Define “Reform”


From the list of Shit That Pisses Me Off:

Poll: Republican voters back immigration reform?

While immigration reform may not be high on voters’ lists of priorities heading into the 2014 midterms, a new survey of a variety of critical states shows that Americans are predisposed to support efforts to repair the nation’s immigration system.

The Republican firm Harper Polling’s automated survey of between 500 and 855 likely voters in 26 states (Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin) shows voters believe the system is broken and in need of repair.

86 percent of self-described Republicans and 79 percent of independents in those 26 states said that the immigration system is in need of fixing. Moreover, 79 percent of Republican respondents said that it was “important” for Congress to act on immigration reform this year. 53 percent of Republicans went a step further, saying that it was “very important.” 71 percent of Republicans said that they would support a candidate who backs immigration reform while only 15 percent of self-identified GOP voters said that they would not support a pro-reform candidate.

In worse news for opponents of immigration reform, voters do not believe that the argument that President Barack Obama would not enforce border security provisions in an immigration bill is a valid reason for opposing reform. 72 percent of all respondents said did not believe that concerns over enforcement of border security was a good reason for rejecting immigration reform, including a majority of Republicans and 69 percent of independents.

The Harper survey found that nearly two-thirds of all voters and 54 percent of self-identified Republicans support a pathway to legal status for illegal immigrants.

For those that think the crisis on the border has cooled Republican support for reform, this survey suggests otherwise. Among voters in Texas where the border crisis has been most acute, 84 percent of Republicans said that it was critical for Congress to reform the immigration system this year.

Define “reform”

There is a general consensus in this country that our current immigration system is badly in need of repair. There is little or no consensus on what that repair should look like.

But wait! There’s more!

Half of Texas Republicans said they supported the “immigration standards” set by House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), which would include increased border security and expanding visas for high-skilled workers and farm laborers. 40 percent of Texas Republicans, however, said that all illegal immigrants should be deported.

Raise your hand if you are familiar with the “immigration standards” set by Boehner.

Contrary to what you see portrayed in the media, most Republicans support legal immigration and a “pathway to citizenship.” Call it “amnesty” and watch the numbers of people in either party who support it drop dramatically.

Yes, we are a nation of immigrants. Every single person in this country is descended from immigrants, including the Native Americans whose ancestors got here first. But things have changed since the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

We no longer have an open frontier and lots of unclaimed land to give away. We no longer have a rapidly growing industrial economy to absorb millions of unskilled, illiterate workers. Manual labor jobs are being taken over by machines. More and more jobs require skills and training that most immigrants don’t possess.

Most importantly, we have millions of Americans who can’t find work. Our social safety nets were never intended to be an alternative to working. We are literally supporting Americans who could be working at the jobs that immigrants are taking.

Let me put it another way.

I own one cat. Okay, she might say that she owns me, but the two of us live together. I also support at least two other animals, a stray cat and a raccoon. They are not pets and don’t come in the house, but I feed them dry cat food at the back door. It’s not a big deal.

What if fifty cats and/or raccoons decided to move into my back yard? The nominal cost of feeding two extra animals would become a burden when it becomes fifty. Then there would be the sanitation problem (and smell) as fifty animals use my yard as a toilet.

I would have constant flea problems, with no way to treat that many animals. Nor would there be any way to control fighting and disease, nor could I treat illnesses and injuries. Since it would be unlikely that the animals would be spayed and neutered, fifty would soon become several hundred.

More than likely complaints from the neighbors would soon bring a visit from animal control. I’d probably end up in the news even if I wasn’t hit with criminal charges. I’d be charged with neglect if I tried to stop feeding them all.

All because I felt sorry for some homeless strays.

People are not animals, but the principle is the same. We cannot let immigrants overwhelm our resources. Anyone who is advocating “open borders” is an idiot. We need to use compassion AND common sense.

What we are doing now is the equivalent of using sponges to absorb excess moisture in the middle of a raging flood.

