These Children Are Refugees

No deportations
Damian Dovarganes/AP

Several days of cable TV news watching haven’t answered the question that’s on my mind. Why are we even debating this? Desperate children, many of them unaccompanied, have been forced to flee Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador and other countries. We’re expecting 74,000 to show up at our southern border this year.

On June 2, President Obama described it as an “urgent humanitarian situation,” asking Congress for an additional $1.4 billion to deal with the influx and creating a multiagency taskforce, led by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to coordinate the federal response.

These children are refugees from violence and poverty. However, it’s been noted that essentially none of them come from Nicaragua, the second-poorest country in the Western Hemisphere after Haiti. Therefore poverty is a secondary factor. They’re fleeing for their lives.

Yet some politicians want to have a debate about how fast we can send these kids back to their countries of origin to die. Tea-GOPers even want to deny them the right to a court hearing. At the same time, the U.S. is telling Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey to take in millions of refugees from the Syrian civil war.

Right-wingers and racists take note: No, these children don’t have Ebola. That’s a disease endemic in Africa– Ebola has never been reported in Latin America. What about other diseases? The migrants are better vaccinated than U.S. kids. The migrants are not hardened criminals, they are victims. They won’t destroy our economy – the Tea-GOP and Wall Street already did that. No, President Obama didn’t invite children to cross our border illegally – the law that guarantees due process for unaccompanied migrant children was signed by President Bush in 2008. It was uncontroversial at the time it was passed. The National Guard won’t stop the kids from coming, but maybe they could provide humanitarian assistance. Your term of opprobrium against undocumented immigrants isn’t spelled “ILEAGELS.” Also, the policy you oppose is not “AMENSTY,” or “AMNETY.”

More info:
Protesters turn back busloads of immigrants in Murrieta
GOP Candidate Mistakes YMCA Kids For Migrants, Describes ‘Fear In Their Faces’
Sarah Palin Wants President Obama Impeached For Following A Law Passed By Republicans

UPDATES:
This Bill Is Dubbed The HUMANE Act, But It Actually Hurts The Migrant Kids It Claims To Protect
Not the first time members of Congress have used Orwellian language to name legislation the opposite of what it is.

How Conservative Media Killed A Charity’s Plan To Help Migrant Children In Crisis

Politico Columnist Claims Obama “Ignored” Immigration Issues He Already Tried To Address

Politico’s Roger Simon distorted President Obama’s record to claim that his request for emergency funding to deal with the recent flood of unaccompanied minors crossing the border was tantamount to waking “from a deep slumber … to fight a problem he has ignored for years.” In reality, Obama has supported legislation in the past that addressed many of the underlying issues but the legislation has been blocked by the GOP.

  1. #1 by Larry Bergan on July 16, 2014 - 9:04 pm

    This is – BY FAR – the strangest and most disturbing thing I’ve ever seen.

    When you see pictures of Sean Hannity and Rick Parry on a boat with a gatling gun pointed at children, you just sense that something bad has happened.

    It may be just me.

  2. #4 by clear! on July 16, 2014 - 9:06 pm

    Have to wonder on the parents who did this to their kids.

    And the cretinous viper of a president who encouraged it.

    So there is no war in Guatemala nor in Belize yet parents sent there small children through an anarcho terrorist nation of Mexico to apply for American safety. Illegally.

    Retard post.

  3. #7 by Shane Smith on July 17, 2014 - 11:15 am

    Interesting that the GOPer who thinks all diseased is against immunizing our own children.

    Much like the average GOPer who is also against any forms of birth control but can’t imagine why they would be abortions.

  4. #8 by Richard Warnick on July 17, 2014 - 12:58 pm

    Bill O’Reilly Advocates For A Berlin Wall-Style Border Fence

    What O’Reilly is actually referring to was known as the “inner German border.” It was 866 miles long, but not nearly as impenetrable as the Berlin Wall was. Lots of people got through to West Germany. Our border with Mexico is 1,954 miles long. In 2007 the Congressional Research Office said it would cost $49 billion to construct and maintain (for 25 years) a 700 mile fence. So is O’Reilly willing to tax rich people to pay for that, or is he just full of hot air as usual?

