SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – The Trump administration argued in front of a Ninth Circuit panel Tuesday that the government is not required to give soap or toothbrushes to children apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border and can have them sleep on concrete floors in frigid, overcrowded cells, despite a [law] that requires detainees be kept in “safe and sanitary” facilities.


All three judges appeared incredulous during the hearing in San Francisco, in which the Trump administration challenged previous legal findings that it is... mistreating undocumented immigrant children at U.S. detention facilities.


“Are you arguing seriously that you [are not required} to do anything other than what I just described: cold all night long, lights on all night long, sleeping on concrete and you’ve got an aluminum foil blanket?” Fletcher asked Fabian. “I find that inconceivable that the government would say that that is safe and sanitary.” ... you’re putting people into a crowded room to sleep on a concrete floor with an aluminum-foil blanket on top of them ...



“The first thing you do is honor the plain meaning” of words like “safe” and “sanitary,”



“Today we have a situation where once a month a child is dying in [federal] custody,” ...the Border Patrol facilities are secure, but they’re not safe and they’re not sanitary.”

Add cruelty and willfull child abuse to this administrations resume of lying, cheating, stealing, and bullying, as well as incompetence. Wonder if all those things are the worth the price of some conservative judges, and tax cuts.

agree .................deport them; end of problem. The Border Patrol and Ice has begged Congress for more money to deal with this unprecedented influx of illegals .
If only we could think of some way to stop the inflow..... like some kind of barrier.

If only we could think of some way to stop the inflow..... like some kind of barrier.

Help the good guys in their countries fix what's wrong.

I already sent a letter to my Rep Nita Lowy to take action to send more resources to assist border patrol and ICE in managing the detention of illegals . But she won't . She's another open border Democrat .

I already sent a letter to my Rep Nita Lowy to take action to send more resources to assist border patrol and ICE in managing the detention of illegals . But she won't . She's another open border Democrat .
What did she say specifically?

haven't received a reply . But she heads the House Appropriations Committee .So she has the power to do something .

Dems aren't for open borders, repubs just use right wing talking LIES for re election sound bites. Now they want money for concentration camps with no soap, toothpaste or blankets. Repubs make up the law as they go along egged on and with permission of the dufus, their party leader.

you have a funny definition of concentration camps .These are the 1st ones in the world people are climbing fences to get in.

you have a funny definition of concentration camps .These are the 1st ones in the world people are climbing fences to get in.

Very misleading, and you know it.

Anyway, children are certainly not included in your definition.

.
If only we could think of some way to stop the inflow..... like some kind of barrier.


Bin there, done that and the latest barrier is Mexico to stop them or there will be a tariff barrier, perhaps that will be more effective than the border wall the Demonrats don't want. While ever you catch and release they will come, but deport them, push them back over the border. Once they realise they cannot stay the flow will stop

The fact is that since the Flores decision by Judge Dolly Gee in 2015 ,illegals crossing the border seeking asylum with children has soared . Aliens have clearly gotten the message that if they ask to be put into asylum proceedings, their children — and often if not usually the adults, too — will be released into the country shortly after they are apprehended as they await their removal proceedings.Judge Gee made her ruling because the emperor was holding children in what the left now calls 'concentration camps' in what the left is NOW calling inhumane conditions .
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/26/us/detained-immigrant-children-judge-dolly-gee-ruling.html?module=inline

I don't recall this sudden new found outrage then .

There was outrage then and Obama changed that policy, but the dufus brought it back. Most asylum seekers do get deported after due process, still the right rages. Wonder why the law wasn't changed when repubs had full control?

Wonder why the law wasn't changed when repubs had full control?
Wonder why the Dems didn't address reparations and some of their more radical polices when they had full control .Ted Cruz among other Repubs called for legislation to address the flaws in the' Flores v Reno' decision last year .
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/07/29/fix-flores-agreement-solution-immigrant-family-separation-detention-column/841342002/

agree .................deport them; end of problem. The Border Patrol and Ice has begged Congress for more money to deal with this unprecedented influx of illegals .

If only we could think of some way to stop the inflow..... like some kind of barrier.

Terrific response.

Now they want money for concentration camps with no soap, toothpaste or blankets.

Uh, urr well yah! When did Concentration camps provide soap and Blankets?
Call it what it is.

When did Concentration camps provide soap and Blankets?
As I recall from history class ;it was not a good idea to go to the showers in a concentration camp.

Isn't it strange how when Obama had detention camps, they were called "detention camps", but when Trump has detention camps, they suddenly become "concentration camps"?

Isn't it strange how when Obama had detention camps, they were called "detention camps", but when Trump has detention camps, they suddenly become "concentration camps"?
Would you rather be in Obama's detention camp or Trump's concentration camp? No rambling allowed; choose one or the other.

I find it strange that the conversation is around what you call such camps rather than what goes on in them and how they are run.

I find it strange that the conversation is around what you call such camps


Yeah it is stunning how labels have such impact . But once AOC started calling them that ;the whole lefty world became an echo chamber .

I already gave my suggestion about how they can be closed .

Would you rather be in Obama's detention camp or Trump's concentration camp? No rambling allowed; choose one or the other.

Terrific response!!


I find it strange that the conversation is around what you call such camps rather than what goes on in them and how they are run.

Just another way for the loony right-wing to divert the conversation from reailty.

Speaking of the echo chamber ;
all the Sunday shows hit the President and VP with endless questions about children held in border detention centers. Do you remember the same Sunday hosts ever bringing it up in the 8 years the emperor held kids in the same centers, that he built?

Yeah it is stunning how labels have such impact . But once AOC started calling them that ;the whole lefty world became an echo chamber .

AOC was 1000% correct - as attested to by the many survivors and relatives of survivors of the Nazi camps. They began as concentration camps and developed into death camps.


Speaking of the echo chamber ;
all the Sunday shows hit the President and VP with endless questions about children held in border detention centers. Do you remember the same Sunday hosts ever bringing it up in the 8 years the emperor held kids in the same centers, that he built?


Speaking of diversionary tactics. The children are in locked cages NOW. NOW.

Speaking of the echo chamber ;
all the Sunday shows hit the President and VP with endless questions about children held in border detention centers. Do you remember the same Sunday hosts ever bringing it up in the 8 years the emperor held kids in the same centers, that he built?

You must have missed my question. I'll give you a second chance.

Would you rather be in Obama's detention camp or Trump's concentration camp? No rambling allowed; choose one or the other.

Would you rather be in Obama's detention camp or Trump's concentration camp? No rambling allowed; choose one or the other.
looks no different to me

https://www.cnn.com/2014/06/12/opinion/navarrette-immigrant-children/index.html

Would you rather be in Obama's detention camp or Trump's concentration camp?

Your political prejudice is on open and clear display. Obama's centers are "detention camps", but Trumps are "concentration camp(s)."

Trump Derangement Syndrome at work.

Your political prejudice is on open and clear display. Trump's centers are "detention camps", but Trumps are "concentration camp(s)."

Trump Derangement Syndrome at work.

A Freudian slip? Who has the political prejudice now?

I don't say Trump supporters are deranged, but I agree with you when you say it. An unusual piece of honesty from you.

I agree and the loony right has the worst case of DDS I ever saw. DDS-Dufus Derangement Syndrome! Enphasis on the dufus, derangement and SIN part.

Your political prejudice is on open and clear display. Trump's centers are "detention camps", but Trumps are "concentration camp(s)."

Trump Derangement Syndrome at work.
Speaking of derangement ... your honest self finally shifted into gear.

I don't say Trump supporters are deranged, but I agree with you when you say it. An unusual piece of honesty from you.

To anyone familiar with message boards, it was plainly a slip of the keyboard, but even at that, it was still not a dig at Trump. You really need to get out of your "make it up as you go along" fantasy world. But for the sake of the sleepy, I did make the correction.

I did make the correction.

Too late - your true feelings are forever etched on this board.

To anyone familiar with message boards, it was plainly a slip of the keyboard, but even at that, it was still not a dig at Trump. You really need to get out of your "make it up as you go along" fantasy world. But for the sake of the sleepy, I did make the correction.
Freud and Jung would have a few things to say about this.