About Myiq2xu - BA, JD, FJB

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Illegal Immigration, Immigration Reform, Shit That Pisses Me Off and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

124 Responses to Define “Reform”

  1. The Klown says:

    Via Lulu:

  2. The Klown says:

    Chicago South Side Residents Unhappy With Obama’s Response To Immigration Crisis:

    • DandyTIger says:

      Would be nice if black americans woke up and noticed neither party is on their side. Same for women. Same for all of us. Hey party afflicted people, what’s the deal, do you like being used and abused? If you will always vote your party because you think the other side is worse, you don’t count.

      • DeniseVB says:

        “Same for all of us” indeed. I think the only one who speaks for me now is Sarah Palin. The GOP and Dems seem to fear her the most based on the floggings she’s been getting from both sides. She is us 😉

      • Constance says:

        Agree, both parties are out of touch with average Americans and their needs. I also agree we should take care of our own Citizens first and not treat Citizens like a crop of taxpayers to be harvested for the “Worthy programs” of a bunch of detached elitists. People who are concerned about poor people all over the world should use their own money to help others not tax everyone and have the government do charity. Also notice religious people who are usually conservative and being tapped to take care of the illegal immigrants, so where are the liberal groups who are helping using their own resources? Progressives are the party of bureaucratic waste and red tape.

  3. The Klown says:

    Nope, no sexism here:

    Believe it or not, the comments were even worse.

  4. The Klown says:
    • The Klown says:
      • DandyTIger says:

        Wow, that woman sure has a lot of hate, towards women, jews, and who knows who else. Typical vile prog.

      • leslie says:

        Suzie is showing that she couldn’t meet those Fox standards that @rockportbasset set out. (Even though I disagree with his the “big mouth, big ego and small IQ” statement.)
        In truth, I never watched FNC until after bronco roped in (nearly) half the country. I had some of those same ideas about FoxNews. I guess I was a product of MSNBC until I actually started listening to them and became utterly disgusted at their blind support of the POTUS who “doesn’t look exactly like me”. I suppose if we ever have a member of a different party in the WH, I’ll switch to the stations that oppose/challenge that administration.

        • DandyTIger says:

          I always like to listen to the opposing, critical views, no matter who they are. When the criticism is against someone you think you agree with, it’s frustrating and hard to take. When the criticism is against someone you disagree with, it’s kind of fun. Either way, you should listen to opposing views and think logically about them. If a Repub wins in ’16, I’ll listen a lot more to Dem views, e.g., MSNBC.

          • leslie says:

            I guess I should’ve said I’ll switch to the stations that oppose/challenge that administration – more often. Because at times, I turn on MSNBC and CNN and local stations that do support whatever – or nearly whatever – the administration says. and you’re right it is more fun when we agree. other times I want to throw the teevee out the window.

          • DeniseVB says:

            I hide behind Newsbusters, PJmedia and Hot Air to watch the opposing view shows for me. I’m just subjected to clips and transcripts that way 🙂 MSNBC has changed a lot since the Bush administration (as well as their ratings plummeting). I doubt I’ll tune into Sharpton or Neblett to tell me how the GOP President is doing 😀

            I was a huge fan of Keith Olbermann until he “put Hillary in a closet and beat her up” because she wouldn’t drop out in 2008. I really haven’t tuned in since. Before Obama, many of my conservative Republican friends wouldn’t miss Chris Matthews show, then he got a bad case of the tingles.

            CNN may be coming back around. I like the new conservative leaning One America News channel which does straight up reporting in that pesky “here are the facts” way. Refreshing. (it was just added to our VerizonFios lineup).

          • leslie says:

            I had Morning Joe on late last week and Sharpton appeared. Really, I couldn’t do it. Could not watch him. What a raaaacist!
            Years ago, my sister – a less vile prog than she used to be – told me that Sharpton was a fraud and that he made her quite angry. And that if he were nominated (of course she knew he wouldn’t be) she would sit out the election as she would never vote anything but D.
            Thanks for the tip about the new tv station. I bet Comcast doesn’t carry it – and I also bet they never will unless they can charge an additional $$ / month for it.

