# 50 Million Dollar Resort For Illegals



## Misty (Jul 16, 2014)

View attachment 8519FEDS TO OPEN $50 MILLION RESORT FOR ILLEGAL CHILDREN – Complete With Tennis Courts, Sauna & Pools
Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, July 16, 2014, 6:45 AM

Guest post by Kristinn Taylor

Welcome to America!

The  Obama administration has awarded a $50 million contract to a charitable  group to buy a Texas resort hotel and transform it in to a 600 bed  facility for juvenile illegal aliens.

The beautiful Palm Aire  resort and hotel has an indoor Olympic sized pool and an outdoor pool.   Free Wi-Fi and cable TV are included in the simply decorated guest  rooms.

The Palm Aire Hotel and Suites is set to be sold to  Baptist Child & Family Services (BCFS) operating under a federal  contract, pending local government approval, according to reports from  Weslaco, Texas where the hotel is located. Weslaco is a few miles north  of the Rio Grande in Hidalgo County.

The resort hotel for illegal alien children is reportedly the ‘first in the nation’.


The Palm Aire includes tennis courts, a laundromat and a snack bar.

The  plan is to have the hotel ready for illegal alien children ages 12 to  17 by October 1st of this year, a mere two-and-half months from now. It  is expected the average stay will be about fifteen days.

The Palm  Aire Hotel and Suites currently advertises amenities such as two  outdoor swimming pools—one Olympic sized—Jacuzzis, sauna, steam room,  two racquetball courts, outdoor tennis courts, picnic area with grills  and a fitness center with twenty machines and free weights.


A  luxurious fitness center is on site at the Weslaco Palm Aire Hotel and  Suites. Guests can also wind down in the sauna after a long trip.

Attracted  to the space for outdoor recreation at the Palm Aire Hotel and Suites,  BCFS spoke of building a soccer field at the hotel and adding a  perimeter fence.

BCFS plans to employ 650 people at the Palm Aire  Hotel and Suites, which would mean slightly over one worker per illegal  alien child. According to the BCSF Website, the charity’s jobs pay from  $10 to $45 per hour.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...dren-complete-with-tennis-courts-sauna-pools/
_________________


----------



## MrJim (Jul 16, 2014)

I notice, amidst all the snarking that's already coming out of the right, nobody is being critical of the Southern Baptist church, who are the ones getting the money.

So, lemme see here... Obama has been called (along with many other much worse things) a Muslim, a Communist & an atheist by the right. He's had his Christian faith questioned & impugned. All the while, the right has been making the claim that rather than govt assistance programs, the poor & needy, etc., should rely on faith-based charitable organizations, even going so far as to advocate govt funding of said faith-based charities & letting them handle everything.

Now, Obama is partnering with the biggest Christian organization in the country to handle a major humanitarian crisis. 

Looks to me like the right is getting what it's been asking for all along.

So, where's the problem here?


----------



## Misty (Jul 16, 2014)

MrJim said:


> I notice, amidst all the snarking that's already coming out of the right, nobody is being critical of the Southern Baptist church, who are the ones getting the money.
> 
> So, lemme see here... Obama has been called (a!ong many other much worse things) a Muslim, a Communist & an atheist by the right. He's had his Christian faith questioned & impugned. All the while, the right has been making the claim that rather than govt assistance programs, the poor & needy, etc., should rely on faith-based charitable organizations, even going so far as to advocate govt funding of said faith-based charities & letting them handle everything.
> 
> ...



One of the problems, Jim, is these are illegals who are breaking the law, and being treated to luxuries no legal immigrants are being granted to enjoy by government funding.  As for the right advocating government funding of faith based charities, I had never heard about that....do you have a link for it?


----------



## MrJim (Jul 16, 2014)

Misty said:


> One of the problems, Jim, is these are illegals who are breaking the law, and being treated to luxuries no legal immigrants are being granted to enjoy by government funding.  As for the right advocating government funding of faith based charities, I had never heard about that....do you have a link for it?



Well, it's kinda early in the game to be making assumptions about which luxuries they are going to be "treated to". Since nobody has spent any time there yet & no operational plans have been put into place, we cannot just assume that the place will be like a free-for-all luxury vacation with unlimited swimming & recreational privileges, or Mexican kids lounging by the pool, sipping soft drinks thru straws, from hollowed out coconut shells with little umbrellas sticking out, served by an attentive, bowing & scraping wait staff.  

I would venture to guess that there will likely be strict rules & restrictions attached to the use of the recreational facilities. As far as the food & medical services are concerned, they are children. They have to be fed & cared for. Unless the right is in favor of letting them starve & be sick. 

Also, their stay there is going to be limited to two weeks, after which, I assume, they'll be moved to a more " no-frills" facility.

Finally, we have to assume that, at some point, this child influx is bound to end. At this point, the resort faciliies will probably revert to housing American displaced women & children, or needy families. I would assume the Baptists are looking ahead to future possible uses for the facility & would then work out some purchase agreement with the feds.

As for your link request...

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0410.sullivan.html

https://www.au.org/resources/publications/the-faith-based-initiative

https://www.au.org/church-state/october-2002-church-state/featured/faith-based-flim-flam

If you'd like to see several more, copy & paste the following search criteria into Google search bar: 

_republicans advocate funding faith based charities



_


----------



## Mirabilis (Jul 16, 2014)

I still would not change places with them.


----------



## Misty (Jul 16, 2014)

Thanks  for the links, Jim. Very Interesting. If I read correctly, Bush was  criticized for not following through with his original faith based  initiative. In the Washington Monthly article I found this interesting.

Quote:

In the last few years, a few studies have looked at  both faith-based and secular social service providers, and they have  particularly tried to replicate the incredible results boasted by the  model Texas programs. The verdict? There is no evidence that faith-based  organizations work better than their secular counterparts[/QUOTE]

_And this in the AU article
Quote:
__
The concept of a federal office aimed at finding ways to funnel tax  money to religious groups is impossible to square with our country’s  tradition of separation of church and state.Houses of worship are better off using their own funds for social-service projects. [/Quote]

These references don't agree with the government giving funds to churches to help social service projects. Wouldn't housing illegal immigrants and the poor in a spa be considered social service projects?

There must be far more reasonably priced dwellings than a 50 million dollar spa to house them for a couple weeks.
_


----------



## Misty (Jul 16, 2014)

*
Due to the backlash the charity received after the story was posted on The Drudge Report,* *Baptist Child and Family Services withdrew it’s bid for the Palm Aire Resort*.The charity said it was disappointed and that the resort would have been perfect for the illegal alien children.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 17, 2014)

Illegal immigrant children or YMCA campers? Some people are so het up they can't tell the difference.



> CBS/AP
> July 16, 2014, 11:27 AM
> *Arizona protesters mistake busload of YMCA campers for immigrant children*
> 
> ...



Perhaps the resort story is a bit overblown too. Is it a resort or a suitable property that can be converted into a hostel ?


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 17, 2014)

Separation of church and State, we hardly knew ye.

I guess the stereotype has come full circle now - Mexican / South American kids lounging by the pool while po' white trash works as pool- and cabana boys ...


----------



## Elyzabeth (Jul 17, 2014)

They need to be fed, clothed  have a health check and returned home.

This seems to be too organized, for thousands of people to decide to send their children here en masse...all of a sudden...?

Can Cartels behind it perhaps?

Border patrols can't bother with drug smugglers when they are trying to place thousands of children.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 17, 2014)

Elyzabeth said:


> They need to be fed, clothed  have a health check and returned home.
> 
> This seems to be too organized, for thousands of people to decide to send their children here en masse...all of a sudden...?
> 
> ...




I think the children are turned over to the Human Resource Department per the law...

Oh, and btw....I wouldn't call the Palms Aire Resort a 'Spa' when you can rent one of their roach infested rooms for $59 a night.....look it up on Tripadvisor.

*What is fueling this influx? Why have so many children from Central America attempted to enter the U.S. over the past nine months?*
A study by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees found that 58 percent of the unaccompanied children are motivated by safety concerns, fearing conditions back home.
Their home countries have been racked by gang violence, fueled by the drug trade. According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, "Salvadoran and Honduran children ... come from extremely violent regions where they probably perceive the risk of traveling alone to the U.S. preferable to remaining at home."
There's violence in Guatemala, too. Many Guatemalan children, however, come from poor rural areas and may be seeking economic opportunities. The same is true for children from poorer parts of El Salvador. For many, the prospect of reuniting with family members in the U.S. is also a powerful motivating force.
Central American families may have been misled by rumors — often spread by profit-seeking smugglers — that their children will readily be reunited with relatives already in the U.S.
Republicans argue that the president's 2012 decision not to deport so-called dreamers — young adults brought to the country illegally as children — has led more families to hope for similar treatment.
*Why are Central American children treated differently than Mexican children attempting to cross the border illegally?*
U.S. policy allows Mexican child migrants to be sent back quickly across the border. *However, under a 2008 law meant to combat child trafficking, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, children from Central America must be given a court hearing before they are deported (or allowed to stay). Given the huge backlog of cases, they may have to wait years for a hearing.*
"Because of a backlog, which is growing greatly with the recent influx, in essence a kid released tomorrow could stay in the U.S. for up to three years waiting for that date," explains NPR's Carrie Kahn. "And for most of these kids, that's three years with a long-lost relative or three years away from extreme poverty and violence."
In the meantime, as many as 90 percent of the children stay with relatives or family friends already living in the U.S., with the rest placed in foster care, according to theMigration Policy Institute.
President Obama recently asked Congress to amend the 2008 law to make it easier to repatriate Central American children more quickly.
http://wfit.org/post/whats-causing-l...rief-explainer

Unaccompanied minors fall under the bipartisan law, William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which passed the House and Senate unanimously and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

That law says the children cannot be sent back. They must instead be held humanely by the Department of Health and Human Services until the courts release them to a “suitable family member” in this country.
The child “shall be promptly placed in the least restrictive setting that is in the best interest of the child,” the law stipulates. “Placement of child trafficking victims may include placement in an Unaccompanied Refugee Minor program … if a suitable family member is not available to provide care.”
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sources say more than 80 percent of these children will find permanent homes in the U.S., with either family or foster homes and not be sent back to Central America.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-wave-u-s-law/

The below article has more on the 2008 law and how President Obama is trying to get it changed so that the illegal immigrates can be deported faster.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...rder/11915723/


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 17, 2014)

> Oh, and btw....I wouldn't call the Palms Aire Resort a 'Spa' when you can rent one of their roach infested rooms for $59 a night.....look it up on Tripadvisor.


