Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Immigration Enforcement Ramping Up?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    IT's like they read that cartoon: NOW that Trump has signed the EO keeping families at the border together, the liberals are whining about keeping them in Adult Detention Centers (which is why they were separated in the first place)... Idiots at work

    îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


    • #32
      What? No idiotic, irrelevant non sequitur from red? Huh!

      O.K., then, it bears repeating:

      Build that wall and we won't have this "debate," this "argument." Illegal immigration won't occur on a massive scale like it has for decades.

      Legal immigration will be the way ! This is not a bad thing, this is what needs to be done !

      îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


      • #33

        That is correct. A country must have borders and a consistently APPLIED immigration policy.

        A country that does not, will be invaded.

        BUT . . .

        Don't feel bad rover, you're not the only one who can't - or won't - read.

        Who isn't capable of honesty.

        Who wants to deny that America is being invaded.

        You're in "good" company. With every other leftist liar/denier who supports criminals.

        -----------------------------------------------------------

        Our country is being victimized by a network of con-artist foreigners and America-hating left-wingers passing out fake papers, fake stories and fake scripts to Third-Worlders, who lie about seeking "asylum" to get in on the American gravy train and wreck our country.

        And that's in normal times.

        Journalists know absolutely nothing about immigration and refuse to learn, so when I cited the fraudulent "humanitarian" cases on TV Sunday night, I footnoted myself live on air, citing a New Yorker article as well as my book, "Adios, America," which has nearly 100 pages of footnotes. That should make it easy for even the stupidest reporters.

        You haven't met The Hill's Jacqueline Thomsen! She was at a loss. The New Yorker? What's that? Jacqueline thought and thought and thought, until her head hurt! Finally, she decided, as she wrote in The Hill, "It's unclear what New Yorker article Coulter was referring to."

        Armed only with the information that there was an article in a tiny little publication known as "The New Yorker" about asylum applicants being coached on their fake asylum claims, how could an American reporter ever hope to locate "The Asylum Seeker" in the Aug. 1, 2011, New Yorker? Forget "Adios, America," where it is cited, along with many, many other sources. I can't read a BOOK, Thomsen thought to herself.

        I Googled "New Yorker asylum," and the article I was referring to came up as the third item in the list. Add "coaching" or "coached," and it's the very first item Google gives you. It took 3 seconds.

        Thomsen: HOW DOES GOOGLE WORK, ANYWAY?

        The New Yorker article begins with "Caroline," an illegal alien from a middle-class family in Africa, who passed herself off to U.S. immigration authorities as a victim of rape and torture. As she admitted to The New Yorker, while giggling: "I have never been raped."

        Our immigration officials are so thorough, so hard to fool, that they granted Beatrice Munyenyezi asylum and citizenship, allowing her and her kids to live off the U.S. taxpayers for 10 years before federal prosecutors noticed, Hey! Munyenyezi wasn't a victim of the Rwandan genocide; she was a perpetrator! Munyenyezi had personally sentenced thousands of Rwandan women and children to death.

        And now the poor murderess has been SEPARATED FROM HER CHILDREN!


        Crack reporter Thomsen must have missed that story, too. For her reading pleasure, assuming she can read: Chris McGreal, "Rwandan woman stripped of U.S. citizenship after lying about genocide," The Guardian, Feb. 22, 2013.

        One asylum applicant written about in The New York Times claimed she was being persecuted in Russia because she was gay. She told her immigration lawyer, "I'm not gay at all. I don't even like gay people." (For ace Hill reporter Thomsen, who is hopelessly confused about "books" and "Google," the cite is: Sam Dolnick, "Asylum Ploys Play Off News to Open Door," The New York Times, July 12, 2011.)

        Usually, frauds are only exposed when the asylum applicant makes the news. You'd think one of these times, an asylee would become famous and we'd find out: Hey, this person really was fleeing persecution!

        Nope. The pattern is: They make the news; we find out their asylum applications were total frauds.

        Here are a few:


        ... That ... rover won't read about !!

        No, rover will make ad hominem attacks against the author at best.
        At worst, we'll get to see a short tirade of complete nonsense LOL


        http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/20...html#read_more

        îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


        • #34
          Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
          That is correct. A country must have borders and a consistently APPLIED immigration policy.
          Like Mexico has and does.

          îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


          • #35
            This IS a simple issue.

            But, we've seen what happens when incompetent people attempt to take care of simple issues.

            This has been an ongoing issue for many decades, it isn't "new."

            We've witnessed so many administrations that couldn't do the sensible thing, like every other country on earth..

            But America can't solve this ! We should be very embarrassed.

            We should be embarrassed because this is a very simple issue, yet WE keep electing incompetent people to run our government and they only make the problem worse.

            Many want to lay all of the blame for this at President Trumps feet. He wants to finally have a sensible immigration law/policy, and we're witnessing the fools in our government dance and blather and holler about why "they can't do anything" !!

            They never HAVE been able to do anything !!!

            So the invasion continues, while our "officials" pick each others noses and stare at their "finds."

            ....and vacantly tell us about... "these poor children," ignoring our own poor children !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            Below is a long and informative read about this "impossible to solve" problem....

            The problem that's impossible to solve because we have morons trying to solve it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            ------------------------------------------------------------------

            The House killed a hard-right immigration bill Thursday, and Republican leaders delayed a planned vote on a compromise GOP package with the party's lawmakers fiercely divided over an issue that has long confounded the party.

            The conservative measure's 231-193 defeat set the stage for debate on the second bill, this one crafted by Republican leaders in hopes of finding an accord between the party's sparring moderate and conservative wings. That bill was considered too lenient by some conservatives and seemed likely to fall, too, and aides said the final roll call would wait till Friday.

            Rejection of both would represent an embarrassment for President Donald Trump, who had embraced them. The battle over immigration has been intensified by heartbreaking images of migrant children separated from families and complicated by opaque statements by Trump.

            At the White House, Trump defended his administration's "zero tolerance" policy of prosecuting all migrants caught illegally entering the country, a change that has caused thousands of families to be divided while the parents are detained. He said without it, "you would have a run on this country the likes of which nobody has ever seen."

            He said he was inviting Congress' top two Democrats, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, to the White House for immigration bargaining. He called them "extremist open-border Democrats."

            In a tweet that seemed to undermine House leaders' efforts to round up votes, he questioned the purpose of their legislation by suggesting it was doomed in the Senate anyway.

            Trump issued an executive order Wednesday aimed at reversing his own policy of taking immigrant children from their detained parents, but emotions remained high.

            "I was welcomed here," a tearful Rep. Norma Torres, D-Calif., said during House debate, describing her journey to the U.S. as a child from Guatemala. "I was not put in a freezing cell."

            In an embarrassing detour, the House used an early procedural vote to correct what Republicans called a drafting error — language providing $100 billion more than they'd planned to help build Trump's proposed border wall with Mexico. Instead of giving initial approval for $24.8 billion spread over the next five years, the legislation said it would open the door to $24.8 billion "for each" of the next five years.

            The rejected compromise bill would have granted no pathway to citizenship for young "Dreamers" who arrived in the country illegally as children, curbed legal immigration and bolstered border security.

            The second was a compromise between GOP moderates and the party's conservatives that included an opportunity for citizenship for the young immigrants. It provides $25 billion for Trump's wall, restrictions on legal immigration and language requiring the Homeland Security Department to keep migrant families together while they're being processed for illegal entry to the U.S.

            Democrats oppose both measures as harsh.

            "It is not a compromise," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters. "It may be a compromise with the devil, but it is not a compromise with the Democrats."

            Even before votes began, Trump complicated GOP efforts to round up votes.

            "What is the purpose of the House doing good immigration bills when you need 9 votes by Democrats in the Senate, and the Dems are only looking to Obstruct (which they feel is good for them in the Mid-Terms)," Trump wrote. "Republicans must get rid of the stupid Filibuster Rule-it is killing you!"

            In the unlikely event that the House approved the GOP compromise, it seemed certain to go nowhere in the GOP-run Senate. Democrats there have enough votes to use procedural delays to kill it. Sixty votes are needed to end filibusters.

            On Wednesday, Trump reversed himself and took executive action aimed at curbing the separation of families. His order seemed to stem some of the urgency for Congress to act.

            But GOP leaders were eager to hold the votes anyway. The roll calls would let Republicans assert to voters that they tried addressing the immigration problem.

