Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 03/2004

« Mystic Avenue development gets largest publicly funded renovation in state history | Main | Newstalk for Wednesday November 28th 2007 »

November 27, 2007

Comments

Pilgrims

The Pilgrims were illegal immigrants.

Grog29

No they were'nt.

The so-called "Native American Indian" tribes
(whose ancestors came over the land bridge in the Bering Straits from Siberia and Asia had no laws on immigration and beleived that "nobody owns the land".

Therefore the Pilgrims were not illegally in North America.
The U.S. has LAWS now (as do all other countries in the world) regulating immigration.

Grog29

By the way...how many "Part"s are there going to be for this
guy's left-wing liberal rants on how we need to rollover for
illegal foreign squatters in our midst??

It's about time to end the "series".

Enforcement is the new "reform".

James McLean

Hey, Bill "Hugo Chavez" Shelton, quit being an asshat and blaming "Big Bad American businesses" for all the ills in the world. Wasn't it your hero, Bill "bang fatbody interns" Clinton who pushed NAFTA through Congress? Blame 'ol slick Willy for the problems then.

The real reason that the illegals come to our country (USA!!!) is that their countries have NEVER been decent or worth a shit. None of these lowlifes have a pot to piss or a window to toss it out, so they come here, steal our jobs and pollute our way of life. There isn't a whole lot more to it than that and making it more complex just slows down the process of tossing illegals out.

As Grog correctly pointed out: there really for this "crime against journalism" 5 part series. I mean you simply seemed to have cut/pasted from moveon.org or Michael "Never met a twinkie I didn't like" Moore talking points. Have you thought about all the trees you're now responsible for killing having scribbled all your hashish influenced thoughts down? The horror... the horror...

Now let us rip you a new one on all your "theories" on solving the problem of illegals (the real solution is to simply TOSS THEM OUT!):

You want effective immigration policies? Try these:
· End corporate welfare. Talk about an overused line. What you're really saying is that we should NEVER help US based businesses, so we can blow more money on the sick & twisted social engineering programs you libaloons love so much. Pass the bong, dude.....
· Hold importers to the same labor and environmental standards to which we hold each other. yeah... that has worked real well in the past. Let's hold the rest of the world socially responsible to your leftwing, moonbatish ideals. They'll laugh right in your tofu-munching face. Didn't Jimmy "Worst President of ALL TIME" Carter try this? Look where that got him - universally regarded as the worst president of all time. He lost Iran for us too. He still needs a good swift kick to the nuts to calibrate his brain
· Take away the billions in subsidies now propping up dying but well-connected industries and invest them in technologies that will produce well-paying jobs for U.S. workers. Thought you wanted to help the down and out workers? Ever think that pulling the rug out from those industries will cost millions of jobs?

Oh and on the farms disappearing: better machinery, processes have eliminated the weak farms. Better machinery and processes invented and implemented by Americans GETTING BETTER EDUCATED. I like that the crappier farms are gone, now those farmers who can't cut it can work other jobs. Oh damn... the illegals stole all those jobs.

Teddy

Hey, libaloons, freak, moonbats! This is for all you liberal ass fools (Bill, Ron, Election, and the rest of you "light-in-the-loafers" freaks) who think we should bend over for these dirtbags who come here illegally and don't assimilate!

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag.. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people. Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Solh Zendeh

"The real reason that the illegals come to our country (USA!!!) is that their countries have NEVER been decent or worth a shit."

Wow Bill, so much for all your "research", James just told you how it *really* is. Basically, he made something up in his head, and then *wrote it down*. Booo-ya! Instant facts without needing to do any gay "looking stuff up". Make this man the president!

Buddy

Solh, and there I was thinking you just might be good people after all. You've disappointed me now. I'll get over it.

In the meantime, please tell me, genius, why do they come here if their countries are all that? They come because they don't live in countries where wealth is any way distributed, so the scum at the bottom of the barrel gets on boats/planes or slips under fences and shows up here. It isn't our fault they screwed up their own countries and you wacked out libaLOONS need to stop the whole "blame US" crap.

The illegals need to get their own countries in order - on their own - and stop coming here and sucking up our resources (resources that are finite). In the meantime, we need to create immigrataion camps/work camps here and get some value out of them. They should be forced to work for the equivalent wages they would earn in their home countries, so they get through their heads it is not worth coming. Amazing how many simple solutions (toss them out, build bigger fences, camps) there are to this "complex" issue!

