13 Feb

Desiline Victor- sorry to burst the happy bubble but…

                                       

d victor

Desiline Victor was one of the props used by Barack Obama in his State of the Union Address. She has been widely celebrated in the press largely because she waited three hours to vote for Obama.

Daily Mail

A 102-year-old woman has been chosen to sit next to Michelle Obama at the annual State of the Union address in Washington.

Desaline Victor, a naturalized U.S citizen from Miami, Florida, waited for more than three hours to cast her ballot for the President on November 6.

Ms Victor will sit in the First Lady’s box with military families, people who are championing immigration reform and victims of gun violence.

Haitian born Ms Victor, who is known as ‘Granny’ in her local community, expressed her surprise at the opportunity.

She said: ‘I know I’m going to sit with the president’s wife. I did not think I would get here. I am proud.’

White House Officials say that Ms Victor represents the minorities and immigrants who stand to benefit from the policies President Obama will discuss in his speech.

About what she said- we’ll be revisiting that.

“White House Officials say that Ms Victor represents the minorities and immigrants who stand to benefit from the policies President Obama will discuss in his speech”

They got that part right.

HuffPo:

WASHINGTON — A determined Florida centenarian who had to make two trips and wait several hours to vote for President Barack Obama last fall joined first lady Michelle Obama for Tuesday’s State of the Union. Her resolve to cast a ballot became a symbol of early voting obstacles in the presidential election.

Desiline Victor, 102, of Miami, endured a weather-delayed flight to Washington on Monday in order to get to town for Obama’s address. She was among the guests seated in the House visitors’ gallery, an opportunity she called “a beautiful thing.”

During his address, Obama cited Victor as an example worth following, saying she was concerned about “whether folks like her would get to have their say.”

Tampa Bay Times:

When she set out to cast her vote last year in North Miami, Desiline Victor had no way of knowing the journey would lead all the way to the White House. Tuesday night, Victor, a 102-year-old Haitian immigrant, sat in the House chamber as a guest of first lady Michelle Obama. Victor voted for the president, but it was not easy. On her first visit to the polls Oct. 28, the first day of early voting, she waited in line for three hours. Poll workers eventually advised her to come back later. She finally cast her vote that evening.

In his speech, President Barack Obama said we should follow Victor’s example.

“When she arrived at her polling place, she was told the wait to vote might be six hours,” Obama said, “And as time ticked by, her concern was not with her tired body or aching feet, but whether folks like her would get to have their say.”

And there’s lots more. The first question that popped into my mind was “What kind of people would make a centenarian wait three hours to vote?” Why wasn’t she immediately granted access to the front of the line?

I guess that what they do in North Miami.

But then I began wondering more about her. Specifically, why is she even here and how is she a US citizen?

Victor was born in 1910 and she is 102 years old. It’s admirable that she is “determined.” The problem is that she came to this country in 1989 at the age of 79. She doesn’t speak English.

“I’m very happy, very proud,” she said, communicating through a translator because she speaks only Haitian Creole. The translator is her godson, Mathieu Pierre Louis, whom she raised as her son. She moved to the United States in 1989 and became a naturalized citizen in 2005.

One of the requirements for citizenship is the ability to speak English:

General Eligibility Requirements

To be eligible for naturalization pursuant to section 319(a) of the INA, an applicant must:

Be 18 or older
Be a permanent resident (green card holder) for at least 3 years immediately preceding the date of filing Form N-400, Application for Naturalization
Have been living in marital union with the U.S. citizen spouse, who has been a U.S. citizen during all of such period, during the 3 years immediately preceding the date of filing the application and up until examination on the application
Have lived within the state, or USCIS district with jurisdiction over the applicant’s place of residence, for at least 3 months prior to the date of filing the application
Have continuous residence in the United States as a lawful permanent resident for at least 3 years immediately preceding the date of filing the application
Reside continuously within the United States from the date of application for naturalization until the time of naturalization
Be physically present in the United States for at least 18 months out of the 3 years immediately preceding the date of filing the application
Be able to read, write, and speak English and have knowledge and an understanding of U.S. history and government (also known as civics)
Be a person of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States during all relevant periods under the law

“Be able to read, write, and speak English” Hmm. How did she gain citizenship?

And let’s examine why the President says we need immigration reform:

“Real reform means fixing the legal immigration system to cut waiting periods, reduce bureaucracy, and attract the highly-skilled entrepreneurs and engineers that will help create jobs and grow our economy.”

“attract the highly-skilled entrepreneurs and engineers”

Like Desiline Victor, right? How much has she contributed to the system? How much has she paid in income and social security taxes?

We’re going to strengthen the economy by importing 80 year olds with no skills and who cannot speak English and who are wholly dependent on the government for support?

Seriously?

Or are we merely importing elderly dependent future democrat voters who are willing to wait three hours to vote for their “son”?

About DrJohn

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.
This entry was posted in Barack Obama, Economy, Immigration, Law, Obama Euphoric-Rapture Syndrome, Politics, Uncategorized, WtF? and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Wednesday, February 13th, 2013 at 6:41 am
| 4,547 views

217 Responses to Desiline Victor- sorry to burst the happy bubble but…

  1. Aqua says: 151

    @DrJohn:

    Send all illegals back? You bet.

    I just want to address this part with you Dr. J. This is a valid argument, and something that people on both sides should be able to discuss.
    You called out “you left-wingers” in your last post. I’m more than a little sure that Aye is not a left-winger. I’m not a left-winger, but this comes up with certain people on the right more frequently. If you disagree with a position, you are not a true “conservative, republican, right-winger.” Personally, I tend to lean libertarian on social issues, and conservative on fiscal issues. As I told Ms. Bees in another thread, I don’t want to be ruled by either side, and that seems to be the way we are going. I don’t want to be ruled by the right or ruled by the left.
    As for illegal immigration; a man, woman, husband, wife, mother, father, will do anything to make life better for their family. Our founding parents were just such people. They couldn’t change the political situation in the countries, so to provide a better life for their families, they came here.
    The border needs to be secured; it’s a national security issue. Is the left wrong on this? Yeah, just ask ranchers in the southern border towns. The border is not secure.
    Our immigration process needs to be fixed, it sucks. From the top down, it needs to be reworked.
    Deport all illegals? You can be a conservative and also be a realist. It’s never going to happen. Self deportation is one of the most stupid things to flow from Romney’s mouth. From people that rightly say national background checks won’t work well because criminals will not get a background check, comes self deportation. E-verify and illegals will no longer be able to work. Yeah, it’ll put a crimp in system, but they’ll just go underground. By they, I mean illegal aliens and those that employ them. Operation Wetback II? Yep, that will look great on the nightly news. The site of millions of families being torn apart a the borders streaming into the living rooms of the most generous people in the world.
    There’s a way to fix all of this, and that is the conversation we should be having. It shouldn’t be about a 102 year old woman that may or not be benefiting from the taxpayers.

    ReplyReply
  2. DrJohn says: 152

    @Aqua:

    As I told Ms. Bees in another thread, I don’t want to be ruled by either side, and that seems to be the way we are going. I don’t want to be ruled by the right or ruled by the left.

    Fair enough.

    The border needs to be secured; it’s a national security issue. Is the left wrong on this? Yeah, just ask ranchers in the southern border towns. The border is not secure.

    Agreed

    Our immigration process needs to be fixed, it sucks. From the top down, it needs to be reworked.

    Agreed

    Deport all illegals? You can be a conservative and also be a realist. It’s never going to happen.

    Agreed.

    Self deportation is one of the most stupid things to flow from Romney’s mouth.

    Agreed

    There’s a way to fix all of this, and that is the conversation we should be having. It shouldn’t be about a 102 year old woman that may or not be benefiting from the taxpayers.