            "Our members wanted to express themselves on an issue they care a great deal about," Speaker Paul Ryan said.

            Passage of the GOP compromise was always a long shot, but failure may now come at a steeper price. Republicans and Trump have raised expectations that, in control of Congress and the White House, they can fix the nation's long-standing immigration problems.

            When the crisis of family separations erupted at the border, GOP leaders revised the compromise bill to bolster a provision requiring parents and children to be held together in custody. It did so by eliminating the 20-day cap on holding minors and allowing indefinite detentions.

            Even though Trump has acted unilaterally to stem the family separations, lawmakers still prefer a legislative fix. The administration is not ending its "zero tolerance" approach to border prosecutions. If the new policy is rejected by the courts, which the administration acknowledges is a possibility, the debate could move back to square one.

            Senate Republicans, fearing Trump's action will not withstand a legal challenge and eager to go on record opposing the administration's policy, have unveiled their own legislation to keep detained immigrant families together.

            In the House, moderate Republicans forced the immigration debate to the fore by threatening to use a rare procedure to demand a vote. Led by Curbelo and Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., many are from states with large populations of young "Dreamer" immigrants who now face deportation threats under Trump's decision to end the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. A federal court challenge has kept the DACA program running for now.


            https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/im.../21/id/867553/

            îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


            • #36
              The language games played by leftists are always on display for us.

              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              New York governor Andrew Cuomo announced this week that he will refuse to deploy National Guard troops to assist in border control—though no one asked him to, and no one is ever likely to ask. Cuomo is a master of the political non sequitur—last month, he promised to send a Dunkirk-style small-boat flotilla against offshore oil rigs that don’t exist—and he’s also pretty good at twisting the English language to serve his interests.

              In this, he is not unique—hence the rhetorical riot generated by the Trump administration’s so-called “family separation” policies—but the governor’s National Guard posturing is at once over the top and instructive. “In the face of the federal government’s inhumane treatment of immigrant families, New York will not deploy National Guard to the border,” Cuomo announced Monday. “We will not be complicit in this ongoing human tragedy.”

              Well, again, nobody asked. But the Guard diversion is a useful tool, deflecting attention from the fundamental dishonesty of the governor’s full statement. That is, the federal government is treating no one inhumanely; the “families” involved are not so much immigrants as they are economic migrants with no inherent right of entry into the United States—and to the extent that there is an “ongoing human tragedy” on the border, responsibility for it resides with those attempting to enter the county illegally.

              It is true that Americans love children. The Clinton administration discovered that in 2000, when it sent heavily armed immigration agents storming into a Florida home to remove a screaming seven-year-old boy. The reaction was furious. That same instinct underlies the current controversy, as well as the politicized reaction to it. Just as most people don’t want bad things to happen to children, even fewer want to be perceived as agents of harm, and not just to children. That’s why disingenuous rhetoric such as Cuomo’s can be such an effective tool.

              Indeed, not since “the homelessness crisis” blossomed a generation ago to constrain honest discussions of substance addiction, disintegrating families, deinstitutionalization, and an explosion of common vagrancy has artful rhetoric so successfully obscured facts, law, and sound public policy. Then (as now) it was deemed judgmental—a grave sin—to censure personal choices or behavior. The problem, advocates and the media insisted, was lack of a home, and it was up to government to provide one. Since then, billions have been spent on housing and other programs, to no discernible long-term positive effect—and it is still all but impossible to have a serious public discussion about the addled, the addicted, and the socially dysfunctional.

              Fast forward to America’s southern border, where—advocates and the media contend—children routinely are “ripped” from their mothers’ arms, shunted off to “cages,” and pretty much traumatized for the rest of their lives. Once again, facts and context are optional; politically opportunistic rhetoric drives what little debate is allowed, and meretricious politicians like Cuomo get away with simply making stuff up. Never mind that the policies now at issue date at least to the Obama administration, even if the circumstances have changed. Or that the alternative to separation is a choice between jailing the children with their illegal-alien parents, or allowing those parents free passage into the country.