Hey, Bill "Hugo" Shelton, what will your next series solve? World peace? Hunger? The homeless? AIDS? We await with bated breath!

Hint: moveon.org and Michael Moore's websites might have some downtime for the Christmas holiday. hmmmm.... on sencond thought... both those sites are Godless. Cut/Paste away!

HL Menken

Sohl,

I suspect that one or more of these hostile posts are from people who favor amnesty for immigrants and are trying to gain sympathy for their cause by posing as hateful anti-immigrant idiots.

Consider the comparison between the columns in this series and these yahoos' posts. Bill Shelton has had the courage to say what he really thinks. He has the journalistic integrity to back it up with the evidence that persuaded him, evidence that can be verified. And he's proposed a system of strict immigration enforcement that could work.

The yahoos substitute insults for evidence. They proposed an enforcement system that the government tried to make work by increasing its budget 600+%, and the number of illegal immigrants doubled.

So if you are an undecided reader, who will you find most persuasive?

Buddy

HL/Solh, what solutions did Bill propose?
These?
You want effective immigration policies? Try these:
· End corporate welfare.
· Hold importers to the same labor and environmental standards to which we hold each other.
· Take away the billions in subsidies now propping up dying but well-connected industries and invest them in technologies that will produce well-paying jobs for U.S. workers. This TRIPE? Pleeeease!

None of the above is doable - Hugo Shelton just threw out the far left talking points. Any imbecile can see that none of those "solutions" will ever be done by ANY president or congress. Point #2 is especially funny. You want to go over to foreign countries and tell them how to treat their workers? LOLOLOLOLLOLOL!!!! You moonbats are extremely entertaining.

Thank God we're still driving the bus and you fools haven't managed to wrest the steering wheel away from us. I don't see it happening for a long time either as the PDS got their asses handed to them and Kankles Clinton is behind in every poll against every GOP candidate. Why? because the Iraq war is won - surge worked (and it would ne nice if you leftwing traitors would admit it), real mideast pease may happen now and theeconmy is doing fine (contrary to all the naysayers on the left).

Looks like we'll be driving the bus for the next decade as well. Just deal with the reality that the country does not agree with your wacked out freak positions.

Election

Looks like Buddy, is our old friend who got banned recently. Enjoy using the slow proxy lane, Buddy!

Diogenes

Well, Election, based on the same crude writing and cruder reasoning, I think that Buddy, James McLean, and possibly Teddy as well are the same petty little poster. So you may be right that this mouth breather may also share an identity that got banned.

One clue to me that thinking is a difficult exercise for these types is their poor reading comprehension. It's true that Bill stated facts that would make reactionaries writhe in dismay, discomfort, and denial. But his proposal to make employment for anyone in the U.S. dependent on their proving their true identity would make liberals howl with indignation.

People who have to fit everyone into narrow categories like liberal and conservative that are no longer even consistent within themselves are not going to get Bill Shelton. They would have to think.

Election

Bill's proposal would be acceptable to me.

Experienced

I think your article points to the problem of our two party system. The fact is that most government programs are intended for an imperative or good purpose. Over time partisan politics prohibits reforming the programs to fit new circumstances and they become more harmful than good. Is this a liberal or a conservative argument? Are you a democrat dedicated to ending corporate welfare known to “systematically promote the interests of an elite against those of everyone else”? Or, are you republican vowing to repeal excessive federal policies? The answer is, both. There are more than two sides to the challenges facing America including immigration. Your article intelligently highlights the need for a more complete solution – politics just doesn’t support the depth of argument needed to find one. Hopefully you are carving it out.

Citizen

I don't think that anyone who is writing here is stupid, although some stupid things are being said. And it is stupid to imagine that you've made a point by insulting someone.

Despite Grog, Buddy, and James implying that they've read this whole series, they probably haven't. Otherwise, they would have read the part in which Mr. Shelton suggested making everyone in who works in the U.S. establish their identity with a governmental agency, and making every employer confirm that identity before they hire. And they would understand why this part is called "Long term solutions."

That suggestion would be a lot cheaper and a lot more effective way to enforce immigration laws. Of course, if spending taxpayer money to punish illegal aliens is more important to you than keeping them out the country, you won't like it.

Solh Zendeh

James/Buddy/whatever is just making stuff up and insulting people anonymously because (s)he can. It's as simple and as frustrating as that.