I'm questioning the $50 million luxury resort tag too. Other reports put its value at $3.2 to $4 million. Given that fairly ordinary suburban houses where I live are bringing around $750,000, I don't thing $3 to $4 million is all that high. Has anyone checked whether the photo is Palms Aire Resort or just a file photo?


----------



## Misty (Jul 17, 2014)

Most Voters Want to Send Latest Illegal Immigrants Home ASAP
Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Thursday, July 17, 2014


Most voters don’t want any of the young illegal immigrants who’ve recently arrived here housed in their state and say any legislation passed by Congress to deal with the problem should focus on sending them home as soon as possible.


The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the primary focus of any new immigration legislation passed by Congress should be to send the young illegal immigrants back home as quickly as possible. Just 27% say it should focus instead on making it easier for these illegal immigrants to remain in the United States. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)


Advocates for the illegal immigrants argue that they are flooding into the country to escape violent situations in their home countries, but just 31% of U.S. voters think they are coming here now for their own safety. Most voters (52%) believe they are coming here for economic reasons. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.


Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, who last week criticized efforts to deport these illegal immigrants, is now reportedly the latest governor to tell the White House not to house any of them in his state. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of voters disapprove of housing these illegal immigrants in their state. Only half as many (29%) approve, while 14% are undecided.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...t_to_send_latest_illegal_immigrants_home_asap


----------



## MrJim (Jul 17, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I'm questioning the $50 million luxury resort tag too. Other reports put its value at $3.2 to $4 million. Given that fairly ordinary suburban houses where I live are bringing around $750,000, I don't thing $3 to $4 million is all that high. Has anyone checked whether the photo is Palms Aire Resort or just a file photo?



Just guessing here, but I think the $50 million contract also covered staffing the facility & stocking it with whatever necessities would be involved in taking care of the kids.


----------



## JustBonee (Jul 17, 2014)

MrJim said:


> Just guessing here, but I think the $50 million contract also covered staffing the facility & stocking it with whatever necessities would be involved in taking care of the kids.



Not to mention the amount of money needed for upkeep of their indoor and outdoor pools .... $$$$$$$
.. AND to hire people to teach all those kids how to swim ... couldn't have anyone drown or there would be bigger problems.

Sorry for being so sarcastic, but it seems insane on any level.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 17, 2014)

Well, whatever you do, it is probably more humane than what we do over here. We put them all in mandatory detention, not on the mainland if we can help it, but in hellish facilities on malaria ridden islands  where we pay foreign governments and foreign contractors huge amounts of money to do our dirty work. They are kept hidden from the view of the Australian public, lest we start to empathise with them. Then we try offering them up to $20,000 each to return whence they came or face the rest of their lives where they are. Lately we've been towing back boats to Indonesia and have even handed Sri Lankan asylum seekers back to the Sri Lankan navy, the very people they were seeking to escape. 

And still they come. What they are fleeing must be horrendous.

I'm ashamed of our government, and the previous one that was little better.


----------



## Ina (Jul 17, 2014)

Dame Warrigal, Do you get into trouble in your country if you protest your government's policies? How much of your populous is concerned with this issue? :wave:


----------



## Sunny (Jul 17, 2014)

This whole subject sounds like it was lifted right out of The Onion.

Speaking of which, here is today's leading headline in that illustrious journal:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/everyone-in-middle-east-given-own-country-in-31700,36484/


----------



## MrJim (Jul 17, 2014)

Love The Onion.

They put everything in perspective.


----------



## Ina (Jul 17, 2014)

And what "brain" came up with this "solution"? :tapfoot:


----------



## MrJim (Jul 17, 2014)

The Onion is a news parody site.

Not real.


----------



## Ina (Jul 17, 2014)

Thanks for the clue Mr. Jim!! :dunno:


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 17, 2014)

Not at all. People take to the streets in protest but there are not enough of them. Our media has been demonising "illegals" who arrive by boat for the last decade and their faces have been kept away from our gaze so that they have become synonymous with muslim terrorists, regardless of who they are and where they come from.

 All of the churches have condemned the government's treatment of asylum seekers and I have personally written letters to various ministers for immigration on behalf of families and children. If anything, over time, things have got worse, not better.

 It's not as if we don't have room. Our country is the size of mainland USA and we have a population of about 24 million, so it is mostly empty. Nor is it because we can't afford to house these people on the mainland until the processing is done. Per capita we are one of the wealthiest countries in the world although the wealth distribution is very skewed towards the top income receivers. And it's not because we can't handle migrants and asylum seekers. We have a good history of immigration and multicultural integration of newcomers since the end of WW II. 

 However, recent governments have made asylum seekers a political football with each one trying to position themselves as having the toughest policy on unauthorised boat arrivals. Australians have a very strong xenophobic streak that is all to easy to appeal to. You only have to listen to talk back radio to hear what people think. It makes me cringe.

If you are on Facebook take a look at the home page of Gosford Anglican Parish and you will see that not all Australians are anti asylum seekers. Just take a look at the photos of the church sign out the front.

https://www.facebook.com/anggos/photos_stream

Additional - The UNHCR people are currently inspecting the detention centre on Christmas Island which is an Australian run facility. Apparently they are not impressed by the condition of the children and this facility is much better run than the off shore ones.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 17, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Not at all. People take to the streets in protest but there are not enough of them. Our media has been demonising "illegals" who arrive by boat for the last decade and their faces have been kept away from our gaze so that they have become synonymous with muslim terrorists, regardless of who they are and where they come from.
> 
> All of the churches have condemned the government's treatment of asylum seekers and I have personally written letters to various ministers for immigration on behalf of families and children. If anything, over time, things have got worse, not better.
> 
> ...



Australia sounds like the USA of the Eastern & Southern hemispheres.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 17, 2014)

We have become copycats of the USA. 
We have long been copycats of Britain.
We're at our best when we think for ourselves.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 17, 2014)

From what I understand, like here in the US, there's a sense of "rugged individualism" in Australia.

That sort of hard-headed, pioneer, cowboy mentality seems to breed things like nationalism & xenophobia.


----------



## Ina (Jul 17, 2014)

Warri, I tried that link, but Facebook said it wasn't to be found.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 17, 2014)

That's a myth. The Australian population was once more evenly distributed between the cities and the coast and the inland rural centres. Over time the cities and the coast  have thrived and the country towns are in decay. We are a suburban nation.

We've never been ruggedly individualistic but we have been regarded by others as being resourceful and useful workers. We've always tended towards collectivism and have looked to governments to manage us since the first days of settlement. Our xenophobia stems from our fear of the Asian hordes swooping down to take our country from us. First the Chinese,  then the Japanese and now the muslims. The fear is mostly irrational.

If you ask an Aussie what is the foremost Australian value, he will probably respond the "everyone being entitled to a fair go" but the ideal and the reality are as far apart as they ever were, and the gap is widening.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 17, 2014)

Ina, try this one. You can look at the photo albums from the home page https://www.facebook.com/anggos/timeline


----------



## JustBonee (Jul 18, 2014)

Sunny said:


> This whole subject sounds like it was lifted right out of The Onion.



Doesn't it!   .. have enjoyed that website for years.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 20, 2014)

just takes one. Border closed problem solved


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 20, 2014)

Not much different to the Russian solution, is it?


----------



## kcvet (Jul 20, 2014)

are the Russians invading us??? guess i missed that one


*Illegal Immigrant “Children” Include MS-13 Gang Members

an internal summary of Border Patrol operations at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Nogales (Arizona) Placement Center stated that 16 unaccompanied immigrant children being held at the facility are members of Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) transnational criminal gang.
The summary, which was obtained by the Townhall online magazine, noted that Border Patrol officials at Nogales were alerted to the MS-13 presence among the detainees when they discovered gang-related graffiti in the walls of the processing center.

link

*he MS13 is the deadliest gang in the world. they been coming in here for years. their goal is to murder rival gangs here and take over. they've also murdered US citizens as well. same with Islamic terrorists. their coming in to. the human garbage of the world is pouring in

a country with no border's is not a country


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 20, 2014)

kcvet said:
			
		

> are the Russians invading us??? guess i missed that one


No, but they might. 

<sarcasm> Isn't that the reason that you are all keeping huge private arsenals of pistols, rifles, assault weapons & personal anti aircraft devices? </sarcasm>

Honestly kcvet, do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you suggest that all that you need to do to deal with a flood of juveniles being smuggled across the border is to strafe Mexico, or do you want to declare war on all of Central America? Why not drop a hydrogen bomb or two and destroy both American continents? That should fix it once and for all.

My reference to Russia was the callous indifference they are showing about the lives of civilians, including children and infants. If the US were to do what I think you  suggest with that photo then, as a nation, you would be no better than Russia. So much for American exceptionalism.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> No, but they might.
> 
> <sarcasm> Isn't that the reason that you are all keeping huge private arsenals of pistols, rifles, assault weapons & personal anti aircraft devices? </sarcasm>
> 
> ...



your from Australia. how could you possibly know the problems we face here. also its obvious you decided not to read what I posted. 

*oh Warrigal tap tap its not just children. its adults to. dangereous criminals.* do you understand this or am I not making myself clear?? 

*have ever heard of HIV, Dengue fever, Chikengunya, hepatitis just to name a few. we can arrange to bring these plagues to your shores. that ok??. no??




			or do you want to declare war on all of Central America? Why not drop a hydrogen bomb or two and destroy both American continents? That should fix it once and for all.
		
Click to expand...


we just want our border closed to these threats. need I say more, or are you that obuse ??? *


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 21, 2014)

kcvet, I'm willing to concede that you face different problems to us. For one thing you have land borders with your neighbours. We don't. Our border is the ocean but our northern coastline is not all that far from our closest neighbours, just as Alaska is close to Russia.

Also, the number of people attempting to reach Australia by boat is miniscule to the numbers that you are facing.
But when you suggest by way of a photo of a military aircraft that one airstrike will solve the problem, I don't really feel like reading anything else that you put up. You aren't being serious.

To solve a problem one must first clarify what the problem is, then work out what is causing it. Then you might be ready to explore a number of solutions, none of which, short of a real war, is likely to involve military strike fighters, especially where children are part of the problem.



> *have ever heard of HIV, Dengue fever, Chikungunya, hepatitis just to name a few. we can arrange to bring these plagues to your shores. that ok??. no??*


We've got all of these already with the possible exception of Chikungunya which I've never heard of. We also have Lime disease, Ross River virus and Hendra virus and many other diseases but we do have a good public health system that controls them. They certainly aren't at plague proportions over here. How bad is your plague situation?