              That last point, of course, is the fundamental element in the debate: is America to have control of its borders, or not? Once again, euphemism obscures the issues; when “illegal alien” morphed into “undocumented immigrant” in the popular lexicon, the debate was largely over. After all, immigrants are American icons—isn’t that where we all came from?—whereas illegals are a nettlesome law-enforcement problem. And as was the case with the socially dysfunctional, if you label problems as something other than what they are, you can ignore the issues they raise.

              Meanwhile, is there a more delightful attention-deflector in America discourse than the word “undocumented?” Every other country on the planet requires passports, entry papers, work permits, and the like, but on America’s southern borders, just tell the immigration agents that you left your “documents” in your other suit, and everything is cool. Or so the advocates, and especially the media, would have it. But “illegal alien” is precisely the correct term because it speaks directly to the debate’s core issue: territorial integrity, the basis for national sovereignty. Without that, there can be no meaningful rule of law—and without that, every place becomes a sanctuary city, and eventually an MS-13 gang war.

              So let’s lay it out in simple terms: Americans have the right, if not the duty, to lock their doors to keep their persons and property safe. Why shouldn’t the nation, too? Senator Ted Cruz has advanced a humane proposal to let detained parents stay with their children while their cases are adjudicated, but opponents of the administration’s border policy are arguing for blanket immunity from the democratically legislated consequences of blatantly illegal conduct. There’s no other honest way to put it—not that honest debate seems to matter.


              https://www.city-journal.org/html/bo...mes-15977.html

              îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


              • #37
                Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                The language games played by leftists are always on display for us.

                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                New York governor Andrew Cuomo announced this week that he will refuse to deploy National Guard troops to assist in border control—though no one asked him to, and no one is ever likely to ask. Cuomo is a master of the political non sequitur—last month, he promised to send a Dunkirk-style small-boat flotilla against offshore oil rigs that don’t exist—and he’s also pretty good at twisting the English language to serve his interests.

                In this, he is not unique—hence the rhetorical riot generated by the Trump administration’s so-called “family separation” policies—but the governor’s National Guard posturing is at once over the top and instructive. “In the face of the federal government’s inhumane treatment of immigrant families, New York will not deploy National Guard to the border,” Cuomo announced Monday. “We will not be complicit in this ongoing human tragedy.”

                Well, again, nobody asked. But the Guard diversion is a useful tool, deflecting attention from the fundamental dishonesty of the governor’s full statement. That is, the federal government is treating no one inhumanely; the “families” involved are not so much immigrants as they are economic migrants with no inherent right of entry into the United States—and to the extent that there is an “ongoing human tragedy” on the border, responsibility for it resides with those attempting to enter the county illegally.

                It is true that Americans love children. The Clinton administration discovered that in 2000, when it sent heavily armed immigration agents storming into a Florida home to remove a screaming seven-year-old boy. The reaction was furious. That same instinct underlies the current controversy, as well as the politicized reaction to it. Just as most people don’t want bad things to happen to children, even fewer want to be perceived as agents of harm, and not just to children. That’s why disingenuous rhetoric such as Cuomo’s can be such an effective tool.

                Indeed, not since “the homelessness crisis” blossomed a generation ago to constrain honest discussions of substance addiction, disintegrating families, deinstitutionalization, and an explosion of common vagrancy has artful rhetoric so successfully obscured facts, law, and sound public policy. Then (as now) it was deemed judgmental—a grave sin—to censure personal choices or behavior. The problem, advocates and the media insisted, was lack of a home, and it was up to government to provide one. Since then, billions have been spent on housing and other programs, to no discernible long-term positive effect—and it is still all but impossible to have a serious public discussion about the addled, the addicted, and the socially dysfunctional.

                Fast forward to America’s southern border, where—advocates and the media contend—children routinely are “ripped” from their mothers’ arms, shunted off to “cages,” and pretty much traumatized for the rest of their lives. Once again, facts and context are optional; politically opportunistic rhetoric drives what little debate is allowed, and meretricious politicians like Cuomo get away with simply making stuff up. Never mind that the policies now at issue date at least to the Obama administration, even if the circumstances have changed. Or that the alternative to separation is a choice between jailing the children with their illegal-alien parents, or allowing those parents free passage into the country.