    I agree that it could have been written better. Thank you for the civil discussion. It’s refreshing.

    ReplyReply
  3. Aqua
    hi, you gave many good points and possible solutions,
    I would think that, every time we have a AUTHOR WRITING A POST SUCH AS THIS ONE,
    THE PERSON NAME LIKE DESILLIN IN IT IS JUST USED TO APPROACH THE BIG PROBLEM YOU HAVE TOUCH,
    AND in all those POSTS VERY WELL DONE BY CONSERVATIVES AUTHORS , WHO’S DECENCY PREVENT THEM TO ARTICULATE FURTHER WHAT IS WRONG IN AMERICA ON THAT THEME ALONE,
    THEY JUST OPEN A DOOR TO A GIGANTIC PILE OF PROBLEMS WHICH THE ONES COMMENTING ON IT ,
    ON EACH POST, IS GOING FURTHER AND SHOWING THE FRUSTRATION AND ANGER OF THE REGULAR CITIZENS WHO HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT, WHICH NOW THEY HAVE TO COMPETE WITH THOSE PROBLEMS
    BECAUSE IT IS DEFINITELY TOUCHING MORE AND MORE THE CITIZENS TOLERANT AND PEACEFULLY SENDING MESSAGES TO THE LAWMAKERS, WHICH THEY GET NO RETURNED ACTIONS.
    WE SEE MORE CRIMES, WHY THEY SAY? THEY DON’T HAVE THE GUTS OR THE BRAINS TO DWELL
    IN THE CRIMES, THEY WANT NOT AN AMERICA, THEY WANT A BABEL TOWER,
    THE BORDERS BRING NOT ONLY MEXICANS, THEY WHERE COMING MANY YEARS AGO, THEY WHERE NEVER FEARED,
    THEY FOR MANY HELP THE LOCALS IN WARS,
    BEFORE THESE MANY GENERATIIONS, AND THEY DID ASSIMILATE TO THE LAWS OF THE LAND
    CAUSING NO PROBLEMS, BELIEVING IN GOD ALSO,
    WE CANNOT PUT THEM IN THE BIG BLAME,
    BUT THE MARKET OF BORDER CROSSING IS VERY GOOD THE ONE WHO GET PAID MAKE A GOOD LIVING, AND THEY DEAL WITH 150 DIFFERENT COUNTRIES ILLEGALS,
    THOSE ARE MORE AND MORE COMING, NOW THERE IS PAID TEACHERS TO EDUCATE THE PEOPLE TO CALL THEM THE NEW MAJORITY NOT THE ILLEGALS,THAT COME FROM OBAMA DIRECTLY, THE PILGRIMS WHAT? THE PILGRIMS?
    THEY ARE NOT PILGRIMS WHO CROSS THE BORDER IN AMERICA,
    THAT’S WHERE THE PROBLEM COME FROM THESES LAST 4 YEARS AND NOW INCREASING FASTER
    SO TO OBTAIN THE OBAMA SOCIALIST PLUS AGENDA WITH HIS NEW MAJORITY, 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN AND GROWING IN AN AMERICA HE IS RUINING ECONOMICLY AND FINANCIALY,
    HE IS BETTING ON,
    AND COULD NOT CARE LESS ABOUT THE REAL AMERICANS,
    HE SEE THEM AS THE FUTUR MINORITY OF THIS AMERICA ,
    NEXT HE WILL JOIN THE UN GLOBAL POOL WORLD

    ReplyReply
  4. bburris says: 154

    @Aqua:

    Wanting “all illegal immigrants” deported is an idealistic dream and desire, based not one bit on racism or anti-immigrant feelings, but, as you say, is unrealistic. However, this form of “self-deportation” could be achieved, and I think it would work.

    Demand positive identification for government funded services. You show up at the emergency room for treatment of a cold or fever? Present ID. If no ID is presented, while the patient is being treated, ICE is called. Want housing subsidies? Present ID. Want food subsidies? Present ID. Once it is affirmed that there is no way to get the necessary government subsidies for living in the expensive United States, those who cannot afford to live here (those exploited for their illegal status) and cannot get the supplements to stay will HAVE to leave.

    Perhaps the quick-draw response of assuming someone opposing enforcing immigration laws as being liberal is based on how liberals blindly support any and all violations to immigration law to swell the ranks of those they wish to one day amnesty onto the voting roles is thrown about too freely and the net catches a few non-liberals. I am sure I have been guilty of it myself. However, it is possible to get immigration back on an even keel; that cannot be done until there is some equity between how we treat the legal immigrant and how we treat those who broke the laws to impose themselves upon our economy, regardless of need.

    ReplyReply
  5. retire05 says: 155

    @Aqua:

    As for illegal immigration; a man, woman, husband, wife, mother, father, will do anything to make life better for their family. Our founding parents were just such people. They couldn’t change the political situation in the countries, so to provide a better life for their families, they came here.

    Founding parents? I assume you are speaking of those who came here in the 1600-1700’s? But while their ancestors did migrate from other countries, mostly the UK, all but 8 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were born on the American continent. Their intent was never to change the nation of their ancestry, but to create a new nation, one without the oppression of their ancestral past. Their loyalty was to this country, not the county of their ancestry.

    Our immigration process needs to be fixed, it sucks. From the top down, it needs to be reworked.
    Deport all illegals? You can be a conservative and also be a realist. It’s never going to happen. Self deportation is one of the most stupid things to flow from Romney’s mouth. From people that rightly say national background checks won’t work well because criminals will not get a background check, comes self deportation

    So, let me see if I understand you correctly; you are saying that if you could not get a job here because employers refused to hire you because they stood to lose their licence to participate in business and if you were not allowed to draw any social welfare benefits such as housing, food stamps, etc, you would remain in that environment?

    Yeah, it’ll put a crimp in system, but they’ll just go underground.

    To what avail? If you can’t get a job, and you can’t collect social welfare, how would you live? Hiring an illegal immigrant is a violation of the law. When we start enforcing that law, with severe ramifications, like losing your licence to conduct business, or face jail time, employers will not be willing to risk their investment to hire illegals. If you can’t draw social welfare benefits, of any kind, how would you survive?

    Operation Wetback II? Yep, that will look great on the nightly news.

    Therein lies a major problem. The left wing press views illegal immigrants as potential Democrat voters. And anyone who dares mention the downside of illegal immigration will be promptly labeled a racist, although nationality is not a race. The time to clean house in the American press is long overdue.

    The site of millions of families being torn apart a the borders streaming into the living rooms of the most generous people in the world.

    We separate families every day of the week when we sentence people to jail/prison time. If that is a reason to not deport those who have broken the law, first by entering a sovereign nation illegally, and then every day after that by remaining, then we should not be putting mothers and fathers in jail for any crime because it would cause “families to be torn apart.” The truth is that many of those families were already torn apart when one of them chose to enter the nation illegally. Why do you think the remissions sent back to their native lands are so high? Billions of dollars leave our economy every year because foreign illegals send that money back to their native lands.

    http://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/immigrants-send-money-home.html

    For one thing, we must make it known to certain nations that we will not tolerate their dumping their responsibilies on us. During Vicente Fox’s days as President of Mexico, Mexicans were given comic book-styled handouts explaining to them what to take on their trip to El Norte, how to avoid the Border Patrol, what to do if caught (demand to see a Mexican consulate officer) and how to collect social welfare. A good neighbor doesn’t give his ten kids written instructions on how to break into your home, raid your refrigerator and take over a bed room, demanding that he educate them and provide them with all their needs.

    There’s a way to fix all of this, and that is the conversation we should be having. It shouldn’t be about a 102 year old woman that may or not be benefiting from the taxpayers.