  5. DandyTIger says:

    It looks like this mass invasion was encouraged by this admin and the Dem party in conjunction with open boarder/pro illegal immigration groups. It’s a simple math problem. What will this country look like economically when it goes from 350M to 1B, where almost all that growth is uneducated and unskilled. Say those groups win and they get the population they want. Then what?

    • The Klown says:

      1. Massive immigration
      2. ???
      3. Victory!

      • DandyTIger says:

        That’s clearly their theory. The Dems think they will have a permanent majority. The establishment Repubs seem to be onboard with that. The pro illegal groups think they will get their mythical country back. All of them think the good times are just around the corner. They’re all completely insane. Apparently math is hard.

        • 1539days says:

          Maybe they should start with taking Mexico back from Narco terrorists and taking South America back from socialist dictators. When they finish that, we can talk about what they’ll do for America.

          • Constance says:

            I agree with this. The USA shouldn’t be poaching segments of the population from our neighbor countries. The people who are trying to be in the USA should be organizing to take their countries back from the gangs that are currently running them. But if it gets to the point where they all want to be in the USA instead of their homelands and if we are going to take all of them in, then we should just take over the country and take all their resources along with their population. Our government is ineffective but there is a better chance the resources will be used for the common good if we annex them than if the Dictators/Narco terrorists control the resources.

          • Constance says:

            Which is not to say I think this is the perfect solution or that there is a perfect solution. But I do believe the status quo can be improved on.

    • taw46 says:

      Yes, no one wants to talk about that, do they? One billion people. In all my long life, I never imagined the insanity I have seen since 2008. Ashamed I was ever a Dem.

    • lildoggy4u says:

      Those new immigrants have one skill Americans do not have and will be hired for that skill regardless of intelligence or education. They speak Spanish. Here in South Florida with our great immigrant population, there has been no assimilation, therefore it is a necessity that for any job – from Burger King server to executive position, doctors, lawyers; you’ll find that bi-lingual (but only English/Spanish) is the first requirement in any job posting.

      • Constance says:

        15 years ago I was stuck in the Miami airport for a few hours and couldn’t get anyone to talk to me in English which is my only option. I have never flown into Miami since I fly to Orlando and rent a car and drive the rest of the way.

  6. Somebody says:

    When most people say they support immigration reform they actually mean secure the border. There is a fringe that wants open borders, but the vast majority of Americans want secure borders. They want to stop the flood of illegals. My sister the vile prog is for immigration reform, which in her mind is securing the border and guest worker visas. She won’t actually say “secure the border” because that’s a republican talking point, but if you poke and prod that’s where she goes.

    If there was a survey asking about securing the border I bet 95% would be for it. In fact most everyone wants that and it is a dereliction of duty that our federal government is not keeping our borders secure……not just the southern border either, plenty slip in other ways. Our borders could be much more secure with the resources we currently have or in some areas with minimal supplementation. Proper placement of resources and actually enforcing the laws would be a great start. The problem is there is no desire from either party to secure our borders, sure they may talk about it, but neither side wants our borders secure each for different reasons.

    Once the border is secure, if that ever happens, there is some disparity in opinions on reform of our immigration policies. I’d be willing to bet that there is a solid majority of John Q. Public that doesn’t support amnesty in any form. We’re a nation of laws, or at least we’re supposed to be, people don’t like rule breakers. Beyond the issue of amnesty opinions vary. Personally I’d like to see the whole anchor baby issue addressed. If someone is here legally, even if they’re not yet a citizen and they have a child, fine their child is a US citizen. However, the practice of any child born here automatically being a citizen I think is a giant magnet encouraging illegals. It’s not just people coming across the southern border having children either, they fly in to the west coast from Asian countries. If you’ve been in the US for a couple of days, weeks or months and haven’t taken any steps toward becoming a citizen then I don’t think your child is a citizen either, even if you give birth here……….I know, I know, I’m racist, heartless, phobic and who knows what else.

