her Highness and Ear Man are gone as well).
We live in interesting times.
Ct...Hunter/Tancredo!Either w
January 26, 2007 - 20:52 ET by bigtimerCt...
Hunter/Tancredo!
Either way...all the way!
bt...I hear ya!
January 26, 2007 - 20:55 ET by Clear thinkerbt...
I hear ya!
listen to the "thinker"
January 26, 2007 - 21:05 ET by tumbler_2007YOU DON'T "SUPPORT" ANYTHING (And you aren't a clear thinker.)
You know, I was starting to f
January 26, 2007 - 20:17 ET by Indiana JoeYou know, I was starting to feel kind of bad about how I was responding to you. I try to not let vitriol get to me, and you DO use a LOT of vitriol on this topic. It's a shame you don't see it.
But now you're claiming that people here have claimed that "whites" don't steal or break the law or ever do anything wrong. No one has made any such claim. (Just by the way, I wonder why "yellow" and "brown" and "red" and even, lately, "black" are not acceptable to denote race in people, but "white" still is?)
This man has cited cases where the perpetrators were CAUGHT, and have proven to be illegal immigrants. Why must you assert that he is lying? THAT'S why I said you assume NO illegal immigrants ever commit criminal acts. And your post below (<edit> sorry, above this one, the way the thread has developed <end edit>), where you express no feeling for HIS loss: would it bother you if it was YOUR property that was stolen, by ANYONE?
This is the constant vitriol you inject here, and you just don't seem to see it. I think it's a shame. It doesn't help you in your arguments at all. You alienate people without even seeming to realize it. You feel beset on all sides, and wonder why. You are not the only "righteous man" here. You just dismiss and insult all who disagree with you, while accusing them of insulting you BY disagreeing with you. Not the same thing. Too bad you can't see it.
thanks for toning this down
January 26, 2007 - 20:51 ET by tumbler_2007Indy, I have respect for you. Really; you make more sense than a few of the short-tempered white supremes around here. Let me attempt to cheer you up.
You say: "you're claiming that people here have claimed that "whites" don't steal or break the law or ever do anything wrong. No one has made any such claim. (Just by the way, I wonder why "yellow" and "brown" and "red" and even, lately, "black" are not acceptable to denote race in people, but "white" still is?)--"
What you're reacting to was IRONY, my open contempt for a variant of our citizenry who still believe being white has more credibility, more cause to complain and more "respect" for the law. Here they forget how many of our own fellow-citizens are dishonest, predatory and coarse. Not because of a basic right; citizenship. Because the "other" was born to speak Spanish, not English. We can't stand the very idea that anybody from Mexico should deserve a break, or even be innocent until he's proved guilty. It's class-consciousness and prejudice!
Am I righteous because I can argue this point? Hell, no. I'm your NEIGHBOR. We live together in the greatest land on earth! It's not righteousness that motivates you to flip me off. If I alienate you because I stick to my guns, it's YOUR fault. You have no cause for complaint, you're already set for life being an American. You're busy insulting me while you claim I'm alienating people. Do I cry?
No-- I'd rather provide the balance here, against or upon those who alienate ME. You do, you know. I have a right to speak my opinion. You can't stop me or limit my rights. I wish to speak here for those who have no voice on NewsBusters. Good people who have been assigned to your trash heap. There are always two sides to every story. I'm on the side of Mexicans quite openly hated by white supremacists.
Warning! Niagra Falls ahead:N
January 26, 2007 - 21:59 ET by Indiana JoeWarning! Niagra Falls ahead:
Nope, tumbler, it doesn't wash. I watched you engage others, and stood by. I finally engaged you myself, with logic and questions. You wouldn't address those questions. You slowly moved me into the class of "white supremacists" when I wouldn't buy your arguments.
Then you try to start this post all friendly and conciliatory, but by the end, you're back to your "white supremacist" ranting. You claim everyone here has a problem with Mexicans. You can't seem to wrap your mind around the concept that it is the illegal aliens, most of whom are admittedly Mexicans, that are the problem.
The fact that it is easier for Mexicans to enter this country illegally than almost any other nationality is the reason for this situation. But you just assume that it is hatred of Mexicans in general that motivate me and all others (that you assume are white) in our objections to illegal immigration. And you have no room in your philosophy for the concept that YOU may be wrong when you assume to understand others' motivations.