    Actually, it should be about the benefits given to illegals once they have violated our laws of sovereignty and demand benefits that are designed for American citizens and legal residents. We should not be giving out any social welfare benefits to those who are coming here simply because they know they can benefit from taxpayer largess.

    I know many are under the misguided impression that those who enter illegally are only coming here so that, in the end, they can become citizens. A recent report done by the Pew Hispanic Research Center shows that lesss that 40% of Mexicans, who are eligible for citizenship, have done so. A report done by the same group in 2011 showed that immigration issues was “extremely important” to only 33% of Latinos, with jobs and education being more important (50% and 49%). Immigration came in last in the list of “most important” to the Latinos surveyed.

    We are a nation of laws. We need to enforce those laws already on the books before we talk about enacting any new laws. Employers must know that there is a severe downside to hiring illegals, and illegals need to know that if they come here, without our government’s permission, the chances they will get a job is slim to none and they will not benefit from any social welfare programs.

    ReplyReply
  6. Nan G says: 156

    Desiline Victor did NOT wait 3 hours in line on Election Day to vote.
    No she did NOT!
    She wanted to vote EARLY…..DAYS EARLY.
    So, she waited 3 hours to do that – as the DNC wanted ALL Dem voters to vote early whether or not they could come out on Election Day.
    IF she had wanted to vote early without any line she could have sent in an Absentee Ballot.
    No line at all.
    Obama, a fine Liberal, basically identified a non-problem and proposed a “solution” that would not be needed even if the problem did exist.

    ReplyReply
  7. Tom says: 157

    @DrJohn:

    You left wingers encourage illegal immigration.

    I didn’t think I could find you more pathetic, but you’ve proven me wrong. So far you’ve not been able to respond to one criticism that was honestly and openly put to you. Instead you try to dishonestly brand Aye, a person you know is conservative, as a “left winger”, hoping you can whip up some idiotic partisan anger towards him, giving you a chance to duck out of the back door. If anyone has the slightest doubt regarding whether you are intentionally dishonest, or just plain ignorant, we now know the truth.

    ReplyReply
  8. Richard Wheeler says: 158

    Aye a left winger—-Doctor are you self medicating? I thought you off center with your support of the Mad Colonel—-but this???

    ReplyReply
  9. Tom says: 159

    @Aqua:

    Hmmm. No one is going to agree with everything you’ve written. In other words, great post.

    ReplyReply
  10. DrJohn says: 160

    @Tom:

    I am not especially troubled. As I said, I have never seen such behavior at a “conservative” blog- one author ripping into other authors and commenters and discouraging viewership.

    Therefore, the logical conclusion is that said person is not really a conservative.

    It’s my opinion, and that’s what blogs are largely about. You’ve expressed yours yet I have not responded to you as you have to me.

    ReplyReply
  11. DrJohn says: 161

    @Richard Wheeler: Mata and I were on the same page with the Colonel. The devil we knew and had was better than the new devil. Things are worse, not better.

    Mubarak and Gaddafi were corks on the Al Qaida genie.

    Why you would support Al Qaida, Rich, I do not understand.

    ReplyReply
  12. Aye says: 162

    @DrJohn:

    Oh, fun stuff. You want to play another round of Whack-a-Weasel, eh? No problem at all.

    Are you seriously advocating an immigration policy that bases citizenship decisions on age and voting preferences?

    No but we seem to have one now. Those with skills like my office manager who are going to vote conservatively face large hurdles and onerous burdens. Those who follow the immigration rules encounter the greatest challenges.

    First of all, you’re trying to establish a present day premise/complaint based on immigrants to came to this country in 1989-1990? Aren’t your case study examples way outdated? Or, do you prefer to use old case studies because they may support your position better than newer information? Doesn’t matter really. Your premise will fall apart completely when the next piece of scrutiny is applied to it.

    Second, when immigration decisions are made are they truly being based on voting proclivity as you allege? How is that measured exactly? Thru x-ray? MRI? EKG? How does a person measure the voting proclivity of someone they know nothing about other than race, sex, and country of origin?

    Maybe the immigration decision is based on a determination from this guy:

     photo carnac_zps40f15d0c.jpg

    Are those who make immigration decisions in possession of your negative stereotypes as well and simply work them from the opposite point of view?

    Or, is it more likely that there is no weighted value placed on age or future voting preference when it comes to these decisions? As is a virtual constant, you’ve presented no factual basis by which to support your argument.

    You left wingers encourage illegal immigration.

    You left wingers are always magnanimous with the fruits of others.

    That’s some funny stuff right there. Man…when you kept saying “you left wingers” I had to go and search my house to see if a group of ‘em had busted in during the night and were now demanding the right to stay. Man, oh man… so funny.

    But we both know that the “left winger” slur was aimed directly at me don’t we? Only a person who is either a) blissfully unaware or b) patently dishonest would make such an accusation because there’s not one syllable that I’ve ever written that would support such a conclusion.

    So, which is it? Are you so blissfully unaware of the person that you’re addressing that you would make such a statement in error? Or, are you just dishonest?

    You’re more than welcome to quote things I’ve written that you think may help your case. Be my guest. The FA archives are at your unlimited disposal. I enjoy the same.

    While we’re weighing one another on the scales of Conservative cred, we can talk about more about your views. On trigger locks for example. And multi-mag vest purchases. And the mentally ill registry.

    It’ll be fantastic. Loads of fun. Let me know when you’re ready. I look forward to it.

    I see you stayed up all night burdened with this.

    Really? You think so? Let’s see… I posted my response to you at 5:34am PST (FA is based on PST). I live in Georgia. That would make the time I posted my comment 8:34am EST. No indication there that I “stayed up all night”. So, again, blissfully unaware? Or do you have an honesty problem?

    And they’re always dependent on the gov’t even when there’s not anything to support those conclusions right?

    Prove otherwise and I’ll take it back. I’ll admit you were right about this one person but I doubt you will be able to.

    And 160 or so comments in, you admit that you do indeed possess negative stereotypical ideas about this 102 year old woman.

    Now, why precisely, is it the responsibility of the reader to disprove your thesis? As with so many of the other points you’ve raised, you’ve made no effort to support it with fact.

    If you want to be rid of bigoted stereotypes Doctor, heal thyself. I can only use a magnifying glass to focus the sunlight.

    Actually, it’d be fun to know that Mrs. Victor came here with $10 million in the bank that would be subject to the inheritance tax.

    Yeah, that would be great wouldn’t it? Oh…wait… Aren’t Conservatives against inheritance/estate taxes?

    Or is that only when the decedent is younger, whiter, from the 4th or higher US generation, speaking perfect English, and voting the right way [wink wink] in every election? I have to admit the pretzel logic has me confused. Have you got a flow chart you could send me?

    I’m consistently opposed to inheritance/estate taxes no matter who the decedent was. Oh, crap… Does that make me a “left winger” who is magnanimous with the fruits of others? Damn… I sure hope not.

    That last part is what you wrote in regard to an Olympic Silver Medal winner.

    Who wrapped himself in a Mexican flag after the privileges this country granted him allowed him to achieve what he’d achieved.

    False. He carried a Mexican flag while wrapped in the US flag (evidenced in the picture you used). Why so dishonest? Is the truth that difficult a standard?

    Send all illegals back? You bet.

    You’re lamely attempting, once again, to shift the goal posts of the discussion to a completely different topic. From the beginning, this thread was never about illegal immigration. Nor was your Manzano post. He, like Ms. Victor, is a naturalized US citizen and they have been for many years.

    As horribly as you’re flailing on the actual topic, I really can’t blame you for wanting to change the subject.

    You are…self-righteous…cantankerous…bitchy…just mean overall…You shit all over anyone with whom you disagree…you just look like a jerk…a-hole…idiot…

    You forgot pissy. That one is normally in your list.