HL Menken, thanks but I'm not undecided - I advocate stopping all immigration for a while. In short, I believe we are already in a period of population overshoot, and when the resource reality starts to make itself obvious (sorry, *more* obvious than quadrupling oil prices, crumbling infrastructure and stagnant real wages) to the common man, we will be far better off having as few "extra" mouths to feed.

Bill's suggestions basically entail bringing us closer to a free market - where price signals allow the customer to make rational choices. I support his proposals, and would personally push for the strict enforcement of the current employment laws in addition. If those were followed the illegal problem would solve itself - no need to waste tax money building walls or crashing down doors.

Bill Shelton

I think that Experienced has put his or her finger on what I find foolish in so many of the posts that appear in this and other blogs. And it's not just James/Grog/Buddy posts; it sometimes come from the left as well.

It's the Us-and-Them. The idea that it's the saints versus the evil doers--Republicans versus Democrats, or "conservatives" versus "liberals," or those most monstrous of all demons, "progressives."

Since self-described "conservatives" have been responsible for astronomical deficit increases, the erosion of individual liberty, and failed nation building, and self described "liberals" have been responsible for dismantling the social safety net, killing the American manufacturing sector, and beating the war drum, I think that it's meaningless to apply those terms to current political actors. The Clintons are as grotesque a caricature of a liberal as George W. Bush is of a conservative.

I think that, instead, we need to look at the reality we're living in and find effective solutions, irrespective of whether they are identified by others as "conservative" or "liberal." Instead, we should ask, "will they make things better for the vast majority of decent and hard working people who make up our nation?"

I believe that a much more insightful way of understanding what prevents these solutions is to identify whose interests they would threaten, rather than being distracted by "conservative" and "liberal" labels that those interests have cloaked themselves in for political advantage.

For myself, my core values are fairly conservative. But our economic and political institutions have become so distorted that we can only achieve those values through radical solutions, including some that would be labeled as "socialist."

I don't start out from an ideological point of view when I write this stuff. I don't imagine that I have all of the answers. And I welcome solid evidence that makes me rethink my position. Spewing puss doesn't count as evidence of anything other than the spewer's inadequcies.

Grog29

When you "spewed the puss" in your first "Part" of this never ending pro-illegal alien miniseries by propagandizing that "we are a nation of immigrants"
I immediately knew what kind of "ideological point of view" you were coming from. That's why I immediately corrected you with the FACT that 88% of Americans were born here. We are a majority nation of "native born" Americans and it will be for the rest of your lifetime. Buy a dictionary. Immigrants are people who are born in one country and move to take up permanent "legal" residency in another. So stop mixing the word immigrant with illegal alien. It's a low form of propaganda intended for the clueless. One is legal and the other isn't. You insult legal immigrants by mixing the two. Most of them are against the illegally squatting linecutters.

Identify the laws that are being broken by these tourist visa overstayers, illegal border crossers, etc. and ENFORCE those laws using any means necessary without giving the vast majority of outraged Americans sobstories and Marxist propaganda.
When the amnsety went down in flames last June, the
DREAM ACT didn't even get enough votes to make it to the Senate floor to debate, and when Democrats start doing a 180 degree switch from supporting driver's licenses for illegals...you know how the grass root voters are effecting the politics. Politicians are more afraid of supporting illegals than ever before.
They should be afraid.

