Texas Dem hands out lollipops to detained immigrant children

[Moonglow]

Texas Dem hands out lollipops to detained immigrant children

Did they miss the crate of poisoned lollipops sent by the GOP churches??

 

[MikeK]

Texas Dem hands out lollipops to detained immigrant children

Who are entitled to due process of the law along with all other persons in the United States.

And when that due process is completed, what will be the inevitable outcome? In this example due process means prolonging the inevitable. These kids have entered the U.S. illegally.

It would be nice to defer to Emma Lazarus' poetic sentiment and welcome them, but to do so would be to initiate an unsustainable policy. We simply cannot assume the role of provider for the world's unfortunate children. To pose this reality in the most bluntly pragmatic terms, are you willing to adopt one or more of them? And if these kids do have relatives in the U.S., are those relatives capable of supporting themselves as well as immigrant children? Or will we be increasing an existing welfare burden -- at a time when we already are dealing with a dramatically increasing problem of abjectly impoverished and homeless citizens.

 

[Mustang]

That probably works on naive college kids.

It works on pretty much everyone since it's both true and simple common sense.

Obama is the pissant who is abusing children. He's responsible for them being here. Do you really think you're fooling anyone?

Oh for heaven's sake, unless you can prove that Obama drove them to the border on some kind of bus, or that he invited them here in some kind of a PR campaign, I think it's safe to say that the kids, their parents, and smuggling coyotes made the decision to come here just like millions of people from Central America have been doing for the last several decades before anyone ever even heard of Barack Obama.

 

[gallantwarrior]

These are future democrat voters. The poor ignorant useful idiots here still think they can fool some people. Obama certainly does, which is why you pitiful creatures are defending this.

The very fact that the "poor ignorant useful idiots" are defending this atrocious disregard for his oath of office and an absolute failure to execute the laws of the land should indicate that obama has apparently been able to completely bamboozle some portion of the electorate. The sheeple have bleated, please respect that...they are the "majority", after all!

You seem to be forgetting that little act that President George W. Bush signed in 2008.

And I will ask again, that makes it all OK for your Boi King to double/triple down? At least Bush signed a act passed by Congress. You Boi King messiah continues to issues his royal edicts in order to violate the Constitution and circumvent the Legislative duties assigned to Congress.
But, hell, it's all OK, he's the first (half) black president and we should never, ever utter criticism of his absolute lack of ability to lead, lest we be labeled racist.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Texas Dem hands out lollipops to detained immigrant children

Who are entitled to due process of the law along with all other persons in the United States.

They're not here legally. They should be returned to their home country and then make use of due process to come here legally.

That, too, is the Law of the Land. Unfortunately, this is one of those Laws that our dictator-in-chief has chosen not to enforce, a direct violation of Article Two of the Constitution and his oath of office.

 

[Lakhota]

The very fact that the "poor ignorant useful idiots" are defending this atrocious disregard for his oath of office and an absolute failure to execute the laws of the land should indicate that obama has apparently been able to completely bamboozle some portion of the electorate. The sheeple have bleated, please respect that...they are the "majority", after all!

You seem to be forgetting that little act that President George W. Bush signed in 2008.

And I will ask again, that makes it all OK for your Boi King to double/triple down? At least Bush signed a act passed by Congress. You Boi King messiah continues to issues his royal edicts in order to violate the Constitution and circumvent the Legislative duties assigned to Congress.
But, hell, it's all OK, he's the first (half) black president and we should never, ever utter criticism of his absolute lack of ability to lead, lest we be labeled racist.

Well, sparky, please be SPECIFIC about what laws President Obama isn't enforcing and/or violating. Also, any Executive Orders he may issue are LEGAL - otherwise he couldn't issue them. He's still way behind Bush...

Also, what violations of the Constitution are you talking about. Please be SPECIFIC. We're here to help...

 

[gallantwarrior]

You people do need to quit treating them like criminals. I know all this fear and loathing is somehow fun to you people but getting your hate fix on these kids is kind of creepy.

It least it shows us how compassionate conservatives really are. I mean, anyone who picks on children has got some issues that have nothing at all to do with politics.

It definitely shows how desperate the despots who want to bring this country down to the level of a third world shithole are. Really, the way they are using these children as brickbats to beat everyone into submission who disagrees with what they are doing. Gutless prols who are incapable of advancing a persuasive argument in support of their plans and ideology, using children like they're some kind of weapon.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Texas Dem hands out lollipops to detained immigrant children

Who are entitled to due process of the law along with all other persons in the United States.