                That last point, of course, is the fundamental element in the debate: is America to have control of its borders, or not? Once again, euphemism obscures the issues; when “illegal alien” morphed into “undocumented immigrant” in the popular lexicon, the debate was largely over. After all, immigrants are American icons—isn’t that where we all came from?—whereas illegals are a nettlesome law-enforcement problem. And as was the case with the socially dysfunctional, if you label problems as something other than what they are, you can ignore the issues they raise.

                Meanwhile, is there a more delightful attention-deflector in America discourse than the word “undocumented?” Every other country on the planet requires passports, entry papers, work permits, and the like, but on America’s southern borders, just tell the immigration agents that you left your “documents” in your other suit, and everything is cool. Or so the advocates, and especially the media, would have it. But “illegal alien” is precisely the correct term because it speaks directly to the debate’s core issue: territorial integrity, the basis for national sovereignty. Without that, there can be no meaningful rule of law—and without that, every place becomes a sanctuary city, and eventually an MS-13 gang war.

                So let’s lay it out in simple terms: Americans have the right, if not the duty, to lock their doors to keep their persons and property safe. Why shouldn’t the nation, too? Senator Ted Cruz has advanced a humane proposal to let detained parents stay with their children while their cases are adjudicated, but opponents of the administration’s border policy are arguing for blanket immunity from the democratically legislated consequences of blatantly illegal conduct. There’s no other honest way to put it—not that honest debate seems to matter.


                https://www.city-journal.org/html/bo...mes-15977.html
                I know how much you savor torturing children but have you given any thought to much your fun and games are costing taxpayers?https://www.cheatsheet.com/money-car...tml/?a=viewall

                îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                • #38
                  Originally posted by redrover View Post
                  I know how much you savor torturing children but have you given any thought to much your fun and games are costing taxpayers?https://www.cheatsheet.com/money-car...tml/?a=viewall
                  More greats from rover !!

                  and...

                  We know that allowing millions of illegal, illiterate aliens into America ... why it's "Good for us" !!!

                  It saves us money, it saves lives, why the benefits never end do they ??

                  Something you also might enjoy reading - https://www.uspoliticsonline.com/for...460#post555460

                  îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                  • #39
                    The dishonest media doesn't want to talk about this.

                    They don't want us yo know the costs of allowing people to come into our country so easily illegally.

                    They just want to show us staged propaganda of screaming kids.

                    They just want to manipulate us, hoping were so dumb we CAN be manipulated.

                    ------------------------------------------------------------------

                    'We Will Not Rest Until Our Border Is Secure'

                    President Donald Trump on Friday ripped the nation's "weak" immigration laws, telling families of people who died at the hands of illegal immigrants that "our first duty, and our highest loyalty, is to the citizens of the United States."

                    "We will not rest until our border is secure, our citizens are safe and we finally end the immigration crisis once and for all," Trump told the "Angel Families" at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building near the White House.

                    "We want safety in our country," he said. "We want strong borders.

                    "We want people to come in, but we want them to come in the proper way.

                    "These are incredible families, incredible people," the president said. "Your loved ones have not died in vain."

                    Trump's comments came two days after he signed an executive order halting his administration's policy of separating children from their parents detained after illegally crossing the U.S. border.

                    But the president's order did not end the "zero-tolerance" policy that criminally prosecutes all adults caught crossing the border illegally.

                    President Trump has long championed the cause of the angel families, appearing with them during the campaign and speaking at rallies organized by The Remembrance Project, which was formed in 2009 to honor those murder victims.

                    Trump also slammed the media for not addressing the concerns of such families, amid the images of children being held in cages at border detention centers and audio recordings of young children crying for their parents.

                    He also cited statistics on the number of violent crimes committed by illegals, including 63,000 Americans being killed by aliens since the 9/11 attacks, and bashed sanctuary cities "that release violent criminals into our communities and then protect them."

                    "We're gathered today to hear from the American victims of illegal immigration," Trump began. "You never hear this side.

                    "These are the American citizens permanently separated from their loved ones.

                    "They're not separated a day, two days," the president continued. "Permanently.

                    "Their loved ones were killed by illegal aliens. These are the families that the media ignores.

                    "These are the stories that Democrats and people that are weak on immigration — they don't want to discuss, they don't want to hear, they don't want to see or talk about.