By the way, you have (bubonic/pneumonic) plague and rabies too. So far we've escaped these and no, you can't ship yours over here. We have pretty strict quarantine rules. We don't lock horses and immigrants away for six months anymore but we'd probably make an exception for these two.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> kcvet, I'm willing to concede that you face different problems to us. For one thing you have land borders with your neighbours. We don't. Our border is the ocean but our northern coastline is not all that far from our closest neighbours, just as Alaska is close to Russia.
> 
> Also, the number of people attempting to reach Australia by boat is miniscule to the numbers that you are facing.
> But when you suggest by way of a photo of a military aircraft that one airstrike will solve the problem, I don't really feel like reading anything else that you put up. You aren't being serious.
> ...





> But when you suggest by way of a photo of a military aircraft that one airstrike will solve the problem, I don't really feel like reading anything else that you put up. You aren't being serious.



who said anything about an air strike???


----------



## Misty (Jul 21, 2014)

kcvet said:


> your from Australia. how could you possibly know the problems we face here. also its obvious you decided not to read what I posted.
> 
> *oh Warrigal tap tap its not just children. its adults to. dangereous criminals.* do you understand this or am I not making myself clear??
> 
> ...



If the laws would have been followed, our borders would have been protected, instead of having the border patrol back down to allow all these illegals to infiltrate our country. Today I read that Gov Perry is preparing to deploy the National guard to help solve their problem with dangerous gang members , drug dealers. Human traffickers etc, unless he needs government approval, which will probably not be given. 

It's interesting that all these illegals should be welcomed with open arms, but our President won't even go to the border to meet with them. He may be afraid of catching some of these diseases you mentioned, kcvet and bringing them home to his wife and children.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 21, 2014)

kcvet said:


> who said anything about an air strike???



This did.






Plus this 





> just takes one. Border closed problem solved


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> This did.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



did I say kill anyone with it???


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Misty said:


> If the laws would have been followed, our borders would have been protected, instead of having the border patrol back down to allow all these illegals to infiltrate our country. Today I read that Gov Perry is preparing to deploy the National guard to help solve their problem with dangerous gang members , drug dealers. Human traffickers etc, unless he needs government approval, which will probably not be given.
> 
> It's interesting that all these illegals should be welcomed with open arms, but our President won't even go to the border to meet with them. He may be afraid of catching some of these diseases you mentioned, kcvet and bringing them home to his wife and children.



good post Misty. I totally agree. I read a Mexican Helo went across the river and fired on our border patrol. they claim it was accidental but flying 100 yards into US air space is a serious offense. 
also Pelosi went down there i think for a photo op. she's in favor of dropping the guard and just let em pour in. but she refuse to touch any of them


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 21, 2014)

> did I say kill anyone with it???


What was I to infer? That you wanted to sell tickets for joy rides?

I've never seen one of those before but it didn't look like a passenger plane to me.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 21, 2014)

One interesting aspect of this situation is that these countries see the U.S. as being weak because of our liberal immigration policy and seek to take advantage of it, whereas the more liberal citizens here see it as being one of our strengths as well as our historical legacy.

Much like a bully picking on a small, quiet person, they might find out to their dismay that the small person might actually be an experienced warrior. In this case that would mean returning all of their children that they thought we would never turn back.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> What was I to infer? That you wanted to sell tickets for joy rides?
> 
> I've never seen one of those before but it didn't look like a passenger plane to me.



think Warrigal. its really not that hard

hint:


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> One interesting aspect of this situation is that these countries see the U.S. as being weak because of our liberal immigration policy and seek to take advantage of it, whereas the more liberal citizens here see it as being one of our strengths as well as our historical legacy.
> 
> Much like a bully picking on a small, quiet person, they might find out to their dismay that the small person might actually be an experienced warrior. In this case that would mean returning all of their children that they thought we would never turn back.



I don't think any other country would allow this. some have and lived to regret it. better us them them ???


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

*FORMER BORDER PATROL CHIEF: ‘1 IN 5’ ILLEGALS HAS CRIMINAL RECORD*


*Former US Border Patrol Deputy Chief Ronald Coburn reported that the southern border is seeing “the kind of chaos we saw along the border prior to 9/11” and that “one in five” illegal aliens today has a criminal record in an appearance on Saturday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Justice With Judge Jeanine.”*


story

this is how gang members ID each other. and their enemies as well. the too


----------



## Misty (Jul 21, 2014)

kcvet said:


> good post Misty. I totally agree. I read a Mexican Helo went across the river and fired on our border patrol. they claim it was accidental but flying 100 yards into US air space is a serious offense.
> also Pelosi went down there i think for a photo op. she's in favor of dropping the guard and just let em pour in. but she refuse to touch any of them



Thanks, kcvet.  After Pelosy visited the illegals, she said she wished she could take them home with her.
I can imagine her outcry if 100's of them were sneaked into her neighborhood, as they are doing to alot of other states. The states are not even notified in advance of the drop off's.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 21, 2014)

Well, as I see it Britain became the great country that she was/is because of a series of invasions from continental Europe. Australia without immigration would still be a series of scattered colonies at the arse end of the world. I was given to understand that the USA was built by people who braved the seas from the Old World looking for economic opportunity and built a great nation.

Halr the world is on the move, searching for a chance to better themselves, fleeing from oppression, corruption, starvation and poverty. I can understand their desire for a better life, and IMO these people make the best migrants because they have little option but to work hard and put down roots. That's if they are allowed to.

I can also understand that when they arrive in large numbers they frighten the natives. What I can't tolerate is people being unfairly demonised and treated as if they are subhuman. Especially children.

Some people seem to begrudge even this basic level of care for the children who make the long journey from Central America and finally make it across the border still alive. These children are being fed every 6 hours and get a daily shower while they await processing. Is this the height of luxury? (http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-...Look-at-TX-and-AZ-Immigrant-Detention-Centers)



Still, we are much worse. We lock them up indefinitely out of sight on the modern equivalent of Devil's Island.


----------



## Misty (Jul 21, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> One interesting aspect of this situation is that these countries see the U.S. as being weak because of our liberal immigration policy and seek to take advantage of it, whereas the more liberal citizens here see it as being one of our strengths as well as our historical legacy.
> 
> Much like a bully picking on a small, quiet person, they might find out to their dismay that the small person might actually be an experienced warrior. In this case that would mean returning all of their children that they thought we would never turn back.



Good post, Phil. Since the visits to Guatemala by Kerry, and soon after Biden didn't accomplish anything, returning the children back home would send a stronger message, that we mean business.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 21, 2014)

Same Warrigal said:
			
		

> Some people seem to begrudge even this basic level of care for the children who make the long journey from Central America and finally make it across the border still alive.




And yet these are mostly the people who consider themselves to be such wonderful little God loving "Christians". Morally superior to everyone else while spouting their xenophobic paranoia.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> No, but they might.
> 
> <sarcasm> Isn't that the reason that you are all keeping huge private arsenals of pistols, rifles, assault weapons & personal anti aircraft devices? </sarcasm>
> 
> ...



*No, no, noooooo..... anything is OK as long as it's wrapped in the American flag first. 

*Don't you understand that by now? 

It's the cornerstone of the rightwing redneck code.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 21, 2014)

Misty said:


> Good post, Phil. Since the visits to Guatemala by Kerry, and soon after Biden didn't accomplish anything, returning the children back home would send a stronger message, that we mean business.



And that we're callous & don't give crap about children.

And that we talk a lot about compassion & humanity, but don't really believe in it.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 21, 2014)

Kcvet, I followed your link and discovered that the statement that “one in five” illegal aliens today has a criminal record" is not as clear cut as it would seem. It seems to be a gross exaggeration not well founded in fact.



> “One in ten of every adult male crosser in this day and age more than likely already has a violent criminal record here in the United States, has been removed, and is returning. Another one in ten, making it one in five, is bringing with him or her their violent criminal tendencies and records from their own countries of which we don't know yet” Coburn said.




First, it is talking about adult males, not women and children and second,"more than likely already has a violent criminal record here in the United States, has been removed, and is returning" sounds like speculation to me. Also the wording that the other "one in ten is bringing with him or her their violent criminal tendencies and records from their own countries of which we don't know yet" is yet another sweeping and speculative generalisation. He doesn't know that and admits as much, yet word goes out that one in five is a violent criminal, not just in their home country but in the US as well. One of the comments below the report said _"That aint nothing. Black men in America are 42% felons and 80% have an arrest record." _

I don't think I'll bother looking up _Justice with Judge Jeanine_. She and I would probably not have the same views on what justice looks like.

For what it's worth, almost 100% of our first fleeters were felons and the rest, their guards, were a pretty violent lot. The first free settlers turned out to be mostly corrupt. From these unlikely beginnings good things developed. Sometimes people just need a chance.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

MrJim said:


> *No, no, noooooo..... anything is OK as long as it's wrapped in the American flag first.
> 
> *Don't you understand that by now?
> 
> It's the cornerstone of the rightwing redneck code.



its ok to wrap yourself in the flag. we'll even light it for you


----------



## Ina (Jul 21, 2014)

This morning's Fox news said we are putting 1,000 National Guardsmen on the border not to stop the immigrants, but to relieve the Border Patrol, so that the BP can enforce what measures are already in place. They also mentioned that only 40 of the recent immigrants have been sent back. :dunno:


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Ina said:


> This morning's Fox news said we are putting 1,000 National Guardsmen on the border not to stop the immigrants, but to relieve the Border Patrol, so that the BP can enforce what measures are already in place. They also mentioned that only 40 of the recent immigrants have been sent back. :dunno:



might be to late. like closing the gate after the horse is out.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 21, 2014)

kcvet said:


> its ok to wrap yourself in the flag. we'll even light it for you



Don't bother.

I'd never be a part of anything that involved burning the American flag.

Because unlike the vast majority of tough-talking, chest-thumping, fire-breathing, right wing conservative redneck phony baloneys, I actually respect not only the flag itself, but what it stands for & the ideals that it was founded upon.

Something that most of the aforementioned hot air bags don't even understand or think about.