You mention me flipping you off, but gloss over the fact that you flipped me off first, and have done so MUCH more often. As you usually do. And do again in this post, several times, gratuitously and unnecessarily. You simply can't seem to admit when you are wrong. I never approached you in a hostile manner until YOU turned our dialogue hostile. I KNOW this for a fact, yet I'm sure you won't buy it. You see insults where there is only disagreement. That's another fact, and as I said before, you just won't see it. I'll admit that it has reached the point where very few people here CAN debate you without being hostile themselves, because you have insulted and belittled them in the past. You have created this situation, with your constant insulting, racial, and racist responses to all disagreements.
I know how much you dislike long posts. I believe complex issues require complex discussion, not one-liners and insults. But I'm nearly done here, hope you're still with me. I've had disagreements with others here, and managed to always stay civil while disagreeing. Some have gotten me heated, but never to the point of mindless name-calling. I don't like it, and I don't like to do it. I refuse to engage in it anymore. If your object here is to silence dissent, as you accuse me and others of doing, you will accomplish that goal. Because, like me, others will eventually tire of this game, and merely stop responding to you.
If you truly wish to debate these issues, then I suggest you seriously re-think your tactics. But that's just a suggestion from someone you obviously have no respect for, in spite of your protestations to the contrary. As for me, I'm taking the pledge... again. Maybe I'll even be able to keep it. I'll make you a deal. I'll respond to OTHERS here, such as "cjkinsky," but not to you. I ask you do me the same courtesy. Because I've tried all I can, and it's just not worth the effort. I refuse to sink to this level anymore.
Can't really say much for your "attempt to cheer [me] up." I don't really NEED much cheering up, I'M doing just fine.
IJ...Knew you couldn't last,
January 26, 2007 - 22:18 ET by bigtimerIJ...
Knew you couldn't last, I did the same thing two nights ago....
He isn't worth it, but dang you can't help yourself at at times, it was when I defended misterb, him calling the friend a liar.....that did it for me.
He is pathetically past help.....I'd like to say forget about it...but well, you know....
LMOA!
Hang in there...
You can provide the books, he just eats the pages.
Well, bt, I think I managed t
January 26, 2007 - 22:27 ET by Indiana JoeWell, bt, I think I managed to last longer than most, you know? I'm almost convinced now there's a tie-in with "cjkinsky." Why was tumbler doing all his defense tonight? Where was "cjk?"
Speaking of "defense:" Colts and Bears! Who'd a thunk it... except maybe... ME? LMAO!
Too bad they don't play at a home field anymore... we could call it the "I-65 Superbowl!" ;^D
Luck,
IJ
joe & me agree
January 27, 2007 - 00:25 ET by tumbler_2007Indiana Joe & I are not responding to one another anymore, by mutual agreement (Sniff.)
Here's a point he made in his final statement to moi.
"But you just assume that it is hatred of Mexicans in general that motivate me and all others (that you assume are white) in our objections to illegal immigration. And you have no room in your philosophy blah blah."
If you scan all my posts you have to see that I also "object" to illegal immigration. That's why I said that we aren't debating law enforcement at all. YOU'RE insulting and rejecting anybody who doesn't join in lockstep bashing illegals, suggesting ways to kill them if they dare infiltrate, and reducing them as a people to the level of scum. "Cockroaches" as one of you said once. The objective here isn't a resolution to the problem. It's just knee-jerk verbal abuse to which all must concede. No opposition, those who don't march in step must be denigrated, scorned and hated.
I'm in favor of deportation but not a FENCE. I abhor the widespread tendency of my conservative fellow-Americans to indulge in petty hate-speech directed at poor people who can't defend themselves. Hatred is not an option, My Friends. You may find me insufferable. But I'm right.
Silence.It's golden.
January 27, 2007 - 00:30 ET by bigtimerSilence.
It's golden.
bigtimer,Didn't take long for
January 27, 2007 - 01:09 ET by Indiana Joebigtimer,
Didn't take long for that "mutual agreement" to be violated, did it?
With one final (?) "bash-fest." What a surprise.
IJ
Seriously ROFLMAO IJ!Seems to
January 27, 2007 - 01:31 ET by bigtimerSeriously ROFLMAO IJ!
Seems to have worked so far though...
My last post that is....LOL!
Yeah right, when pigs fly!
He'll be back!
Gotta love it!