What they don't tell you at Harvard

I never agree with you, but you made some really good point here. I am against illegal immigration, I will be honest. My reason has to do with the cost they bare on the American workforce. I have posted a few times about reports on how African Americans are the ones most directly effected by illegal immigration. I think we can assume that alot of the problems seen in African American communities recently is due in part to low employment. Anyways, I don't want to open a can of worms, so here is my take. If we want to study immigration, lets take a look at two countries from two different areas of the world, Lithuania and Mexico. Both countries have a lower standard of living and over the past years have implemented economic reforms similar to those advocated by the Washington Consense. I admit, this might be an apples to oranges comparison, but I bring it up because the two countries have a high outflow of residents seeking prosperity elsewhere. One theme we see in the world economy these days is reduction of state led development coupled with open borders and low taxes. The goal is to increase economic wealth through expansion and market economies. In reality it appears that all we really see is western companies taking over sectors of the economy and paying people slave wages while cutting workers who are deemed unproductive. Ask any Brazlian, they will tell you the reason then come here is because they are pretty much unemployed after 35 since companies won't hire them. To make matters worse, the pay is so low that well educated people need to move. I know a girl from Lithuania who holds a Doctorate in economics who works as a maid in Manhattan. The problem is this, the current thoughts about economic development are flawed if not done deliberatly. When the western trained economists from Harvard and MIT come in and preach the glories of the free market, take this as a sign your country is done. Lets look what happened in these two country. Pro western leaders came in and open the borders allowing western companies to move production in exchange for lax labor laws and low waged work. Many of these people were government workers, farmers, or had their own buinsesses. These people were economic losers because the government slashed jobs, farmers were put out and independent buisness owners could not compete. Their only option was to work for slave wages or take the chance of moving west. They come here because a job that pays ten dollars and hour is better then where they come from. Do you blame them, no, blame the powers that be in the global economy. We lose out because our population is increased, and we are now forced to compete with more people who work for less wages. If your low skilled and low waged chances are you would have to take a paycut and work under the table to even get these jobs now. Ask me why I am against illegals if I am a white collar worker. Easy, we have politicians who are sly as foxes, look at Elliot Spitzer and Deval Patrick. Don't be fooled by them, they are products of the global elite. They want to give the children of illegals and education and allow high skilled workers in because these means white collar workers will also have to compete. Just recently I met a lovly young girl who is a financial analyst for a bank. I asked her how she got this job, she said that the lawyers found ways around the law and she was given the job over a native. I asked her how much she worked for and she said $20,000 a year. The median wage for a financial analyst is $50-60,000 a year. You see why I am skeptical of the people in power. It kind of seems like they are playing the fool of us all. One day were going to wake up and we will be naive serfs working for slave wages and we won't care because something is better then nothing, right.

Truth Fan

Groggy,

It would be good for this debate if we had someone participating from your ideological position who has the capacity to think. Sadly, you do not qualify. For all of your blather, you haven't added a single substantive response to the points made in this column.

You have offered no evidence, or even made clear your line of reasoning to support the unsupported assertions that you make. You seem to think that if you keep shouting "nyah nyah" loud enough, it will dominate fact, and everyone will say, "Damn, that potty-mouth guy knows what he's talking about.

Your little riff about how we're not a country immigrants is a good example. Anyone of even modest intelligence who reads this understands the intended point: the ancestors of everyone now living in the Americas came here from Europe, Asia, or Africa. You acknowledge that when you beat down Pilgrim's assertion that Pilgrims were illegal immigrants. This kind of obtuseness is a way to avoid confronting the substantive issues.

If, when you post here, you have no other intent than exhibitionist masturbation, would you please aim your emissions elsewhere?

Bill,

I was expecting that in this series you would address the issue of Somerville's Sanctuary City status. What do you think?

What they don't tell you...,

It sounds like everything that you've written here could be written by Bill as well. I think that it would make for a good conversation if you talked about where you disagree with him.

Bill Shelton

Truth,

What I have to say about Sanctuary Cit isn't long enough for a column, so I'll say it here.

Local police already are doing more with less. Turning them into immigration agents would undermine the trust that the Department has spent years building. Many people, not just illegal immigrants, would be less likely to report crimes and cooperate with criminal investigations if they feared that doing so would lead to deportation of family, friends, and neighbors.

On the other hand, for a municipality to defy federal law is essentially an act of civil disobedience. It should only be done for strong and morally unassailable reasons. In 1987, the Guatemalan government was waging a genocidal war against Mayans. Death squads were killing anyone in El Salvador with leadership potential and a willingness to speak out—from union leaders to schoolteachers. Military dictatorships in Haiti and Brazil had been persecuting and assassinating dissenters. And all of these evil doers were receiving material aid from the United States government. I believe that creating a “sanctuary” for those who might otherwise be killed or tortured was the right thing to do.

Now, however, none of these conditions exist. Those urging city government to defy immigration law wwould have to make a very persuasive case. I have trouble imagining what it could possibly be.

Ron Newman

Things are still not wonderful in Guatemala, and they may be even worse now in Haiti then back then.

Buddy

Moonbat Asshats (Bill, Diogenes, Election, Sohl, et all...), you want proof that illegal immigration costs us money? I got plenty of it below and the solution is simple (ignore Bill "Hugo Chavez" Shelton's tripe series): BIGGER FENCES, MORE ICE AGENTS, DEPORT THE FILTHY SCUMBASG, WORK CAMPS AND JAILS. Quite easy, morons, so SHADDUP!

Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.

Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).

With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.

On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.

Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.

If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.

Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status -- what most illegal aliens would become -- can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.

Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.

The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain -- many legal immigrants are highly skilled.

The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work.

The results of this study are consistent with a 1997 study by the National Research Council, which also found that immigrants' education level is a key determinant of their fiscal impact.

Solh Zendeh

Buddy, I don't need your cut-and-paste proof that allowing millions of unskilled workers into the workforce is economic suicide. The fact that you think I do, along with your continued vulgarity, demonstrates the lack of seriousness you bring to this subject.

When you decide you can speak like an adult, we'll welcome you back to the discussion. Thanks.

Somer_Salted

He who's been Banned/
At bat, he gets Fanned

Bill Shelton

It’s said that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. A good example of this is Buddy Grog’s knowledge of how to use Google, but incapacity for critical thinking about the information that he selectively culls. [Buddy Grog, I’m not being willfully disrespectful of you by choosing not to address you directly. Instead, you have eloquently demonstrated that you are unable or unwilling to have a mutually respectful conversation.]

Truth Fan often writes about the importance of “evidence.” Evidence is information that is verifiable and reproducible. Anyone can verify its providence and methodology, and anyone using the same methodology will get the same results.

All of the information that Buddy Grog offers in his last post comes from a single "study" by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS). CIS presents itself as a mainstream, nonpartisan research groups that is just trying to provide useful information. It agreeably describes its purpose as seeking “fewer immigrants but a warmer welcome.”

In fact, as the Wall Street Journal (WSJ, June 14, 2004) reported, CIS and several other anti-immigrant groups, (FAIR, NumbersUSA, Project-USA) were founded by a White Supremacist named John Taunton.) CIS is funded by a variety of right-wing sources including the Pioneer Fund, described by a Wall Street Journal editorial as a "white-supremacist outfit devoted to racial purity through eugenics.” (While there are a number of articles exposing CIS, I cite WSJ because it is usually considered a Republican organ and therefore, presumably, would be more sympathetic to a legitimate conservative organization.) CIS wants to drastically reduce legal as well as illegal immigration.

Among the articles appearing on the CIS website are ones that

• compare people who support increased legal immigration with Romanian dictator Ceacescu’s force pregnancy program;

• argue that American Jews advocate “open boarders immigration” and are “engaging in intellectual and moral trimming, self-deception, and denial;”

• insist that there is an “inevitable link between immigration and terrorism” and that, therefore, we must close our boarders:

• claim that America has been continually threatened by “foreigners promoting radical ideologies, including Jacobinism, anarchism, communism, fascism, and now Islamism” and argue that immigrants should be banned based on their beliefs;

• attempt to play off immigrants against African Americans and unions; and so on.

Mark Krikorian, top hater in charge at CIS, insists that “terrorists comprise a miniscule (sic) percentage’ of immigrants, but the immigrant communities nonetheless serve as the sea, as Mao might have put it, within which the terrorists swim as fish.”

In other words, CIS dwells in the same fictional universe as Buddy Grog. That is the Provenance of Buddy Grog's “facts.” CIS has been kind enough to describe its “methodology” in the study.

It says that the study’s raw data comes from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Study (CPS), while acknowledging that the Census Bureau “does not ask respondents if they are illegal aliens.” Instead, CIS “estimates the size and characteristics of the illegal population” represented in the CPS sample, using “some very well-established facts about the characteristics of the illegal population.” It does not describe how it applies these “well established facts” to CPS data on “citizenship status, year of arrival in the United States, age, country of birth, educational attainment, sex, receipt of welfare programs, receipt of Social Security, veteran status, and marital status.”

It applies this assumed fraction of respondents who are illegal aliens to “income, household structure, and use of public services in the calendar year,” reported in CPS data and, in turn, estimates these household’s impacts on “federal expenditures and tax receipts.” So the study is as much a work of fiction as are Buddy Grog’s posts to this website.

The information that I have used in my columns comes from raw government data or peer-reviewed journals whose methodology is transparent, verifiable, and replicable. In response to Norski’s question about the column on immigrant criminality, for example I provided my list of sources. This takes up a lot of space, but I would be please to list the sources that I used for any other aspect of this series.