    Congressman Henry Cuellar (D-TX):

    “Simply stated, a fence is a 14th century solution to a 21st century problem. …[I]f the fence is an impediment undocumented aliens will find another way. According to Homeland Security, 40 percent of all undocumented aliens came here legally on some type of work or student visa. They just never went back home. Of the other 60 percent many were brought in by smuggling operations.”

  5. #10 by clear! on July 19, 2014 - 4:04 pm

    Who is the GOP er?

    I have the likes of you Shane supporting a president who has now engaged in destroying Libya, Afghanistan, and has funded terrorists in Syria as well as in Libya.

    Who is shockingly wrong? These problems in central America might be ours to solve, however bringing kids to a busted broke USA is hardly the answer.

    Somebody has to make this site somewhat interesting, otherwise it tends to be a whiny crashing bore..

  6. #11 by clear! on July 19, 2014 - 4:06 pm

    I have gangs killing more kids to in Chicago that we do absolutely nothing about right here at home…it is a grave misfortune Shane, and speaks to the lack of leadership of this cretinous viper of a president.

    • #12 by Shane Smith on July 19, 2014 - 5:25 pm

      So to be clear, so far in 2014 there have been less 90 gang shootings in Chicago, according to the Chicago police, and the countries these kids are from have more murders than that per 200,000 people, and that in your mind is “more” murders right here at home.

      Math. You you failed it.

      And despite the fact that it is the GOP congress that blocked gun legislation, this is the presidents fault.

      Logic, you failed that too.

      And this is your way of making the site interesting? I have said it before, and I will say it again, you should honestly seek medical attention, as you are not entirely mentally functional…

  7. #13 by clear! on July 19, 2014 - 4:48 pm

    And what’s up with immunization? How is this juxtaposed? Is this your diseased mind projecting assumptions into a person you have never met, nor know nothing about..this site and what goes on here is hardly a qualifier.

    Look at it this way..without someone to post up against the bulk of the claptrap here this site would little more than an echo chamber.

    We can leave NPR on the radio, this venue should be as it claims, an open forum…as much as diseased minds wish it to be an echo chamber..as it is the technical side of this site sucks, and along with the rampant censorship it is a parody of what it claims to be.

    Cliff made it, so that is to be expected..

  8. #15 by clear! on July 19, 2014 - 6:34 pm

    There were 22 people shot in Chicago in one weekend.

    Now you move to gun control..back and forth..are you smoking weed?

    Onto reality…there have been over 1200 shootings in Chicago, Obamas hometown, where guns are basically banned. In 2013 there were over 2000. You are safer in Afghanistan. So what do you teach Shane..math?

    http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/shootings

    22 people shot in a weekend. You lose.

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/22-shot-dead-unacceptable-chicago-gun-violence/story?id=24633372

    • #16 by Shane on July 19, 2014 - 8:01 pm

      “CHICAGO — Gang-related shootings here are steadily declining, officials said on Wednesday, citing violence-reduction efforts that prevent gang retaliation and that are prompting the interest of other cities.

      Since the beginning of the year, less than half of the 188 shootings in Chicago were related to gang activity, Police Department numbers show. That represents a sharp drop from previous years, when gangs were responsible for 61 percent of shootings in 2013 and 65 percent in 2012 for the same period of time.”

      In contrast, the article I linked earlier and simple math tells us Hondurus had 14,960 homicides in 2012. In fact they have the highest rate on earth.

      So no, I don’t teach math. I am just able to read. Which you clearly are not.

      • #17 by Shane Smith on July 20, 2014 - 4:12 pm

        Oops, my phone doesn’t do math either, and likes to leave out details when i voice dictate.

        Near the end it should read “tells us Hondurus had 14,960 homicides in the 2012 to 2014 period.”

  9. #18 by clear! on July 19, 2014 - 6:40 pm

    What drugs are you on Shane to be absolved from reality? Are you on Solost? Fellbutrin? Procrack?

    Considering a majority of Americans are on these Flouride based poisons it is becoming no surprise that we have the odious president we do, and the inability to understand basic reality.

    Just having fun Shane, while shining a flashlight into the darkness of your empty skull..ooo, look out, was that a bat I saw in your belfry?