But hey, you have a nice day all the same. &#55357;&#56829;


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

MrJim said:


> Don't bother.
> 
> I'd never be a part of anything that involved burning the American flag.
> 
> ...



you have a nice day to


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 21, 2014)

Something to keep in mind with immigrants, especially the illegal immigrants from any country is that you are getting mostly alphas from the country. As Darwinian as it is it takes a lot of determination and aggressiveness to achieve one's goals at all cost including a thousand mile plus journey and criminal behavior as bared out by the illegal border crossings and the ethnic gangs in these immigrant communities.   In many of the Central American countries there is culture of violence. Mexico has one of the highest gender violence rates in the WORLD along with their drug gang crime.

http://www.womenundersiegeproject.org/conflicts/profile/mexico

Honduras has one of the highest murder rates in the world

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/10/us-latam-crime-idUSBREA390IY20140410

Gang violence including illegal immigrant gang violence accounts for a large portion of gang crime in the US.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2009/01/illegal-immigrant-gangs-commit-most-u-s-crime/

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/FedCrimes/story?id=6773423&page=1

Many of the dead illegal immigrants found near the border are killed by the coyotes or smugglers for not paying up.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/20/bodies-immigrants-brooks-county-texas/2509053/

It is a culture of violence that is coming across the border en mass. They don't care because it's all about them. Part of the reason for that is the most aggressive are frequently the only ones choosing to come to the US and choosing to enter and live in the US in a criminal fashion. It takes an alpha and that same alpha will take what ever they want even if by crime.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 21, 2014)

kcvet said:


> I don't think any other country would allow this. some have and lived to regret it. better us them them ???



Not "better us than them", but that's just the way this country works. For good or bad we've set ourselves up as the Gold Star Standard for what a country should be and we believe our own PR, so we pretty much HAVE to do things like this occasionally to prove to ourselves that we're really what we think we are.

Unfortunately (at least in my view) we're like a doctor trying to do open-heart surgery while our left leg and right arm are being amputated - there's just too much personal pain and suffering to mind the patient properly. The prudent thing to do would be to wait until we've recuperated and THEN start accepting new patients again ...


----------



## Misty (Jul 21, 2014)

:hijacked:  By me....Sorry


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 21, 2014)

MrJim said:


> And that we're callous & don't give crap about children.
> 
> And that we talk a lot about compassion & humanity, but don't really believe in it.



But there's a big difference between, say, finding a single lost child on the road at midnight and taking them home to care for them until you can locate their parents, and allowing thousands of basically healthy people who have been knowingly tossed out by their parents to cross the borders and take up residence here, with no intention of ever returning home.

The first is an act of charity and mercy; the second is being expected to _perform_ that charity and mercy on an unwarranted level like a trained circus animal.

Charity and mercy are *choices* - with this situation, with the world watching, we cannot do anything less than care for them. We *have* no choice. We have basically had our policy dictated to us by another nation. 

What has this country historically done when another country tries to dictate policy to us?  

We declare war ...


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 21, 2014)

> with the world watching



The world is watching us too. Our government is attempting to draw the curtains.
Ethics and morality is shown by what you do when no-one is watching.



> We declare war



How's the war on drugs going? And the war on terrorism?
Perhaps the next presidential campaign will be won by declaring war on illegals
Should be a landslide. It's worked twice over here already.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> The world is watching us too. Our government is attempting to draw the curtains.
> Ethics and morality is shown by what you do when no-one is watching.



Actually, morality comes from a set of laws set out by society, so it is first and foremost a _public_ act. Now ethics I agree can and should be practiced both in front of and behind the curtain, but morality? No, morality is just a small group of people telling me what I can and cannot do. 




> How's the war on drugs going? And the war on terrorism?



The war on drugs was not a war based upon others imposing their will on us. It came about because of internal politics, misinformed ones at that.

The war on terrorism? Well, you kind of have to give us a little bit of a head start there - we only really got into it in 2001. Even so, we haven't had nearly as many terrorist acts as some other countries ... 



> Perhaps the next presidential campaign will be won by declaring war on illegals
> Should be a landslide. It's worked twice over here already.



If that were the party platform I would register to vote for the first time in my life.


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 21, 2014)

> How's the war on drugs going? And the war on terrorism?
> 
> The war on drugs was not a war based upon others imposing their will on us.



My point is that it is impractical to declare war on anything other than a nation state. That's why you can't have a war on drugs, terrorism or illegals. The reason that it is impractical is because the war can never be finished. With whom do you sign the peace treaty?


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> My point is that it is impractical to declare war on anything other than a nation state. That's why you can't have a war on drugs, terrorism or illegals. The reason that it is impractical is because the war can never be finished. With whom do you sign the peace treaty?



I would then hazard to say that you yourself are engaged in several non-war wars -



The war on dental health
The war on mental health
The war to survive

Over the top? Maybe. 

The reason the "war on drugs" was so named was to stir up associations of past real wars in our population, so that they would see drugs as the enemy and support all efforts to "wipe them out". It was never envisioned to be a real war.

Unfortunately, as part of this naming convention there were deaths produced that might not have happened if they had not named it a "war". This war also, like all other wars, has produced gigantic profits for those in certain fields such as private prisons and public police departments.

The war on terrorism ... well, right after 9/11 when the U.S. military was essentially issued a hunting license, I see that as a bit more than just a random action - we *were* attacked so we *did* go off to find those responsible. 

Just because there is no hope of reconciliation does _not_ mean it cannot be a war.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> Separation of church and State, we hardly knew ye.
> 
> I guess the stereotype has come full circle now - Mexican / South American kids lounging by the pool while po' white trash works as pool- and cabana boys ...



Not to mention there is no housing for "citizens" of the USA here in my area.  Oh well, yes there is, but you have to stand in line behind about 500 other people.  I lived in those projects when I was a kid, and they didn't have a pool then, and they don't have one now.  They still have cockroaches though.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 21, 2014)

nwlady said:


> Not to mention there is no housing for "citizens" of the USA here in my area.  Oh well, yes there is, but you have to stand in line behind about 500 other people.  I lived in those projects when I was a kid, and they didn't have a pool then, and they don't have one now.  They still have cockroaches though.



Well, that's one of your inalienable rights as an American - the right to have roaches. Be proud and stand up for your rights!


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> Well, that's one of your inalienable rights as an American - the right to have roaches. Be proud and stand up for your rights!



LOL, yeah, we were to poor to have a dog or kitti, but we did have the roaches to play with.  

I especially like what Misty had to say about "the point is".  What the heck, illegal aliens being put up in a fancy, shmancy housing?  I think O'bama's new theme song should be "if I only had a brain".  I can't wait to hear what happens after their 15 day vacation?


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 21, 2014)

President Obama is following the law that was passed in 2008......you can look the law up and see what it entails 

READ BELOW

Unaccompanied minors fall under the bipartisan law, William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which passed the House and Senate unanimously and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

That law says the children cannot be sent back. They must instead be held humanely by the Department of Health and Human Services until the courts release them to a “suitable family member” in this country.
The child “shall be promptly placed in the least restrictive setting that is in the best interest of the child,” the law stipulates. “Placement of child trafficking victims may include placement in an Unaccompanied Refugee Minor program … if a suitable family member is not available to provide care.”
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sources say more than 80 percent of these children will find permanent homes in the U.S., with either family or foster homes and not be sent back to Central America.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-wave-u-s-law/

The below article has more on the 2008 law and how President Obama is trying to get it changed so that the illegal immigrates can be deported faster.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...rder/11915723/

Now I know it is really fun for some to get on the forum and spew Glen Beck and Fox news and to talk about burning flags with people in them and send in the jet bombers and to ridicule the President but just maybe a more constructive approach would be to press your congress person to change the law if you are unhappy about it.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

Jackie22 said:


> President Obama is following the law that was passed in 2008......you can look the law up and see what it entails
> 
> READ BELOW
> 
> ...



Isn't trafficking when kids are brought across the border to be used for porn or something??  Is this the same thing?  Doesn't sound right to me, I thought these were young people choosing to break the law themselves, not being used by others to make money?  Are they "victims"?


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

Ok, so reading further Jackie, I see there is a loop-hole in the Act, so I see now why it is considered the legal thing to do.  But I also wanted to mention you running down Fox News for one, because they spoke up for O'bama doing what the law states:  http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-...r-for-Worse-Is-Following-Law-on-Border-Crisis.  

And as far as "fun" I think both O'bama supporters, as well as non-supporters have equal amounts of fun.  I do appreciate you sharing the law, I learned something today.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> My point is that it is impractical to declare war on anything other than a nation state. That's why you can't have a war on drugs, terrorism or illegals. The reason that it is impractical is because the war can never be finished. With whom do you sign the peace treaty?



if people die its a war. by any name


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Jackie22 said:


> President Obama is following the law that was passed in 2008......you can look the law up and see what it entails
> 
> READ BELOW
> 
> ...



well we're waiting. just anytime. before golf we hope. mean time their still pouing across. you mean writing your elected  officials ??? we only hear from them at election time


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Kcvet, I followed your link and discovered that the statement that “one in five” illegal aliens today has a criminal record" is not as clear cut as it would seem. It seems to be a gross exaggeration not well founded in fact.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



give me a better source then. you need to take a real good look at how they live down there. 1 in 3 ??? its probably closer to 2 of 3. would your government give them a big sloppy kiss and welcome or detain them???


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

I still say it's about the people that are citizens being taken care of first before we give more money to other countries.  I mean, that confuses me more then anything.  I've said it before with little response from anyone, but how can we help others if we are not taking care of ourselves?  Can't we tighten border security?   We're sending our military to god-knows-where to help others, and why aren't we sending them to the freaking border to stop this crap.  Has everyone lost their minds??  Why is all this not being straightened out, is it money?  I know it's the most powerful thing in the world, so I guess I just answered my own question.


----------



## Misty (Jul 21, 2014)

This article states a different interpretation of this law. 

2008 Trafficking Law Largely Inapplicable to Current Border Crisis
By Jon Feere July 2014


Jon Feere is the Legal Policy Analyst at the Center for Immigration Studies.

The recent influx of Central American illegal immigrants has resulted in a significant debate about how the United States should deal with the newly arrived families and children. Despite the attention it has received, by its own terms, the "William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008" — a law aimed, in part, at "unaccompanied alien children" who are victims of trafficking — may have little applicability to the current situation on the border:


It appears that a significant majority of children coming across are not "unaccompanied alien children" according to the definition found in federal law. Federal law defines an "unaccompanied alien child" as an illegal alien under the age of 18 who is without "a parent or legal guardian in the United States". Data from government agencies suggest that the overwhelming majority of minors arriving on the U.S. border have family in the United States. 


There is little evidence to suggest that the recent arrivals are victims of trafficking, which involves coercion. Instead, families and their children are willing participants in smuggling operations, having paid smugglers to bring them into the United States. As ICE explains, "Human trafficking and human smuggling are distinct criminal activities, and the terms are not interchangeable."