Truth Fan

This is a wonderful example contrasting evidence that proves the point of someone posting here, and evidence that unintentionally proves that someone posting here doesn't know what he's talking about.

Grog29

Typical of the radical left. To assume that challenges to your line of thinking and ideas must be a "single poster with multiple screenames". It's demented and desperate.

Why not ask JN to do some research and list here anyone who has used more than one screename? Better yet, get rid of the frustrated leftie conspiracy theorists by limiting the use of chosen screenames to one on this site. I have never used any other screename on here and I didn't think anyone could post using the same screename that I use. The fact that people can use someone elses screename makes this
website somewhat of a joke.

Ron Newman

The fact that people can use someone elses screename makes this website somewhat of a joke.

I don't agree with Grog29 on much of anything else, but he's right on the money with this statement.

Bill Shelton

I agree. Sorry if that seems disloyal.

Imux

insist that there is an “inevitable link between immigration and terrorism” and that, therefore, we must close our borders.

There isn't? You sure 'bout that, Bill? Check 911 list of islamofacists.

Bill, I have been on a little hiatus, but am back now. I just read your article and must admit that it appears you've gone off your rocker. I have to agree with Buddy that #2 had me rolling around laughing out loud!

Simple solution: Toss the illegals out,have the cops report all illegals to ICE, have a local ICE substation in Somerville, build bigger fences and muzzle the far left moonbats. Also, we all should be more vigliant and report any illegals to ICE (I do this now).

Freedom is not free. Surge worked. Economy booming. Moonbats crying.

it *is* funny

I don't understand why JN unbanned Imux. I'm taking a break from this site for a while ... it has become too tedious to wade through the noise to get to the signal.

Bill Shelton

You mean "lol" = "laughing out loud?"

Dang! I thought that Buddy was sending me "lots of love."

I guess that I don't understand why #2 is so funny. You can't mean that you think it's unachievable...can you?

And I think that my proposal in the previous column would stop illegal immigration more effectively than yours, and at a lower cost. Although, it might upset American Civil Liberties Union types who confuse symbol with reality.

Election

We won't hear much from Buddy, I'm afraid, given that now the individual who was behind Buddy has been unbanned.

Somer_Salted

Moonbats are fallin' on my head/I'm sure that each of them is RED...

Hey, Kids! Fill in the REST of the lyrics to the "Ballad of Buddy & Imux," and win a prize!

1st Prize = 1 Hour Dialogue with Imux/Buddy
2nd Prize = 1 Day Dialogue with Imux/Buddy
3rd Prize = 1 Week Dialogue with Imux/Buddy.

Election

Perhaps JN will nuke this thread/Unlikely 'cuz he's drunk in bed

Imux

Bill, your "solutions" are just talking points. Not actionable items.

End Coporate welfare: yeah, like that has a snowballs chance in hell.

Hold Importers to the same standards: again..snowballs chance in hell.

and you cannot KILL industries that employ millions and not ruin the economy. Can't happen.

Can you rewrite the article with a more simple set of solutions that are doable like:

1. Toss the illegals out NOW
2. Build bigger fences
3. Local cops report all illegals to ICE
4. Any employer who hires illegals gets 1 year automatically in jail

Oh yeah...and look at how the leftwing fools (election, Somer, it *is*) refute the facts with ad hominem attacks only. Election, Somer Salt and the rest of you fools can all go taking a flying.... I wouldn't blow my nose in your general direction. That's how much your opinions of me mean to me.

Craig

I-Hole: "There isn't? You sure 'bout that, Bill? Check 911 list of islamofacists."

All of the individuals responsible for hijacking the planes entered the country legally. Stop coming back to that argument, because it's fatally flawed.

And I guess you can add this to your list of "ad hominem attacks" because you happen to not like getting called out. However, I find it hilarious and at the same time sad that someone who is as obsessed with name-calling and lack of rational dialogue as you are continues to cry to his mom about being picked on at the playground.

Grow up and stop drinking.

Election

If we had invaded the country of origin of the alleged 9/11 attackers, we'd be in Saudi Arabia now.

Imux

The attackers should have been stopped at the borders. If before 911 we had done a better enforcing visas and not allowing illegals in then we would still have the twin towers. 911 falls squarely on Clinton's shoulders (for not getting OBL when he had the chance) and the liberal left's fault for bending over for the terrorists and illegals. It is sad that the left now supports a form of slavery (illegals coming in and working under the table for slave wages) and terrorists. If you don't America - move to France!