    • The Klown says:

      Lots of people come to the US legally and then overstay their visas. Like Obama’s relatives.

    • leslie says:

      . . . the practice of any child born here automatically being a citizen I think is a giant magnet encouraging illegals.” That may be part of it, but I think the benefits – the free stuff, if you will, is a large if not larger magnet. I say this because I know plenty of people who have relatives that are setting up their applications for SSI and Medicaid and plan to come here legally and soon. They come for a visit, say they are staying with their son/ daughter, go to the Medicaid and SSA offices to apply for their monthly “benefits” and then, after they go to the MD and use the local ERs, go back home until they come here permanently. They are gaming the system because so many others have done that before them. And it seemed to work.
      I am not against ppl coming into the US – legally. I AM against gaming this system leaving our own people who are in need with fewer and fewer resources and options.

      • Somebody says:

        I don’t think anyone should come here legally or illegally if they can’t support themselves. I agree with you Leslie that the freebies are a giant magnet, anchor babies are one way to tap into that. Our standard of living is much higher than most of the world, our poor live as well as middle class do in many countries. We take clean, running water and sewage for granted for instance.

        You shouldn’t be allowed to come here if you can’t support yourself. There should be no public assistance for people coming here for a set amount of time……one year, three years, ten years, take your pick. The point is don’t come here if you can’t be a productive member of society, other countries have such rules why can’t we? Clearly there should be exceptions for some unforseen tragedy, but the general rule should be you have to be a productive member of society to immigrate.

        Klown I know lots of people come here and overstay their visas. That’s what I meant in the second paragraph when I said plenty slip in other ways. We need to crack down on those people just as much as we need to secure the southern border.

        • swanspirit says:

          My future daughter in law from Glasgow is in Nursing school in Scotland . She will have all kinds of hoops to jump through just to marry my son , much less be able to come here and work ; and that is with a nursing shortage .

        • WMCB says:

          ^^This^^ I am sorry, but if we take in the dregs of the world in large number (and yes, I DO have compassion for those people) we will cease to exist as a viable society.

          I feel sorry for orphans, too. No, I am not in a position to permanently adopt and care for 30 of them. I have a family of my own, and responsibilities to them. That doesn’t make me cruel, it makes me sane and realistic.

      • 1539days says:

        The people who are coming over are used to hiding from their governments and living in misery. America represents less misery because they can undercut minimum wage by working off the books and still make enough to live in a household filled beyond its zoning limitations. We’ve tried making illegals legal before. It gave those crossing illegally even more to hope for.

    • foxyladi14 says:

      Exactly 🙂

    • Constance says:

      I agree, the “if you are born here you are a citizen” policy has been abused, it was a good idea but needs to be refined.

      • 1539days says:

        The policy is actually part of an Amendment intended to give de facto citizenship to former slaves who were real undocumented workers with nothing like a birth certificate. Lawyers eventually figured out they could apply this to “anchor babies.”

  7. gainny says:

    If you had all those cats and raccoons on your property, you would be accused of hoarding. Amnestyites are alien-hoarders.

    • leslie says:

      “Amnestyites are alien-hoarders”. Just not in their own neighborhoods – or homes.

  8. gram cracker says:

    “This immigration cannot be so great in volume as to exceed whatever may be the economic capacity of the country at the time to absorb new arrivals. It is essential to ensure that the immigrants should not be a burden upon the people of ….. as a whole, and that they should not deprive any section of the present population of their employment.”

    The above seems like a reasonable guideline for immigration policy for any country. Apparently this is not the guiding principal for what immigration reform means for the USA as defined by the Democrat party elites who want to exponentially increase their poor, uneducated, untrained, dependent on government handouts voter base and the Republican elites who want an endless supply of both unskilled and skilled workers to help keep wages depressed across the board.