Too late - your true feelings are forever etched on this board.

That made me laugh. "Forever etched on this board"?? I guess that is supposed to make me panic. "Oh no! Athos has forever etched my words on this board! What shall I do??"

Have you always been such a lover of drama?

That made me laugh. "Forever etched on this board"?? I guess that is supposed to make me panic.??"

Keep it up. We're all enjoying your freaking out.

Keep it up. We're all enjoying your freaking out.

Have you always lived in this fantasy world of yours? I've never seen anything quite like it. You just make it up to suit you. It's really a sad sight to behold. I feel sorry for you. I hope I am never as eaten up with hatred and bitterness as you seem to be.

I hope I am never as eaten up with hatred and bitterness as you seem to be.

You're already far ahead of me in that department. I LIKE Obama! How about you?

Have you always lived in this fantasy world of yours? I've never seen anything quite like it. You just make it up to suit you. It's really a sad sight to behold. I feel sorry for you. I hope I am never as eaten up with hatred and bitterness as you seem to be.
Rather than acknowledge fault and apologize, the guilty too often accuse and shame the other.

You're already far ahead of me in that department. I LIKE Obama! How about you?

Finally. A reasonable comment to reply to. I don't like Obama but then I've never met him. I did not like his presidency. Too much lying, scandal, deficit spending, etc.

I don't like Trump. He has a vindictive, shady side that I find unappealing, but I do appreciate what he has done for the economy and his efforts to appoint reasonable court judges. His willingness, aided and abetted by the Congress, to engage in reckless, deficit spending is atrocious. But considering who the dems are considering to run against him, I imagine I will vote for him again.

Rather than acknowledge fault and apologize, the guilty too often accuse and shame the other.

That's funny. You are doing precisely what you are accusing others of doing.

What fault?

That's funny. You are doing precisely what you are accusing others of doing.

Nice try, jl. But no, you win the prize for that one.

Nice try, jl. But no, you win the prize for that one.

Illogical response.

This can be a strange board. There's a flurry of activity, and then it's like everyone goes out to get some dinner and stays out.

This can be a strange board. There's a flurry of activity, and then it's like everyone goes out to get some dinner and stays out.
When there were more of us, something was happening every minute. Now we're fewer in number, older and slower, and spread across two time zones. And dinner and the after-dinner nap are VERY important!

When there were more of us, something was happening every minute. Now we're fewer members, older and slower, and spread across two time zones.

That's unfortunate. I actually did practically all of my posting on the plumbing category, but that kind of dried up, so then I noticed the current events. But as you say, it's the same six or seven members and we basically are saying the same things for about the fifteenth time. Still, it's interesting to see the points of view of others.

That's unfortunate. I actually did practically all of my posting on the plumbing category, but that kind of dried up, so then I noticed the current events. But as you say, it's the same six or seven members and we basically are saying the same things for about the fifteenth time. Still, it's interesting to see the points of view of others.
I could change my name, put on a disguise, and agree with you on everything.

I could change my name, put on a disguise, and agree with you on everything.

A rose by any other name would still be a liberal. (said with humor)

Besides, I prefer to hear what others believe. My goal for the future is to eliminate personal references by me. Can't control what others do, but I can control me. Well, most of the time I can.

Can't control what others do, but I can control me. Well, most of the time I can.
The last thing we need on here is you running amok!

The last thing we need on here is you running amok!

Perhaps I can merely walk amok.

That's unfortunate. I actually did practically all of my posting on the plumbing category, but that kind of dried up, so then I noticed the current events. But as you say, it's the same six or seven members and we basically are saying the same things for about the fifteenth time. Still, it's interesting to see the points of view of others.


There is a time of the year when things go quiet, dark even. It must be because the sun is out. I don't come here to talk crap so I just watch and maybe there is something interesting. Right now, not so much. I feel we have exhausted the complain about Trump, rehash Hilliary and other failed campaigns and so we are left with prelude to war

Maybe a different approach? not a matter of right or wrong, good or bad, arguing with someone who can defend.

Maybe a different approach? not a matter of right or wrong, good or bad, arguing with someone who can defend.

Debate for debate's sake, I don't think so. We all have opinions so we can fairly state those, but arguing back and forth like a pack of juveniles

Would you rather be in Obama's detention camp or Trump's concentration camp? No rambling allowed; choose one or the other.

Why is this an issue with you? Ask a kid that same question, how do you think he/she would answer? not a matter of right or wrong, good or bad. It's not just about arguing ( Debate for debate's sake) with someone who can defend.


The children are in locked cages

Throw a tin blanket over it and call it a fort. What kid doesn't like living in a fort.

If you haunt seen, "Life Is Beautiful (1997)", you really need too.

Ya don't have too, ya don't have to live like a refugee

Throw a tin blanket over it and call it a fort. What kid doesn't like living in a fort.


Words fail me.

That was as cruel as the dufus and his minions child abuse tactics.

What part of illegal alien don't you understand? These people are criminals, law breakers and all you can say is that temporarily housing them is cruel

No Clete that's the dufus spin to justify his cruelty and hide his mismanagement. They are neither illegal nor criminals and deserve the milk of Christian kindness until we sort the mess out. I don't think I've heard the dufus mention Jesus not once, and his sidekick smiling Mike is as fake as they come.

They are neither illegal nor criminals and deserve the milk of Christian kindness until we sort the mess out.

You don't know a single one of them, but you know they all deserve the milk of Christian kindness? What insight.

You don't know them either, and that's what a humane process seeks to find out. Surely you don't think the kids are criminals and don't deserve your Christian kindness? Maybe you don't care?

You don't know a single one of them, but you know they all deserve the milk of Christian kindness? What insight.

In Clint, Texas, a government compliance team composed of lawyers from Willamette University discovered conditions so bad they decided not to keep quiet about what they found as originally planned but went to the press a few days ago so that the American government (Trump) would be shamed to take action. The inmates have dwindled from 155 in a facility built for men to 35 as the publicity was so bad even Trump had to do something.

Here's what they found:
Ages 0,0,1,2,4,5 0, 2,1 - and on and on.
Sleeping on concrete including infants.
Being fed frankenfood three times a day for days on end.
Children filthy - no soap, no diapers, no hygiene even minimally.
Lice infestation, no showers.

The situation was so bad the team considered it life-threatening. So they went to the press to expose Trump's policies. Clint is right outside of El Paso and it was by chance they stumbled onto it.

Yet you refuse them the milk of Christian kindness because you don't know them! Does an infant need an ID for you to offer help?

I could not help but be reminded of your previous support and approval of your God slaughtering Canaanite children because their parents didn't measure up - just like the parents of these innocents. In case some don't survive, you'll be sure to tell the world they will go to hell because they are unbelievers. You've got it covered from infancy to death.

You are one sick puppy, jls.

No Clete that's the dufus spin to justify his cruelty and hide his mismanagement. They are neither illegal nor criminals and deserve the milk of Christian kindness until we sort the mess out. I don't think I've heard the dufus mention Jesus not once, and his sidekick smiling Mike is as fake as they come.

I think you need to stop leveling blame at the top, if failure exists it exists in operations, on the ground right at the coal face. Christian kindness has nothing to do with it unless you are suggesting administration of this problem should be handed to the churches. There is a duty of care, nothing to do with Christian kindness. These people are supposedly Christian and yet they travel thousands of miles to demand someone else take responsibility for their circumstance. Hardly a Christian attitude, so keep Jesus out of it because these are the poor he told us will always be with us. If you are concerned, lobby your government to improve their circumstance in the country of origin. Stop over producing in your own economy and buy goods from them

If the top doesn't address the failures and correct them then he is held in account because that's his job plain and simple. Lol, if the top takes all the credit for success should he not get the blame for failure? That includes assisting the many volunteers from charity and churches who are overwhelmed but work tirelessly to do what they can. I find it fascinating you you just pass over my observation that it is the dufus who ignores Jesus when you have no problem reminding everyone else of what a sin that is. How about applying that same standard to the top dufus.

Unless of course you find him irredeemable. He obviously wants no part of your salvation.

How about applying that same standard to the top dufus.