    The quoted section above, ladies and gentlemen, is the product of someone who can’t argue facts, principles, and consistency when confronted by critics and has basically no response beyond a string of insults, pejoratives, and obscenities.

    The product of someone who won’t correct the record, even when repeatedly confronted with the truth. Even the oft-maligned NY Times does a better job at corrections/retractions than Dr. John.

    It’s one thing for commenters to be idiots but an author? That can’t be a great thing for a blog.

    I am not especially troubled. As I said, I have never seen such behavior at a “conservative” blog- one author ripping into other authors and commenters and discouraging viewership.

    Let’s see (as of now): 3,398 views , 107 likes. By your own standards, it looks like an idiot author success story.

    Of course, it’s possible that all those views and likes are from people who enjoy seeing you get your azz kicked all over the Interwebz. Who knows for sure.

    Therefore, the logical conclusion is that said person is not really a conservative.

    So….if a person disagrees with you and calls you out for lack of research, lack of facts, baseless conclusions, sheer dishonesty, and stereotypical, bigoted attitudes that makes them “not really a conservative”?

    Err… umm… wow…. That’s interesting. A more logical conclusion is that you don’t really understand what Conservatism is.

    I don’t think I have ever seen another blog in which there is such a lack of civility between contributors.

    Other blogs may have authors who always walk in lock step with one another. Or they may not. It’s irrelevant what they do. What’s relevant is what happens here at FA.

    This is not the first… or second… or third …or more time that authors here have disagreed on things. And is not likely to be the last. Curt didn’t bring us on board so we could be a mimeographed chorus line of parroted opinion. Surely you’ve been around long enough to know that.

    Besides, disagreement is good. Discussion is good. Some of us are actually able to learn from the process. Don’t you agree?

    Being able to present and then stand and defend your ideas based on fact and reality and logic is a must have skill-set before you go in the deep end though. As you’ve discovered, when you choose to swim with water wings, trouble is likely.

    Anytime you disagree with me, and think you have a factual case to make, please do so. I welcome the discourse.

    Why do you do this? Is it worth it?

    Why? Because it’s fun. Consider yourself my very own Petri dish smear, subject to constant probing and testing and examination. Sometimes the results will be pleasant. Sometimes not.

    Either way, the examinations will continue as long as you choose to remain in the dish.

    ReplyReply
  13. Richard Wheeler says: 163

    Dr.J. The support of genocidal Dictators for ANY reason is wrong. Foolish to say I support Al Qaida.
    To suggest Aye is not a true Conservative is one of the reasons you’ve been on the losing side recently.

    Is Marco Rubio a true Conservative?

    ReplyReply
  14. Aye
    drjohn is one of our AUTHOR, TO RESPECT FROM US, EVEN IF YOU DON’T AGREE WITH HIS POST, it has a value to get opinions, and you r opinion but no need to try to destroy him as an AUTHOR,
    WE THE OTHER APPRECIATE HIS EFFORT, WITH ALL THE NUMEROUS COMMENTS HE ALWAYS GET,
    CONTROVERSIAL? ALSO YES, BUT AS AN AUTHOR OF CONTROVERSIAL POSTS,
    NOT TO BE TURNED IN FOOD FOR THE NIGHT SHIFT SHARKS,
    THAT BRING TO MIND WHAT THE PRESIDENT BUSH SAID ONCE,
    IF YOUR NOT WITH ME, YOU ARE AGAINST ME,
    THAT WAS YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD DRJOHN ALL ALONG THIS CONSERVATIVE POST,
    I say that because you just warn him of future actions,
    it show that you are going personal,

    ReplyReply
  15. Aye says: 165

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    Bees, I will refer you to my earlier response to a similar query.

    My answer now, as it was then, is that I won’t change my position on standards, principles, consistency, and honesty.

    Not for you. Not for Dr. John. Not for anyone.

    If the criticism is too great in the present set of circumstances, then perhaps future posts and commentary will strive for a higher plane.

    The standards of scrutiny on my end, however, will not waver.

    ReplyReply
  16. Wordsmith says: 166

    @DrJohn:

    As I said, I have never seen such behavior at a “conservative” blog- one author ripping into other authors and commenters and discouraging viewership.

    Therefore, the logical conclusion is that said person is not really a conservative.

    My logical conclusion is that aye is attempting to stand up for the conservative side, lest new readers passing through here deem all conservatives to be fringe nutjobs.

    I think there’s no question that your voice has dominated here at FA, due to how prolific a blogger you have been. And because of that, you have attracted a viewership of likemindeds, a number of whom strike me as those occupying the fringe right.

    Some of the regular commenters of old who once frequented this blog no longer seem to come by anymore. I personally miss their voices.

    Some of the newer folk who have come through here strike me as living up to conservative stereotypes, as described by liberal opponents. They lend ammo to the other side; and some of your posts, in my honest opinion, are so Obama deranged, that they serve to only shoot us in the foot.

    Who do you suppose gives conservatism a bad name? You or aye? Alex Jones or Marco Rubio?

    It should be a badge of honor when liberal blogs start linking to your posts- but only if your posts are worthy of the conservative brandname. Instead, when I look at the content of this post, what I feel is embarrassment for FA. I wish I could defend a fellow author; but you make that one a difficult challenge because sometimes you post the indefensible; and it puts our own credibility on the line as contributing authors if we must defend or remain silent to some of the hyperbolic partisan attack posts you put out there.

    I don’t enjoy coming in here to criticize a fellow author. But the attack-Obama-for-any-and-every-kind-of-reason-post and pushing conspiracy theories does not further the conservative cause. It makes us the fringe blog no better than Democratic Underground in credibility.

    @Aye:

    Besides, disagreement is good. Discussion is good. Some of us are actually able to learn from the process. Don’t you agree?

    It sounds like Dr. John should be thanking you! :D

    After all, it’s through challenge and debate and immersion in facts that whets and hones one’s view.

    So long as you’re blogging here, Dr. John, aye is just trying to whet and hone you into becoming a better, more credible blogger. ;)

    ReplyReply
  17. Aqua says: 167

    @retire05:

    Founding parents? I assume you are speaking of those who came here in the 1600-1700′s? But while their ancestors did migrate from other countries, mostly the UK, all but 8 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were born on the American continent.

    Yes, founding parents. The people that came to this country to escape oppression. The people that formed the colonies, later to become States that the signers were born in. They didn’t wake up one day and, “viola” we have States. They didn’t wake up one day with the principles they had, those principles were instilled by someone. And those “someones” left their homelands for a better life for themselves and their children.

    So, let me see if I understand you correctly; you are saying that if you could not get a job here because employers refused to hire you because they stood to lose their licence to participate in business and if you were not allowed to draw any social welfare benefits such as housing, food stamps, etc, you would remain in that environment?

    I would do whatever I had to do to provide a better life for my family, and so would just about everyone here. Faced with a 10 year process just to get a work visa or watching your family starve, what would you do?

    To what avail? If you can’t get a job, and you can’t collect social welfare, how would you live? Hiring an illegal immigrant is a violation of the law.

    It’s against the law now! But you want to go Obama on us right? You want to punish businesses for hiring people. People they may very well think are legal. But in any case, you want to punish them because you haven’t done your job. Have I got that right? It goes back to being ruled by the right or ruled by the left. You are not better than a liberal.

    The time to clean house in the American press is long overdue.

    By the right, correct? You should be in charge of finding a new press? They could just have cameras at the border showing families being torn apart, no one would have to report on anything or even say a word. Americans are way to kind-hearted and generous to sit by and watch.

    We separate families every day of the week when we sentence people to jail/prison time.

    True. But put it in perspective. Do we sentence people to prison for stealing a loaf of bread to feed their kids? Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor. I’m not saying it’s right and I have always said the border needs to be secured.