  10. #19 by clear! on July 19, 2014 - 6:50 pm

    So perhaps we should ban guns and killing down in these countries…wait they already are. Venezuela is a murder state, it has 10 times our murder rate for decades…personal gun ownership is illegal…seems to be working swell, there, and in Chicagoland…obama’s home town.

    As the bhuddists say..I am devoted to the mystic truth of cause and effect….given your own logic its pretty clear gun control doesn’t inhibit murder…um, people inhibit murder, often armed ones…

  11. #20 by brewski on July 19, 2014 - 7:06 pm

    http://youtu.be/ZdbDDfTutZQ

    nah, we don’t have a problem. It’s just all of them racists.

  12. #21 by clear! on July 19, 2014 - 11:12 pm

    So everyone else shot in obama’s hometown where guns are banned don’t count somehow?

    Nothing to see here move along…unless they have colors this shooting didn’t count..reduction..sure..still five months to go there math whiz.

    Right,they have a high murder rate, always have…so does that mean we should be letting the kids in? I say alright then, let them come in, in fact let’s go and conquer them after and fix the problem….ya right…

    I would say in fact that the US military is easily the biggest murder making gang statistically on Earth, and I don’t see you advocating to let in hordes of refugees from bloody mess we have been creating the last fifteen years..and your guy there likes to drone and bomb every bit as much as any other president we have had in recent times. Even more so in the droning dept. 8 times bushes rate over terms.

    Pretty sure this cynical drone murdering president picked his moment and decided to issue the welcome anyone and everyone for the purposes of promoting his immigration policy..which is basically none…while drone murdering away and creating a new pile of refugees wherever we bomb and the goon squad goes. Upon his orders. Executive and his decisions ALONE.

    He’s a filthy animal from Chicago, and as his horrid trashed city made him, he carries on in force the same way it does..in the Chicago Way..the price we are going to pay for his hubris and criminality is yet to be reckoned.

  13. #22 by clear! on July 19, 2014 - 11:17 pm

    I read Shane…you may not have…refer to the trib reckoning in the link I presented. You are off on your Chicago shooting count by a factor of 10.

    http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/shootings

    As for Honduras seems that the people there should do what the Mexican people have done in relation to their gangs. Arm up and hunt and kill them. What with obama and holder running guns to narco terrorists you can see how this can be problem for people who want them gone..I refer to fast and furious, another criminal enterprise of a Chicago variety we have yet to pay the piper for.

    • #23 by Larry Bergan on July 20, 2014 - 9:24 pm

      clear (did I spell your name wrong)?

      You said:

      “Obama and Holder running guns to narco terrorists”.

      You should be focusing on Vince Foster.

  14. #24 by clear! on July 20, 2014 - 9:32 pm

    Well they only did..and some of them have killed Americans.. Gun dealers under oath testified to the fact that they were compelled to sell them to narco terrorists by holder’s justice dept.

    They are all the same, or worse.

    • #25 by Richard Warnick on July 20, 2014 - 10:31 pm

      Not true, and you can’t post a link to any credible source that backs your claim. Why say stuff like this when it’s provably false?

  15. #26 by Richard Warnick on July 22, 2014 - 9:29 am

    Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) says something about the refugee kids that’s both rational and eloquent.

  16. #27 by Shane on July 22, 2014 - 9:44 am

    “I have gangs killing more kids to in Chicago that we do absolutely nothing about right here at home…”

    Any time you want to man up and admit several thousand in each of those countries per yer is more than any gang homicide estimate in Chicago, we might start listening to your blather….

  17. #29 by clear! on July 23, 2014 - 5:40 pm

    Haha..total censored rework…many responses never posted.

    You guys, and this site is a total joke.

    I posted links to the testimony, here ya losers.

    http://mobile.businessweek.com/articles/2013-05-21/fast-and-furious-scandal-returns-to-haunt-obama

    Fix the site, it just sucks and isn’t worth the bother…good luck.

    • #30 by Richard Warnick on July 23, 2014 - 6:36 pm

      Glenn, how can we miss you if you don’t go away?

      The ATF didn’t “allow” the sale of guns to criminals. The fact is that current law (thanks to the Gun Lobby) makes it very difficult if not impossible to prosecute “straw buyers.” So they did the next best thing, they tried to track the guns to crime scenes in Mexico so they could be used to convict drug cartel members. This program began under the Bush administration in 2006, BTW.