So it would be OK to hold Obama responsible for the IRS scandal, the VA scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, and the Benghazi debacle? I ask because I did not see liberals doing that very thing when Obama was in office. To this very day you will not do it, so wouldn't that be a double standard?

You had the chance to do just that and you blew it. Maybe we will fair no better with the dufus, but it is our turn.

If the top doesn't address the failures and correct them then he is held in account because that's his job plain and simple. Lol, if the top takes all the credit for success should he not get the blame for failure? That includes assisting the many volunteers from charity and churches who are overwhelmed but work tirelessly to do what they can. I find it fascinating you you just pass over my observation that it is the dufus who ignores Jesus when you have no problem reminding everyone else of what a sin that is. How about applying that same standard to the top dufus.

Unless of course you find him irredeemable. He obviously wants no part of your salvation.

Is Trump a Christian, I am not in a position to judge, however, his family appears more Jewish than Christian. Trump has searched himself and found his god. He basks in his own glory. All people are redeemable, it takes humility and repentance

You had the chance to do just that and you blew it.

Not true. I have consistently laid blame at the feet of Trump for horrendous budget deficits and for passing tax cuts without spending cuts. As to the border, I don't see that as a pressing issue. It's unfortunate what is happening, but we did not invite those people to come here, and they are being treated better than they were in their own countries. I see a lot of liberals whining about the situation, but I don't see any of them down there using their own time and resources to help those people. When you have a migrant family living in your house, or you have employed them and helped them find a home, then come back and tell us about it.

Talk is one thing accountability is totally another. We both accuse the other side of whatever we don't like and in truth it doesn't present enough evidence in a court of law. Don't expect me to join you blasting Obama, that's a waste of my time so sorry you weren't around when he was the prez.

The opposition had their fun, now it's my turn and have at it I surely will.



Is Trump a Christian, I am not in a position to judge, however, his family appears more Jewish than Christian. Trump has searched himself and found his god. He basks in his own glory. All people are redeemable, it takes humility and repentance


The dufus is neither humble nor likely to repent, so I guess his supporters don't care what god he worships. Frankly neither do I but he is a selfish cruel bully in his ways of dealing with things. Surprised that religious types do support him was just my observation.



As to the border, I don't see that as a pressing issue. It's unfortunate what is happening, but we did not invite those people to come here, and they are being treated better than they were in their own countries. I see a lot of liberals whining about the situation, but I don't see any of them down there using their own time and resources to help those people. When you have a migrant family living in your house, or you have employed them and helped them find a home, then come back and tell us about it.


Like conservatives don't whine. I just see us as better than what we have presented so far. By US I mean the government that represents us. Your the guy hollering about killing kids in the womb, but abuse and neglect seem to be okay with you when it comes to migrant kids. That's a bit inconsistent.

Personally I don't mind supporting kids, the weak, helpless or needy through my tax dollars. Even migrant kids and people who show up at the border. Beats giving it to a rich guy who hoards it for his own kids and sends me and mine (And yours) the bill!

Talk is one thing accountability is totally another

I have seen you neither talk about Obama's errors nor hold him accountable, so I can handle it as long as we acknowledge that it cuts both ways.


By US I mean the government that represents us.

The battle cry of liberals. Let someone else take care of it. And in this statement, we see it in application. "Personally I don't mind supporting kids, the weak, helpless or needy through my tax dollars." And in practice, it seems to end up being, "Tax the rich and let them take care of it." So it just looks like a strategy to enable liberals to suppose they occupy the moral high ground when, in truth, they really just don't want to be bothered. Or at least that's how it comes across to me. In the meantime, Christians both oppose abortion and fund/operate pregnancy centers, promote adoption, and do so with their own, non-taxed dollars.

As to the border, I don't see that as a pressing issue. It's unfortunate what is happening, but we did not invite those people to come here, and they are being treated better than they were in their own countries.

"Unfortunate" what is happening? You don't see it as a "pressing issue"? They are "treated better than they were in their own countries"?

Here's another comment previously made by jlisenbe - sarcastically responding to a call for the milk of Christian kindness by refusing such kindness since the possible recipients are "not known"!

It is not easy to respond to such evil, especially to one who claims to be a Bible-believing Christian.

Here's part of a previous post dealing with these issues and with jls.
Here's what was found by a legal team from Willemette University:

Children aged 0,0,1,2,4,5 0, 2,1 - and on and on.
Sleeping on concrete including infants.
Being fed frankenfood three times a day for days on end.
Children filthy - no soap, no diapers, no hygiene even minimally.
Lice infestation, no showers.

That's only a partial list of the horrors.

The situation was so bad the legal team considered it life-threatening. So they went to the press to expose Trump's policies. Clint is right outside of El Paso and it was by chance they stumbled onto it.

Yet you Jlsenbe refuse them the milk of Christian kindness because you don't know them! Does an infant need an ID for you to offer help?

I could not help but be reminded of your previous support and approval of your God slaughtering Canaanite children because their parents didn't measure up - just like the parents of these innocents. In case some children don't survive, you'll be sure to tell the world they will go to hell because they are unbelievers. You've got it covered from infancy to death.

You are one sick puppy, jls.

Unfortunate" what is happening? You don't see it as a "pressing issue"? They are "treated better than they were in their own countries"?
In their own countries, weren't they caught between gangs and druglords and bombs and bullets? I'd certainly head for someplace safer!

What annoys me are the frequent mentions that these children don't have toothbrushes. Of all the help and care they need, toothbrushes wouldn't be at the top of my list to send them. They're living in filth, sleep on cold concrete floors, eat uncooked (even frozen) food, have lost their parents probably forever. My heart breaks!

I would be quite willing to speculate that I have done as much for those immigrant children as you have, unless you want to count complaining on a message board read by ten people.

It's amazing to me that, when we mention the incredibly good economy, all liberals want to make sure to point out that Obama should get some credit for that, but when we talk about the shortage of facilities on the southern border and the avalanche of people coming across, it's suddenly all on Trump.

I'll say it again. We did not invite these people to come. They are housed securely and fed on a regular basis. It's not the Holiday Inn, but it is probably better than what they are accustomed to. Having spent 8 days in the boonies of Guatemala, it is hard to imagine how their living conditions could be that bad. When people come in uninvited and yet are housed, fed, and kept secure, then I think we are making an effort. And as usual, there are no liberal groups flocking down to the border to make things better. There is just the usual vitriol against Trump from people who were notably silent when Obama was in office.

I could not find the article you quoted from, but I did find the one below which notes that these problems have been in place for decades, meaning that Mr. Obama had his chance and did next to nothing to solve the problem.

So rail on Trump if it makes you feel better, but if you really want to be honest, you'll do likewise with Obama.

They are housed securely and fed on a regular basis. It's not the Holiday Inn, but it is probably better than what they are accustomed to.
No, what they are enduring now is NOT better!

Having spent 8 days in the boonies of Guatemala, it is hard to imagine how their living conditions could be that bad.
Because now they aren't free and are locked up like animals -- no, in conditions worse than animals!

When people come in uninvited and yet are housed, fed, and kept secure, then I think we are making an effort.
"Housed, fed, and kept secure"? Are you kidding me???

....It's amazing to me that all liberals want to make sure to point out that Obama should get some credit for that....... We did not invite these people to come. They are housed securely and fed on a regular basis. ........................................... better than what they are accustomed to. .... and are housed, fed, and kept secure, ... when Obama was in office.

Children, including infants and toddlers, are living in horrendous conditions - some are dying - and all you can manage to do is comment on Obama and "liberals". You need a moral bath. (https://www.navycthistory.com/all_guestbook-email_rosters_selection_page.html)

No, what they are enduring now is NOT better!

So you've been to Guatemala and you know this? I've been there, and Guatemala is better than some other CA countries. So these people are not coming from the U.S. They are coming from terrible backgrounds. As of the present time, 90% of them do not show up for their asylum hearings.


"Housed, fed, and kept secure"? Are you kidding me???

No, I'm not kidding. It's true so far as I can tell. I have no doubt it is better than the conditions many homeless Americans live in. Besides, where were you when this was going on under Obama???


Children, including infants and toddlers, are living in horrendous conditions - some are dying - and all you can manage to do is comment on Obama and "liberals". You need a moral bath.