Even where the 2008 trafficking act is applicable, provisions within the law allow its application to be limited in "exceptional circumstances", which — as one prominent Democratic senator recently suggested — might include the current border crisis.

http://cis.org/2008-trafficking-law-inapplicable-current-border-crisis


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

nwlady said:


> I still say it's about the people that are citizens being taken care of first before we give more money to other countries.  I mean, that confuses me more then anything.  I've said it before with little response from anyone, but how can we help others if we are not taking care of ourselves?  Can't we tighten border security?   We're sending our military to god-knows-where to help others, and why aren't we sending them to the freaking border to stop this crap.  Has everyone lost their minds??  Why is all this not being straightened out, is it money?  I know it's the most powerful thing in the world, so I guess I just answered my own question.



yes we have to stop being the world's cop. let someone else do it.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

And it's like a lifeboat full of people, it will only hold so many.  If you get too many folks "in the name of saving lives" you won't save anyone because the boat will sink, not to mention provisions like food and water, enough for all?  NO, not in our present state, look how much we are in debt.  I think it would be wonderful if we were set up to help everyone, but we aren't.  America, the land of opportunity, is slowly becoming the opposite for many of us, and I'm one of them.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

kcvet said:


> yes we have to stop being the world's cop. let someone else do it.



I have to agree with this too, but because we aren't taking care of our own country, not to mine, and a lot of other people's satisfaction.  I mean, figure it out.  You have 10 children, you work a 40 hour week to feed and cloth them.  Well, you decide to help all the neighbors first, so you drop off the groceries, paycheck at the "poor" neighbors.  What happens to your kids?


----------



## kcvet (Jul 21, 2014)

nwlady said:


> I have to agree with this too, but because we aren't taking care of our own country, not to mine, and a lot of other people's satisfaction.  I mean, figure it out.  You have 10 children, you work a 40 hour week to feed and cloth them.  Well, you decide to help all the neighbors first, so you drop off the groceries, paycheck at the "poor" neighbors.  What happens to your kids?



and we're spending millions to refugee's in foreign countries. funds that wind up in the hands of dictators who oppress and kill their own. we need those funds here and now for us. hey world, can ya spare us a dime??? no. drop dead


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

kcvet said:


> and we're spending millions to refugee's in foreign countries. funds that wind up in the hands of dictators who oppress and kill their own. we need those funds here and now for us. hey world, can ya spare us a dime??? no. drop dead



That's the truth, how much of our donations actually get to the "intended".  It's like the guy down the street, the one, fancy house on the block, with a Mercedes parked in the driveway.  Oh he's so rich, money to blow.  Then you find out he's so far in debt he'll never be out.  But hey, he just goes and gets some cash on his credit line and sends it off to someone in need.  He's giving money that isn't even his to give.


----------



## Misty (Jul 21, 2014)

nwlady said:


> That's the truth, how much of our donations actually get to the "intended".  It's like the guy down the street, the one, fancy house on the block, with a Mercedes parked in the driveway.  Oh he's so rich, money to blow.  Then you find out he's so far in debt he'll never be out.  But hey, he just goes and gets some cash on his credit line and sends it off to someone in need.  He's giving money that isn't even his to give.



Good post, nwlady,,,,it describes the U.S. We have to keep borrowing money and we are deeply in debt. So much for being a wealthy country. As you mentioned, we can't even afford to help our legal citizens. Don't understand the business idea that to be successful, you borrow your way to success.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 21, 2014)

I think the smart peeps are learning, or re-learning to pay with cash if you want something (save up in other words).  Yeah, this countries leaders need to be "leading" us out of debt, focus on "home" first. geeeeeeeeeeeeez, I gotta say it, you gotta be a pinhead to do anything but that!!


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 21, 2014)

nwlady said:


> And it's like a lifeboat full of people, it will only hold so many.  If you get too many folks "in the name of saving lives" you won't save anyone because the boat will sink, not to mention provisions like food and water, enough for all?  NO, not in our present state, look how much we are in debt.  I think it would be wonderful if we were set up to help everyone, but we aren't.  America, the land of opportunity, is slowly becoming the opposite for many of us, and I'm one of them.



Love this analogy because it's quite close to the truth. How many more "citizens" can the economy support. How many more tax dollars can be taken from people already hurting for money. Our local school taxes are already high and keep on rising. Why, because we live on the border of a big city with failing schools so many city dwellers come to suburban schools illlegally(boundary or district hopping) or they just move to the suburbs. Caught boundary hoppers have included illegal immigrant children. Part of the reason for poor city schools is that many are overwhelmed by new citizens and/or illegal immigrant students. 

The "system" and/or economy IS the over filled life boat at this point.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 22, 2014)

To all the above people complaining about how bad they've got it & how we should turn our backs on the rest of the world, I ask... how many meals have any of you missed? How many nights have you gone to bed hungry because you couldn't afford food due to it being given to foreigners & their children? When was the last time you spent the night sleeping outside on the sidewalk or underneath a bush on the side of a building because you have no money for a roof over your head due to your job being taken away by a foreigner?

The truth of the matter is that none of you have experienced any of that. 

You are all members of one of the most comfortable, well-fed societies in the world & in it's entire history. The number of homeless people in this country is a miniscule percentage of our total population & many of them are homeless either of their own choosing or due to some mental illness, alcoholism or drug addiction that prevents them from leading a normal life. 

And re: the question "...how can we help others if we are not taking care of ourselves?"... aside from a decent, affordable health care system which Obama has tried to fix & gotten nothing but resistance on, we ARE taking care of ourselves. Every senior citizen is entitled to a reasonably & in many cases, overly generous monthly Social Security check. Our poor & needy get food & shelter assistance. 

Hell, the same people complaining that we "aren't taking care of our own" because we're giving too much to foreigners, are the same ones who are complaining that we're giving too much to needy Americans right here at home. Make up your minds!!!!

Face it... you all really just don't like the idea of the govt giving anybody anything.

The problem is not that the govt gives too much money away to foreigners, the problem is that too many Americans have gotten themselves mired in so much personal debt, when tough times come along, they're stuck with so many bills for things they've bought but didn't necessarily need, that they cry & complain that it's all the fault of foreigners & welfare recipients.

It amazes me that there are people who would be willing to sit & listen to reports of human suffering on the news every night & just think to themselves "too bad for them, just don't send any of our tax dollars there to help them".

And as for the comments about the US debt, most of that "debt" is not owed to foreign countries like China. Most of that debt is owed to Americans citizens right here in this country in the form of pensions, Social Security etc.









Blaming foreigners for every little perceived imperfection in life has always been the favorite tactic of nationalists & xenophobes. America cannot shut it's doors & turn into an isolationist country, hell bent on taking care of only it's own. If we did that, we'd give up any influence we have in other regions of the world, & believe you me, countries like Russia & China would happily step in to fill the void. And you can bet that the economic & trade agreements they entered into with all these countries we abandoned in the name of taking care of numero uno, would not be beneficial to us at all.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 22, 2014)

MrJim said:


> To all the above people complaining about how bad they've got it & how we should turn our backs on the rest of the world, I ask... how many meals have any of you missed? How many nights have you gone to bed hungry because you couldn't afford food due to it being given to foreigners & their children? When was the last time you spent the night sleeping outside on the sidewalk or underneath a bush on the side of a building because you have no money for a roof over your head due to your job being taken away by a foreigner?
> 
> The truth of the matter is that none of you have experienced any of that.
> 
> ...



you runnin' for office??


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 22, 2014)

Jim,

It's ludicrous for anyone to think they can help others if they have nothing to give, I have a heart for less fortunates, but again, I can't give away something I don't have. denise

PS and one more thing, I have gone without meals in my life, not by choice, and I have lived in a shelter because I had no job to pay for a roof over my head.  Now you can say "well there's always work for the ones that want to work, which is no longer true in this country.  I am just now getting to pet-sit for a living, and I am a qualified Administrative Assistant/AP Clerk.  I could and would work in a motel, but the work is too strenuous for me now.  I'm not in some teenie minority either, I know lots of good folks that are fighting to keep food on the table, and a roof over their heads in America.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 22, 2014)

MrJim said:


> Blaming foreigners for every little perceived imperfection in life has always been the favorite tactic of nationalists & xenophobes. America cannot shut it's doors & turn into an isolationist country, hell bent on taking care of only it's own. If we did that, we'd give up any influence we have in other regions of the world, & believe you me, countries like Russia & China would happily step in to fill the void. And you can bet that the economic & trade agreements they entered into with all these countries we abandoned in the name of taking care of numero uno, would not be beneficial to us at all.



I'm not thrilled about refugees flooding into the US, but they're here and I think we're dealing with it as well as can be expected.  I don't love Obama, but it seems to me that every issue is blown out of proportion in the news by those who still have sour grapes over this President's two electoral victories.  Our high taxes and economic condition is not caused by letting some immigrants across the border, although having all of them here does make matters a bit worse.  But haven't much poorer countries like Jordon and Syria dealt with all the refugees from the Iraq war, when the US invaded Iraq?

I think that part of the reason we are in so much debt and in such a hole economically, is that we allow large corporations tax breaks when they set up in other countries like China.  Also, look at the huge amounts that we've thrown away on senseless wars, etc.

http://costsofwar.org/article/economic-cost-summary


I think the facts were always known that we took some of the land in the US away from the Mexicans to begin with, so their coming here is not that much of a surprise now, tables are turning, but many don't want to look at the realities of what happened long ago...http://www.cbsnews.com/news/americas...-the-border/3/




> Greenberg says the conflict matters today because "A lot of people live in land that was taken from Mexico in this war, taken from Mexico, and they're not aware of that. I believe a lot of the immigration debate that's going on now operates in a vacuum, where people are not realizing that in fact Mexicans are here in lands that once belonged to Mexico."



I agree that we should take care of ourselves first, but we have been spiraling downwards long before this border flooding, what about addressing all those decisions that the government has been making for decades now, instead of fussing with each other over some immigrants?

An EMP from a nuclear attack can take down the US in a heartbeat.  Russia and China have already insulated and prepared their electrical grid in case of attack, either nuclear or solar.  The US government is aware of the threat to America, and the fact that only a minute amount of the population (if any) would survive such a thing, but they're gonna fight back and forth with each other over every little thing, instead of leading this country and taking care of the American people.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 22, 2014)

I don't know what to believe most of the time, when I get into the news discussions, but I read this today, and thought I would post it since it does go with the topic.  If you read it, read the whole thing, because I like the way the "writer" is researching himself/herself to see if things are true in the article, denise

http://www.naturalnews.com/046104_illegal_immigration_border_crisis_United_Nations.html


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 22, 2014)

I was thinking about the "debt" talk, which I was one that mentioned it, and I realize I am not so much talking about the National debt, as I am talking about "helping" our own country first, so that people have something to "give".

I don't think illegal immigrants are our only problem either, but that was just the topic.  I think the whole world is spiraling downwards, and that's why people are freaking out girding their loins.