      • #31 by Shane Smith on July 23, 2014 - 8:48 pm

        Glenn’s own link pointed this out.

        “Largely lost in all the Republican vituperation and Justice Department defensiveness is the deeply troubling fact that Fast and Furious was not an invention of the Obama administration. As I reported in a Bloomberg Businessweek feature article, “The Guns That Got Away,” (November 17, 2011), Fast and Furious was preceded by an alarmingly similar bungled gun-trafficking investigation called Operation Wide Receiver, which began during the Bush administration.”

        The question is now can he not understand what he reads, or does he simply not read?

  18. #32 by clear! on July 23, 2014 - 5:43 pm

    And the main upshot is..why do we care when we have tremendous problems of our own?

    More people in prison in raw numbers than communist China…a nation with four times our population.

    What agenda is it you have carrying obama’s water in this side show while the rest of the nation burns and twists in the wind?

  19. #33 by clear! on July 23, 2014 - 10:02 pm

    Finally right, it was a holder justice dept operation.

    So fix the site, quit censoring, and maybe, maybe, this site won’t be a laughing stock.

    C’ Mon already, nobody takes it seriously.. John Daly has more serious and real questions about this serial liar of an administration in his pinky toe than posters here.

    No one posts here anymore because of you schmucks censoring and the ridiculousness of how badly the site operates….just ask Larry.

  20. #34 by clear! on July 23, 2014 - 11:17 pm

    You know how crazy you seem referencing people that aren’t visible?

    Seems this Glenn owns this site whenever he wants..quite a prospect for those peddling it.

    • #36 by brewski on August 19, 2014 - 2:37 pm

      How many have you signed up to personally adopt and assume all legal and financial responsibility?

      • #37 by Richard Warnick on August 19, 2014 - 2:50 pm

        Typical, coming from you brewski.

        We have a government that can deal with big issues like this far more effectively than individuals and private charities (although Catholic Relief Services has been doing a great job). There have been 63,000 unaccompanied undocumented immigrant children so far this year.

        • #38 by brewski on August 19, 2014 - 3:21 pm

          Typical Statist response coming from a Statist.

          How is a “government” going to “deal with” those actual human beings? Where are they really going to go? 63,00 people need to go some place. What is the “government” going to do with them?

          Please describe the actual place the “government” is going to “deal with” them.

          • #39 by Richard Warnick on August 19, 2014 - 3:42 pm

            Anything the government can do would be better than your proposal for a DIY solution. What would I do, swing by the nearest ICE facility and ask for some kids to take home with me?

            Luckily, a lot of the unaccompanied minors have family already in the USA. In those cases, the job is to help them find a good home environment with relatives while their application for asylum gets sorted out.

            There are things the government can do to help these kids. You may recall that President Obama asked Congress for an emergency appropriation, and they turned him down out of partisan pique. You may recall that the federal government handled the influx of 125,000 Cuban asylum-seekers during the Mariel boatlift. No right-wingers complained about that!

          • #40 by brewski on August 19, 2014 - 3:47 pm

            No. I didn’t say DIY.

            But thank you for not answering the question.

            Emergency appropriation does not raise a child. People do.

          • #41 by Richard Warnick on August 19, 2014 - 4:05 pm

            I got interrupted while typing. Note what I said about the Mariel boatlift.

            The emergency appropriation would be for the immediate crisis. If children need foster homes after being granted asylum, then someone needs to look out for their welfare. Catholic Relief Services can’t do it all.

            Anyway, the Obama administration’s half-baked idea of deporting the children and giving money to Honduras for better law and order isn’t working.

          • #42 by brewski on August 19, 2014 - 5:12 pm

            No, the children don’t need foster homes. They need permanent homes. They need real parents who will raise them. Have you signed up to do so? Yes or no?

        • #43 by Richard Warnick on August 19, 2014 - 9:55 pm

          The U.S. expects neighboring countries to accommodate millions of refugees, first from our invasion and occupation of Iraq and now from the Syrian civil war.

          But you say the U.S. government can’t solve the problem of 63,000 child refugees. Most of them are probably already with their U.S. relatives by now. No, you switch to ad hominem mode and tell me it’s my problem.