Tried your link. Took me so some strange sight called "All Duty Station". Kind of a dead end.

I have to comment on Obama. You don't seem to be willing to do it or to admit that this is a problem that has been many years in the making, including the eight years of Obama. Now when you are willing to include him in your fault assessment, you will start to have a little bit of moral credibility. Until then, it just looks like TDS.

Until then, it just looks like TDS.


The derangement is all yours. Your silence speaks volumes.

"I tell you, if these keep silent, the very stones would cry out".

So you've been to Guatemala and you know this?
I have two friends in Colombia and one in Brazil.

"Crime is rampant throughout Guatemala, where police are outnumbered and unable to address every issue of violence. Crimes against travelers are part of the country’s high crime rate and include theft, robbery, carjacking, and rape. Visitors should protect themselves by traveling discreetly. Avoid taking valuables into the country, and carefully secure any valuable that you must take. The U.S. Department of State advises that you should not resist an attack, as most Guatemalan criminals are violent and will not hesitate to cause harm."
https://traveltips.usatoday.com/guatemala-travel-warnings-1546.html

No, I'm not kidding. It's true so far as I can tell. I have no doubt it is better than the conditions many homeless Americans live in. Besides, where were you when this was going on under Obama???
"Better than"???? Surely you jest! Do you know any homeless people? I did for the 25+ years I worked in public libraries. We always steered them toward getting whatever services were needed. Public libraries do that. And yes, I donated/donate to charities that I know will help.

"Better than"???? Surely you jest! Do you know any homeless people? I did for the 25+ years I worked in public libraries. We always steered them toward getting whatever services were needed. Public libraries do that. And yes, I donated/donate to charities that I know will help.

I have worked with many homeless people. Our city has hundreds of them camped out around the town. Maybe they live in the lap of luxury in your city, but here it's tough. Hot in summer, cold and wet in winter. Now you are free to believe what you want, but having a secure place to stay and three meals a day is better than a lot of the homeless have.

I assume from your reply you have never actually been to the boonies of Central America. Until you have, you might want to reserve judgement a little. I've seen it. No medical care. No dental care. You eat only what you can grow. You've also not been to our border to see these camps. I just don't think you are in any position to have an accurate idea of what they left and what they've come to.


The derangement is all yours. Your silence speaks volumes.

Sorry, but making vitriolic posts on message boards just does not strike me as making a great effort to help these people. When you've done more than that, get back with us. And like I said before, if you want me to take your moral position seriously, then be prepared to lash out at Obama in the same way you do towards Trump over this issue. It has been going on for many years.

having a secure place to stay and three meals a day
But they DON'T have that! Spoiled food, still-frozen food, and certainly not three times a day. Secure place? Bright lights are on 24/7, cold concrete to sleep on, Mylar blankets? Even the guards are molesting and raping the migrant kids. El Paso residents took disposable diapers, clean clothes, soap, wipes, and other essentials to the detention center near them and were turned away.

But they DON'T have that! Spoiled food, still-frozen food, and certainly not three times a day. Secure place? Bright lights are on 24/7, cold concrete to sleep on, Mylar blankets? Even the guards are molesting and raping the migrant kids

How do you know this?

How do you know this?
***Doctors and attorneys say hundreds of young people are living under inhumane conditions at a border control station in Clint, Texas. They say they found about 250 infants, children and teens locked up for weeks without adequate food, water and sanitation.A researcher told "CBS This Morning" that at the Clint facility, about 20 miles southeast of El Paso, more than a dozen children had the flu, and that some were in quarantine cells without adult supervision. The researcher added that young girls were taking care of a sick two-year-old boy who was in filthy clothing without a diaper, and that the children said they were fed uncooked frozen food and had gone weeks without bathing. CBS News reached out to immigration officials, and has not yet heard back.***
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/children-at-border-facility-children-living-inhumane-conditions-texas-border-facility-doctors-attorneys-say/

Here's another one:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7176191/300-migrant-children-removed-border-camp-poor-conditions.html

$700-800 per person per day/night.

if you want me to take your moral position seriously,

It's not MY moral position, it's the moral position of anyone with an ounce of intelligence who pays attention to the events taking place in Clint and other places. Your gross inability to do so belies anything you say on any topic.

You're trapped in a self-imposed prison of Bibliolatry and Trump policies. You should welcome the criticisms you receive here. It gives you a chance to examine your beliefs.

Your own words have exposed you jls, time to shut up or rethink. Your choice.

You must be an octopus, having to hold your nose while you cover your eyes and ears to the truth that the dufus drowns out. Only a dufus could blame others while he has the ball and is the one running with it the wrong way. While Obama and the ones before him were far from perfect this guy has found and keeps finding new lows to slink to.

And you cheer him for it. My friend you are playing for the wrong team, and stubbornly defend a cruel, selfish, liar and cheater and bully who abuses the helpless, no matter the evidence right before your face.

Worse case of TDS I have ever seen! It's an epidemic I tell ya! You far righties should be quarantined.

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/173/17315/1731508.gif

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/173/17321/1732149.gif

Wondergirl, you have an article with very little direct evidence. A dozen children have the flu. One infant was poorly cared for. Some children allege they were poorly fed. You have nothing about children being raped or physically abused.

I'm sure there have been some unfortunate incidents, and those should be corrected, but you have no evidence that the great majority of people have not been adequately cared for. Considering that this situation has come about fairly suddenly, and that the Obama admin seems to have done but very little to provide for facilities, then it was kind of foreseeable that this might happen. I'm all for having humane conditions, but I'm not convinced that that is not the case in most of the facilities.


It's not MY moral position, it's the moral position of anyone with an ounce of intelligence who pays attention to the events taking place in Clint and other places. Your gross inability to do so belies anything you say on any topic.

OK. It's not your position, so I don't have to pay any attention to it. Thanks!


You're trapped in a self-imposed prison of Bibliolatry and Trump policies. You should welcome the criticisms you receive here. It gives you a chance to examine your beliefs.

I do receive all opportunities to examine my beliefs.


Your own words have exposed you jls, time to shut up or rethink. Your choice.

Sez you, but like I have said, when you can tell me what you are personally doing to help, other than making offensive remarks on a message board, and when you can point out how you were critical of Obama for his lack of attention to this problem, then that moral position you claim you don't hold might stop ringing hollow.

You might try taking your own advice about examining beliefs.

Wondergirl, you have an article with very little direct evidence.
You haven't been watching tv and hearing the reports of medical people and others who've been allowed to see what's going on? Oh, yeah. Fox whitewashes.

Would you allow your own small children to visit there for a few days and share the frozen chicken nuggets and tacos, the lice and germs, and get smeared with poop and pee?

https://www.stltoday.com/news/national/govt-and-politics/government-moves-migrant-kids-out-of-texas-detention-center-after/article_e451cf33-8906-5451-b72a-62829b5416bc.html

https://www.theroot.com/migrant-children-moved-from-texas-detention-center-afte-1835813375

You haven't been watching tv and hearing the reports of medical people and others who've been allowed to see what's going on? Oh, yeah. Fox whitewashes.

I don't watch any of the evening news shows. I asked you for your evidence. It was minimal. If you want to make an accusation, then be prepared to back it up. The two links you provided were just a rehash of the El Paso story you had already linked. It did note that some of the children had not had a shower for several days. Do you not realize that there are virtually no showers in the rural areas of Central America, or that many homeless men have no access to showers? That is what I was referring to when I said that the great majority of them might very well have it better here than where they came from, or that they have it better than many of our homeless people who are American citizens.


Would you allow your own small children to visit there for a few days and share the frozen chicken nuggets and tacos, the lice and germs, and get smeared with poop and pee?

I would not take my small children somewhere where I have not been invited and where I have no idea of how we would be taken care of. Would you??

I would not take my small children somewhere where I have not been invited and where I have no idea of how we would be taken care of. Would you??
Great answer! Exactly what I expected!

If the part of Chicago where I live was overtaken by drug dealers, gangs, robbers, rapists, general fear that I can't even leave my house, yes, I would go (and take my children) to what I hoped and had been told was a safe place. Apparently, the refugees were told wrong. The US isn't a safe place.