    The quote above is from the Churchill White Paper of 3 June 1922 clarifying how Britain viewed the Balfour Declaration of 1917. That Declaration announced the British intent to aid the “establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” It took its name from Winston Churchill, the then-Secretary of State for the Colonies.

  9. leslie says:

    I gotta go back to work on the church rummage sale….. have a good Sunday TCHers.

  10. DeniseVB says:

    Feeling frisky on twitter 😉

  11. SHV says:

    “Define Reform”
    “…make changes in (something, typically a social, political, or economic institution or practice) in order to improve it.”

    I guess “improve it” is in the eye of the beholder….certainly ISIS beheading infidels is, from their perspective, improving Islam. Or the Chamber of Commerce, Big AG, Silicon Valley tech., IBM, etc. having an unlimited supply of cheap labor is considered “reform” and a good thing.

  12. DeniseVB says:

    Just an FYI …. follow this verified timeline on twitter for updates ….

    I gave up on the Gaza feeds since they were just showing old propaganda and very graphic photos of slaughtered children from other conflicted countries and blaming Israel. Unfortunately our media seems to be falling for it.

  13. Lulu says:

    The polling data is rigged, gamed and paid for by big business low wage advocates. And Democrats are backing off of it. “Immigration reform has fizzled as an issue for Democrats, who are barely mentioning it on the campaign trail despite making the issue their top domestic priority in 2013 and 2014.

    “Polls showing public opposition to higher rates of immigration have been obscured by other surveys — many commissioned by business groups — showing a majority of Americans generally favor immigration reform.” “But such general survey data often do not distinguish between various approaches to immigration reform such as increasing border security, boosting legal immigration flows and granting a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.”

  14. 1539days says:

    Paul Rodriguez has a point. We have three options when it comes to the influx of under 18 year-olds coming over, the ones Obama announced would not be deported years ago.

    1. We can send them back, which will put them in danger but will discourage other parents going into indentured servitude to coyotes.

    2. We can let “the children” stay, which will depopulate Mexico and parts of South America until we become an impoverished hellhole and have to go back to option 1.

    Option 3 is doing nothing, which is what we already have. This consists of encouraging human trafficking, drug smuggling, gang migration, economic destabilization and children putting their lives in danger to win a Darwin contest of making it across the border or dying.

  15. WMCB says:

    • DeniseVB says:

      I know that name (Pat Dollard) and just now followed him. I think he’s been the most retweeted twit on my timeline, not sure why I haven’t paid attention to him til now, thanks WMCB !

      • votermom says:

        He got some backlash a while back for some anti-Muslim tweet he made; iirc it was after the London slashing though so I think it was just temper.

        • The Klown says:

          He’s a 90%er – 90% of what he says is okay, but every so often he makes a right turn into Crazy Town.

          • Constance says:

            90% works for me!

          • WMCB says:

            Pretty much. I’ll follow a 90%er, or even a 50%er if they are particularly bright or interesting, or even if they link to stuff that is. I mostly don’t bother with anything below a 40%er unless it’s just for lulz or the batshitness entertains me.

    • Constance says:

      Very true! But they are only inadvertently acting as the representatives of foreign nationals illegally residing in the USA, while purposefully acting as the representatives of multinational corporations who purchase the USA government.

  16. driguana says:

    Another great Sunday post or riposte, if you will. I love the thought provoking Sunday morning posts because then I can go out and do my garden work and yard work and have a slightly different conversation with my plants and outdoor animals. I really related to your points about the outdoor animals, as I have numerous….a family of squirrels, a variety of snakes and lots of birds. We also have a small dog, cat and a beautiful sun conjure who literally flew into our yard and our lives. So my time with all of them, and the conversations that we have…..including the plants….is very important to me. I know the neighbors think I am talking to myself, and I’ll leave it at that with them as they would probably not comprehend the fact that I have plant and animal conversations.