          The reason we have a government is because DIY solutions are overrated.

          • #44 by brewski on August 19, 2014 - 11:00 pm

            Thank you for showing you have no clue how children are raised.

          • #45 by Richard Warnick on August 20, 2014 - 7:30 am

            Just to be clear, your idea is to send them back to Honduras to be murdered.

          • #46 by brewski on August 20, 2014 - 8:05 am

            Just to be clear, my idea is to solve the problem and not dither with the symptoms in a hypocritical way.

  21. #47 by piss poor website on August 20, 2014 - 11:53 am

    Hey, the US is currently giving israel the missiles to blow children to kingdom come in Gaza, please don’t cry crocodile tears over this obvious political pandering obama has fomented on the border.

    The problem isn’t ours as sad as it is. We have a nation completely run by out of control incompetents, riots in the streets, unaccountable cops, and burning and looting in our streets.

    It would be recommended that America needs to make its own country safe, for it own citizens, respect their human rights, maybe figure out how to develop a real economy, and one not so predominated by DEATH and its cult followers. I.e. the military, and militarized police.

  22. #49 by piss poor "progressivism" on August 21, 2014 - 1:39 am

    I do what needs doing. Piss poor website covers it, when its up and running well we can change to….well, its changed. Just as well.

    • #51 by brewski on August 25, 2014 - 4:42 pm

      Adopt one.

      • #52 by Richard Warnick on August 25, 2014 - 6:52 pm

        You didn’t read the article. They are refugees, but not orphans. The vast majority are coming to join family members already in the U.S.

        • #53 by brewski on August 25, 2014 - 10:27 pm

          And for the rest?

          • #54 by Richard Warnick on August 26, 2014 - 7:02 am

            This is why we have a government. So we don’t collapse into a YOYO society (you’re on your own).

          • #55 by brewski on August 26, 2014 - 7:40 am

            You haven’t explained how “the government” is going to raise these children. Please do.

          • #56 by Richard Warnick on August 26, 2014 - 8:40 am

            They are not orphans. What part of that don’t you get?

            BTW you still haven’t explained why right-wingers could deal with the Mariel boatlift in 1980 but they are freaking out over this.

          • #57 by brewski on August 26, 2014 - 11:36 am

            Where are their parents? How will they be reunited with their parents?

          • #58 by Richard Warnick on August 26, 2014 - 12:22 pm

            There is actually an agency that does this, the Office of Refugee Resettlement. It’s part of the Department of Health & Human Services.

            I assume you are unable to answer my question regarding right-wingers and the Mariel boatlift.

          • #59 by brewski on August 26, 2014 - 3:09 pm

            You continually refuse to answer any of my questions and you still do, so it is laughable that you would change the subject and ask me about what other people thought in the 80′s. It is so difficult for you to answer a simple question?

          • #60 by Richard Warnick on August 26, 2014 - 3:36 pm

            I answered your questions. You just don’t understand the answers because you think deportation is the only answer. Well, most of the Mariel refugees didn’t get deported because the right-wingers were not as crazy in the 1980s. It was a chaotic situation, but the Carter administration coped with it and we didn’t have the insane anti-immigrant hysteria we’re seeing now.

          • #61 by brewski on August 26, 2014 - 3:59 pm

            You have not.

          • #62 by Richard Warnick on August 26, 2014 - 4:06 pm

            Using your computer’s mouse, move the little arrow over the link that says “Office of Refugee Resettlement.” Then click the left mouse button and read what comes up on your computer screen.

          • #63 by brewski on August 26, 2014 - 4:32 pm

            I read it. It doesn’t answer my question.

            Why don’t you try using your fingers and hit those little squares with the letters on them and tell me in your own words what is going to happen to any unaccompanied minor who does not have a qualified sponsor who is in the US?

          • #64 by Richard Warnick on August 26, 2014 - 7:27 pm

            Your question was “How will they be reunited with their parents?” The Office of Refugee Resettlement is doing that wherever possible.

            They also find other sponsors if they can’t find relatives who can be trusted to take care of the kids and cooperate with immigration. Which answers the separate, additional question you just asked, “[W]hat is going to happen to any unaccompanied minor who does not have a qualified sponsor who is in the US?”