If the part of Chicago where I live was overtaken by drug dealers, gangs, robbers, rapists, general fear that I can't even leave my house, yes, I would go (and take my children) to what I hoped and had been told was a safe place. Apparently, the refugees were told wrong. The US isn't a safe place.

I think the refugees are largely safe. You have produced no evidence of widespread conditions of people not being safe. Now are they being fed and housed in an acceptable fashion? I don't know, and I don't think you do either, but I've seen no evidence that there are widespread problems with this. It is sad that children are temporarily separated from parents, but I'm not sure what to do about that, and it does not last more than twenty days, so I just don't know what to say about it. I suspect those people are accustomed to much tougher conditions than you realize. I can tell you some stories just from my own time in Guatemala that would illustrate that.

You did raise a good point about Chicago. Parts of that city HAVE been taken over by drug dealers and gangs and are unsafe, and people are affected by the tens of thousands, and yet you have not mentioned that. Why is it that you people in Chicago do not make your own city safe? Why is it that liberals living in major U.S. cities are so quick to jump on the situation at the border, and yet so silent about the horrendous conditions which exist practically in their own backyards? Can you answer that question for me? Why is that?

It's late and I'm old, so it's lights out for me. Mañana.

It's late and I'm old, so it's lights out for me. Mañana.

It shows

It's late and I'm old, so it's lights out for me. Mañana.
I'm older than you and will be up for a few more hours.

I have been doing what I can to improve Chicago and suburbs. Rome wasn't build in a day.

I have been doing what I can to improve Chicago and suburbs. Rome wasn't build in a day.

Not easy, is it? And that is kind of my whole point. Liberal democrat governments have utterly failed in their efforts to make inner city areas safe and productive. In Baltimore, for instance, 13 of the 39 high schools could not produce a single student who scored proficient on the state's mathematics exam. So maybe it's time for liberals to cut the government a little slack on the border and give it some time to get the problem fixed instead of setting your hair on fire and running out of the house screaming bloody murder. Also not a good idea to accuse detention guards of rape and assault without some really good supporting evidence. A little moderation would be in order from the people who can't get the problems in their own backyards fixed. You've had decades and failed, and your plea is, "Rome wasn't built in a day." Well, it's been a far, far shorter period of time on the border.

Not intending to sound impatient, but I'm still waiting for your answer to this question. "Why is it that liberals living in major U.S. cities are so quick to jump on the situation at the border, and yet so silent about the horrendous conditions which exist practically in their own backyards? Can you answer that question for me?"

Chicago has a more dynamic economy than the whole state of Mississippi despite the challenges, so be careful who you call a failure.

Chicago has a more dynamic economy than the whole state of Mississippi despite the challenges, so be careful who you call a failure.

You have completely and thoroughly missed the point. You have also dodged the question.

In the meantime, Chicago has more murders in a year than the lowest fifteen states combined.

If you want to suggest that Mississippi has failed in a number of important ways, I would agree with you.

As I have always reminded Clete, more people, more poverty. It's a growing thing, that needs to be solved. The longer it festers, the harder the solution, and the more problems it brings.

Just do the math, start with population per square mile and you will understand the challenge better.

As I have always reminded Clete, more people, more poverty. It's a growing thing, that needs to be solved. The longer it festers, the harder the solution, and the more problems it brings.

Poverty of soul is the great enemy. If economic poverty causes crimes, then how can you explain how the crime rate fell during the Great Depression?

Poverty of soul is the great enemy. If economic poverty causes crimes, then how can you explain how the crime rate fell during the Great Depression?

Noone but the criminals had any money

What Clete said. It is no coincidence that there was and has always been two economies in America. One for the haves, and one for the have NOTS. LOL, guess how the dufus got to be one of the haves?

Noone but the criminals had any money


What Clete said. It is no coincidence that there was and has always been two economies in America. One for the haves, and one for the have NOTS. LOL, guess how the dufus got to be one of the haves?

So I'll ask it again. If poverty causes crime, then why did the crime rates FALL during the Great Depression? And please don't tell me you have to have money to commit a crime. That's a ridiculous idea.

https://www.history.com/topics/great-depression/crime-in-the-great-depression


New Deal (https://www.history.com/topics/new-deal) programs were likely a major factor in declining crime rates, as was the end of Prohibition and a slowdown of immigration and migration of people from rural America to northern cities, all of which reduced urban crime rates. Even when the U.S. economy stalled again in 1937-38, homicide rates kept falling, reaching 6.4 per 100,000 by the end of the decade.


https://www.city-journal.org/html/crime-and-great-recession-13399.html

All excuses aside, you cannot escape the fact that poverty increased dramatically during the GP. Now you say that poverty causes crime, but crime decreased during that time, so even if you throw in some government programs, most of which involved work and not sit around and do nothing programs, and all of which still left people in a hard financial situation, how do you account for that decrease in crime? I thought increased poverty would result in increased crime?

I wonder if it could have been the fact that those people were poor in money but not afflicted with poverty of soul, and not given to the idea, as many are today, that my lack justifies me taking from others, and that the culture of the time did not include people running around making excuses for criminal behavior.

Now to be fair, I understand that poverty adds stress to lives, and people might do things when poor that they would not have done outside of poverty, but it is not automatic. The great question is, how do people get into, or out of, poverty? I contend that, in most cases, it starts on the inside. A woman who decides to have three children outside of marriage runs a great risk of poverty. A person who drops out of school in the 11th grade because "it's too dull" is in trouble. People who don't like the concept of work are not in a good position.

"Why is it that liberals living in major U.S. cities are so quick to jump on the situation at the border, and yet so silent about the horrendous conditions which exist practically in their own backyards? Can you answer that question for me?"
I'm working to help both.

I'm working to help both.

That's good. It should help you realize how difficult it is and hopefully foster some humility.

That still does not tell us why liberals are so quick to breathe fire at Trump for the situation at the border while being so silent about their own challenges in inner cities. If you want to feel sorry for children, try feeling sorry for the tens of thousands of poor kids who are trapped in failing inner city schools and have so little hope for the future.

I will keep it simple. There has always been poverty and crime, it's a challenge that has never been solved despite how sophisticated we think we have become. Maybe as you say it's just the nature of some to be evil, as it is for some to be good, or anywhere in between.

I think it's only natural for liberals to breathe fire at the dufus, as it was for the conservatives to breathe fire at Obama. Geez JL, does any human need an excuse to breathe fire if they don't like something? Some are just noisier than others and you shouldn't blast them for it. The thought of abused children get's people riled up and that's something you know about. Nothing personal, liberals don't abide by the dufus the way you do.



That's good. It should help you realize how difficult it is and hopefully foster some humility.

You could have kept that condescending comment to yourself. You are not the only or even the most experienced person on this board you know. I could be over reacting, but just saying!

Maybe as you say it's just the nature of some to be evil, as it is for some to be good, or anywhere in between.

I'm not saying that as much as I'm saying it can come down to simple choices that we, as a culture, should value and encourage others to value.


I think it's only natural for liberals to breathe fire at the dufus, as it was for the conservatives to breathe fire at Obama. Geez JL, does any human need an excuse to breathe fire if they don't like something? Some are just noisier than others and you shouldn't blast them for it. The thought of abused children get's people riled up and that's something you know about. Nothing personal, liberals don't abide by the dufus the way you do.

I think that's a fair statement. I just want people to get as riled up about abused children in their own city as they do about the reports from the border. If not, then at least admit that the person really doesn't care about children so much as he/she just does not like Trump.

I do get tired sometimes of the constant personal attacks that get launched on this board against someone who is not a flaming liberal and does hold to Christian values. That's why I think your quote above was fair and even-handed. I "abide" by Trump because I like many of his policies, just like you abided with Obama for the same reason.

Those simple choices aren't so simple. Maybe for YOU, but not for others, is all I'm saying. Nice to have choices though, and the wisdom to make good ones. Not everyone has it like that for whatever reason. Seems logical to conclude the bigger the city the more crime there is. The more corruption. More who need and can't get.

Sometimes all your choices are bad ones, so you can only go with the least bad choice. That's pretty screwed up ain't it?