PS America became rich and powerful, so we had lots to give and share.  A bank doesn't just keep giving out loans to folks that don't pay back, so I am still talking about the debt.  Well, maybe I am just to simple-minded, but that's something I don't get.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 22, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> I'm not thrilled about refugees flooding into the US, but they're here and I think we're dealing with it as well as can be expected.  I don't love Obama, but it seems to me that every issue is blown out of proportion in the news by those who still have sour grapes over this President's two electoral victories.  Our high taxes and economic condition is not caused by letting some immigrants across the border, although having all of them here does make matters a bit worse.  But haven't much poorer countries like Jordon and Syria dealt with all the refugees from the Iraq war, when the US invaded Iraq?
> 
> I think that part of the reason we are in so much debt and in such a hole economically, is that we allow large corporations tax breaks when they set up in other countries like China.  Also, look at the huge amounts that we've thrown away on senseless wars, etc.
> 
> ...



if you can afford it old missile silos are still for sale. and many have bought them


----------



## MrJim (Jul 22, 2014)




----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 22, 2014)

MrJim said:


>



Let's stop abortion for what I believe to be the wrong reasons.  If I could adopt a child, I for one could not deal with a juvenile that breaks the law, just too old to take that on.  I would also adopt one of my countries homeless children/orphans first.  I am too tired to type anymore right now, but I do see where you are coming from in much of your input Jim, it's just that we all have different ways of seeing things, especially when we are in dire straits ourselves. I agree we have more that many countries, I'd me totally stupid if I didn't know that, but there are things that need repair at home, first, not "only" just first.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 22, 2014)

The ‘Boat People of Vietnam’ seemed to encapsulate all the suffering Vietnam had suffered from 1955 to1975. Despite the end of the Vietnam war,  tragedy for the people of Vietnam continued into 1978-79. The term ‘Boat People’ not only applies to the refugees who fled Vietnam but also to the people of Cambodia and Laos who did the same but tend to come under the same umbrella term. The term ‘Vietnamese Boat People’ tends to be associated with only those in the former South who fled the new Communist government. However, people in what was North Vietnam who had an ethnic Chinese background fled to Hong Kong at the same time fearing some form of retribution from the government in Hanoi

the US took in 823,000, Britain 19,000,  France 96,000, Australia and Canada 137,000 each

isn't it strange those we took in are LEGAL citizens today ??? you never hear anything about them. could the world step up here and help out?? they did then.  you tell me


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 22, 2014)

kcvet said:


> The ‘Boat People of Vietnam’ seemed to encapsulate all the suffering Vietnam had suffered from 1955 to1975. Despite the end of the Vietnam war,  tragedy for the people of Vietnam continued into 1978-79. The term ‘Boat People’ not only applies to the refugees who fled Vietnam but also to the people of Cambodia and Laos who did the same but tend to come under the same umbrella term. The term ‘Vietnamese Boat People’ tends to be associated with only those in the former South who fled the new Communist government. However, people in what was North Vietnam who had an ethnic Chinese background fled to Hong Kong at the same time fearing some form of retribution from the government in Hanoi
> 
> the US took in 823,000, Britain 19,000,  France 96,000, Australia and Canada 137,000 each
> 
> isn't it strange those we took in are LEGAL citizens today ??? you never hear anything about them. could the world step up here and help out?? they did then.  you tell me



This is a good point, makes me wonder, ty KC, denise


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 22, 2014)

Short explanation and video explaining the current immigration crisis...http://www.vox.com/2014/6/16/581340...merica-unaccompanied-children-immigrants-daca


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 22, 2014)

Just a side fact. The new Governor of South Australia, a post that means that he is the Queen's representative, is a former Vietnamese boat person who came here with his family as a boy. It is his signature that will appear on every piece of legislation passed in the SA parliament until he steps down.

During the time of the Vietnamese inflow there were quite a few unaccompanied minors. We even had a planeload of infants who have been thrust at the departing soldiers by their distraught mothers. Some of these got into trouble with the law and were recruited by gangs but the majority have grown up to embrace Australian values and the Australian way of life. Overall, they have been an asset, just as every other wave of immigrants has been. They don't add to the national debt over their lifetimes. Quite the opposite in reality.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 23, 2014)

Something came to mind, thinking about this situation last night.  I know it was mentioned about "helping" others, including me talking about helping our own first.  I remembered what I've learned over the years about the difference between helping, and enabling.  I know it was brought up about griping on the help that is given to those that basically, I feel don't deserve it.  There's a fine line there too, like is alcoholism a disease, or a bad habit.  

I was just thinking that I am for drug testing folks that want government funds, and rehab going with the "help" that's given out.  Yes, help our own, but don't enable people to stay in their ruts.  Helping folks from other countries is something America has always done, but is there enabling going on in those situations as well.  

I realize how much I don't know, and I sure don't know what should be done, or not done about the problems in the world.  I know our country (people) are so divided on everything that comes up, it scares me.  I used to always hear it said, a country divided can't stand, something like that.  So where are we headed.  I think I need to get off this thread, I am getting really depressed.  It's so hard to take care of my, little piece of life, let alone get in and try to fix what's going on in the rest of the world.  Guess I'm selfish.


----------



## Davey Jones (Jul 23, 2014)

*Nwlady,
*Good posts there,

One of the biggest reasons and total disappointment why this country is going downhill is very easy to figure out.
Point your finger towards Washington,D.C. and every elected official that works there including the President.
Ive lived in this country long enough to watch all politicians at work doing what they think is best for this country.
So far,IMO,they have done very little if anything to get this county moving again but on the other hand the voters have to share this blame too by reelecting those do-nothing members of Congress over and over again.

OK Ill get off the speakers box now,I said my piece.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 23, 2014)

I agree Davey,

by the same token though, who do I believe when they give there "elect me" speaches  I know you are talking about NOT re-electing those that don't keep their promises.  Does that ever happen? LOL!  Ok, well, the scariest part for me is how the votes turn out.  I think I am right to believe what I do, but the majority has been voting against what I believe.  So am I wrong, or are the wrong people our leaders.  I mean show me, and I am not afraid to admit I am wrong, change my vote whatever.  But I don't see it, hell, I don't even see anyone I want to vote for anymore, because like I said, I don't trust any of them.  I wonder how many don't vote at all because they'd rather have no crackers than stale ones


----------



## kcvet (Jul 23, 2014)

Davey Jones said:


> *Nwlady,
> *Good posts there,
> 
> One of the biggest reasons and total disappointment why this country is going downhill is very easy to figure out.
> ...




they are the true American terrorists


----------



## Misty (Jul 23, 2014)

Davey Jones said:


> *Nwlady,
> *Good posts there,
> 
> One of the biggest reasons and total disappointment why this country is going downhill is very easy to figure out.
> ...



I agree, Davey. We need to quit voting in the same career politicians, who follow their own agenda's instead of working for the people who elected them.  Both parties are guilty and we the people deserve much more. I'm really looking forward to the 2014 election, and hopefully we will elect those who will work for what's best for our country instead of their own political interests


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 23, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> Short explanation and video explaining the current immigration crisis...http://www.vox.com/2014/6/16/581340...merica-unaccompanied-children-immigrants-daca



Thanks for posting this, SeaBreeze, a very good explanation.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 23, 2014)

Misty said:


> I agree, Davey. We need to quit voting in the same career politicians, who follow their own agenda's instead of working for the people who elected them.  Both parties are guilty and we the people deserve much more. I'm really looking forward to the 2014 election, and hopefully we will elect those who will work for what's best for our country instead of their own political interests



I hope so Misty, it seems kind of hopeless, I was one of those silly kids that was taught good always overcomes bad.  One thing I have to bring up is the lack of attention to the billions of abortions that are still being allowed, what about people not being able to choose naturopaths for their primary docs if they want to?  Seems that unless you've lived some of these issues, how can someone that hasn't make wise choices on Capital Hill?  Money rules, or vote for the guy/gal that looks like me, or comes from the biggest family (ancestors).  We need a Mr. Smith (James Stewart's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington)  I know, I'm such a dreamer


----------



## Misty (Jul 23, 2014)

nwlady said:


> I hope so Misty, it seems kind of hopeless, I was one of those silly kids that was taught good always overcomes bad.  One thing I have to bring up is the lack of attention to the billions of abortions that are still being allowed, what about people not being able to choose naturopaths for their primary docs if they want to?  Seems that unless you've lived some of these issues, how can someone that hasn't make wise choices on Capital Hill?  Money rules, or vote for the guy/gal that looks like me, or comes from the biggest family (ancestors).  We need a Mr. Smith (James Stewart's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington)  I know, I'm such a dreamer



Recently read there is a greater divide among people than 4 years ago, and hopefully that divide will get the voters to the polls. People are really getting angry and beginning to let their voices be heard, and seen, and those politicians ignoring the majority of voters demands, are backing down. It would be good to see majority rule back again. Still don't understand how the majority of people can be overruled by for instance 1 person, in many situations. Hopefully all the overblown political correctness will go away too.

i'm with you about abortions, Denise, and Obama voted four times against legislation to protect and care for infants accidentally born alive during late-term abortions....the newborns are left to die.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 23, 2014)

OMG, don't even get me started on partial birth abortions.  Talk about horrific, and talk about putting a childs life in danger, geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez, don't get me started.

But yeah, It seems to me that to stay in their jobs, politicians have to stay with whatever keeps their job.  Now how can I fault that when I have to kiss butt on every, job I've ever done.  You stand up for the unpopular vote, and you six feet under, as SB mentioned.  You go with the flow or you're out.  Hell, at this point I could even feel sorry for O'bama, he needs his paycheck right?


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 23, 2014)

MrJim said:


> To all the above people complaining about how bad they've got it & how we should turn our backs on the rest of the world, I ask... how many meals have any of you missed? How many nights have you gone to bed hungry because you couldn't afford food due to it being given to foreigners & their children? When was the last time you spent the night sleeping outside on the sidewalk or underneath a bush on the side of a building because you have no money for a roof over your head due to your job being taken away by a foreigner?
> 
> The truth of the matter is that none of you have experienced any of that.
> 
> ...



This seems like the old clean your plate don't you know there are starving kids in China. True there's a lot we have not experienced but recognize with things like foreign aid and personal charity. People give what they can when they can. Every body can't experience every thing good or bad. And many here have had to sacrifice. Just because some ONE has does NOT mean EVERYone should have it. What's mine is not yours-it would be nice if I share but not necessarily practical, legal or ethical. There's a reason a life guard throws you a life preserver or pole before they jump in and attempt a rescue.  

Some countries are in the early stages of development-there's no way around it. But being poor does not justify gangster crime, smuggling, prostitution or illegal entry into other countries. It doesn't take money to be honest, hard working or to have the focus to push one's self through hard times and conditions.