    So when I went out this morning muttering about “reform”, there was immediate feedback. Reform, they told me, means to change again the form or structure of something. They quickly reminded me that I am constantly cutting and pruning and transplanting them, most of the time without asking them or at least discussing the lopping of limbs and forced movement to a new and perhaps strange part of the yard. I should start to ask them if they mind, I was told. OK fair enough…but…I cut, prune and transplant all of these guys to make them better, to put them in a better position for their own benefit. Yeah right…..that’s what they all say.

    It was a long and arduous struggle with the squirrels. I kept seeing them run across the utility lines with peanuts. At first I thought some neighbor was constantly giving them the nuts. They would also keep planting them in my garden, sometimes disturbing the other plants. Then I realized, and my girlfriend still doesn’t believe me, that the squirrels were actually planting and harvesting peanuts!! We reached an agreement. Here are your boundaries….they do not include my garden! If you want, you can plant your peanuts elsewhere and I will help cultivate them….water them, weed them and so forth. Lo and behold, we now have lots of thriving peanut plants!!! I Pulled one up the other day and there were at least a dozen peanuts on it… now we all plant and harvest together and they stay within squirrelville and I get my garden. So borders and boundaries do work. Haven’t communicated too well with the snakes. I have only told them not to scare me so far….I hate snakes and they know it. I don’t really want them in my neighborhood.

    Borders and boundaries have been screwed up for millennia. Having lived in West Africa in the late 60s and early 70s, I became acutely aware of the ridiculousness of colonial boundaries. They had nothing to do with reality. The boundaries between Liberia, Guinea an Sierra Leone are absurd….this also happens to be the area where the current Ebola outbreak is ravaging….the different sets of boundaries have made it nearly impossible to provide aid and assistance. As far as I can tell, boundaries and borders are about tribalism….tribes, different ethnic groups, different language groups. You see, I think it has all boiled down to an interesting moment in our progressively evolved time….people still, by and large, prefer to be among their own kind in a setting that makes them comfortable. The history of this country bears that out….I grew up in Pittsburgh and there were black neighborhoods, Italian neighborhoods, Jewish neighborhoods, Hungarian neighborhoods, Polish neighborhoods……call them tribes if you want….they preferred their own neighborhoods. Choice is great and should always be an element of our society….but if I want to live among my tribe mates, I should be able to do that as well.

    This is what my plant and animals friends passed on to me this morning about reform.

    • WMCB says:

      I never really get the aversion to the importance of tribe/nationality/race/religion etc among progs who claim to want multiculturalism. If you pretty much tell people that any attempt to preserve/nurture their own culture is racist and xenophobic hate, then you will end up not with multiculturalism, but homogenous “culture” – as well as a shitload of conflict in forcing it. The reason I even WANT to go to Jamiaca is that it is quintessentially Jamaican. As France is quintessentially French. I want to enjoy a different culture than my own (and yes, whitebread Americans have one. I have several, actually.) I also want to be able to nurture my own culture without being told it is ipso facto hatred for other cultures.

      Hatred and violence etc there is no room for. But if you leave people alone, they largely have a tight circle of those they are *most* comfortable with (and yes, that is usually people of same tribe/race/background/culture) and then an expanded circle, and then peacable and enjoyable interactions with groups/persons that are not their “own”. None of this is set in stone. Individual exceptions always exist. Sometimes particular overlaid interests (academia, religion, etc) outweigh birth tribe. But for humans in large groups, in general? Yeah, this is utterly normal behavior, not hate. And in applies in overlapping circles of various complexity. I enjoy Texas. But I feel **home** in the culture/people I grew up with, in a way I never will here. Is that hate? Sometimes I want to be around only women. Do I hate men? Of course not! Nor do men who sometimes want a “men only” space hate women. It’s NORMAL.

      And as you pointed out, while natural, organic melding of cultures does and should occur over time, trying to force it by dictat or overwhelming a native culture with “others” actually creates MORE conflict and hardening of tribalism to something ugly. Not less.