Yes, people are sometimes in tough situations and their options are limited, but that is generally not the case. Women don't have to get pregnant out of wedlock which is a choice many make and is generally devastating for the woman and the child. Dropping out of high school is usually not a necessary choice. Choosing to be lazy is bad. So I'd just like to see our culture return to a time when family, education, and hard work were valued.

They ARE valued by most I think, but some take longer than others to get it, and still more need help finding it, but we have to accept that there are those that don't and won't and deal with them appropriately. You can't save everyone, even if they WANT to be saved.

but we have to accept that there are those that don't and won't and deal with them appropriately.

Yes, there are those who make bad choices. I don't see why the government should be able to force an American who makes good choices to take some of his/her money and give it to a person who is making poor choices. They are free to make poor choices, but they should also bear the responsibility for those decisions.

Taking tax money for the general welfare is what governments do. I don't see why the government gives a corporation a tax incentive to close a plant and build a new one in another country. I guess we both have our issues, and different opinions about human suffering be it intentional, or not.

LOL, sometimes having sex is the only feel good in a miserable life. Breeding is the most powerful of human instinct and we suffer from it as well as without it. Some are more evolved than others. I don't exactly condone bad choices or mistakes, but been there and done that, so I certainly UNDERSTAND it.

Taking tax money for the general welfare is what governments do.

Yes, but for the GENERAL welfare, which means that which benefits everyone. Highways, national defense, schools, and a system of courts quailfy for that, but taking money from one person for no other reason than to give to another is not the general welfare. And besides, it is typically bad for both persons.


I don't see why the government gives a corporation a tax incentive to close a plant and build a new one in another country

That should not be the case. I'm not aware that it is, but if it is, it should be stopped.

That's good. It should help you realize how difficult it is and hopefully foster some humility.


Calling this statement condescending is the understatement of the year. You are a pompous a**, jsl.

You are the only one on this board who has gone on the record as approving the slaughter of children - first in the Bible, now the abuse of infants and toddlers at the southern border.

You claim to be a Christian who is following Trump's policies. Trump's policy is to abuse children and, by negligence, allow some to die. He is doing this for one reason only - to force the Democrats to fund his wall. You know, the wall you support that was supposed to be funded by Mexico? How gullible can you be? How Christian is that?

Stop whining at how you are treated here on this board - you brought it on yourself with your constant posts denying and refusing to believe what the whole world knows about the situation at the border. You say "I don't watch the evening news". Is that supposed to be some rationalization of your behavior? A pleading of ignorance?

You are a pompous a**, jsl.

Thank goodness you don't believe in name calling.

Rather than take your comments one point at a time, I can only suggest you try and keep up with what is being said on this board. Your accusations are ridiculous and easily refuted with what I have said before. I will not bother and say them again for your benefit.

The others on this board who do not agree with me on a number of points manage to keep the conversation civil. You might try doing the same. You seem to be one, evermore angry person. Sad. You might want to try and figure out why.

As to my supposedly condescending statement, it was directed at WG. I can tell you from experience that she is well capable of defending her points of view. If she feels offended, she will tell me.

Thank goodness you don't believe in name calling.

I make an exception for you.


Rather than take your comments one point at a time, Your accusations are ridiculous and easily refuted with what I have said before.

So easy that you can't refute them, can you? I stand by everything I've said.


You seem to be one, evermore angry person.

That reply is at least consistent with your inability to defend killing (bible) and abusing (border) small children. The real mystery is why aren't YOU an "evermore angry person"?


As to my supposedly condescending statement, it was directed at WG.

"Supposedly"? The target of your statement doesn't change its condescending nature. Trust me, you have nothing to be condescending about.

So easy that you can't refute them, can you? I stand by everything I've said.

I don't care.

As to the rest of your rant, I don't trust you, and I see no need to repeat myself for someone who doesn't like to read. I don't care for your nasty, angry approach. You are a liberal version of Donald Trump. You mistake personal attacks for thoughtful responses.

I don't care.

I think that typifies your contribution

These lefties are ridiculous . 1st they complain that the kids are sleeping on floors . So the administration contracts to buy beds . Then the workers at the plant protest because the company is going to sell beds for the kids in the detention camps .

1st they complain that the kids are sleeping on floors .

As it turns out, the kids were sleeping on concrete floors and in cages during the Obama admin. Not surprisingly, there were no complaints at the time, which makes the outrage exhibited now by so many seem kind of fake.

https://apnews.com/a98f26f7c9424b44b7fa927ea1acd4d4

The real protest Tom is about separating kids from parents. The solution is reuniting families while being processed.



As it turns out, the kids were sleeping on concrete floors and in cages during the Obama admin. Not surprisingly, there were no complaints at the time, which makes the outrage exhibited now by so many seem kind of fake.


Obama ended the practice it must be noted (AGAIN) and the dufus brought it back as part of his zero tolerance policy. There was outrage then, so Obama changed the priorities to going after criminals and releasing family groups for judicial processing. The outrage now isn't fake, it's a carryover to an unpopular policy the dufus carries out.

You like distorting facts to blame Obama. Nope this is all on the dufus. BUMMER!

You like distorting facts to blame Obama. Nope this is all on the dufus. BUMMER!

Well, here they are, sleeping on concrete floors, in cages, asleep with all the lights on, and using aluminum foil blankets. The primary difference is this was done by Obama, so I guess that makes it alright. This pic was taken in 2014. So far as I can tell, there was no outrage at the time, and nothing much said about in the supposedly non-partisan news media. In fact, it was so little noticed that these same pics were later reused in 18 as supposed proof of what Trump was doing and no one even noticed until it was finally pointed out the pics were from 14. I'm pretty sure that none of the outraged members of this board were outraged then. Politics.

49185


In case the photo doesn't load, as it sometimes does not, here's the link.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5b0dbccf1ae66230008b4fec-960-623.jpg

The real protest Tom is about separating kids from parents. The solution is reuniting families while being processed. It was lefty judges that held that kids can't be detained with adults. The REAL solution is to close the border from illegal crossers .

Nice try, but why do you think Obama ended the practice? Yeah he goofed, and corrected his actions, so when will you make the dufus correct his folly or even acknowledge his doing it is far worse, as he has slowed and stopped the whole process creating this current situation on our southern border. Blaming Obama for what the dufus is doing now is ridicules, and perpetrates another of his more obvious LIES that you seem to like repeating, while leaving out the nasty conditions that your picture is proof Obama DIDN'T do.

Now that's simply outrageous, even for you.


It was lefty judges that held that kids can't be detained with adults. The REAL solution is to close the border from illegal crossers .

Or process the LEGAL ones which asylum seekers are. Righties seem to have ignored that FACT of the LAW. Saying it's so doesn't make it so.

The REAL solution is to close the border from illegal crossers .

I think that's about right.

They are not legal asylum seekers . The criteria is clear as to who is eligible and that does not include people trying to escape poverty. They have to suffer persecution due to race,religion.nationality;membership in a particular social group or political opinion. Also international principle says that those who claim asylum or refuge must claim it at the first safe country they reach. That would be Mexico.

Much of this is just an excuse for liberals to complain about Trump. That doesn't mean the whole situation is not tragic, but it's been going on for decades. Politics.

A link to the law of which you speak would be quite helpful.


Much of this is just an excuse for liberals to complain about Trump. That doesn't mean the whole situation is not tragic, but it's been going on for decades. Politics.

I don't need an excuse to complain about the lying, cheating, cruel bullying dufus. Thought you knew! Politics? YEP!

Politics? YEP!

An honest man! Diogenes would be pleased.

"Asylum is the legal protection afforded by the United States government to a person who can demonstrate a “well-founded fear of persecution” based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group."

https://immigration-law.freeadvice.com/immigration-law/asylum/what_is_asylum.htm

It also requires due process, meaning representation and a judge.

A judge yes, but the article said nothing about representation, or at least not that I saw. But there is the problem. When ten thousand people (or whatever it is) suddenly hit the border, then coming up with so many judges can probably be a major problem, and thanks to a court decision, they only have twenty days.

It just follws that any court proceeding has to include a counsel for the defendent since there is a prosecutor present.