            All this is explained in the link I gave above.

            When a child who is not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian is apprehended by immigration authorities, the child is transferred to the care and custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). Federal law requires that ORR feed, shelter, and provide medical care for unaccompanied children until it is able to release them to safe settings with sponsors (usually family members), while they await immigration proceedings.

            All your questions answered, in plain English. This law was passed during the Bush administration. Are you suggesting the government ought to break the law?

          • #65 by brewski on August 26, 2014 - 9:45 pm

            So when are you going to sign up to adopt a child who does not have a qualified relative ?

          • #66 by Richard Warnick on August 26, 2014 - 9:56 pm

            Right after I rescue the American middle class, halt global warming, wipe out ISIS, reform every racist local police department…

            Oh wait, I don’t have to solve every problem myself. We have a government that’s far more capable of doing all these things, and taking care of refugees too.

          • #67 by brewski on August 26, 2014 - 10:59 pm

            So what you are saying is that you care enough for the government to “take care” of these children, but you don’t care enough to lift a finger yourself.

            Classic Statist hypocrisy.

          • #68 by Richard Warnick on August 27, 2014 - 9:06 am

            The policies you call “statist” I know by the name progressive.

            The founders of the progressive movement rejected what was then known as “social Darwinism.” Today’s progressives care about reducing the gap between rich and poor, making sure anyone in America can get a good education, and providing health care that doesn’t cause medical bankruptcy. We want equal rights for everybody. We want to roll back the burgeoning National Security State with its illegal wars and unconstitutional infringements of civil rights. We want a green economy, conservation of natural resources, and renewable energy. We want to end the war on drugs that has made America’s incarceration rate worse than China’s.

            There’s more, of course. You can join us, because I think you agree with some of this.

          • #69 by brewski on August 27, 2014 - 10:05 am

            I don’t agree that the government can raise children.

            Now I know why you brought up the Mariel Boatlift. That is because you love Castro.

          • #70 by Richard Warnick on August 27, 2014 - 11:00 am

            When the other guy descends into bizarre ad hominem, that’s how I know I have won the argument on the facts.

          • #71 by brewski on August 27, 2014 - 12:08 pm

            All you do is ad hominems. That is your only tactic. That and quoting 22 years old bloggers living in their mother’s basement.

          • #72 by Richard Warnick on August 27, 2014 - 12:16 pm

            I never resort to name-calling, or personal attacks of any kind. You cannot cite one example from this blog (or anywhere else).

  23. #73 by piss poor "progressivism" on August 27, 2014 - 8:54 am

    This another in the series of obamafarce, the pretense to humanity, then come the funding of jihadi terror and endless lies facilitating false flags.

    The bombing begins in 5 minutes.

    Ronnie could have written bama’s speeches, but neither of them write much, get a speech writer, make some quotables, lie some more. Good stuff!

  24. #74 by piss poor "progressivism" on August 27, 2014 - 9:12 am

    How is it progressive to arm jihadi terrorists, who you once claimed as a threat to humanity?

    It’s pretty obvious to the world where the threats come from, whether arming head chopping jihadi terrorists or blood thirsty khazar jews armed with our missiles murdering disenfranchised people in their hovels. It’s all made in the USA.

    Sad for nation born in the making of useful things to now be little more than an arms cache for tyranny.

    • #75 by Richard Warnick on August 27, 2014 - 10:58 am

      I never advocated arming jihadi terrorists. Where do you get that from? What is the point of spewing nonsense?

  25. #76 by piss poor "progressivism" on August 27, 2014 - 10:37 am

    The government can’t even take care of veterans who swore their oaths and lives to this nation.

    God help any children in their filthy hands.

  26. #77 by Richard Warnick on September 3, 2014 - 12:16 pm

    • #78 by brewski on September 3, 2014 - 2:13 pm

      How do you know something before it happens?

      • #79 by Richard Warnick on September 3, 2014 - 6:05 pm

        That’s a question I would like to ask the Tea-GOPers who are threatening impeachment and government shutdown in revenge for something President Obama hasn’t done yet.

        But to answer the point in question, why even risk sending children to their deaths? What’s the upside? We know some of them were murdered within hours of returning to Honduras.