"Create a scenario when they get here"
January 26, 2007 - 10:35 ET by misterbill"Create a scenario when they get here"--your job Jim,if you decide to accept this mission, is to put this plan together and implement it. Thank you for your suggestion. I will put it in the box with the others. In the meantime, since we are considering illegals immigrants individually, will you please estimate how many a day you can process and what your criteria are for acceptance or rejection. When you have your plan togather, please go to Washington and explain it to Homeland Security--there is no question they can use the extra help.
Yes cjkinsey
January 26, 2007 - 10:44 ET by SportPoliticsYes cjkinsey, they are illegally human. You're also an illegally idiotic retarded inhuman freak, not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't "get that" either. Did you "get this" ?
How about this way. What I don't get is why you weirdos have to play games. Why don't you just say it. You don't like them being called "illegals", because you get EXACTLY what that means, but you would rather play a s**tgame where you pretend to be dumb, instead of saying "I want what I personally consider to be a more repsectful label put on these people, and screw it's accuracy".
Do you weirdos also want us to stop calling certain people "gang members", or perhaps "convicts", or "felons", or say "neocons" ?
HUH - WHAT ABOUT "NEOCONS" YOU IDIOT ?!!!!!!!!
I CAN'T STAND people like you. You talk ANOTHER LANGUAGE, the language of the stupid covered and veiled liberal idiot - that language.
"create a scenario" where blah blah blah - Apparently you missed the SOTU. Go watch it.
Here's another BIG PROBLEM with you people. After you shriek and moan the illegal immigrants deserve to be treated fairly and have a job to feed their starving families and not be terrorized with deportation, and ALL THE REST, YOU INSTANTLY ATTACK THE VERY COMPANIES THAT WERE GIVING THE POOR F****I'N ILLEGALS EXACTLY WHAT YOU *****MNED DEMANDED THEY RECIEVE!!!!! A JOB A FREAKING WAD OF CASH TO MAKE IT WITH!!!!! AND YOU WANT THE COMPANIES TO "PAY THE PRICE!!!"
I HATE YOU, I HATE YOU IDIOTS, I HATE YOU.
Are you opening your lawn and home and car to foreign nationals, as the other poster suggested you do, to remain "true to your cause" ?
Will you even acknowledge the question to you ?
MY GUESS: NO - BECAUSE YOU'RE AN INSANE LIBERAL FREAK WHO CANNOT POSSIBLY ANSWER THAT AND STILL HOLD YOUR GROUND.
Oh, and have a nice day.
"Oh, and have a nice d
January 26, 2007 - 10:50 ET by MightyMouth"Oh, and have a nice day"
Well SP, at least the idiot can't accuse you of not having decorum! :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
MM-- decorum???
January 26, 2007 - 11:05 ET by misterbillMM-- decorum??? Is that when your wife fixes up the house??
No buddy, my wife calls tha
January 26, 2007 - 11:18 ET by MightyMouthNo buddy, my wife calls that: "get off your ass and do something!"
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
SportPolitic - hey man!
January 26, 2007 - 11:12 ET by misterbillSportPolitic - hey man! You rellay let it out. To be truthful, I get that angry when I read posts by certain bloggers. I think a lot of us are reaching our tolerance levels with theses fools and in the past 5 days, there seems to be an increase in them,. At any rate, how would you like to meet me outside CJ's house about midnight tonight?? I have a small financial problem and I would like to earn some dinero. We wil enter his house, without his permission and help ourselves to some of his goods which we can sell and send money to our families.
As long as I am not called an illegal, it's all OK.
PS also don't forget I am a DemocratIC not a Democrat!
PPS CJ will most likely rebut with "they are not breaking in and stealing" to which I reply "My ass, their not!"
wank politics speaks
January 26, 2007 - 16:32 ET by tumbler_2007Ok, Wank Pol, thenk ya very much, thenk ya very much!
Your .02 cents is much appreciated.
What I don't get is what the
January 26, 2007 - 10:47 ET by rdave63What I don't get is what the word is meant to describe? Are they illegally human?
Illegal: not according to or authorized by law (Webster)
Alien: relating, belonging, or owing allegiance to another country or government-foreign (Webster)
Immigrant: a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence (Webster)
Therefore, an illegal immigrant is obviously someone, belonging to another country, taking up permanent residence here not accordance with authorized law.
Illegals
January 26, 2007 - 10:58 ET by misterbillIllegals- a shortened description of non-American citizens who flaunt US laws and enter the United States of America. Thus, they start their lives in America by committing a crime. The full term is "an immigrant who gains entry into the United States by illegal means".