    A good neighbor doesn’t give his ten kids written instructions on how to break into your home, raid your refrigerator and take over a bed room, demanding that he educate them and provide them with all their needs.

    I agree, and our country is complicit in this as well. And it has been for as long as I have been alive. What would you suggest? Sanctions? Send their countries into further economic decline and despair?

    Actually, it should be about the benefits given to illegals once they have violated our laws of sovereignty and demand benefits that are designed for American citizens and legal residents. We should not be giving out any social welfare benefits to those who are coming here simply because they know they can benefit from taxpayer largess.

    I have absolutely no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is those that immediately assume anyone that comes here does so for just those purposes. And since I have seen this happen up close and personal, I know it happens all too often. I have friends that have come here legally, are legal residents, started their own companies, hired people, pay their taxes, and have heard remarks about how they live better than citizens because of welfare. And this thread made just such a presupposition.

    We are a nation of laws. We need to enforce those laws already on the books before we talk about enacting any new laws.

    Absolute nonsense. We change laws all the time that don’t work, and that is the way it should be. If something isn’t working, it should be fixed. But in your opinion, we just need to enforce Obamacare before we even talk about enacting any new laws? Yep, that’s what I love about purists. They want to rule just as much as the liberals. Just under their rules.

    ReplyReply
  18. retire05 says: 168

    @Aqua:

    Yes, founding parents. The people that came to this country to escape oppression. The people that formed the colonies, later to become States that the signers were born in. They didn’t wake up one day and, “viola” we have States. They didn’t wake up one day with the principles they had, those principles were instilled by someone. And those “someones” left their homelands for a better life for themselves and their children.

    Not all came here to escape oppression, as you try to insinuate. Some came for financial opportunity. And no, they didn’t wake up one day and “viola” we have States. The did create colonies, from the very beginning, and those colonies morphed into what we know as “states.” The colonists tried many forms of government, particularly socialism. Everyone worked, and everyone shared equally in the harvest. But it was a miserable failure, as some worked, but some did not, and so that form of “eqality” was changed to work and you share, sit on you bum and you do not.

    I would do whatever I had to do to provide a better life for my family, and so would just about everyone here.

    Would that include a life of crime, dragging drugs across the border, to support your family?

    Faced with a 10 year process just to get a work visa or watching your family starve, what would you do?

    How about trying to make your own nation better for those who suffer. Oh, wait, wasn’t that the goal of those founding “parents” you referenced? Or is it just easier to sneak across a sovereign border where others that came before you paved the way for a better life, and not do anything to instill the same reform in your own nation? There are those kind of people still left in Cuba. They struggle everyday to make the country they love a better place for freedom. They don’t come here, they don’t want to come here, and many times they languish in Cuban prisons for years. But they don’t give up.

    Hiring an illegal immigrant is a violation of the law.

    It’s against the law now!

    Exactly. But those laws are not enforce with any great regularity.

    You want to punish businesses for hiring people. People they may very well think are legal.

    You’re trying to compare apples to oranges. I want to punish businesses for violating federal laws. That is not the same as punishing businesses for hiring “people.” And if there is any doubt that someone is legal, gee, haven’t we all been told what a great program E-Verify is and how well it works? Or do you have some objection on an employer using E-Verify to make sure that the guy with a strong Irish brogue is legally in this country (yes, there are many illegal Irish here)?

    It is the responsibility of businesses to make sure the people they hire are legal, just as it is your responsibility to make sure that you adhere to the laws of this nation. If you don’t, chances are you will be arrested and prosecuted. So tell me, what real raficiation has companies like Tyson Foods suffered even after they not only knowingly hired illegals to replace American workers, but sent recruiters to Mexico to arrange for those Mexicans to be brought into the U.S. by cayotes so they could make their way to Arkansas to work at the chicken plants? How many times has Tyson Foods been drug into court because of that policy? Tyson should have not only lost its license to conduct business, but the company should have been drumed out of business.

    But in any case, you want to punish them because you haven’t done your job. Have I got that right? It goes back to being ruled by the right or ruled by the left. You are not better than a liberal.

    How so? I have never hired an illegal in my life. And I never claimed to be better than anyone. Was that just a strawman comment to add flavor?

    You should be in charge of finding a new press?

    No, the press should be self-policing. But then, go to any journalism school in the nation and you will hear how the gods of the press are Walter Duranty, Walter Lippman and Walter Cronkite, all who did not report facts, but spun the news for the creation of public opinion. Americans have a right to news that is not tainted by the journalists personal opinion. Facts are facts, not opinion. But there you have it, the Almond-Lippmann Consensus.

    Do we sentence people to prison for stealing a loaf of bread to feed their kids?

    Oh, I think stealing from the public coffers equates more than just a simple loaf of bread.

    Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor.

    Only if caught the first time. If you cross the border illegally more than once, it then becomes a felony, punishable by two years in prison.

    What would you suggest? Sanctions? Send their countries into further economic decline and despair?

    Actually, yes, I would support sanctions, and the ending of foreign aid. Mexico, for example, is a very, VERY rich nation with great oil wealth, great income from tourism. Carlos Slim, the very man whose millions bailed out the NYTimes, and who earns millions a year from the purchase of Obama phones, and the richest man in the world, is Mexican.

    What I do have a problem with is those that immediately assume anyone that comes here does so for just those purposes.

    The contribution made to our nation by LEGAL immigrants, cannot be denied. But the cost of illegal immigration is a net drain on our ecomony. That also cannot be denied, not by any rational thinking person. And yes, Aqua, there are those who do come here for nefarious purposes. To deny that is to deny the existance of the Mexican Mafia (mostly illegals), MS-13 (mostly illegals) and all other drug based gangs, such as the Somalian gangs now such a problem in St. Louis and other cities.

    We change laws all the time that don’t work, and that is the way it should be.

    How do you know our current laws don’t work when they are not enforced? There is a big difference between effectiveness and enforcement. No law works, not even speeding laws, when they are not enforced Once drivers learn that a highway is not patrolled, they will speed because they know the law, not enforced, is meaningless.

    ReplyReply
  19. Wordsmith
    do you think the last comment from retire05,
    come from extreme CONSERVATIVES VIEWS?
    those you call the fringe
    and there is more of it,
    so to be name extreme right wing, is a mistake is in it,
    why do you care so much of what the other side think,
    we already know they hat this side and won’t change their
    views because they are fed constantly by the agenda from the WHITE HOUSE,
    THEY EVEN ARE BEING TEACH TO CALL THE ILLEGAL AS THE NEW MAJORITY, THE PILGRIM JUST LIKE THE GATHERING OF THE PILGRIMS IN THE SACRED LAND MOSQUE THEY ALL MUST GO OMCE IN THEIR LIFE, THOSE ARE THE PIGRIMS

    ReplyReply
  20. Bewildered says: 170

    Please continue to educate yourselves and not take heed to what this “Author” and I use that term lightly reports…….

    Chapter 3: Medical Disability Exception (Form N-648)

    A. Medical Exception Requirements

    In 1994, Congress enacted legislation providing an exception to the naturalization educational requirements for applicants who cannot meet the educational requirements because of a physical or developmental disability or mental impairment.[1]

    ReplyReply
  21. Aqua says: 171

    @retire05:

    Would that include a life of crime, dragging drugs across the border, to support your family?

    No. Is that what you think all illegals do? I would live off the grid illegally in a country that might provide a means to provide for my family though. And I suppose you wouldn’t.

    How about trying to make your own nation better for those who suffer. Oh, wait, wasn’t that the goal of those founding “parents” you referenced?

    Thanks for making my argument. The “founding parents” I referenced did not try to make their own nation better for those who suffer. They left, came to the new world. And it’s pretty easy to say you would fight for making your own country better. We’re Americans, it’s all we know. We will fight at the drop of a hat to protect our freedoms. It’s what I love most about us. But there are those in other countries that know nothing but the status quo. The guns have been taken, they have no means to fight. Political disobedience is likely to get one killed.