But overly generous social security checks-really???? Which most paid for. I'll be the first to admit in capitalist country too many American can't manage their own finances or fail to learn and understand economic theory. But overly generous social security checks???  I'm living in a neighborhood where those "overly generous social security checks" can't keep up with the over sized local tax increases to pay for massive public school expansion in part due to inner city boundary hoppers partially fueled by illegal immigrant students. Until the end of 90s they had to pull the seniors on social security out of their house on a gurney. Today in the same neighborhood you have quadruple the number people letting their house go into tax foreclosure. And with all the unoccupied homes the local schools still have an increasing student population which theoretically would mean some homes are sending 5-10 kids to school.  The tax burden is worse than carrying a mortgage in some cases.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 23, 2014)

Misty said:


> ... and Obama voted four times against legislation to protect and care for infants accidentally born alive during late-term abortions....the newborns are left to die.



Good to see both sides of the story, regardless of which party you favor...



> Gingrich has echoed this claim in recent days, saying Obama is “the most extreme, pro-abortion president in U.S. history” and that he voted in favor of killing unborn children.
> 
> That bill, which Obama did vote against, would have required doctors to resuscitate an aborted fetus if legislators felt it had any chance of viability. But Obama’s reasoning for voting against the bill was nothing like how Gingrich and Huckabee represent it.
> 
> ...


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 23, 2014)

WhatInThe said:


> This seems like the old clean your plate don't you know there are starving kids in China. True there's a lot we have not experienced but recognize with things like foreign aid and personal charity. People give what they can when they can. Every body can't experience every thing good or bad. And many here have had to sacrifice. Just because some ONE has does NOT mean EVERYone should have it. What's mine is not yours-it would be nice if I share but not necessarily practical, legal or ethical. There's a reason a life guard throws you a life preserver or pole before they jump in and attempt a rescue.
> 
> Some countries are in the early stages of development-there's no way around it. But being poor does not justify gangster crime, smuggling, prostitution or illegal entry into other countries. It doesn't take money to be honest, hard working or to have the focus to push one's self through hard times and conditions.
> 
> ...



Isn't where people all are only allowed to have the same amount, same belongings, same amount of money in the bank called communism?  I think it is, but I better google it.

Your post brought to mind about just because America, or anyone has a lot, that they have to give it all to their neighbor, enough so the neighbor has the same stuff.  I don't believe in that, and I don't want what others have just because they have more than I do.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 23, 2014)

http://relevantmagazine.com/life_article.php?id=7591 
Strang: Based on emails we received, another issue of deep importance to our readers is a candidate’s stance on abortion. We largely know your platform, but there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?

Obama: I absolutely can, so please don’t believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it’s entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don’t think that “mental distress” qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.

The other email rumor that’s been floating around is that somehow I’m unwilling to see doctors offer life-saving care to children who were born as a result of an induced abortion. That’s just false. There was a bill that came up in Illinois that was called the “Born Alive” bill that purported to require life-saving treatment to such infants. And I did vote against that bill. The reason was that there was already a law in place in Illinois that said that you always have to supply life-saving treatment to any infant under any circumstances, and this bill actually was designed to overturn Roe v. Wade, so I didn’t think it was going to pass constitutional muster.

Ever since that time, emails have been sent out suggesting that, somehow, I would be in favor of letting an infant die in a hospital because of this particular vote. That’s not a fair characterization, and that’s not an honest characterization. It defies common sense to think that a hospital wouldn't provide life-saving treatment to an infant that was alive and had a chance of survival.

Strang: You’ve said you’re personally against abortion and would like to see a reduction in the number of abortions under your administration. So, as president, how would do you propose accomplishing that?

Obama: I think we know that abortions rise when unwanted pregnancies rise. So, if we are continuing what has been a promising trend in the reduction of teen pregnancies, through education and abstinence education giving good information to teenagers. That is important—emphasizing the sacredness of ****** behavior to our children. I think that’s something that we can encourage. I think encouraging adoptions in a significant way. I think the proper role of government. So there are ways that we can make a difference, and those are going to be things I focus on when I am president.


----------



## Misty (Jul 23, 2014)

According to factcheck.org:

Obama opposed the 2001 and 2002 "born alive" bills as backdoor attacks on a woman's legal right to abortion, but he says he would have been "fully in support" of a similar federal bill that President Bush had signed in 2002, because it contained protections for Roe v. Wade.


We find that, as the NRLC said in a recent statement, Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported. Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee's 2003 mark-up session.


----------



## Misty (Jul 23, 2014)

Thanks SeaBreeze and Jackie for your articles showing another side.  it really adds to the discussion. I may not always agree, but I do respect your opinions.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 23, 2014)

Yes, I agree to disagree with opposite views from my own.  Good stuff Misty, denise


----------



## Misty (Jul 23, 2014)

nwlady said:


> Yes, I agree to disagree with opposite views from my own.  Good stuff Misty, denise



Thanks Denise  You are a really good disagree'er <----new word, too.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 23, 2014)

Misty said:


> Thanks SeaBreeze and Jackie for your articles showing another side.  it really adds to the discussion. I may not always agree, but I do respect your opinions.



Right back atcha Misty, I respect your opinions too.  :coolthumb:


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 23, 2014)

nwlady said:


> Yes, I agree to disagree with opposite views from my own.



LOL Nwlady, you should run for office! k:


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 23, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> LOL Nwlady, you should run for office! k:



I think people that run for office are gluttons for punishment, lol!  I'll stay in my "woman cave" wherever that may be:hide:


----------



## Warrigal (Jul 23, 2014)

I'm awake now and have just caught up with this discussion. Well done everyone on the excellent tone.
I'm happy to keep reading because it is very informative but I have nothing to add.

Except this side note:



			
				NWLady said:
			
		

> Isn't where people all are only allowed to have the same amount, same belongings, same amount of money in the bank called communism?  I think it is, but I better google it.



I think the definition of pure communism is "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."In some ways that is also a plank of Christianity, Judaism and Islam but with God as part of the equation..


The trouble is that neither the communists nor the religious communities have lived by this principle. They have tried but failed. Today, with a world run by economists, there's not even much lip service paid.


----------



## Misty (Jul 23, 2014)

The Washington Post
House Republicans unveil plan to deal with border crisis
 By Ed O'Keefe and Robert Costa July 23 at 7:48 PM   

A House Republican plan to address the influx of illegal immigrants at the U.S.-Mexico border would cost considerably less than President Obama has requested but could get upended by the political forces that long have divided GOP lawmakers.

The $1.5 billion proposal unveiled Wednesday proposes to spend far less than Obama’s
$3.7 billion request to provide more resources along the southern border and to care for the record number of migrants who have arrived in recent months. It would mandate the deployment of National Guard troops, boost funding for Border Patrol, and require the administration to more quickly process and deport young children and families who have illegally entered the country.


But it was unclear how rapidly the House could advance the proposal and whether House Republicans will be able to reach agreement with Senate Democrats on a final deal before Congress adjourns Aug. 1 for a five-week recess.


“I’d like to act. We’ve got a humanitarian crisis on the border that has to be dealt with,” House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters Wednesday. But Boehner also faulted Obama for failing to work with Congress to swiftly seek a solution.


“The administration ought to get their act together,” he said. Later, Boehner’s office sent a letter to the White House asking for clarification on whether it supports changing a 2008 *anti-trafficking law to make it easier to deport minors from Central America.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...34b762-1280-11e4-8936-26932bcfd6ed_story.html


----------



## Misty (Jul 24, 2014)

*To Ease Crisis, U.S. May Vet Young Refugees Inside Honduras*

                                                             By FRANCES ROBLES and MICHAEL D. SHEARJULY 24, 2014 


                                       Photo                  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




                          Migrants traveling north  through Mexico toward the United States on a northbound freight train  known as “The Beast,” because of rampant accidents and violent crime.                                      Credit             Meridith Kohut for The New York Times                                        

Hoping  to stem the recent surge of migrants at the Southwest border, the Obama  administration is considering whether to allow hundreds of minors and  young adults from Honduras into the United States without making the  dangerous trek through Mexico, according to a draft of the proposal.

If  approved, the plan would direct the government to screen thousands of  children and youths in Honduras to see if they can enter the United  States as refugees or on emergency humanitarian grounds. It would be the  first American refugee effort in a nation reachable by land to the  United States, the White House said, putting the violence in Honduras on  the level of humanitarian emergencies in Haiti and Vietnam, where such  programs have been conducted in the past amid war and major crises.

Critics  of the plan were quick to pounce, saying it appeared to redefine the  legal definition of a refugee and would only increase the flow of  migration to the United States.

Now President Obama is thinking about going to Honduras to get immigrants to come to the U.S, to save them the hardship to get here on their own.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/w...ing-of-youths-seeking-entry-to-honduras-.html


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 25, 2014)

As the article states, the White House has said this is the least likely option they will take, in the meantime, Republicans refuse to do anything on Immigration Reform.


----------



## Misty (Jul 25, 2014)

Jackie22 said:


> As the article states, the White House has said this is the least likely option they will take, in the meantime, Republicans refuse to do anything on Immigration Reform.



 So far, Jackie...there are 3 Immigration reform proposals. One is a 3.7 billion proposal by Pres. Obama , a 2.7 billion proposal by the Democrats and a 1.5 billion by the Republicans, which I posted. The Republican proposal includes that the 2008 immigration bill be changed so illegal immigrants can be returned to their home countries sooner. The Democrat and Pres. Obama proposals do not want the 2008 bill changed.

There are 2 weeks left to resolve the issue before congressmen and women leave on their August break.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 25, 2014)

The Republicans can draft all the proposals they want to, but when they refuse to take action on them, what's the point? Other than political grandstanding. 

_"Oh yeah, we've got a proposal of our own!!!! (We're just not going to schedule a vote on it any time soon...)"_



> *Really? House GOP Whines About Border Crisis While Killing Its Own Immigration Reform Plan*By: Justin Baragona
> Friday, July, 11th, 2014, 10:19 am
> 
> 
> ...



.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 25, 2014)

Boehner knew when he made the first statement that their proposal was dead in the water, the article said that the Republicans did not agree on it.......Boehner was doing nothing but playing games, coming out and saying they want to act...what a laugh...this has been going on for some time, now it is down to the wire and the below article just came out in the Washington Post with him stating there will likely be no immigration reform because they can't trust President Obama....give me a friggin break.

As to your comment that the President does not want the 2008 law changed, I've already posted links stating otherwise.

From the Washington Post........