Is there anything else I can help you with this morning.? No! Well, have a good day then!
If the illegals are 'fearful'
January 26, 2007 - 07:14 ET by Mica the MagnificentIf the illegals are 'fearful' 'afraid' and 'terrified' - why do they still come here illegally? Just because Mexico is a country of lawlessness, doesn't mean the illegals should expect the same here.
If I were them, I'd go back to my own country, where I could be 'happy' 'calm' and 'laughing.'
All Reuters stories should come with a disclaimer: "the following story is meant to help terrorists or criminals or anybody or anything else that may bring America to it's knees."
Mica
January 26, 2007 - 08:49 ET by cjkinseyThey come because they are poor and are hoping for more. As all humans are hoping for, better for their children.
We have more, but we are not here to give away more just because we have it. Instead what we want to show is compassion, understanding, and the opportunity for a better life? We should use our position to improve not to tear down. Unfortunately we have been lead and leading the wrong direction for years now. Which has caused us in the US to start to think for the first time that our children will have less than the generation before it.
Are you happy, calm and laughing?
I ask because honestly you sound, angry, sad, and terrified.
http://iamnotsosure....
cj,I'm just fine, thank you.
January 26, 2007 - 09:13 ET by Mica the Magnificentcj,
I'm just fine, thank you.
But wouldn't it show more compassion if the Mexican government did something to promote prosperity over there?
Why don't you write to the Mexican leadership and tell them to show some 'compassion' for their own people?
Quite frankly, if Americans had to sneak over a border to find opportunity, I'd be damned ashamed of my country.
I like to blame America first, it's safe to do that. No-one will knock on my door and kill me for it. - Old liberal proverb
So since they are poor and
January 26, 2007 - 09:25 ET by Troika37So since they are poor and hoping for more, we are obligated, under the rights of humanity to take them in? What about the poor in Rwanda? Aren't they equally entitled to share everything we have? Aren't we equally obligated to ensure they get here so as to enjoy the fruits of America? If we don't, aren't we discriminating against them geographically? It's not their fault they were born an ocean away instead of just south of the border.
cjkinsey
January 26, 2007 - 10:04 ET by SportPoliticscjkinsey, I went to your website and I think you're a liberal kook. Good luck with your insane ignorance on the rule of law and it's decades of established outcomes.
BTW- It was all too stereotypical when at your website I saw, after your insane babbling, the urging to " act on your feelings ." Thanks for that, it proves to me the republicans have not been lying, but have been telling me the truth about you people.
" act on your feelin
January 26, 2007 - 10:10 ET by Jack Bauer" act on your feelings"
Oh sure. That's what liberals have been telling the people since the 1960s.
If you want to see how well that all turned out, look up. Their monument lies all around.
And start in the prisons. The drug rehabs. Child services. Fatherless families.
Ah yes, "progressive" societal successes litter the horizon: from sea to shining sea!
Sport,Yeah, I gave him a &quo
January 26, 2007 - 12:08 ET by Indiana JoeSport,
Yeah, I gave him a "hit," too. Notice that on just the first page, four or five posts going back to January 12th, and not ONE reply? Must be discouraging, huh?
Just looking for some attention, I guess... hoping to generate some hits here maybe.
look out for conservatives
January 26, 2007 - 17:53 ET by tumbler_2007In our group here, liberals are always kooks, cjkinsey. Even if they are morally upright and inherently Americans of good will. Good will isn't appreciated by some of our happy, freedom-loving lumpenproletariat. Above all, they can't allow any liberal to correct them, even if hell freezes over. Guess what this attitude and obstinacy is called by definition? BIGOTRY.
Because I'm also moved with compassion for the offenders of our immigration laws, they've refused to accept me as a true conservative. It's the ONE issue for which I'm denigrated here. In every other aspect of social and fiscal conservatism, I never take a back seat; yet these mugs hate me. I won't march in lockstep behind them, and fully a third have exhibited every racist characteritic! They expect me to be a racist hate-monger too!
Particularly so, the Moron calling himself sportpolitic. He's teeming with hatred he can't contain his venom. How does he delude himself as to his good character? By citing the law, his phoney pretext for white supremacy.