                    "The networks don't bring cameras to their homes, or display the images of their incredible loved ones across the nightly news," Trump said.

                    "They don't do that.

                    "They don't talk about the death and destruction caused by people that shouldn't be here," he added. "People that will continuously get into trouble and do bad things.

                    "For years, their plight was met with indifference. No more."

                    Several family members spoke, discussing how they lost children and relatives to violence by illegals and attacking the media for ignoring their situations.

                    "We weren't lucky enough to be separated for five days, 10 days," Laura Wilkerson, of Pearland, Texas, told the gathering. "Separated permanently."

                    Her son, Josh, 18, was murdered by an illegal immigrant from Belize in 2010 who tortured and set him afire.

                    .....


                    https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/pr.../22/id/867832/

                    îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                      The dishonest media doesn't want to talk about this.

                      They don't want us yo know the costs of allowing people to come into our country so easily illegally.

                      They just want to show us staged propaganda of screaming kids.

                      They just want to manipulate us, hoping were so dumb we CAN be manipulated.

                      ------------------------------------------------------------------

                      'We Will Not Rest Until Our Border Is Secure'

                      President Donald Trump on Friday ripped the nation's "weak" immigration laws, telling families of people who died at the hands of illegal immigrants that "our first duty, and our highest loyalty, is to the citizens of the United States."

                      "We will not rest until our border is secure, our citizens are safe and we finally end the immigration crisis once and for all," Trump told the "Angel Families" at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building near the White House.

                      "We want safety in our country," he said. "We want strong borders.

                      "We want people to come in, but we want them to come in the proper way.

                      "These are incredible families, incredible people," the president said. "Your loved ones have not died in vain."

                      Trump's comments came two days after he signed an executive order halting his administration's policy of separating children from their parents detained after illegally crossing the U.S. border.

                      But the president's order did not end the "zero-tolerance" policy that criminally prosecutes all adults caught crossing the border illegally.

                      President Trump has long championed the cause of the angel families, appearing with them during the campaign and speaking at rallies organized by The Remembrance Project, which was formed in 2009 to honor those murder victims.

                      Trump also slammed the media for not addressing the concerns of such families, amid the images of children being held in cages at border detention centers and audio recordings of young children crying for their parents.

                      He also cited statistics on the number of violent crimes committed by illegals, including 63,000 Americans being killed by aliens since the 9/11 attacks, and bashed sanctuary cities "that release violent criminals into our communities and then protect them."

                      "We're gathered today to hear from the American victims of illegal immigration," Trump began. "You never hear this side.

                      "These are the American citizens permanently separated from their loved ones.

                      "They're not separated a day, two days," the president continued. "Permanently.

                      "Their loved ones were killed by illegal aliens. These are the families that the media ignores.

                      "These are the stories that Democrats and people that are weak on immigration — they don't want to discuss, they don't want to hear, they don't want to see or talk about.

                      "The networks don't bring cameras to their homes, or display the images of their incredible loved ones across the nightly news," Trump said.

                      "They don't do that.

                      "They don't talk about the death and destruction caused by people that shouldn't be here," he added. "People that will continuously get into trouble and do bad things.

                      "For years, their plight was met with indifference. No more."

                      Several family members spoke, discussing how they lost children and relatives to violence by illegals and attacking the media for ignoring their situations.

                      "We weren't lucky enough to be separated for five days, 10 days," Laura Wilkerson, of Pearland, Texas, told the gathering. "Separated permanently."

                      Her son, Josh, 18, was murdered by an illegal immigrant from Belize in 2010 who tortured and set him afire.

                      .....


                      https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/pr.../22/id/867832/
                      Y ou are all bent out of shape over an atrocity that occurred eight years ago/ Couldn't you find something a little more timely? As our classy first lady says I don't really care do U. I hear that next year instead of the Easter egg hunt She's going to have a wet tee-shirt contest which she plans to enter and win.At that time we expect all the girls from the border that have been kidnapped and held at the White house as sex slaves will be released to participate in the contest. The girls who finish in the top ten will be returned to their mothers.https://mashable.com/2018/06/20/wher.../#SAXGSZF.xqqT

                      îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by redrover View Post
                        Y ou are all bent out of shape over an atrocity that occurred eight years ago/ Couldn't you find something a little more timely?
                        You're offering a distraction by having us believe that the only incident was the one mentioned at the end of the article.