    How many times has Tyson Foods been drug into court because of that policy?

    The only time I know of they were acquitted of the very charges you state. Am I supposed to believe you or a jury?

    How so? I have never hired an illegal in my life. And I never claimed to be better than anyone. Was that just a strawman comment to add flavor?

    No strawman. Put yourself in the position as president for a day. Since the day Reagan signed the Amnesty Law, our immigration system has been crap. The democrats failed to follow through on border security. Now, you’re in charge. The federal government has failed to do their job, and you as president for a day head that government. You want to punish companies for your failures. You want to put the onus on companies and corporations to do a job you failed to do. I’m all for E-Verify, I just think it will fail.

    The contribution made to our nation by LEGAL immigrants, cannot be denied. But the cost of illegal immigration is a net drain on our ecomony. That also cannot be denied, not by any rational thinking person….And yes, Aqua, there are those who do come here for nefarious purposes….

    No doubt. But should we assume everyone does?

    How do you know our current laws don’t work when they are not enforced?

    In 1986 Reagan signed amnesty for roughly 1.2 million illegal immigrants. 26 years later, there are over 11 million. What we have now obviously doesn’t work. As I told Dr. J., it’s perfectly ok to be a conservative and be a realist. Democrats don’t want to enforce the current laws because they believe they will have more voters. Republicans don’t want to enforce current laws because companies don’t want it enforced. Faced with that reality, what would you suggest?

    ReplyReply
  22. Bewildered
    so you found it GOOD OF YOU, but don’t blame any AUTHOR,
    YOU DON’T HAVE TO ,

    ReplyReply
  23. Aqua
    you know the BORDER PATROL OFFICERS RECEIVE THE ORDER FROM OBAMA, TO LET FREE THE ILLEGALS CROSSING AND FOUND TO HAVE DONE CRIMES,
    THEIR HANDS ARE TIED NOW AND THEY CANNOT DO ANYTHING TO PROTECT THE AMERICANS,
    AND THEIR LIVES ARE IN DANGER TOO

    ReplyReply
  24. retire05 says: 174

    @Aqua:

    Would that include a life of crime, dragging drugs across the border, to support your family?

    No. Is that what you think all illegals do

    Did I say that? Please, do not try to put words in my mouth that are not there.

    I would live off the grid illegally in a country that might provide a means to provide for my family though. And I suppose you wouldn’t.

    No, I don’t think I would, Aqua. Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? I would rather die on my feet, than live on my knees. Life, without freedom, is not life worth living.

    The “founding parents” I referenced did not try to make their own nation better for those who suffer. They left, came to the new world.

    Did they renounce their citizenship from those nations they migrated from? Or did they, in fact, name those colonies, in many cases, after the very nation they left. And why did they flee in the first place? It did not have anything to do with being able to earn a living, but in many cases due to religious persecution. Those who enter our nation illegally cannot make that claim unless they are from China or North Korea.

    But there are those in other countries that know nothing but the status quo. The guns have been taken, they have no means to fight. Political disobedience is likely to get one killed.

    And yet, they bring, in many cases, an acceptance of those very things they fled, and then demand rights they were not willing to fight for in their native lands. Mexico has some of the strongest anti-gun laws in the world, which only proves that when anti-gun laws are passed, and the populace accepts that, only the bad guys have guns. Now, there doesn’t seem to be any problem getting guns into Mexico, be it from China or our own Fast & Furious failed policy. If people want reform, that often, as in the case of the United States, has to be acheived by war against the status quo. Can you name one nation, where illegals migrate from, that has not seen a revolution against the status quo at one time or another?

    Put yourself in the position as president for a day. Since the day Reagan signed the Amnesty Law, our immigration system has been crap. The democrats failed to follow through on border security. Now, you’re in charge. The federal government has failed to do their job, and you as president for a day head that government. You want to punish companies for your failures. You want to put the onus on companies and corporations to do a job you failed to do.

    No, I would order all agencies to follow the law. I would work to pass legislation that any city who assumes the position of a “sanctuary” city, refusing to follow federal law, would not be eligible for any federal funding; I would instruct my Border Patrol to do the job they are tasked to do, order the DoJ to go after businesses that failed to follow federal immigration laws. And I would not pander to special interest groups for votes.

    ….And yes, Aqua, there are those who do come here for nefarious purposes….

    No doubt. But should we assume everyone does?

    Did I say we should?

    In 1986 Reagan signed amnesty for roughly 1.2 million illegal immigrants. 26 years later, there are over 11 million. What we have now obviously doesn’t work.

    Thank you for proving my point. Laws enacted, but not enforced, do not work. Granting amnesty in 1986 simply sent a message that if you sneak into the U.S., and manage to avoid ICE for long enough, you will be allowed to stay with another amnesty. And what will that cause? The opposite side of our southern border is going to look like the Oklahoma land rush. How do we prove how long any illegal, who has been working under the table, has been here? How do we make those who are currently earning poverty level wages pay fines? How do we verify they have no criminal record in Honduras, Mexico or any of the other Central/South American nations that refuse to cooperate? If only 36% of all Mexicans immigrants who are currently eligible for citizenship do not persue it because they refuse to learn English, how do we force the newly amnestied illegals to learn it? And why should they when everything, including ballots, at printed in Spanish?

    You use the number of 11 million illegals currently here (the Border Patrol estimates it is closer to 20 million). Hasn’t that number dropped from the estimated 14 million just a few years ago? And why would it now be lower, Aqua? J-O-B-S When there is no work, especially in the trades, they go back to their native countries. Last year, the Mexican Consulate in Dallas reported that it had a record number of requests for illegal Mexicans to be able to return to Mexico taking their children with them. You see, Mexico requires them to get permission to return if they want to return legally. But with Mexico having a 4+% unemployment rate, their chances are better at gaining work there.

    I have given you a reference that shows that immigration is not the most important issue to Latinos. The same reference also shows that the majority of illegals knew they were breaking U.S. law. Willful violation, Aqua. What laws do you suggest that Americans be allowed to violate and then be rewarded for their violations?

    ReplyReply
  25. retire05
    the thing that bug me, and I find very wrong is the 88.8 millions AMERICANS
    WITH THE LABEL FELON STICK ON THEM EVEN AFTER 10 YEARS,
    TEY ARE UNABLE TO PASS A TEST FOR JOBS BECAUSE THEIR FELONY VERY MILD FOR MANY ARE FOUND IN SEARCH PLACE LIKE GOOGLE AND OTHER,
    THEY ARE DESPERATE FOR MANY HAVING PAID THEIR MISTAKE, AND ARE STUCK IN
    A NO MAN’S LAND,
    AND NOW OBAMA WANT TO BRING FOREIGNERS 11 MILLION IN THE WORK FORCE WHERE THERE IS 23 MILLIONS OUT OF WORK,
    IS THAT A SANE PRESIDENT? NO I think he should be arrested for chewing the best herbs there is,
    so to come to AMERICANS and look at them in the face and say he want the 11 millions or 20 millions as you say to have amnesty at this time of a ruin economy an over blown debt he is responsible for,
    and AMERICANS LIVING ON WELFARE WITH STAMP, CLOSE TO HALF OF THE NATION POOR,
    AND HE HAS THE GALL TO WANT TO BRING PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD ON TOP OF THOSE,
    THAT IS A TREASON TO MY MIND TO WANT TO DESTROY THIS AMERICA,WHO CANNOT SUPPORT HERSELF HOW THE HELL CAN SHE SUPPORT 20 MILLIONS MORE, WHERE DO YOU THINK?