      • WMCB says:

        Oh, and another interesting thing. The lines are rarely hard and fast, they are somewhat blurred and fluid, but still there. For instance, I am often much more “at home” around a black rural southerner than I am an Ivy League white person. People’s tribal loyalities are an overlapping mishmash, not neat squares in a grid.

        The point is that if you leave people ALONE, the survival mechanisms that we have evolved over thousands of years, so as to not constantly kill each other, will work out how much interaction is optimum, with whom, and where we can meld or blend. There is no need to intervene unless **genuine** injustice and violence is taking place. People left to themselves generally (again the caveat) do not either completely rididly segregate or blend into oblivion.

        Everyone who lived prior to Holy Progress was not stupid. That’s one of the huge lies of progressivism. Human beings know what works.

      • driguana says:

        good points…

        • WMCB says:

          I seriously have no problem with people having a different view, or drawing the lines re: human interaction/tribalism in different places than I do. What I hate and despise with a passion is the idea that the very topic is taboo.

    • foxyladi14 says:

      Thank you. 🙂

  17. Constance says:

    The clip of Paul Rodriguez is interesting. Media assume these illegals will be Democrat voters forever but maybe not. It takes a lot of drive to dump all your belongs except what you can carry and travel rough for hundreds of miles to maybe get a chance to live in the shadows of a different country doing hard work for years. So basically the difficulty of the trip here selects for only the most motivated and energetic folks. These might not be Democrat voters after all.

    I work with many legal immigrants and they don’t support illegal aliens. They worry about terrorists strolling across our southern border in the chaos just like your all American DAR members.

    • WMCB says:

      My brother in law is now a citizen, but came here dirt poor illegally from Mexico as a teenager decades ago. He worked his ass off following the racehorse stables around the country as a groom and stall-mucker. He rolls his eyes and tells us all the time that most of what is coming now is pure trash. These are not (majority) farm workers and opportunity seekers. He’s connected with the Mexican American community, and there is a LOT of unease with what is coming across that border, because many of them fled Mexico to GET AWAY from that trash.

      • 1539days says:

        You would think Mexico would want the kind of people who would take risks and work hard to stay in their country. Now, the laugh’s on us. Since all those people are gone, the new people coming over are opportunists and criminals.

        When we gave asylum to anyone from Cuba, Castro emptied out the insane asylums.

        • lildoggy4u says:

          Yes, I experienced the Muriel boatlift from Cuba firsthand. I lived on the beach at the time in what is now referred to as South Beach. We heard gunshots every night. Crime was rampant. We’d find all sorts of rafts on the beach every morning. Main thing was it killed businesses and nobody ventured outside at night. It later turned out that those rafts didn’t make the trip across the straights but rather people with boats were being paid by the Castro regime to haul them here and dump them on the beach at night. They were almost all criminals set free from Cuba’s prisons. Many are now prominent politicians elected because they were Cuban. There was never any way to do background checks like are done for almost every new hire now. They had no background to check.
          BTW, almost everyone of the Cubans have elected to the US Congress a Republican Representative however they went for Obama 2 to 1.

    • The Klown says:

      The law of unintended consequences will bring lots of surprises.

  18. WMCB says:

  19. WMCB says:

    But when we warned over the past several years that anti-semitism was on the rise, and being ignored so as not to offend the precious Muslims, we got told we were paranoid crazies. France today. And I quite seriously doubt that the majority of that crowd is evil elderly Catholics.

  20. The Klown says:
  21. Lulu says:

    If you want to change or do away with borders you may not like the consequences. Sovereignty and rule of law to prevent chaos has a lot to do with it. If a country is too weak to defend its borders it collapses. If you protect three borders but not a forth you might find a break off state that will and will start gobbling up your territory. Would Obama respect a Texas Oklahoma international border or a southern US border that ran from Colorado-Utah to Nevada-California? My guess is he would not like that which is why I don’t think his administration has thought about a sovereignty court case and how “historical” it would be.