        • #80 by brewski on September 3, 2014 - 6:16 pm

          I guess you could blame the parents of Columbine High School for even risking sending their children to their deaths. Your logic.

          • #81 by Richard Warnick on September 3, 2014 - 10:37 pm

            Here’s the thing. Congress passed a law granting special status to immigrant children from these countries, and President Bush signed it. You want President Obama to break the law.

          • #82 by brewski on September 4, 2014 - 8:33 am

            He already is, so why would a silty thing like the law stop him?

          • #83 by cav - Spam Status?: Solidifying on September 4, 2014 - 9:01 am

            Anonymous internet commenters are unimpeachable sources.

            cav, authoritatively

          • #84 by Richard Warnick on September 4, 2014 - 12:02 pm

            I’m curious. What law(s) is/are President Obama currently violating?

          • #85 by brewski on September 4, 2014 - 1:12 pm

            Affordable Care Act.

            Bergdahl swap.

          • #86 by Richard Warnick on September 4, 2014 - 4:02 pm

            Speaker Boehner’s lawsuit accuses the President of delegating implementation of some provisions of the ACA, a law that the House voted to repeal about 40 times. That makes no sense. Federal regulations and programs get delayed or postponed all the time.

            As for the release of SGT Bergdahl from Taliban captivity, the GAO says that the administration had to give Congress 30 days notice according to a new law passed last February. That’s an absurd rule. They really wanted to tell the enemy to hold the guy an extra 30 days?

            Seriously, is that all you can come up with? The torture of detainees is a federal felony conspiracy, but the Tea-GOP won’t talk about that because Bush did it too. Same for the extra-judicial executions of U.S. citizens. Also, President Obama went to war in Libya without any congressional authorization.

          • #87 by brewski on September 4, 2014 - 8:05 pm

            It is absurd rule that Congress passed and Obama signed. There are lots of absurd laws. In fact most laws are absurd. The president doesn’t get to just break any law he doesn’t like. That is what king’s do. My ancestors fought not to have a king.

            As for unilaterally breaking the law with regard to the employer mandate. That is breaking the statute. Period.

          • #88 by Richard Warnick on September 4, 2014 - 9:36 pm

            What’s absurd is the Tea-GOPers threatening impeachment over minor stuff, while ignoring federal felony violations.

          • #89 by brewski on September 4, 2014 - 10:28 pm

            Source please.

          • #90 by Richard Warnick on September 5, 2014 - 7:08 am

            Source for the felony crimes is the U.S. Code: Title 18.

            There are any number of sources for Tea-GOPers threatening impeachment over one political issue or another. None of them cited criminal acts by the President (they cannot do that because it will remind everyone of the crimes Bush/Cheney got away with).

            Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who was involved in the Clinton impeachment, says he wants to do the same to President Obama.

            Rep. Steve King (R-IA) recently said, ”Congress needs to sit down and have a serious look at the constitution and that includes that ‘I word’ that we don’t want to say.”

            Rep. Steve Stockman
            (R-TX) has threatened to file articles of impeachment against President Obama.

            Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC): “If one of our troops goes to Syria and is killed, I will introduce articles of impeachment against the president.”

            You can add to the list Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Rep. Trey Radel (R-FL), Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC). There are more, but I’m having breakfast and have to go to work.

          • #91 by Larry Bergan on September 5, 2014 - 5:59 pm

            That’s a pretty good list alright. Good job!

            Lindsey Graham should be ashamed of himself to bring up impeachment after Clinton. He should recuse himself of further comment.

          • #92 by brewski on September 9, 2014 - 5:41 am

            So you want to charge Obama with a federal felony?

          • #93 by Richard Warnick on September 9, 2014 - 11:27 am

            I wanted to charge President Bush and VP Cheney. Of course, they came right out and admitted on TV that they committed federal crimes. President Obama hasn’t confessed to anything, so he will have to be to investigated first. But who’s going to do it? Not the Tea-GOP- they can’t conduct a serious investigation, and they can’t talk about the Bush administration crimes.

          • #94 by brewski on September 9, 2014 - 11:39 am

            Why not? They don’t need to. They have nothing to do with Bush. The Tea Party is anti-Bush, but that is too complicated for blind partisans like you to understand.

