Republicans, Obama immigration chief clash over criminal immigrants
This seems like a good example of complete dysfunction and a Kobyashi Maru of government. You cannot deport a criminal to a country that will not take them back, so you release them in the US. Why does this seem really strange?
Meanwhile robbed, raped and murdered peaceful American citizens are having the hell kicked out or them.
Anything to swell the ranks of future jackass party voters.
This is why Nancy Pelosi very happily called that illegal immigrant child invasion from Mexico to be "an opportunity."
What the heck? Everybody has to die some day.
We The People amounts to that "political football" if you want to think about it.
kicked around like a football. -- j
.
however illegal or immoral or strange. . the drive for
power knows no bounds. . it brings wealth with it. -- j
.
If the offender is a violent offender and their country refuses them, kill them.
I know that this seems extreme but rest assured that the very threat will greatly reduce the illegal immigration problem. We may have to actually step up and execute a few in order to make the threat believable, but if we do it publicly. Things will come around quickly.
A few things I take into consideration:
First of all, these individuals are convicted criminals - not merely suspects. They have already forfeited many of their rights by committing crimes serious enough that mere incarceration isn't sufficient punishment.
Second, these individuals aren't citizens of the United States. We have no responsibility to take care of them one way or the other.
Third, these individuals abused our hospitality first by coming here illegally and secondly by committing serious crimes against our people. I'm really not in favor of allowing such a mentality to stand very long.
Fourth, the nations these individuals come from don't respect the laws of our nation and are relying on us being willing to provide a subsistence living for citizens they don't want to take responsibility for as a citizen. I say we need to send them back a strong message that says "No Dumping!"
Precisely, and it is because they initiate force on another that they void their right not to have it done on them in return. It's like a ridiculous argument put forth in another article I read today claiming that criminals should have a right not to get shot when perpetrating a crime because it violates their rights (http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/lib....
Now one might make the argument that such a punishment as I am suggesting is disparate to the crime committed. If so, the question then revolves around what punishment is sufficient and who should be charged with carrying out (ie paying for and administering) said punishment, so the argument returns us to the same place.
not take them back. . just give them a snack and a
one-way bus ticket. -- j
.
Here's another one. No Funding No Mandate. For any and all of these federal programs, You want Common Core? Pay for it. You want this or that? Pay for it. etc. etc. etc. You want to raise our taxes to pay for it? No dice. No funding no mandate. Same should apply to the State Government if the people of the State want it or don't want it...
welfare (a.k.a. foreign aid) by the actual costs of their
illegals. . I always thought -- and still think -- that's the
way to get them to pay for the wall. -- j
.
.
On the other hand, I hear that Pitcairn Island wants settlers.
Maybe they'd fit right in there.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic...
like amazon, on a chosen doorstep! -- j
.
eligible senators from d.c., OK? -- j
.
.
p.s. the hindenburg was a good example.
.
Meanwhile the Mexican gov spends resources in the Dark Center "improving" their "image."