And when that due process is completed, what will be the inevitable outcome? In this example due process means prolonging the inevitable. These kids have entered the U.S. illegally.

It would be nice to defer to Emma Lazarus' poetic sentiment and welcome them, but to do so would be to initiate an unsustainable policy. We simply cannot assume the role of provider for the world's unfortunate children. To pose this reality in the most bluntly pragmatic terms, are you willing to adopt one or more of them? And if these kids do have relatives in the U.S., are those relatives capable of supporting themselves as well as immigrant children? Or will we be increasing an existing welfare burden -- at a time when we already are dealing with a dramatically increasing problem of abjectly impoverished and homeless citizens.

I don't think they care, as long as said "immigrants" vote Dem and eventually marginalize the GOP.

 

[guno]

Who are entitled to due process of the law along with all other persons in the United States.

And when that due process is completed, what will be the inevitable outcome? In this example due process means prolonging the inevitable. These kids have entered the U.S. illegally.

It would be nice to defer to Emma Lazarus' poetic sentiment and welcome them, but to do so would be to initiate an unsustainable policy. We simply cannot assume the role of provider for the world's unfortunate children. To pose this reality in the most bluntly pragmatic terms, are you willing to adopt one or more of them? And if these kids do have relatives in the U.S., are those relatives capable of supporting themselves as well as immigrant children? Or will we be increasing an existing welfare burden -- at a time when we already are dealing with a dramatically increasing problem of abjectly impoverished and homeless citizens.

I don't think they care, as long as said "immigrants" vote Dem and eventually marginalize the GOP.

The white christian party doesn't need any help being marginalized , they marginalized themselves

 

[Mustang]

You people do need to quit treating them like criminals. I know all this fear and loathing is somehow fun to you people but getting your hate fix on these kids is kind of creepy.

It least it shows us how compassionate conservatives really are. I mean, anyone who picks on children has got some issues that have nothing at all to do with politics.

It definitely shows how desperate the despots who want to bring this country down to the level of a third world shithole are. Really, the way they are using these children as brickbats to beat everyone into submission who disagrees with what they are doing. Gutless prols who are incapable of advancing a persuasive argument in support of their plans and ideology, using children like they're some kind of weapon.

How many Cubans did one state (Florida) absorb due to the Mariel boatlift in 1980 without the fabric of the nation coming apart at the seams?

Answer: about 125,000.

The difference at that point was that conservatives pretty much welcomed Cubans because they were seen as all being anti-Castro, anti-communist voices, and it was also understood that Cuban exiles would be pretty reliable voters for Republican candidates in the years to come. But I don't remember Democrats acting then the way conservatives are acting now.

 

[J.E.D]

Strange....the GOP has many Hispanics in Congress.

You cater to the bottom of the barrel Hispanics whereas the smarter hard working Hispanics go with the GOP.

What percentage of the Latino vote did Romney get?

 

[Vigilante]

These are future democrat voters. The poor ignorant useful idiots here still think they can fool some people. Obama certainly does, which is why you pitiful creatures are defending this.

The main reason they would be future democrat voters is because of the way that conservative Republicans treat them. Namely, with contempt.

Mustang, please learn about what is going on, and just don't go along with the subversive crowd!

Obama’s illegal immigration invitation

You can tell the tidal wave of illegal aliens, many of them unaccompanied minors, surging across the southern border is causing a bit of political discomfort for President Obama, because he briefly felt obliged to pretend he’s not happy about it. “Briefly” means last Friday, when the President gave us the hilarious vaudeville pantomime act of asking the people of Central America to stop throwing their kids across the hemisphere. From a Washington Times report:

President Obama made a personal plea Friday for the families of Central America not to send their children to America, trying to stanch the crisis of illegal immigrant youths flooding across the border.....

Obama's illegal immigration invitation | Human Events
​

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Texas Dem hands out lollipops to detained immigrant children

Who are entitled to due process of the law along with all other persons in the United States.

And when that due process is completed, what will be the inevitable outcome? In this example due process means prolonging the inevitable. These kids have entered the U.S. illegally.

It would be nice to defer to Emma Lazarus' poetic sentiment and welcome them, but to do so would be to initiate an unsustainable policy. We simply cannot assume the role of provider for the world's unfortunate children. To pose this reality in the most bluntly pragmatic terms, are you willing to adopt one or more of them? And if these kids do have relatives in the U.S., are those relatives capable of supporting themselves as well as immigrant children? Or will we be increasing an existing welfare burden -- at a time when we already are dealing with a dramatically increasing problem of abjectly impoverished and homeless citizens.

The problem is not children entering the United States absent documentation, the problem is Congressional republicans' refusal to seek a political solution, where the legislative and political process is not allowed to realize resolution.

And when elected officials fail to act, or act in an un-Constitutional manner, the judicial process is authorized to take action, safeguarding the civil liberties of all persons in the United States, in this case the right to due process of the law, where those allegedly undocumented are afforded a presumption of innocence and cannot be subject to summary punitive measures.

But the judicial process is not suited to resolve such issues, as this belongs to politicians to resolve, not judges, the law serves solely to protect individuals' rights.

Unfortunately the age of partisan gridlock has relegated this and other issues to political limbo as a consequence of legislative inaction. It is neither the role nor responsibility of the courts to resolve political conflict. We saw this with Citizens United, for example, where the Court could not weigh in on the merits of campaign finance reform and the serious problem of excessive money in the political process and its undue influence as a result. The Citizens United Court could only rule on the constitutionality of the legislative measures enacted to resolve the problem, not resolve the problem itself.

Last, immigrants are entitled to due process in accordance with immigration law to have their cases reviewed for claims and requests as refugees or asylees, where there may be legitimate, warranted reasons for such immigrants to remain and therefore inappropriate to return refugees absent a review of their cases.

This is a complex and involved issue, not easily addressed with naïve and simplistic 'solutions' such as 'sealing off the border' or 'shipping all “illegals” back.'

 

[Vigilante]

Who are entitled to due process of the law along with all other persons in the United States.

And when that due process is completed, what will be the inevitable outcome? In this example due process means prolonging the inevitable. These kids have entered the U.S. illegally.

It would be nice to defer to Emma Lazarus' poetic sentiment and welcome them, but to do so would be to initiate an unsustainable policy. We simply cannot assume the role of provider for the world's unfortunate children. To pose this reality in the most bluntly pragmatic terms, are you willing to adopt one or more of them? And if these kids do have relatives in the U.S., are those relatives capable of supporting themselves as well as immigrant children? Or will we be increasing an existing welfare burden -- at a time when we already are dealing with a dramatically increasing problem of abjectly impoverished and homeless citizens.

The problem is not children entering the United States absent documentation, the problem is Congressional republicans' refusal to seek a political solution, where the legislative and political process is not allowed to realize resolution.

And when elected officials fail to act, or act in an un-Constitutional manner, the judicial process is authorized to take action, safeguarding the civil liberties of all persons in the United States, in this case the right to due process of the law, where those allegedly undocumented are afforded a presumption of innocence and cannot be subject to summary punitive measures.

But the judicial process is not suited to resolve such issues, as this belongs to politicians to resolve, not judges, the law serves solely to protect individuals' rights.

Unfortunately the age of partisan gridlock has relegated this and other issues to political limbo as a consequence of legislative inaction. It is neither the role nor responsibility of the courts to resolve political conflict. We saw this with Citizens United, for example, where the Court could not weigh in on the merits of campaign finance reform and the serious problem of excessive money in the political process and its undue influence as a result. The Citizens United Court could only rule on the constitutionality of the legislative measures enacted to resolve the problem, not resolve the problem itself.

Last, immigrants are entitled to due process in accordance with immigration law to have their cases reviewed for claims and requests as refugees or asylees, where there may be legitimate, warranted reasons for such immigrants to remain and therefore inappropriate to return refugees absent a review of their cases.

This is a complex and involved issue, not easily addressed with naïve and simplistic 'solutions' such as 'sealing off the border' or 'shipping all “illegals” back.'

You want a solution Shyster...SEND THEM THE FUCK HOME, THEY ARE BREAKING OUR LAWS".... but why would I expect a Shyster to obey the law?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It least it shows us how compassionate conservatives really are. I mean, anyone who picks on children has got some issues that have nothing at all to do with politics.

It definitely shows how desperate the despots who want to bring this country down to the level of a third world shithole are. Really, the way they are using these children as brickbats to beat everyone into submission who disagrees with what they are doing. Gutless prols who are incapable of advancing a persuasive argument in support of their plans and ideology, using children like they're some kind of weapon.

How many Cubans did one state (Florida) absorb due to the Mariel boatlift in 1980 without the fabric of the nation coming apart at the seams?

Answer: about 125,000.

The difference at that point was that conservatives pretty much welcomed Cubans because they were seen as all being anti-Castro, anti-communist voices, and it was also understood that Cuban exiles would be pretty reliable voters for Republican candidates in the years to come. But I don't remember Democrats acting then the way conservatives are acting now.

Exactly.

In fact, republicans tried to work both sides of the street, using Mariel as a political weapon against the administration while at the same time perceiving the new arrivals from Cuba as future republican voters.

 

[Moonglow]

And when that due process is completed, what will be the inevitable outcome? In this example due process means prolonging the inevitable. These kids have entered the U.S. illegally.

It would be nice to defer to Emma Lazarus' poetic sentiment and welcome them, but to do so would be to initiate an unsustainable policy. We simply cannot assume the role of provider for the world's unfortunate children. To pose this reality in the most bluntly pragmatic terms, are you willing to adopt one or more of them? And if these kids do have relatives in the U.S., are those relatives capable of supporting themselves as well as immigrant children? Or will we be increasing an existing welfare burden -- at a time when we already are dealing with a dramatically increasing problem of abjectly impoverished and homeless citizens.

The problem is not children entering the United States absent documentation, the problem is Congressional republicans' refusal to seek a political solution, where the legislative and political process is not allowed to realize resolution.

And when elected officials fail to act, or act in an un-Constitutional manner, the judicial process is authorized to take action, safeguarding the civil liberties of all persons in the United States, in this case the right to due process of the law, where those allegedly undocumented are afforded a presumption of innocence and cannot be subject to summary punitive measures.

But the judicial process is not suited to resolve such issues, as this belongs to politicians to resolve, not judges, the law serves solely to protect individuals' rights.

Unfortunately the age of partisan gridlock has relegated this and other issues to political limbo as a consequence of legislative inaction. It is neither the role nor responsibility of the courts to resolve political conflict. We saw this with Citizens United, for example, where the Court could not weigh in on the merits of campaign finance reform and the serious problem of excessive money in the political process and its undue influence as a result. The Citizens United Court could only rule on the constitutionality of the legislative measures enacted to resolve the problem, not resolve the problem itself.

Last, immigrants are entitled to due process in accordance with immigration law to have their cases reviewed for claims and requests as refugees or asylees, where there may be legitimate, warranted reasons for such immigrants to remain and therefore inappropriate to return refugees absent a review of their cases.

This is a complex and involved issue, not easily addressed with naïve and simplistic 'solutions' such as 'sealing off the border' or 'shipping all “illegals” back.'

You want a solution Shyster...SEND THEM THE FUCK HOME, THEY ARE BREAKING OUR LAWS".... but why would I expect a Shyster to obey the law?

yeah just like Mr. Ronald"amnesty" Reagan...

 

[Vigilante]

The problem is not children entering the United States absent documentation, the problem is Congressional republicans' refusal to seek a political solution, where the legislative and political process is not allowed to realize resolution.

And when elected officials fail to act, or act in an un-Constitutional manner, the judicial process is authorized to take action, safeguarding the civil liberties of all persons in the United States, in this case the right to due process of the law, where those allegedly undocumented are afforded a presumption of innocence and cannot be subject to summary punitive measures.

But the judicial process is not suited to resolve such issues, as this belongs to politicians to resolve, not judges, the law serves solely to protect individuals' rights.

Unfortunately the age of partisan gridlock has relegated this and other issues to political limbo as a consequence of legislative inaction. It is neither the role nor responsibility of the courts to resolve political conflict. We saw this with Citizens United, for example, where the Court could not weigh in on the merits of campaign finance reform and the serious problem of excessive money in the political process and its undue influence as a result. The Citizens United Court could only rule on the constitutionality of the legislative measures enacted to resolve the problem, not resolve the problem itself.

Last, immigrants are entitled to due process in accordance with immigration law to have their cases reviewed for claims and requests as refugees or asylees, where there may be legitimate, warranted reasons for such immigrants to remain and therefore inappropriate to return refugees absent a review of their cases.

This is a complex and involved issue, not easily addressed with naïve and simplistic 'solutions' such as 'sealing off the border' or 'shipping all “illegals” back.'

You want a solution Shyster...SEND THEM THE FUCK HOME, THEY ARE BREAKING OUR LAWS".... but why would I expect a Shyster to obey the law?

yeah just like Mr. Ronald"amnesty" Reagan...

Reagan was WRONG, now you have anything else to discuss, or did I knock you down, and like the little piss ant bitch you are, you can't get up?