He would have you believe you're "kooky" because you're ignorant of the law. What is this famous Law? Is it quantum physics? Or quantum metaphysics, so that only sportspoltroon can attest to it? This guy's obsessed with racial hatred.
tumbler, sidebar, you seem
January 26, 2007 - 18:12 ET by Conservative Voicetumbler, sidebar, you seem to use a tactic that is childish. You reply to the person you dislike, then speak to the person who is on your side and spew passive aggressive hate comments about the person you replied to. It is pathetic. So like when you have an argument with your wife do you speak to your wife by speaking to your neighbor with your wife in the room? Because I can tell ya, you deserve to be slapped for your unChristianlike behavior. Shame on you.
I'm only honest; not devious
January 26, 2007 - 18:38 ET by tumbler_2007Your psychobabble is very impressive, c-v. But here it's not well-placed /
I simply write these rebuttals as the spirit moves me, not as tactics. I'm sorry you look down on them. It's very similar to musical taste. One guy likes Pearl Jam, I prefer Mahler. Does that make me an outcast? Why are folks in your blog department always guaranteed to say "spew"-- Don't you have a vocabulary?
Just to cap this off, I'll have to ask you to leave my wife out of this. Let's continue as friends, whatever our differences.
The wife example was used p
January 26, 2007 - 18:50 ET by Conservative VoiceThe wife example was used purposely to get you to think, I was not being disrespectful of your wife. If you have a problem with a person, then instead of talking through them, talk to them (and use the golden rule...speak how you want to be spoken to, not how you are spoken to). That alone will give you much more mileage in people taking you seriously.
"spew" describes the type of speach you engage yourself in...as in throw-up. Its vile, hateful, and is of no use to anyone. (And that goes to anyone who spews garbage instead of engaging in a conversation that adults are capable of doing).
tumbler...
January 26, 2007 - 18:19 ET by Guy Arthur Thomastumbler, my guess is that at this point, because you appear to no longer have any interest in self-restraint or any form of moderation regarding personal comments...your days here are numbered and any expulsion will be self-inflicted...you will have no one to blame but yourself (but then maybe you WANT what you would perceive to be a little martydom to fuel your imagined suffering and persecution).
If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal. Go Rudy!
that's right, guy
January 26, 2007 - 18:45 ET by tumbler_2007Yes-- You're guessing. You're guessing wrong.
I don't lack restraint. Many times I would have launched invective like crazy and I gave in to reason.
I have no martyr complex nor am I suffering or objecting to ANYBODY who launches on me. I only play "Serve and Volley." You hit the ball, I return it. You just have to learn how it's played. Let me say you are usually a friendly enough fellow. I never try to crush you during our matches. But I could.
Well , Tumbler
January 26, 2007 - 18:55 ET by misterbillWell , Tumbler, now you have done it. I do not believe there is anyone left on this blog site that you have not attacked. Your toxin is bottomless. I wonder if you are resistant to it yourself. I am, once again leaving the field of venomous discourse to you. Somehow, I see you as the scorpion in the ring of fire. You are so vinegary and vicious that you will sting yourself to death.
PS One definition of tumbler:
a toy, usually representing a fat, squatting figure, that is weighted and rounded at the bottom so as to rock when touched.
Adios para siempre parvulo gilpollas!!!!!!!!!!
Are you sure???
January 26, 2007 - 10:38 ET by misterbillAre you sure??? that you are a different person than our resident apologist?? You have not yet started pouring platitudes about God over our heads yet, but you sure do sound like another blogger on this site.
Yeah, misterbill, I wondered
January 26, 2007 - 11:52 ET by Indiana JoeYeah, misterbill, I wondered about that from my first reply above. We have a "1 week +" guy here who is the FIRST person I've seen echo these arguments from, well, you know. Don't want to call down the lightening, LOL.
So, aside from the religious references, yeah, I have my suspicions, too.
Ah! HOPE! A vastly overvalued
January 26, 2007 - 10:52 ET by JPR1Ah! HOPE! A vastly overvalued concept indeed. I for example once hoped to own a 20 room mansion with a garage full of high performance automobiles. Hasn’t happened. I’m pretty sure by now something more than hope was necessary.
Do you think it was hope alone that framed the success of our nations settlers? Of course not.
They suffered and they persevered. They built and improved. Along the way they established laws designed to ensure security and maintain a measure of unity. Without these, would this nation be what it is?
Get a clue. If you are not distinctly aware of the detrimental effects of illegal migration you are either extremely uninformed or simply lack the intellectual capacity to comprehend what is essentially, a very simple matter.