It's a daunting challenge granted to process so many claims but it's done all the time at sports events and lottery. Rich guys can make hundreds of thousands of transactions in minutes no problem. We have the technology, just have a dufus to figure it out. Instead of coordinating his many resources and his congress he gives lip service and lies. That' is why he was elected to solve problems and deal with challenges to the country, not style and profile and tweet insults and derogatorys to his foes and detractors on his campaign stops.

You right wing loonies just suck that stuff up don't you? You don't question his actively slowing down the process to create this chaos.

It just follws that any court proceeding has to include a counsel for the defendent since there is a prosecutor present.

Actually, I'm not sure that is true for those who are not citizens.


You right wing loonies just suck that stuff up don't you?

Wow. What a thoughtful response. Are all liberals as addicted to name calling as the libs on this board??? Well, you will be happy to know that you are more like Trump than you want to think.

So what, if he can do it why can't everybody?

So what, if he can do it why can't everybody?

Because it indicates a person who has run out of civility, and that's not where I want to be. You will have to decide for yourself.

Because it indicates a person who has run out of civility, and that's not where I want to be. You will have to decide for yourself.


That's not where you want to be? That's a laugh!

Where you want to be is supporting the slaughter of children as promoted in your Bible, and supporting the torture and killing of children in the present-day at the southern border because you love Trump's policies.

You have gone on record right here on these pages (no dispute) as approving both of these barbaric murderous activities.

When confronted with your own words, you response is "I don't care"!

So much for your Christianity. It's more like devil-worship.

You have put Moloch ahead of Jesus.

You really need help.

You really need help.

Another non-reply. Hard to rebut the truth.

Geez, look who all of a sudden wants to be civil. Come on JL, we are talking about the dufus here right? There is nothing civil or decent or honest about him so don't expect civil when it comes to him at all. You voted for him, your decision but I don't have to abide by him, his words, or antics. Another woman has accused him of assaulting her, will you dismiss it out of hand as another thrill seeker?

PS

I did call you a right wing loony didn't I. Sorry 'bout that, but sometimes you do sound like one.

I did call you a right wing loony didn't I. Sorry 'bout that, but sometimes you do sound like one.

You generally don't bother me, Tal. I think I understand you, and I never have to try and figure out where you stand. I guess I do have to wear the right wing badge. I hope I'm not loony, but of course loony people are usually the last ones to know it!! As to civility, I shoot for responses that are straightforward and truthful, but I try not to be a name caller or make personal attacks. If I do, then call me out on it. Just bear in mind that stating the truth and calling names are not the same thing.


Another woman has accused him of assaulting her, will you dismiss it out of hand as another thrill seeker?


No, I think it should be taken seriously, unlike the response of the liberals with Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey. Remember them??? Remember the shameful treatment of Monica Lewinsky? Sorry, but your effort to claim the moral high ground on this one won't work. The truth is probably that there are many powerful men out there who have used their money, fame, and position of power to take advantage of women. Sad to say, but likely true.


Another non-reply. Hard to rebut the truth.

Hard to rebut the truth? More like hard to rebut an imaginary discourse that seems to be driven by hate and anger, and appears to border on being irrational. Maybe I'm misreading it, but I don't think so. Read. Think. Anaylzye. Keep up. That will answer your questions.

How far back do you want to go with that past bad behavior? How does that justify the worse behavior NOW? I seek no moral high ground, but neither can you when you just let the antics words, and behavior of this dufus go with the constant references to past bad behavior. Even if I conceded dems dropped the ball many times in the past, I doubt you could acknowledge or admit how really bad this dide in the WH now is.

How far back do you want to go with that past bad behavior? How does that justify the worse behavior NOW? I seek no moral high ground, but neither can you when you just let the antics words, and behavior of this dufus go with the constant references to past bad behavior. Even if I conceded dems dropped the ball many times in the past, I doubt you could acknowledge or admit how really bad this dide in the WH now is.

First of all, we are both up too early in the morning.

As to your point, you asked if I would excuse the new accusation out of hand. I think she should go to the police if she has a good case, but you made it sound as though liberals have a good track record on this when they don't. The behavior of Clinton towards women was terrible, and yet the liberal world was falling all over each other trying to be first in line to support him and insult the women. And if that's not enough, they then decided to run his inept and unaccomplished wife for president!

It is now irrefutable that the Democrat Party's position is open borders .

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/most-democrats-promise-to-decriminalize-border-crossings-during-2020-debate?fbclid=IwAR0M88mLfZrF40DHy_JvX9ZVwToDrc8v6t pHvBbu0KOnT8q2wHMN8OtI9jo

This quote was really laughable. "Asked about the Obama administration’s deportation of 3 million, Biden said the president that he served under “did a heck of a job” and that it would be wrong to compare him to President Donald Trump."

In other words, "It was alright when Obama did it, but not OK for Trump to do it."

Politics.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-warns-central-americans-send-children-borders/story?id=24320063&fbclid=IwAR3pbC9fbJtSvPbekkLG7fNrUy2Pr-xNUUa2fzkIpQxN-gPdZ8q1QXQPYRg

"President Obama says tens of thousands of Central American children flooding into the U.S. along the southern border have created a “humanitarian crisis,” and he appealed directly to parents to stop sending kids north."

It was a crisis then, but not now?

Politics

the whole group of them raised their hands when asked if they want free health care for illegal aliens . <sarc> They are really forging a winning platform</sarc>

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D-HzD2UUwAc7HMv?format=jpg&name=900x900

The best way for Trump to lose is to create the impression that he is an unlikeable loose cannon. Unfortunately, he is doing that very thing.

Some one has lost their mind

Trump made a huuuuge mistake by delaying the deporting . His base is already fuming that he has stopped talking about a wall. This election is on a tee for him to hit out of the park . The only thing that could derail is the economy going to the crapper ;a perception that he is not being forceful enough about the border ;or some new revelation by Mueller . Mueller has already said that his report is his testimony .

He ought to win in a walk, and if his mouth does not do him in, and so far it has not been encouraging, then he should. We'll see.

It was just red meat for the base to chew on anyway, while he goes and schmoozes Vlad and MBS for the weekend. He lost another Supreme Court fight about the census.

ridiculous ruling . SCOTUS has no role in deciding which census questions can be asked . If I were him I'd make a stand and say 'too late ' the question remains . What can SCOTUS do about it ?

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/the-jackson-era-chap-11-7th-grade-1209940636003540-8/95/the-jackson-era-chap-11-7th-grade-54-728.jpg?cb=1209915523 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwitxcfnhI3jAhWlTt8KHdzaDrQQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com%2F20 17%2F02%2Ffederal-judge-issues-issues-nationwide-restraining-order-against-trump-travel-ban&psig=AOvVaw3M2Z-0eAR8R4I5C2dN98Mg&ust=1561840873030336)

I've heard the WH was going to proceed anyway with yet another scheme to suppress the census count, by driving Hispanics away.

https://www.wonkette.com/racist-census-scheme-to-rig-elections

Enforcing the voting rights act my arse!

there is nothing wrong with the question . I am reluctantly involved in 2 otrher census surveys beyond the 10 year census . The American Community Survey(ACS) asks the question about citizenship and no one says a peep about it . (the other one I'm force to take is one about college graduates ) If I were to say I wasn't a citizen then there is a f follow questions about nationality .
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/methodology/questionnaires/2019/quest19.pdf?

The table on this link shows that having a citizenship question on the census goes back years .It is not a Trump invention .
https://cis.org/Richwine/History-Census-Bureaus-Birthplace-and-Citizenship-Questions-One-Table

Look the Congress has the constitutional power to dictate how the census get's taken.As it stands ;the law give the Census Bureau wide latitude in the questions ask. SCOTUS has NO role in deciding what is in effect a political question The Roberts' Court is again out of bounds . What this opens up according to Justice Thomas' dissent is
“for political opponents of executive actions to generate controversy with accusations of pretext, deceit, and illicit motives.”... “Crediting these accusations on evidence as thin as the evidence here could lead judicial review of administrative proceedings to devolve into an endless morass of discovery and policy disputes." In other words it opens up every executive decision to judicial review even ones where is clearly in the power of the President to make the call. or as Justice Alito said in his dissent ;
the federal judiciary has “no authority to stick its nose into the question whether it is good policy to include a citizenship question on the census or whether the reasons given by Secretary Ross for that decision were his only reasons or his real reasons.”