    ReplyReply
  26. retire05 says: 176

    If an illegal immigrant is simply an “undocumented” worker, is a drug dealer then just an “undocumented” pharmacist?

    ReplyReply
  27. drjohn says: 177

    @Bewildered:

    So you believe we ought to import all mentally ill foreign nationals as that will help us somehow

    ReplyReply
  28. Aye says: 178

    @drjohn:

    So you believe we ought to import all mentally ill foreign nationals as that will help us somehow

    So you believe that we should deny the physically or mentally impaired child of a parent seeking US citizenship?

    ReplyReply
  29. Aye
    don’t AMERICA HAVE A CHOICE? IN THE EARLY DAYS THERE WAS A NEED FOR IMMIGRANTS,
    NOW the need is only a burden instead, there is no need,
    OBAMA sell the AMERICAN THE NEED TO ABORTION,
    FOR GOD’S SAKE THOSE ARE AMERICANS THEIR ROOTS ARE BROKEN
    WHEN THEY ABORT, REPLACE BY OTHER NON ROOTS, WHO WANT TO DICTATE THE NEW WAY OF LIFE,
    DAMN, THEY GET IN THE WHITE HOUSE, THEY GET IN THE GOVERNMENT, THEY GET IN THE BEST EDUCATION UNIVERSITY AND THEN TAKE THE JOBS OF THE 23MILLIONS,
    OBAMA SAID HE NEED TO IMPORT TECHNOLOGY JOBS, HELL TO IT
    THE AMERICANS HAVE ALL THEY NEED, THEY WENT TO SPACE DIDN’T THEY?
    THIS TIME IN LOWEST TIME ECONOMICLY WHEN THE THINKERS OF THIS NATION POLITLY SAY WE ARE RUIN, AND OBAMA WANT TO SPEND MORE REGARDLESS OF WHAT HE IS RUINING THE COUNTRY, THIS IS NOT RIGHT

    ReplyReply
  30. drjohn says: 180

    @Aye:

    Frankly, yes.

    ReplyReply
  31. Aye says: 181

    @drjohn:

    Interesting opinion.

    I wonder… why do you think so little of people with mental impairments, such as Downs Syndrome for example, that you would wish to exclude them when the applying parent has no disqualifying factors?

    ReplyReply
  32. AYE
    YOUR QUESTIONS drjohn ARE rubbed UP WITH POISON,

    ReplyReply
  33. Aye says: 183

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    YOUR QUESTIONS drjohn ARE rubbed UP WITH POISON,

    Why? Because they are direct? Because they are unflinching? Because they are expository?

    Bees, I don’t waver or yield. And I make no apologies for that. Not to you. Not to anyone.

    ReplyReply
  34. Aqua says: 184

    @retire05:

    Would that include a life of crime, dragging drugs across the border, to support your family?

    No. Is that what you think all illegals do

    Did I say that? Please, do not try to put words in my mouth that are not there.

    You brought it up. Was it just an off the wall comment that added nothing to the debate? In the context of our debate, it is an insinuation that illegals live a life of crime, dragging drugs across the border to support their family.

    No, I don’t think I would, Aqua. Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? I would rather die on my feet, than live on my knees. Life, without freedom, is not life worth living.

    Yep, I feel the same. But it’s easy to say, tougher to do. I could do it, I have no doubt. I’ve been trained to do it and even though I’m much older, I feel pretty confident that I could still manage. But when I think about putting my wife and kids through something like that, it’s a different story. If somehow Georgia became a tyrannical State and I could choose to fight or move to Florida to provide a better, safer life for my family; even though such a move might be illegal, I would move.

    Did they renounce their citizenship from those nations they migrated from? Or did they, in fact, name those colonies, in many cases, after the very nation they left.

    No, in most cases they didn’t renounce their citizenship’s. And we have New York and New Jersey to mane two colonies named after places in the nation they left.

    And why did they flee in the first place? It did not have anything to do with being able to earn a living, but in many cases due to religious persecution. Those who enter our nation illegally cannot make that claim unless they are from China or North Korea.

    People came to America for all kinds of reasons. Religious freedom was just one reason. Freedom is freedom.

    order the DoJ to go after businesses that failed to follow federal immigration laws.

    Everything else I agree with, except this. What laws? That they aren’t to hire illegals? What if they do it without knowing? How exactly do you prove they purposely hired illegal immigrants? According to you, Tyson does it on a non-stop, continuous basis. Yet a jury acquitted them. I see conservatives post all the time about the burdens and regulations the federal government puts on businesses, and rightly so. Yet you would do the same.

    Thank you for proving my point.

    How did I prove it? If the law isn’t going to be enforced, the law doesn’t work. This goes back to my point about realism; do you actually see enforcement happening in the near or even distant future? Personally, I would like to see the border secure and our immigration system overhauled before there was any talk about what to do with the illegals that are already here. But I don’t see that happening. Nor do I see our current situation changing. Doing nothing is going to produce nothing, and we are going to have exactly what we have now. If we can get something, border security and the repeal of the anchor baby loophole, I would be happy.

    ReplyReply
  35. AYE
    no, not for what you say,
    but , because you are hunting him,
    and shooting bullets to make him weaker, and publicly destroy his character,
    that is wrong,
    you should stop because you’re getting obvious,
    I remember MIKE AMERICA,, he was well like and he could bring a big crowd
    on all his POSTS,
    YOU SIDE UP WITH THE ENEMY, THAT TIME WHEN YOU BROUGHT THE IMAGE OF BUSH WITH HIS FEET ON THE DESK, HE WAS DESTROYED BY THE HYENAS TEARING HIM APART,
    HE DIED FROM FLOPPING ACES,
    YOU’RE DOING THE SAME THING, TO DRJOHN,
    DID CURT GAVE YOU THE OKAY TO GET RID OF HIM OR WHAT?
    I don’t believe it, CURT is the one to destroy those he decide not OFTEN THE CASE.
    IT’S NOT YOUR JOB AYE, I WAS ON YOUR SIDE BEFORE, AND YOU TOOK MY SIDE WITH THE OPPONENT COMING TO INSULT AND DIMINISH ME FOR NOT HAVING ENOUGH ENGLISH SKILLS,
    I did not forget it, but now I cannot stay silent when one AUTHOR GET EVISCERATE PUBLICLY,

    ReplyReply
  36. Aye says: 186

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    Hunting him? Trying to get rid of him? No, not at all.

    I’m simply asking questions and challenging thought processes. How is that destroying character or making someone weaker? Aren’t discussion and debate desirable to you? Or would you prefer to have an echo chamber populated with mindless bobble-headed drones?

    It may bother you that I have no problem critiquing parties from all sides. It may bother you that I’m straightforward, plainspoken, and consistent. You sure wouldn’t be the first person to be bothered by it.

    The fact that others are bothered, however, has never made me waver. Never will. Because I don’t apologize for the things I believe and I don’t apologize for the things I write.

    ReplyReply
  37. AYE
    I ALWAYS HAD RESPECT FOR YOU, AND WHAT YOU STAND FOR,
    it’s the first time I confront your behavior toward drjohn,
    and for the same reason you talk about what your stand for,
    I also feel strongly the abuse you used and still do,
    is in there a time set to leave your opponent ‘s back
    specially that he is a CONSERVATIVE AND AUTHOR,
    I strongly think so.
    bye

    ReplyReply
  38. drjohn says: 188

    @Aye:

    Interesting opinion.

    I wonder… why do you think so little of people with mental impairments, such as Downs Syndrome for example, that you would wish to exclude them when the applying parent has no disqualifying factors?

    You could have asked “Why do you have this opinion?”

    But no, you chose to impugn my motive- nay, presume a motive, ascribe it to me and demonize me for it while you are rife in your glorified self-righteousness.