          • #95 by Richard Warnick on September 9, 2014 - 2:11 pm

            The Tea-GOP is made up 100 percent of people who voted for Bush. 57 percent of them still love Bush, even after he crashed the economy!

          • #96 by brewski on September 9, 2014 - 2:48 pm

            False.

          • #97 by Richard Warnick on September 9, 2014 - 5:52 pm

            What do think is false? That the Tea Partyers all voted for Bush or that 57 percent still love Bush?

            BTW do you have a shred of evidence for your assertion they are “anti-Bush”?

          • #98 by brewski on September 9, 2014 - 6:01 pm

            11% of Tea Party people voted for Obama.

            Your 57% figure is 2 years old and overstates what the poll said.

            Tea Party people are anti Bush/Pelosi immigration amnesty.

            Tea Party people are anti Bush TARP.

            Tea Party people are anti Bush Common Core and NCLB.

            Bush did not crash the economy. Greenspan did.

          • #99 by Richard Warnick on September 9, 2014 - 6:09 pm

            Even if it’s true that 11% voted for Obama (got source?) that doesn’t mean they didn’t all vote for Bush. I have never read an interview with even one Tea-GOP type who can say truthfully they never voted for Bush.

            Got another poll to show me? Please do.

            Tea-GOPers don’t blame Bush for TARP. It was bipartisan.

            Tea-GOPers think Obama invented Common Core because they watch Faux News.

            Greenspan kept the housing bubble going so that Bush wouldn’t have to own up to his lousy job creation record (the worst since Herbert Hoover) and increasing poverty.

          • #100 by brewski on September 9, 2014 - 6:12 pm

          • #101 by Richard Warnick on September 9, 2014 - 6:16 pm

            The list of “Key government officials to blame” includes George W. Bush. QED.

          • #102 by brewski on September 9, 2014 - 6:19 pm

            The asset bubble started in 1995 long before Bush was president. So it is hard to blame Bush for something he wasn’t around for.

            Greenspan didn’t “keep the bubble going”. He caused it in the first place.

          • #103 by brewski on September 9, 2014 - 6:21 pm

            Apparently you can’t read. QED.

          • #104 by brewski on September 10, 2014 - 7:37 am

            So you assert that Bush “crashed the economy” and the list I posted and you have implied credibility, listed hundreds if not thousands of people, many of whom are Democrats and Clinton appointees, and the only reference at all to Bush was subordinate clause referencing that Hank Paulsen was appointed by him. That’s it. So the only thing which you can put a QED after is the QED that you are an informationless voter.

          • #105 by Richard Warnick on September 10, 2014 - 1:46 pm

            President Bush made such a big deal about being “The Decider” and the head of a “unitary executive” administration with the White House controlling everything. Surely he bears SOME responsibility for crashing the economy. Or was he just the equivalent of a Wal-Mart greeter?

          • #106 by brewski on September 10, 2014 - 3:00 pm

            Again, the timeline started long before he was president. so he was less than a walmart greeter then.

          • #107 by Larry Bergan on September 10, 2014 - 3:34 pm

            Sorry brewski, I think I accidentally lost a small comment of yours just now.

            Richard: Did you realize you have two comments in the trash? I have no idea how they got there. Check it out.

          • #108 by Richard Warnick on September 10, 2014 - 3:58 pm

            I deleted them because they came up in the wrong sub-thread. Hard to keep track when you can’t hit “reply.”

          • #109 by brewski on September 10, 2014 - 11:58 pm

            You have a remarkable capacity for mis-stating others’ statements, others’ positions, others’ actions, and actual data.

        • #110 by brewski on September 9, 2014 - 6:15 pm

  27. #114 by cav on September 3, 2014 - 10:53 pm

    I’m surprised they haven’t been saying that ISIS suicide bombers have been sneaking across the border disguised as children.

    It’s the sort of two-birds-one-stone tactic these bozos have made their own.

  28. #115 by cav - Spam Status?: Solidifying on September 4, 2014 - 9:06 am

    From spam to moderation…I must be coming up in the world.

  29. #116 by brewski on September 4, 2014 - 9:50 am

    worth watching:

  30. #117 by brewski on September 4, 2014 - 8:06 pm

    I am in moderation.

(will not be published)


%d bloggers like this: