RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


mnottertail -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/9/2014 10:56:25 AM)

Hey fuckhead, you can be as cretinous as you want. The kids did not trek across mexico and were met at the border all clean and shiny. No such thing happened. Try leaving off the nutsackerisms. Arguing through imbecility as reasons to believe is not how real problems are solved.

Executive orders, regardless of the asswipe you spew can dictate departmental policies only within the extent of the laws allowances.

Thanks for playing, go back to slobberville now.




Needmorenow2014 -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/9/2014 5:57:24 PM)

It is so nice to have a polite conversation with one so knowledgeable about that which has not yet been divulged to the general public via the network news media.

So my dear gentleman friend, since, and I quote your informed statement, "The kids did not trek across mexico and were met at the border all clean and shiny. No such thing happened".

Just how did "The kids" make it across Mexico?

Of course, you in your infinite wisdom, would certainly have the answer to this.

And, let me tell you that I do appreciate your profound comments in this reply, you have demonstrated an excellent example of your mental as well as your judgmental state.

Of course no reference was made to your inaccurate statement about certain reading abilitys.

You have demonstrated an excellent example of basic pettifogging worthy of a Washington politician.

Congratulations. You may reposition your potty now and take it out of the corner.

Extant is about to come on and you would not want to miss the first episode, now would you?






Musicmystery -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/9/2014 7:54:55 PM)

Nmn, you two are talking about two different things. You're stuck on the trek to the US, while he's talking about a transfer between two US cities. His point is city to city readily covers the "all nice and tidy" objection.

Maybe go for a walk, enjoy the night air a bit.




Sanity -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/9/2014 8:57:39 PM)

FR -

Dem. Rep. Rips Obama: 'Aloof,' 'Bizarre,' and 'Detached'

Its at the point one can tell which Dems are up for reelection




Needmorenow2014 -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 4:56:25 AM)

This is in reply to MusicMystery
I agree with Sanity.

I am not here to bother with those rectal farts who get their panties in a wad and call names and act like kindergarten fules.
I am asking ADULTS, what is going on behind the scenes?
Calling me names does nothing to answer that question.
However if it makes the small minded pimple brained wiffiles get off and be happy, so be it. I have an ample vocabulary of such words, this issue is too serious to drop to that level of discourse.
Their problem to live with, not mine.


I am stuck on only what the OP said, "My question for the thread is, what purpose does this wave, this flood of child refugees serve the left - especially if it costs them several Senate seats, or even the Senate itself".

My comments focus on "the purpose of this wave", and who is behind it, and why is nobody reporting to us on that. This is the basic issue, why, why, and more importantly WHY.
Then we can find the answers to the rest of the question. This is what I am "stuck on". This is what we all should be "stuck on".
All his usual petty pantie twisting bitchieness is irrelevant to the original question.


I am, as is the OP, still asking the question, what purpose does this wave, this flood of child refugees serve the left. I would add the words, or serve any agenda? No one yet in my hearing has supplied any kind of a rational answer or for that matter even seems to be looking for an answer.

And I might add that the "night air" is wonderful, at least for now, but I can hear 'em commin' down across the south pasture, daing!

Where did I put that drone?





DaddySatyr -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 5:03:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Needmorenow2014

I am, as is the OP, still asking the question, what purpose does this wave, this flood of child refugees serve the left. I would add the words, or serve any agenda?



Well, the way the question is asked here is a rather simple one to answer ... sort of.

It could very well be that this serves the agenda of those who are hell-bent on what they refer to as "immigration reform" which, based upon what they've said, seems to be pronounced "amnesty"; no matter how much they protest that word.

Much like the late-night TV images of the starving people, through-out the world, this (I believe) is designed for no other purpose than to tug at the heart strings and try to jerk the tears.







Screen captures still RULE! Ya feel me?




Musicmystery -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 5:33:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Needmorenow2014

This is in reply to MusicMystery
I agree with Sanity.

I am not here to bother with those rectal farts who get their panties in a wad and call names and act like kindergarten fules.
I am asking ADULTS, what is going on behind the scenes?
Calling me names does nothing to answer that question.
However if it makes the small minded pimple brained wiffiles get off and be happy, so be it. I have an ample vocabulary of such words, this issue is too serious to drop to that level of discourse.
Their problem to live with, not mine.


I am stuck on only what the OP said, "My question for the thread is, what purpose does this wave, this flood of child refugees serve the left - especially if it costs them several Senate seats, or even the Senate itself".

My comments focus on "the purpose of this wave", and who is behind it, and why is nobody reporting to us on that. This is the basic issue, why, why, and more importantly WHY.
Then we can find the answers to the rest of the question. This is what I am "stuck on". This is what we all should be "stuck on".
All his usual petty pantie twisting bitchieness is irrelevant to the original question.


I am, as is the OP, still asking the question, what purpose does this wave, this flood of child refugees serve the left. I would add the words, or serve any agenda? No one yet in my hearing has supplied any kind of a rational answer or for that matter even seems to be looking for an answer.

And I might add that the "night air" is wonderful, at least for now, but I can hear 'em commin' down across the south pasture, daing!

Where did I put that drone?




Despite your panties being in a wad, the problem is still
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Nmn, you two are talking about two different things. You're stuck on the trek to the US, while he's talking about a transfer between two US cities. His point is city to city readily covers the "all nice and tidy" objection.

Maybe go for a walk, enjoy the night air a bit.


All the huffing and puffing and speeches and declarations you want to spew aren't going to change that you're arguing about a split in opinion that doesn't exist.

Or at least you were. Now you're off on a self-righteous rant, leaving the topic in the dust.




mnottertail -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 5:40:11 AM)

The purpose it serves is none, for nobodies agenda here in the US.

If, tomorrow, someone who didnt wipe themselves properly came over from China and carried an epidemic into NYC and the Eastern Seaboard, whose agenda is served on the left or right?





Sanity -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 5:57:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: Needmorenow2014

I am, as is the OP, still asking the question, what purpose does this wave, this flood of child refugees serve the left. I would add the words, or serve any agenda?



Well, the way the question is asked here is a rather simple one to answer ... sort of.

It could very well be that this serves the agenda of those who are hell-bent on what they refer to as "immigration reform" which, based upon what they've said, seems to be pronounced "amnesty"; no matter how much they protest that word.

Much like the late-night TV images of the starving people, through-out the world, this (I believe) is designed for no other purpose than to tug at the heart strings and try to jerk the tears.







Screen captures still RULE! Ya feel me?

Obamas policies are causing illegals to surge over the border in such numbers that there is no longer any semblance of control over the Southern border

Words like "humanitarian crisis" are being thrown around, Obama is asking for emergency billions (for diapers I suppose)...

In short, this is far more than just a push for amnesty for those already here




mnottertail -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 6:42:42 AM)

And as per usual with your asswipe, the link does not say what you intimate it does. It has nothing to do with any policies of this or even prior administrations.




Needmorenow2014 -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 7:00:55 AM)

To nnottertail
Well I guess you really do have problems reading and processing information. The website link I went to had this to say. If you cannot see possible dangerous connections here, then you have as much of a problem with your vision as you do with the rest of your senses. Or, maybe you are one of THEM?
For those of you that have not gone to the link that nnotertail says is not saying what is intimated, here it is and you can decide for yourself. This is a really big issue and the apathy of the American people is a severe problem.

ok here is what you get on the link:
Immigration: The general in charge of U.S. Southern Command says America's porous southern border poses as much a threat as any foreign power, with gangs and terrorist groups hiding among the tidal wave of illegals.

If Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, commander of the U.S. Southern Command, keeps warning about the crisis at our southern border, he may soon join the long list of generals and admirals sacked by this administration as it decimates the military.

"In comparison to other global threats, the near collapse of societies in the hemisphere with the associated drug and (undocumented immigrant) flow are frequently viewed to be of low importance," Kelly told Defense One, a website focused on national security issues. "Many argue these threats are not existential and do not challenge our national security. I disagree."

Kelly, responsible for the Caribbean and all lands south of Mexico, has sounded the alarm that this isn't just a humanitarian crisis of unaccompanied children.

"Clearly, criminal networks can move just about anything on these smuggling pipelines," he testified in February to the House Armed Services Committee. "Terrorist organizations could seek to leverage those same smuggling routes to move operatives with intent to cause grave harm to our citizens or even quite easily bring weapons of mass destruction into the United States."

Among these threats is Iran's terrorist sock puppet, Hezbollah, below the radar these days as a long-sought Islamic caliphate possibly takes root in parts of Syria and Iraq. Before 9/11, Hezbollah was responsible for more American deaths than any other terrorist group.

"Supporters and sympathizers of Lebanese Hezbollah are involved in both licit and illicit activities in the region," Kelly testified. "Members, supporters and adherents of Islamic extremist groups are present in Latin America. Islamic extremists visit the region to proselytize, recruit, establish business venues to generate funds, and expand their radical networks."

Then there are violent transnational gangs like Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, which specializes in extortion and human trafficking and has criminal franchises throughout the U.S. "The FBI has warned that MS-13 has a significant presence in California, North Carolina, New York and northern Virginia, and is expanding into new areas of the United States, including Indian reservations in South Dakota," Kelly has told Congress.

Roger Noriega, who is an American Enterprise Institute fellow and former assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs during the George W. Bush administration, last month underscored Kelly's warning about MS-13 in the Washington Free Beacon.

"There's going to be a time when MS-13 fires an RPG into an Alexandria (Va.) police car, and (Americans) are going to say, 'What the hell happened?'" Noriega said.

This is more than a humanitarian crisis of unaccompanied children using the U.S. as an international emergency room, Kelly warns.

Drugs like cocaine, heroin and methamphetamines, he tells Defense One, "are produced in Latin America and smuggled into the U.S. along an incredibly efficient network along which anything — hundreds of tons of drugs, people, terrorists, potentially weapons of mass destruction or children — can travel, so long as they can pay the fare."

And American citizens, wondering what we have a National Guard and Border Patrol for, will pay the price for the drugs, crime and potential terrorist activity made possible by President Obama's border policies.


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/070814-707832-general-kelly-border-crisis-existential-threat.htm#ixzz374d1PSzh
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

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

I am trying to stay on the OP's original track here. Let's all do the same and leave the petty name calling to the children under 8yo. Ok, NN?





Musicmystery -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 7:13:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Needmorenow2014


And American citizens, wondering what we have a National Guard and Border Patrol for, will pay the price for the drugs, crime and potential terrorist activity made possible by President Obama's border policies.


Criminals have a funny way of not following policies.

This activity is made possible by Americans' appetite for illegal drugs.




mnottertail -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 7:38:25 AM)

To the hysterical, cowardly, conspiracy nut sock puppet:

We have a porous border, the Mexican problem and the problem of these children only have that feature in common. All other aspects are wholly different and not based on administration policies, but rather laws passed by a mostly republican congress some years ago.

Why do you suppose that droves of Americans don't enter into Mexico illegally? Why do you suppose Texas, Arizona and California drug cartels do not filibuster Mexico?

The drug problem is not at all new. Nixon ended the war on drugs while touting the opposite line. Reagan was a massive drug pusher while his wife just said, "No".

These children fleeing war are not drug pushers.

Stopping drugs coming across that border will require an invasion of Mexico. Give me a reason! Give me a cause! Let's burn this Motherfucker down!!!!!!

Scrupulously incarcerate and maximally fine hirers of illegal immigrants and that would solve the undocumented workers in less than an hour. Unfortunately for us, the nutsackers, and democrats in those districts have those goons and thugs as some of their biggest contributors and lobbyists.

The drug problem is separate, and throwing up a fuckin fence won't fix that.

The children will be given their day in court (as required by law, they are not Mexican) and deported.





Needmorenow2014 -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 7:47:31 AM)

geeze nottedtail you give a new meaning to your word cretin.

wow.

plus you have an extremely low ability to process information, hopeless, one would have to conclude, perhaps it is the ???

well who knows that much about genetics, but ????

hmmmm more study needed.

Have to apply for a federal grant on this one. a bil or two should do it.

dems can print more money




mnottertail -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 7:53:52 AM)

Actually it is republicans in charge of printing money right now, and they are doing it all in, both hands, both feet.

Yep, I have defined cretin for you, its in your mirror. Perhaps if you ever learn the English language, which I must confess there is little hope of you could process information. But, alas and alack, the impossibility is prima facie evident.




Mouth4Mistress -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 8:46:36 AM)

The illegal part is the official sanctioning of an "open-borders" policy, as well as doing everything to encourage illegal immigration - providing transportation, food, shelter, medical treatment, etc.

"Come in, come in, we'll give you everything, doesn't matter if you choose to ignore the immigration procedures! After all, only suckers stand in line at INS offices, and pay immigration lawyers to file the documents. You are special, and exempt from laws. Oh, BTW, it's OK if you're infected with drug-resistant TB, or malaria, we won't check for those if you enter illegally. So what if Southern Texas is experiencing outbreaks of diseases that have never been observed in that region before?"

Could you explain, under these openly-advertised conditions, who in their right mind would follow the LEGAL immigration process? What's the incentive to spend an enormous amount of time, effort, and nerves? Why bother risking rejection on medical grounds?

But hey, it's awesome that the leader of a country is not only blatantly breaking the law, he's also openly aiding & abetting those who break the law as well.

After all, laws should only apply to suckers who work for a living, have legal documents, and pay taxes.




Mouth4Mistress -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 8:54:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
quote:

ORIGINAL: Needmorenow2014

I am, as is the OP, still asking the question, what purpose does this wave, this flood of child refugees serve the left. I would add the words, or serve any agenda?



Well, the way the question is asked here is a rather simple one to answer ... sort of.

It could very well be that this serves the agenda of those who are hell-bent on what they refer to as "immigration reform" which, based upon what they've said, seems to be pronounced "amnesty"; no matter how much they protest that word.

Much like the late-night TV images of the starving people, through-out the world, this (I believe) is designed for no other purpose than to tug at the heart strings and try to jerk the tears.




What's the end result of bringing in millions of illegal immigrants, giving them everything, and making sure they know who their benefactors are?

Hm, can we say "a permanent, undefeatable, Democrat voter base"? I think we can.

At this point, I say, let it burn.

Let them bring in 5, 10, 20, 100 million illegals.

Let's see how long 122 million taxpayers can support 191 million non-taxpayers PLUS the unknown-number-of-millions of illegals.




mnottertail -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 9:03:29 AM)

Maybe you dont understand the law. We aint feeding and sheltering just anyone. These kids are REQUIRED BY LAW to be fed, sheltered, and clothed, and receive medical attention at taxpayer expense until they stand before a judge and be determined to be deportable or given asylum, also REQUIRED BY LAW.

Dont like the fuckin law? Go see your legislators. This is not a 'policy'. The President is not breaking the law, nor is he aiding and abetting those who are (or are not) breaking it. SCOTUS has determined several times that illegal aliens within the borders of the United States enjoy all, that is right, ALL constitutional privileges of a US citizen, excepting the right to vote or possess firearms. (since those two rights can be denied citizens of the US under certain circumstances.)

Plyler v. Doe (1981) (A heavily nixon appointed SCOTUS)




Lucylastic -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 9:24:42 AM)

See the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008
http://www.state.gov/j/tip/laws/113178.htm




Musicmystery -> RE: Obama's Child Refugee Flood (7/10/2014 10:25:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mouth4Mistress

The illegal part is the official sanctioning of an "open-borders" policy, as well as doing everything to encourage illegal immigration - providing transportation, food, shelter, medical treatment, etc.

"Come in, come in, we'll give you everything, doesn't matter if you choose to ignore the immigration procedures! After all, only suckers stand in line at INS offices, and pay immigration lawyers to file the documents. You are special, and exempt from laws. Oh, BTW, it's OK if you're infected with drug-resistant TB, or malaria, we won't check for those if you enter illegally. So what if Southern Texas is experiencing outbreaks of diseases that have never been observed in that region before?"

Could you explain, under these openly-advertised conditions, who in their right mind would follow the LEGAL immigration process? What's the incentive to spend an enormous amount of time, effort, and nerves? Why bother risking rejection on medical grounds?

But hey, it's awesome that the leader of a country is not only blatantly breaking the law, he's also openly aiding & abetting those who break the law as well.

After all, laws should only apply to suckers who work for a living, have legal documents, and pay taxes.

That's a rather bizarre and fanciful read on things. You used up a lot of straw constructing that.

Desperate families are going to try to enter the US. Erect whatever laws/barriers you wish. Fact of life, as long as life is so bad.

As for "blatantly breaking the law," let me ask you . . . .

Colorado and Washington are violating federal law with legalized pot. Should Obama shut them down? It's the law, after all.

Or is some discretion called for?




Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625