    That’s why you are such a prick.

    I have two close relatives who are developmentally impaired and another who is autistic.

    Their support costs a fortune but fortunately their parents are able to afford their care and possibly may provide for their support when they are gone.

    I was inclined to say that such persons might be allowed to immigrate provided support for the lifetime of the impaired child was guaranteed. Then it occurred to me that liberals would scream about such a proposal, calling it “unfair” to those who do not have funds for such support. Without those funds the American taxpayer will once again shoulder the burden for the largesse of others.

    So no, I don’t think we need to import those who are likely to visit a financial burden on the country and it is not because I “think so little” of them.

    And I said it before, do away with all entitlements and I really don’t care who enters.

    Your lack of civility is truly impressive.

    ReplyReply
  39. drjohn says: 189

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    And thank you for your support, Bees.

    ReplyReply
  40. drjohn
    hi,
    I just captured on FOX NEWS , THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE COMING FROM THE MIDDLE EAST CAME IN THIS AMERICA THEY ARE INFECTED WITH A VIRUS TSAR[ I THINK IT GOES LIKE THAT,]
    AND IT ALREADY KILLED MANY PEOPLE,
    THEY WARN THE PEOPLE TO BE CAREFUL ANY WHERE LIKE IN PLANE OR NOT SHARE PILLOWS OR
    TOUCHING OR THE LIKE OF IT, I SUPPOSE NO KISSING EITHER AND NO SEX.
    THEY IDENTIFIED MIDDLE EAST FOR A SURE SOURCE
    BYE

    ReplyReply
  41. retire05 says: 191

    @Aqua:

    In the context of our debate, it is an insinuation that illegals live a life of crime, dragging drugs across the border to support their family.

    Many do, Aqua. They serve as “mules” for the drug cartels in order to pay for their trek to El Norte. Even women serve as mules for the cartels. All manor of drugs are brought across, but the biggest loads that the illegals carry across are marijuana.

    If somehow Georgia became a tyrannical State and I could choose to fight or move to Florida to provide a better, safer life for my family; even though such a move might be illegal, I would move.

    Fortunately for us, the colonists did not feel that way. They choose to fight. If tryanny is not worth fighting against, then what is?

    No, in most cases they didn’t renounce their citizenship’s. And we have New York and New Jersey to mane two colonies named after places in the nation they left.

    And who originated those colonies? The very goverments that gave the colonies names like New Netherlands, New Sweden, New France, New England. New Jersey was originally part of New Netherlands. Those colonies were designed for the same reason that Jefferson made the Louisiana purchase; an expansion of territory. Yes, there were colonies that were started by those seeking religious freedom, like the Brownists, but the land that the colonies were founded on had already been declared territory of the nation that created the colonies. Are we to assume that a Swed, who was prompted to come to the New World in order to participate in the lucrative fur trade, assumed that when he did so, he would not be subject to the laws of Sweden on what was declared Swedish territory?

    What laws? That they aren’t to hire illegals? What if they do it without knowing? How exactly do you prove they purposely hired illegal immigrants?

    If a company takes all possible precautions to avoid hiring illegals, but later learns that they have, that is now a willful violation of the law. They did what they could. Non-intentional violation of the law. As to Tyson, the reason they were acquited was because the federal government did not prove its case to the jurors. Read the ruling. It wasn’t that Tyson was not guilty, it was that the prosecution did not prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the company itself, and not just certain executives, were copable.

    I see conservatives post all the time about the burdens and regulations the federal government puts on businesses, and rightly so. Yet you would do the same.

    Yes, when it comes to our laws of sovereignty, which includes our immigration laws, damn straight I would prosecute them. That has nothing to do with oppressive EPA regulations or the hurdles a person must jump in order to start a business that creates jobs. You are trying to mix apples and oranges. And I don’t say there should be no regulations. I don’t want some cotton mill dumping its waste into our rivers.

    If the law isn’t going to be enforced, the law doesn’t work.

    That doesn’t mean that, if enforced, the law won’t work. You are still trying to equate effectiveness with enforcement. Do you think that Obamacare laws will be enforced, as written? If that is the case, why does this administraiton, and yes, administrations of the past, refuse to enforce the very laws designed for national security?

    For ever action, there is an equal reaction. The action of granting amnesty in 1986 produced the reaction of an even greater number of illegals. The action of instructing our Border Patrol to run and hide when they seen armed cartel members crossing our border has made crossing our borders even easier for armed cartel members. A new amnesty, like the old amnesty, will not garner the GOP the Hispanic vote, it will only create flood gates, especially at the southern border.

    Either we are a nation of laws, to be enforced, Aqua, or we are not. Again, what laws to you propose that I, as a natural born American citizen, be allowed to violate on a regular basis and then be rewarded for those violations?

    ReplyReply
  42. Richard Wheeler says: 192

    Dr. J. You chose to malign Aye with names and say he professes to impugns you by ascribing to you motives you don’t possess.
    Because I supported the overthrow of the genocidal American killer Col. Ghadaffi you accused me of supporting Al Queda.
    Exit question Does your demonizing of me through false presumption of my motives make you a self righteous p—? Just askin?

    Bees You might actually learn something worthwhile by reading the posts of Word,Aqua and Aye. Keep an open mind.

    Semper Fi

    ReplyReply
  43. drjohn says: 193

    @Richard Wheeler:

    Because I supported the overthrow of the genocidal American killer Col. Ghadaffi you accused me of supporting Al Queda.
    Exit question Does your demonizing of me through false presumption of my motives make you a self righteous p—? Just askin?

    Forgetting, of course, that you were the one starting us down this road, right?

    It was something like “Your support of the Mad Colonel”, wasn’t it?

    ReplyReply
  44. Aye says: 194

    @drjohn:

    I see. So for you, a person’s value boils down to a cost/contribution economic analysis. Got it.

    Hey…I hear that those IPAB positions are still wide open. Perhaps you should submit your name. Your thought process would meld seamlessly with theirs.

    I notice that you’ve studiously avoided comment #165 and that you’ve still not corrected/retracted your completely dis-proven post.

    Why would that be?

    ReplyReply
  45. drjohn says: 195

    @Richard Wheeler:

    Yes, here it is

    I thought you off center with your support of the Mad Colonel—-but this???

    You miss Mata and thought me “off center” despite Mata and I sharing the same opinion- that we were better off with Mubarak and Gaddafi as corks on the Al Qaeda genie, yet you wanted AQ set free. It was never about “supporting” the Mad Colonel. It was about his hatred of AQ.

    And if you want murderous tyrants removed- what of Ahmedinejad? Should the US remove him as well?

    ReplyReply
  46. drjohn says: 196

    @Aye:

    My answer now, as it was then, is that I won’t change my position on standards, principles, consistency, and honesty. I can bend steel with my bare hands, I am able to leap tall buildings with a single bound and taught Mother Teresa all she knew.

    That says it all.

    ReplyReply
  47. drjohn says: 197

    @Wordsmith:

    So long as you’re blogging here, Dr. John, aye is just trying to whet and hone you into becoming a better, more credible blogger.

    Who assigned him that responsibility?

    ReplyReply
  48. Richard Wheeler says: 198

    Dr J Are you saying you didn’t support GhadaffI? Are you saying he wasn’t a genocidal killer of American citizens? Or just saying he was a poor misunderstood friend of America and shouldn’t be maligned as the “Mad Colonel”
    Do you really believe my support of his overthrow makes me , a Marine vet, a supporter of Al Queda. Now that is MAD.

    ReplyReply
  49. Richard Wheeler
    on your 192
    thank you but
    yes I always read them all, and read your’ es also
    bye

    ReplyReply
  50. drjohn says: 200

    @Richard Wheeler:

    Rich, twice in this thread I have explained. That’s all I can do.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>