You people need to understand that by supporting illegals and terrorists you are undermining all of our security.

Oh, and can you moonbats even remember the pledge of allegiance? I do and I support truth, justice and the american way.

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation under God, indivisible,With Liberty and Justice for all.

Election

By supporting Imux and the terrorists, JN is clearly jeopardizing the future of SN (if there ever was a future).

cabbie

Hey I -

Admit it, you're not really a Conservative. You're like Steven Colbert...a parody of Conservatives. If that's not intentional well you certainly come off as such.

Oh, and truth, justice and the American way. That's not the Pledge. That's Superman ya maroon.

Imux

cabbie, of course I swiped that line from superman. I have gotten so used to women calling me superman - after a romp with me - that I now use that line. I should also mention that once they start wanting to chat or get all cuddly that I been have known to use superman's other classic line: "Up, up and AWAY!!".

Craig

Again, stop connecting 911 with immigration. They were admitted to the country on valid visas. They were not illegal immigrants. They did not sneak over the Rio Grande with a Coyote. They didn't wait for work at a Home Depot parking lot.

What went wrong was (at least in one case) the FBI never notified INS (as it was then called) that some of the eventual terrorists were under suspicion and shouldn't be allowed to enter. But if you want to keep making simple-minded arguments, then keep doing so, but only in your own head as you listen to Sean Hannity on the radio. I bet you also believe that Saddam Hussein was collaborating with UBL on 911, seeing as Hannity, Limbaugh, and Bush have all said so.

Kate

'simpleminded' - You hit the nail on the head, Craig.

Grog29

Mohammed Atta had an expired tourist visa and several others had violated their student visas. Several hijackers also got driver's licenses and other documents using the illegal alien "infrastructure" of fake document peddlers
and identity fraud. So you see...It's all apart of the illegal alien problems.

Imux

Thanks, Grog. You beat me to it on the overstaying visas and the 911 terrorists using the illegal infrastructure to pass through the system. These moonbats (cabbie, kate, Ron, Election, it *is*) don't care. They want to see America in financial ruin, so they can try to grab power and open our country to their social agenda (pro-illegals, pro-terrorists, pro-gays, pro-abortion, pro-can't-spank-your-own-kids, pro-drugs, pro-criminals, pro-whatever-sick&twisted-stuff-is-out-there).

I've been busy this morning laughing at what "Buffy and Muffy" posted on that other thread about Ron's bicycle and the lack of a bicycle seat when he is riding. That is an instant classic. JN should preserve that one!

Election

Invading Saudi Arabia should be a logical conclusion, given that the alleged 9/11 perpetrators were citizens of that country.

Kate

Imux (still doing business as Grog29) -
You really don't know what you're talking about. You don't belong cyber-conversing with intelligent, thoughtful people. You're a relic, you belong in a museum.

Grog29

Hey Kate-
Stop assuming that only one poster does'nt want to surrender to foreign illegal squatters and will not drink the kool-aide of your little cult. I am Grog29 and I have never posted here as anyone else. Accept that
you are in minority in the country on this subject.

When you post try debating the points being made instead of your whacked out assumptions and conspiracy theories about "it must be only one poster with different
screenames disagreeing with me". It's delusional and vain.

Bill Shelton

Well Grog, whether Kate is in a minority depends on how you define the issue.

The Gallup organization reports that "despite the media attention it has received, immigration usually ranks low when Americans are asked to rate the importance of various issues."

A recent Wall Street Journal poll found that a majority of both Republican and Democratic voters felt that America's current globalization policies have been bad for American workers.

In 2006, Congressional Republicans imagined that immigration would be a wedge issue that would help them in the mid-term elections. They passed the Secure Fence Act, and George W. Bush happily signed it. The electorate was indifferent, Republicans lost the House and the Senate, and the rest of us are stuck with this silly-assed fence that will funnel billions to cronies while doing nothing to halt illegal immigration.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Most Recent Photos

  • Danehy_Park_Family_Day
  • Bloco
  • 3517a
  • Web_toon_7_21_10
  • Prospect hill
  • Web_toon_7_14_10
  • 3224a
  • Art1(2)
  • Art5
  • Art10(2)
  • Union_square_flood
  • Flood_pic_(bridge_1)