                        This lets us ignore other items mentioned in the writing. Things like;

                        "He also cited statistics on the number of violent crimes committed by illegals, including 63,000 Americans being killed by aliens since the 9/11 attacks, and bashed sanctuary cities "that release violent criminals into our communities and then protect them."

                        He was talking to families of people who died at the hands of illegal immigrants ...

                        I'm not at all "bent out of shape."

                        I'm disgusted that this is a problem that we have made for ourselves because we're to ignorant or lazy to enforce our own laws.

                        We can't really blame these illegal immigrants ! We've been letting them come here and giving them free stuff for decades !

                        A time will come when we just can't afford too anymore.
                        THEN people like yourself will scream and whine about "what horrible people we are" LOL So let 'em all come to your house and YOU feed and care for them !

                        Originally posted by redrover View Post
                        As our classy first lady says I don't really care do U. I hear that next year instead of the Easter egg hunt She's going to have a wet tee-shirt contest which she plans to enter and win.At that time we expect all the girls from the border that have been kidnapped and held at the White house as sex slaves will be released to participate in the contest. The girls who finish in the top ten will be returned to their mothers.https://mashable.com/2018/06/20/wher.../#SAXGSZF.xqqT
                        Another roverese rant-o-rama. Ridiculous as always.

                        îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by redrover View Post

                          Y ou are all bent out of shape over an atrocity that occurred eight years ago/ Couldn't you find something a little more timely? As our classy first lady says I don't really care do U. I hear that next year instead of the Easter egg hunt She's going to have a wet tee-shirt contest which she plans to enter and win.At that time we expect all the girls from the border that have been kidnapped and held at the White house as sex slaves will be released to participate in the contest. The girls who finish in the top ten will be returned to their mothers.https://mashable.com/2018/06/20/wher.../#SAXGSZF.xqqT
                          asked the hypocrite whose panties are in a bunch over Trump's locker room talk over a decade ago...

                          CLASSIC buffoonery.

                          îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                          • #43
                            HR 4760, which would have codified leaving children with their parents as their entry into the U.S. is decided, just failed in the House. This is the issue over which the Democraps have been excoriating Trump and the media has been starting wild fires in their pursuit of anything about Trump to bolster circulation.

                            Unbelievably, ALL 190 DEMOCRATS in the House voted against it. Every hypocrital one of them voted "nay."

                            If you need to review what (else) was in the bill that might have prompted them to vote no, you can find it here ... I'm not seeing it.

                            îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                              HR 4760, which would have codified leaving children with their parents as their entry into the U.S. is decided, just failed in the House. This is the issue over which the Democraps have been excoriating Trump and the media has been starting wild fires in their pursuit of anything about Trump to bolster circulation.

                              Unbelievably, ALL 190 DEMOCRATS in the House voted against it. Every hypocrital one of them voted "nay."

                              If you need to review what (else) was in the bill that might have prompted them to vote no, you can find it here ... I'm not seeing it.
                              According to president Trump we are in the middle of an immigration crisis. Of course the statistics show that he's lying. Nothing new about that. The only crisis is the one he created by separating families to appease his racist base. note there is no like program on the Canadian border. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB9vFiH_3PE

                              îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by redrover View Post

                                According to president Trump we are in the middle of an immigration crisis. Of course the statistics show that he's lying. Nothing new about that. The only crisis is the one he created by separating families to appease his racist base. note there is no like program on the Canadian border. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB9vFiH_3PE
                                Irrelevant and non-responsive.

                                What I said was:
                                Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                                HR 4760, which would have codified leaving children with their parents as their entry into the U.S. is decided, just failed in the House. This is the issue over which the Democraps have been excoriating Trump and the media has been starting wild fires in their pursuit of anything about Trump to bolster circulation.

                                Unbelievably, ALL 190 DEMOCRATS in the House voted against it. Every hypocrital one of them voted "nay."

                                If you need to review what (else) was in the bill that might have prompted them to vote no, you can find it here ... I'm not seeing it.
                                Do you have any response to your beloved democraps hypocrisy? ...anything intelligent, I mean.

                                îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?

                                Working...
                                X