  22. WMCB says:

    If, in order for your ideological system (no matter how elegant and beautiful and “fair” it is) to work, human nature must fundamentally change, then your system is irredeemably flawed.

    Is one of many reasons I cannot be a true Libertarian. In an open borders world, barbarism will have the advantage, because any society of value (even a libertarian one) that gets built can be overwhelmed by those who do not share your ideals.

  23. votermom says:

    Hamas hackers take over Israeli Domino’s Pizza Facebook page, hilarity ensues

  24. DeniseVB says:

    OT: I’m breezing through Laura Bush’s memoir-bio “Spoken from the Heart” and can’t put it down. So far, from childhood through the Texas Governor gig, she is such a liberal at heart. Love her spirit. And she did it without being obnoxious. She just did it…..Family and faith first, the rest just seems to be falling in place. So far so good 🙂

  25. lildoggy4u says:

    And of course, Holder doesn’t do his job because, you know, racist.

  26. WMCB says:

    Read the quote in the link. It’s stellar.

  27. DandyTIger says:

  28. WMCB says:

  29. taw46 says:

    Do any of you watch Harris Faulkner’s show on Fox, Sunday nights at 7:00pm? At 7:30, she has a panel: Pat Caddell, Doug Schoen, and John LeBoutillier. I have been watching them for months. They are disgusted with Obama, Dems, and Repubs. They are us. You should watch it, every Sunday night.

    • swanspirit says:

      I love Harris Faulkner !

      • taw46 says:

        She is wonderful, and so is her show. But I wish she had the panel on for the whole hour.

      • Lauren says:

        Thanks for the recommendation (heads over to the channel clicker to turn on Fox and Harris Faullkner’s show).

    • Constance says:

      Harris is really smart and talented. I watch any show she is on.

    • Lulu says:

      I saw part of it last night. Leboutillier said the pro-amnesty Republicans want to drive down labor costs for their rich business friends who want to pay their workers off the books. I nearly fell down. YES! Honesty instead of this pussy footing around. Say it, yell it. They want the taxpayers to pay all the costs of their business labor except for the few bucks they hand over in cash. It was a really good segment for the part that I saw. Cadell and Schoen are pollsters and know this “crisis” is not working for Dems. The White House and DNC told Congressional Dems it would work as a humanitarian PR job. Now they are getting bitched out in their districts. The suckers believed Bronco and it is too late now to fix it before the election. They get to run on Obamacare and a Southern Border invasion engineered by Bronco. What a catastrophe.

      • taw46 says:

        They are honest like this every show. They call them all out. They should be on 7 nights a week.

        • Lulu says:

          Caddell and Schoen used to have a segment on daytime I think on Mondays. I will try to keep an eye out for it today if they are still doing it. I couldn’t find it on any schedule. They are pollsters and I am interested in their evaluation on these polls showing EVERYONE is for amnesty and open borders. LOL. It is misinformation and propaganda probably paid for by business and the Chamber of Commerce. Even the WaPo yesterday said it was business generated polls for their lobbyists which the idiots in the press use without looking into the data.

  30. WMCB says:

    This tweet is from some political official in France:

      • WMCB says:

        Diversity is great. But you have to a) take in numbers that can readily be absorbed, and b) make it very clear from the get go that while you may retain whatever personal customs you’d like within law, the dominant culture is the dominant culture, and no, it will not be changing to suit you. And if you try to force that, you’re outta here.

        Allowing ideologies and cultures diametrically opposed to your own to be coddled made allowances for and protected and remain a nation-within-a-nation on a large scale in ANY voting democracy is a recipe for disaster.

        • WMCB says:

          Were I someday to immigrate to France, I would not expect France to become Americanized for my benefit. It’s their fucking country. I AM THE ONE who would need to adapt.

  31. taw46 says:

    Sadly, that is the case with most of Europe now.

Comments are closed.