Howdy, Magnificent M
January 26, 2007 - 18:56 ET by tumbler_2007My Dear Mica --
About your remark above:
The words "fearful, afraid, terrified,"" in case it eludes you, are written by news reporters, not by the captured offenders. It's doubtful any one of them has been "terrified". Why lap this BS up as if it had weight?
Every day here in NB, we all decry the blatant misrepresentations of the Media; but for this instance, you're hanging on the key words that cause you indignation. As if for once the Media were your source for the truth.
These captured birds are just disapppointed to have crossed over inadvertently on the wrong day. Not fearful or afraid. You really have to use your brains. Don't let everyone (the Media, and our fanatical white supremes) --don't let them lead you around by the nose.
Well, tumbler, I have to give
January 26, 2007 - 19:59 ET by Indiana JoeWell, tumbler, I have to give you credit. You are right in raising the point that the media bias of the use of words like "fearful, afraid, terrified," are the gist of this story. After all, media bias is the basic premise of NB to begin with.
But I must ask, did you read the relevant story? Follow the link? No one was captured because they "crossed over inadvertently on the wrong day." This happened in Los Angeles. Here's a snippet (emphasis mine):
"The-seven day Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sweep, dubbed 'Operation Return to Sender,' targeted jails across five counties in the Los Angeles area, where police took 423 of what they called "criminal aliens" into federal custody for deportation, after being held on charges unrelated to their immigration status.
"Federal agents from seven teams also fanned out in local communities, where they nabbed 338 undocumented immigrants, more than 150 of whom were classed as "immigration fugitives" -- foreign nationals who ignored final deportation orders."
There's more, claims of "everybody" being rounded up, etc. But it wasn't people just crossing the border.
Yes and I'm fearful and afr
January 26, 2007 - 07:38 ET by zhombreYes and I'm fearful and afraid and terrified when I'm speeding and see a police cruiser behind me blinking its cherry. Talk about shock & awe. It is indeed an awful and traumatic experience when you break the law and are actually held accountable for it.
Zhombre
January 26, 2007 - 08:52 ET by cjkinseyAh the rule of law, so I assume that you are the first in line to Impeach Bush? He appears to have clearly broken the law, so you want him held to account? Or is it only specific law breakers that you are concerned about?
http://iamnotsosure....
I see, all issues devolve t
January 26, 2007 - 08:59 ET by zhombreI see, all issues devolve to Bush hatred. Dear monomaniac, peering at the world thru BDS-tinted glasses, I have no intention of rising to your bait. It is the duty of the House to impeach and the Senate to try if articles of impeachment are voted upon. Contact your Congressman to discuss the issue. If you know who that is.
I can hardly wait Zohmbre
January 26, 2007 - 10:09 ET by SportPoliticsI can hardly wait Zohmbre, for our enemy cluckers to move on with impeachment. The truth about Bush will come out, and it will destroy the democrats, and crush their Bush bashing into dust.
The average American will get more than the carefully managed soundbites, and realize the democrats have taken on insanity as part of their personal healh issues. It will blow up in their faces, and destroy them. I fully encourage them to go forward.
What law did President Bush v
January 26, 2007 - 10:35 ET by bassndudeWhat law did President Bush violate? What was the high crime? Did he lie to a grand jury?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
You beat me to the question.
January 26, 2007 - 10:48 ET by taznarYou beat me to the question. Its one of those cases where "everyone says it (on TV) so it must be true!" kind of things.
Kind of like when they accuse Bush of lying, and you ask what, specifically, did he say that was a lie? The answer is usually something about WMDs in Iraq. They don't seem to understand the difference between being wrong about something and lying about it. Every world leader for the decade before the invasion thought Iraq had WMDs and/or was building them. But apparently Bush is the only one who "lied" about it when he stated this belief.
“…clearly broken the law
January 26, 2007 - 11:02 ET by JPR1“…clearly broken the law…”
Ok smart guy, WHAT LAW? Better cite something for us. Make it good. Be thorough now. Get it together; we’ll review for you and you can drop it off with Congress when you deliver your immigration plan to Homelad security.
Sheeeet!
Good, finally the laws are be
January 26, 2007 - 08:19 ET by dscottGood, finally the laws are being upheld and now the law breakers are taking the Law seriously. No one takes the Law seriously when there are no consequences. So to those who say Bush isn't doing enough to curb illegal immigration, take note, stage 1 has commensed more to follow.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
dscott
January 26, 2007 - 08:54 ET by cjkinseyFunny you should mention bush in a discussion of the law having no consequence.
Again I assume that you think he is doing well in this area but are the second in line for his impeachment?
http://iamnotsosure....
impeach Bush....blah, blah, b
January 26, 2007 - 09:41 ET by MassConservativeimpeach Bush....blah, blah, blah. To quote a prior poster on this thread....
"you are large on rhetoric, let's try some specifics!"
All US and foreign gangs of i
January 26, 2007 - 09:41 ET by MivvisAll US and foreign gangs of illegals on our soil should be labeled as terrorists and rounded up. Being a member in one should be illegal. The gangs terrorize good citizens on a daily basis.
This just in - American Gangs
January 26, 2007 - 10:19 ET by RunningBeerThis just in - American Gangs fearful after shoplifting arrests.
A large group of gang members who had infiltrated a shopping mall were rounded up by city police this morning. The group had been littering and shoplifting from the local merchants.
A supposed "community gang worker" who runs a "gang training program" was quoted as being in "shock" over the arrests.
runningbee-- don't wanta get ahead of ya
January 26, 2007 - 19:06 ET by tumbler_2007Pardon me, Beer--?
Not to dispute with you, but-- Hmmmm.
Does anybody know how many of these bad actors were here illegally from south of the border? Do you know? Was it profiling, perhaps? Just asking.
Im all for any impeachment of
January 26, 2007 - 09:44 ET by Dan The Man 2Im all for any impeachment of any officials who have satified the requirements for such. What articles of impeachment would you bring and under what laws, be specific as you can.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
cjkinsey,Just visited the b
January 26, 2007 - 09:56 ET by MightyMouthcjkinsey,
Just visited the blog you have in your sig line. Of course you are a typical liberal leftwing nutjob with a heaping dash of moonbat thrown in. That's not an ad hominem, just an observation on my part.
Also notice you are still stuck on the "legality of the Iraq war" and want Bush to swing for it. One thing you guys just dont get is: the argument, "we should not be in this war!" has nothing to do with what we do about it now. Oh and by the way, "impeachment" is an unfulfilled wet dream you nuts will wake with for EVER! Ain't gonna happen!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Can you say Troll??Save a SeA
January 26, 2007 - 10:37 ET by bassndudeCan you say Troll??
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
bassndude
January 26, 2007 - 10:39 ET by misterbillbassndude--- is cjk aka Fumbler??? or El Gaucho???
Misterbill....he might be fum
January 26, 2007 - 10:56 ET by bassndudeMisterbill....he might be fumbler, if so, he runs more tho. But he isint as smart as gaucho....hehehehe...
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
bassndude
January 26, 2007 - 11:02 ET by misterbillbassndude-- si amigo, I theenk you are right!!!!!!!!
Haven't seen the Tumbler in a
January 26, 2007 - 11:07 ET by JPR1Haven't seen the Tumbler in a while.
Did he get the boot again? I always miss those.
If he did "get the boot
January 26, 2007 - 13:27 ET by Indiana JoeIf he did "get the boot again," that MAY explain a lot about our new "1 week, 2 days" sound-alike... ;^)
Anyone come across this guy on any other threads yet?
<edit> Nah, Tumbler posted just after midnight today on the "Begala" thread #10408. So he's still on. Still, could be an alias, trying to look like he has ONE supporter... sure does SOUND like him, though.
cjkinsey...you sound like ano
January 26, 2007 - 13:34 ET by ww thumpercjkinsey...you sound like another troll that posts here who SETS ON HIS BRAINS!! I can see that you SET ON YOURS TOO; WHAT LITTLE YOU DONT HAVE MUCH OF. Don't go away mad just go away alot! You won't be welcome here , and we are NOT empressed with your BS.... ww v Being "Politcaly Correct" with ISLAM will distroy America......V
The last entry it the attache
January 26, 2007 - 09:45 ET by MassConservativeThe last entry it the attached Reuter's article sums it up perfectly....
"We used to feel secure here," Nicaraguan electrician Manuel Salomon told Reuters as he sipped coffee in a Mexican bakery in the city. "But it looks like that honeymoon is over."
That is exactly the message all ILLEGAL immigrants should be getting from these raids. The honeymoon is over.