A week after signaling that House Republicans would pursue an overhaul of immigration laws, Speaker John A. Boehner declared Thursday that his caucus is unlikely to move forward until President Obama gains their trust.
“There’s widespread doubt about whether this administration can be trusted to enforce our laws,” Boehner (R-Ohio) said during a midday news conference at the Capitol. “And it’s going to be difficult to move any immigration legislation until that changes.”
Boehner was making his first extended public remarks since releasing a list of GOP “standards” for immigration policy at a conference retreat last week. His attempt to place the burden on Obama illustrated the mounting opposition from hard-line conservatives and laid the groundwork for blaming the White House if a deal fails.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said this week that an immigration deal remains a long shot in a sharply divided Congress. Rep. Raúl R. Labrador (R-
Idaho) suggested that Boehner could lose his speakership if he pursues a bill in a midterm election year.
Aides emphasized that Boehner remains committed to immigration reform and said he raised concerns about Obama because they had emerged as a consensus during the retreat. But his remarks drew rebukes from advocacy groups frustrated by the verbal zigzags of a speaker who has spent 15 months calling immigration a top priority while refusing to bring any legislation to the House floor.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/boehner-immigration-reform-stalls-because-gop-has-widespread-doubt-about-obama/2014/02/06/233b497a-8f55-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html?hpid=z1


----------



## Misty (Jul 25, 2014)

The Republicans are accused of being Obstructionists by the Democrats, but Harry Reid is obstructing
the Republican bills and amendments. Most of the Republican Bills and Amendments are labeled "Dead On Arrival" in the Senate by Harry Reid. On a bill with bypartisan support regarding the Pipe Line, it was labeled Dead On Arrival, as are many other bills by the House.

*Sen. Harry Reid — obstructionist in chief*

By U-T San Diego Editorial Board
4:58 p.m.May 22, 2014

There  is much criticism throughout the land about the dysfunction of  Congress, most of it directed toward the House, where Republicans run  the show. “Obstructionists” is the oft-applied label. But what about the  Senate, where the Democrats run the show? Are they innocent of any  charge of obstructionism? Hardly.

One  of the more blatant and serious demonstrations of Democratic  obstructionism arose last week as the Senate considered a bill to extend  business tax credits. As recounted by The Wall Street Journal, this  annual extension is normally a routine exercise in bipartisanship. 

Not  this year. Majority Leader Harry Reid refused to allow Republican  amendments, including one that has 79 senators on record in support to  repeal the Obamacare medical-device tax, the repeal of which is  particularly important to San Diego. Without the amendments, Republicans  are blocking floor action on the bill.


It’s  worth emphasizing that, according to the Journal, Republican leaders in  the House have allowed 125 Democratic amendments to be voted on since  last July, while Sen. Reid has allowed votes on only nine GOP  amendments. Just who is the obstructionist?

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/May/22/senate-reid-dysfunction-tax-credits/


----------



## MrJim (Jul 25, 2014)

Misty said:


> The Republicans are accused of being Obstructionists by the Democrats, but Harry Reid is obstructing
> the Republican bills and amendments. Most of the Republican Bills and Amendments are labeled "Dead On Arrival" in the Senate by Harry Reid. On a bill with bypartisan support regarding the Pipe Line, it was labeled Dead On Arrival, as are many other bills by the House.
> 
> *Sen. Harry Reid — obstructionist in chief*
> ...



Right. And why is that?

Because the Republicans draft bills that are so far to the extreme right, they know the Democrats will bury them.

That is exactly what the Republicans want... to maintain the status quo by ensuring nothing ever gets done via the use of their Machiavellian sleight of hand tactics.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 25, 2014)

Misty said:


> The Republicans are accused of being Obstructionists by the Democrats, but Harry Reid is obstructing
> the Republican bills and amendments. Most of the Republican Bills and Amendments are labeled "Dead On Arrival" in the Senate by Harry Reid. On a bill with bypartisan support regarding the Pipe Line, it was labeled Dead On Arrival, as are many other bills by the House.
> 
> *Sen. Harry Reid — obstructionist in chief*
> ...



well Reid is Obama's boss so what he says sticks


----------



## Misty (Jul 25, 2014)

kcvet said:


> well Reid is Obama's boss so what he says sticks



So true, kcvet, he is his boss for now anyway. In 2006, the Democrats took over the Senate by winning 6 seats, and there is a good possibility the Republicans will win 6 seats in the 2014 election to take back the senate. Many Democrats will be glad to be rid of Reid too, as he was an equal opportunity bill killer to both parties.


----------



## Misty (Jul 26, 2014)

The President of Honduras said in a recent interview, the United States is the reason Honduras is the murder capital of the world, and why the children come here, because of the usage of drugs in the U.S.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 26, 2014)

Misty said:


> The President of Honduras said in a recent interview, the United States is the reason Honduras is the murder capital of the world, and why the children come here, because of the usage of drugs in the U.S.



The US is a major customer for the drugs smuggled in from Central America. BUT the decision to kill, smuggle, deal, bribe or abuse comes from the citizens of those countries. A criminal is a criminal no matter their justification or rationalization. Being poor does not mean you cannot be honest or ethical. If their was the same kind of money & market for Disney toys the same people would criminally conduct that trade as well.


----------



## Misty (Jul 29, 2014)

COLLECT MORE THAN $7,000 PER MONTH FOR 'FOSTERING' ADULT ILLEGAL ALIENS


by KRISTIN TATE  29 Jul 2014, 7:42 AM PDT 
Catholic Charities Needs Foster Families For Immigrant...
CBS Dallas-Fort Worth

HOUSTON, Texas--The federal government is in dire need of U.S. citizens willing to house the thousands of illegal immigrants who enter the country each week, and they are willing to pay them to do so. 

The Texas-based nonprofit Catholic Charities is currently seeking out foster families for the migrants, most of whom come from Central America. Ruth Braiser, a spokeswoman for the organization, told Breitbart Texas that foster families can receive monthly payments for housing adult immigrants who are under 23-years-old.

"Most of our children are 15 to 17-years-old," she said. "But some stay in our program until they are 22-years-old; if they're still working on getting their high school diploma, they can stay until they're that age." 
The revelation that some of the migrants receiving foster care are adults will likely come as a surprise to many; the mainstream media has largely portrayed the border crisis as involving only children and family units. 

Braiser mentioned that foster families will be paid $40 per day for each migrant they take in from Catholic Charities. The payments are funded by the federal government, as Breitbart Texas previously reported. 
Foster parents have the ability to collect more than $7,400 per month, considering that they can house six immigrants at any given time. 

In addition to daily payments, Braiser said that the illegal immigrants are provided with taxpayer subsidized education, health care, transportation, and an "allowance." She was not specific about the amount of such an allowance or how often it is administered. 

Many have expressed outrage that instead of being turned away at the border, many illegal aliens are being brought to federal facilities where they receive a slew of taxpayer-subsidized benefits: housing, food, vocational training, English lessons, recreation, and legal counsel. Ultimately, most of the migrants are released onto U.S. soil after promising to show up at an immigration court hearing.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 29, 2014)

Texas based Catholic Charities now in contention with Baptist Child Family Services for government subsidies.


----------



## Misty (Jul 29, 2014)

WhatInThe said:


> Texas based Catholic Charities now in contention with Baptist Child Family Services for government subsidies.



It sure looks like these two charities are in contention for government charities, WhatInThe, and just for unaccompanied immigrants , Baptist Children and Family Services have received $280 million so far just this year. Galveston Texas charities have been given government money regarding illegal immigrants since 2009. HHS was calling for private contractors to help in January, to transport illegal immigrants throughout the US.


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 29, 2014)

$40/day for housing an illegal; you can have up to six of them, which means $240/day.

I figure I could put six of them in the basement, give them a few boxes of generic cereal and some bottled water and _still_ make a profit.


----------



## kcvet (Jul 29, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> $40/day for housing an illegal; you can have up to six of them, which means $240/day.
> 
> I figure I could put six of them in the basement, give them a few boxes of generic cereal and some bottled water and _still_ make a profit.



don't forget lawn care and roofing


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 29, 2014)

kcvet said:


> don't forget lawn care and roofing



I figure their grazing will keep the yard clean. 

The basement roof is full of cobwebs but it's still pretty sound. I just hope they don't make too much noise down there ...


----------



## Ina (Jul 29, 2014)

You Gentlemen seem to full of it today. :tapfoot: What you don't want the sound of happy little feet to keep you company? Phil your a teacher, you should have lots of fun teaching them English. :wave:


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 29, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> $40/day for housing an illegal; you can have up to six of them, which means $240/day.
> 
> I figure I could put six of them in the basement, give them a few boxes of generic cereal and some bottled water and _still_ make a profit.




Gads Phil, I really need your help, would you be my financial manager?  Are you still only charging 5 cents for advice?  I now have 2 nickels I can rub together, or give them to you


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 30, 2014)

Ina said:


> You Gentlemen seem to full of it today. :tapfoot: What you don't want the sound of happy little feet to keep you company? Phil your a teacher, you should have lots of fun teaching them English. :wave:



Oh, wait, they don't speak English?!?

Doesn't really matter, I suppose - I'll just be tossing their "food" down to them once a day, then slamming the basement doors.



nwlady said:


> Gads Phil, I really need your help, would you be my financial manager?  Are you still only charging 5 cents for advice?  I now have 2 nickels I can rub together, or give them to you



Well, since you have 2 nickels, here's two pieces of advice  - 

1. Find a financial adviser who actually has some money
2. Rubbing those nickels together will probably result in more income than any advice I could give you


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 30, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> Oh, wait, they don't speak English?!?
> 
> Doesn't really matter, I suppose - I'll just be tossing their "food" down to them once a day, then slamming the basement doors.
> 
> ...



LOL, but I have more faith in you then that  I'm more like "mr/miss archeological" find, LMAO!!  So I need hep, hep me pease hep me, LOL!!


----------



## SifuPhil (Jul 30, 2014)

nwlady said:


> LOL, but I have more faith in you then that  I'm more like "mr/miss archeological" find, LMAO!!  So I need hep, hep me pease hep me, LOL!!



LOL - "Hep me, Lord, hep me!" :rofl1:

Well, okay, if you insist, I'll whisper one little word in your ear ...

... "Amway". 

It's the investment of the future! No down side! Millionaires are being made every day!

And, if you join my downline I can guarantee that you too will become a millionaire by the end of the year! Of course, you'll have to plan your work and work your plan and ignore all your family, friends and neighbors who run away at the mere sight of you - those fools don't know what it takes to become a millionaire! 

Let me know when you want to place your first order (minimum $500 + S&H).


----------



## Denise1952 (Jul 30, 2014)

Got it, looking up their website now:congratulatory: 

Ok, can I have my 2 nickels back, that really sucked:frown-new::lofl:


----------