MC,Let's hope so. Now, if we
January 26, 2007 - 10:00 ET by Dave RMC,
Let's hope so. Now, if we can just get employers to stop hiring these people perhaps they will return whence they came, or at least move on north to Canada, which would be fine with me.
They should be terrified...
January 26, 2007 - 10:06 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasThey should be terrified, they are breaking the law. The truth is what they are terrified over is losing the lifestyle they are accustom to as a result of illegal behavior. This is no different than the terror a drug dealers feels when the law comes after him or her. Their terror is not Law Enforcement itself but the loss of the lifestyle they have as a result of their illegal actions, not to mention liberty, a liberty illegally gained hence illegitimate.
If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal. Go Rudy!
Terrorizing democrats
January 26, 2007 - 10:16 ET by SportPoliticsTerrorizing democrats is as simple as saying they belong to the Democrat Party.
Democrats have been in a permanent state of self induced terror ever since their BDS kicked in, which happened many years ago when manbearpig skulked off to grow a beard. Their genetic, drug, and innerchild abuse histories obviously made them extremely succeptible, but that is no excuse for them feeding their illness in a spiralling torturous descent for this many years.
Cjkinsey"What would a fe
January 26, 2007 - 10:06 ET by moonjohnCjkinsey
"What would a fence do, do you remember history and the Maginot wall?"
The Maginot line worked just fine.
The problem was that it wasn’t long enough.
The Germans just drove around it.
In that way it’s like the fences we have in California.
The fences stop the illegal, but the illegals just walk around the ends of the fences.
HEADLINE: DRUG RAID
January 26, 2007 - 10:50 ET by misterbillHEADLINE: DRUG RAID CAUSES "TERROR" AMONG DRUG PUSHERS.
Good! Hopefully all raids against criminals will cause them to feel terror and stop their criminal activties.
Good stuff, ya'll. Where's
January 26, 2007 - 11:43 ET by tgibbsjrGood stuff, ya'll. Where's tumbler? His pc must be down. Someone needs to call him, so we can hear how unloving-uncaring we are. I miss it already!
;-)
tgibbsjr,There seems to be a
January 26, 2007 - 13:32 ET by Indiana Joetgibbsjr,
There seems to be a consensus developing (kind of like the AGW "consensus," but more logical, lol) that cjkinsky may BE the tumbly one... sure sounds like him, doesn't he?
Regards,
IJ
You got that right, IJ. Eer
January 26, 2007 - 17:04 ET by tgibbsjrYou got that right, IJ. Eerily similiar.
I came back later, and notice
January 26, 2007 - 19:38 ET by Indiana JoeI came back later, and noticed that tumbler was responding to the criticisms directed at cjk. BUT... not a peep out of cjk himself.... hmm?
;^D
my name is just tumbler
January 26, 2007 - 23:30 ET by tumbler_2007I've no idea who the other guy was. I lost my old password after resetting Safari last night. Had to request a new one before I could log on.
Whatever; you shouldn't be afraid. I'm only one dissident amongst the crowd of Mexico-bashers. Today one buffoon threatened to send me "back to Mexico" Haha! Why?
On account of my daring to stand up for Mexicans who have no voice here. Notice: Reuters speaks for the illegals who said "We're afraid, terrified." Don't believe it. Warner Todd Huston strikes back; and rightly accuses them of editorializing, instead of reporting.
Then after doing that, what is he doing? Editorializing. On the opposite extreme of the argument. Why can't he be impartial? Because of the agenda. OK; at least he's blogging against Reuters and the vast propaganda war the Left is waging. But here, in NewsBusters, his success is assured before he writes a word. No one will contradict Warner.
My hope is to offer another perspective. Am I impartial? YES. Over and over I've said; I approve of controlling our borders. I believe violators should be sent back (though I see them returning shortly afterward). And I even stated the only way (ONLY WAY) to stop repeat offenders is to send them to prison for a good stretch if they dare to come back after a deporting. Deportation by itself isn't very successful. Fences are sure to fail unless America is willing to shoot a violater who climbs the fence. Something too draconian. So forget it. Forget FENCES. The cost is prohibitive, the results will prove underwhelming. Negative.
Meanwhile, shipping out possibly 10 million families en masse who have settled in, have children in school and/or born in America; have jobs and obligations-- who's going to accomplish this gargantuan exploit of law enforcement? I know YOU GUYS are in the mood to do it. Are you about to volunteer?