So it doesn't matter the dufus is rigging the system? Would it be even wise to TRUST repubs to better enact the Voting Rights Act given the repub shenanigans? Hell NO!!!!

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512/fact-check-has-citizenship-been-a-standard-census-question

it is not the role of SCOTUS to determine motives . They have no business being the referee over political disputes . That is what elections are for . I'll say it again . The Constitution empowers Congress to do a census. They could easily reverse the decision . Instead ,and is too often the case ,they empower the Federal Bureaucracy to become lawmakers .That's all well and good ;BUT the government is run by the executive branch .

Why is it that copying and pasting images does not seem to work on this site anymore? Seems to me at one time it worked, but not now.

it is not the role of SCOTUS to determine motives . They have no business being the referee over political disputes . That is what elections are for . I'll say it again . The Constitution empowers Congress to do a census. They could easily reverse the decision . Instead ,and is too often the case ,they empower the Federal Bureaucracy to become lawmakers .That's all well and good ;BUT the government is run by the executive branch .

The executive branch is but one of 3 coequal branches of government. Something about checks and balances and just because the congress is impotent doesn't mean the judiciary should follow suite. You really want a king don't you? For sure the dufus does.

Why is it that copying and pasting images does not seem to work on this site anymore? Seems to me at one time it worked, but not now.

You have to use the tools

You have to use the tools

Yeah, which seem to be a little iffy as to whether or not they work. But didn't copy and paste work at one time???

Something about checks and balances If you've read my comments carefully I have always advocated Congress do it's constitutional role .I've also as you know have argued that SCOTUS has usurped powers from both branches and is in fact the unequal imperial branch .

.I've also as you know have argued that SCOTUS has usurped powers from both branches and is in fact the unequal imperial branch .

Just about right. There seems to be very little in the way of checks and balances for what the Court decides.

Congress gave up its responsibilities a while back to the exec, so who fills the vacuum? One example is WAR powers, he can preemptively attack whomever he wants. Another is bypassing congress and selling weopons and nikes to whomever he wants. Another is bypass congress and redirecting the money from one appropriation to whatever he wants. Need more or are you getting the picture.

what part of administration and executive authority do you not understand, do you think it means standby and do nothing? it certainly means more than what some beknighted politician thinks is a good idea

Just about right. There seems to be very little in the way of checks and balances for what the Court decides.
yes in fact there is no check and balance since the Marbury v Madison .Whatever the court says goes regardless how preposterous their decision is . Plessy v Ferguson was a SCOTUS decision that decided that segregation was the law of the land . A later SCOTUS decided in Brown v Board of Education that Plessy was incorrectly decided . The Dred Scott decision reversed the Missouri compromise and that directly led to the Civil War. The Korematsu decision rubber stamped the illegal detention of Japanese American citizens . And of course the Griswald v Connecticut case was the most egregious example of SCOTUS verbal jui jitsu in history short of Roberts changing the plain language of Obamacare to say that a "penalty " that would've been unconstitutional was constitutional because it was a "tax"....even though the emperor made it clear that it was not a tax.
In Griswald Justice Douglas came up with the most convoluted reasoning to create what has become known as the privacy right .
"The foregoing cases suggest that specific guarantees in the Bill of
Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that
help give them life and substance. "
What does that even mean ? Penumbra is an astronomical term for when there is a partial shadow in an eclipse .Emaination is a scientific term for gas made from decay .The case was about birth control .But the case led directly to Roe V Wade....another wrongly decided case

Well Tom it seems your courts with their politically appointed judges are incapable of making right decisions. In earlier eras the problem would have been quickly solved. Thomas Moore comes to mind

you mean Becket ?

Him too

Well our dufus has another historic photo op. He shook hands with Kim and walked though NK on his way home. No deals though but one can hope they agreed to keep talking, even while NK keeps it's nukes and Iran contemplates theirs.

Well our dufus has another historic photo op. He shook hands with Kim and walked though NK on his way home. No deals though but one can hope they agreed to keep talking, even while NK keeps it's nukes and Iran contemplates theirs.

I think we have established that the possession of nukes is a talking point, which leads us to ask if Trump can talk to Kim in a amicable manner why can't he talk to Iran the same way. There was a deal which means settlement of disputes was further down the road with Iran than with NK and yet he can be polite to one and shouts at the other

Trump wants to talk to the Mullahs and has offered to do so. I want them gone and for the people of Iran to get the liberty they deserve . Trump gave up Presidential prestige for nothing so far with un-Kim

The time to talk was before you turned the screws up and tore up the signed sealed and deliverd deal on the table by the Chinese, Russians, and Europeans along with us. No fan of Iran, but if the other signatories of the deal tell the dufus to screw off then his war only has him and his sycophants playing with themselves. I don't think the other countries were happy with that G2 meeting, or the dufus photo op with Kim after.

Not a good look that everybody in the world is either sanctioned or tarrifed by the dufus...except for Vlad who loves it immensely. Wait until Bolton gets over his exile to Mongolia so he can hit somebody. What happened to Pompeo? No Netty either to blow sweet nothings in the dufus's ear either. Just Ivanka trying to look important.

Nobody likes her either. Them Mexicans better hurry up and train those 4,000 extra troops for the border or the dufus may jump in their butts again next month. You know how he is.

G2 well that is what I would expect from a self obsessed american

LOL, I mean't G20.

a self obsessed american

See what I mean?

The time to talk was before you turned the screws up and tore up the signed sealed and deliverd deal Iran was pissing all over the paper it was written on before the ink dried .

Not according to our own government proclamation, and the other signatories. They were in compliance with the nuclear treaty even if they had other stuff they were doing we didn't like.

The dufus is LYING...AGAIN as usual.

The 14th amendment almost mandates a citizenship question Section 2 states :


"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the inhabitants of such state, being 18 years of age , and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such citizens shall bear to the whole number of citizens 18 years of age in such state."


There is no ambiguity .It is mandatory .


Compliance is impossible without counting how many CITIZENS live in each state. There is a constitutional obligation to obtain citizenship data.

Trump should issue an executive order stating that, to comply with the requirements of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, the citizenship question will be added to the 2020 census.

Go ahead disobey the court, and end up back in court.

The dufus won't add the citizenship question to the census, but told his cabinet to send citizenship data to where ever, as Acosta RESIGNS amid scandal and controversy, just like many before him. I lost count, but expect the number to rise given the Dufus's penchant for dubious characters around him. Of course that means his kids too.

A shoe that will drop soon.

yeah Trump caved . you must be tired of winning .

I never get tired of winning at anything. You know that! I haven't forgot what losing is for a minute though! You know that too.

We're all winning with the Trump economy.

We're all winning with the Trump economy.

Really, define ALL!. Once again your view is one eyed

Of course he speaks for everyone, or just himself. Can't tell which. I know he doesn't speak for ME!

Yes a limited perception

Really, define ALL!. Once again your view is one eyed

Record low unemployment, stock market at all time high, and highest average income on record sounds pretty good to me. If Obama had done that, you'd be singing his praises. Politics. Just stinkin politics. Sad in this whole deal where bitterness or whatever it is will not allow people to give credit where it is due.

In the meantime, AOC is now at the forefront of democratic economic ideas. Oh brother.

Record low unemployment, stock market at all time high, and highest average income on record sounds pretty good to me. If Obama had done that, you'd be singing his praises. Politics. Just stinkin politics. Sad in this whole deal where bitterness or whatever it is will not allow people to give credit where it is due.

In the meantime, AOC is now at the forefront of democratic economic ideas. Oh brother.

How many points did Obama add to the stock market? What was the stock market doing when he took over? What was the unemployment when he started? When he left? Just like the dufus started his business with a healthy inheritance, so he started his presidency with a healthy economy. Of course you and the dufus give him no credit, and take it all for yourselves, that's hardly accurate. Just as the right wing tries to cast AOC as the voice of the dem party. Are those just your politics, or propping up the lies of a cheating dufus?

Don't forget the brelly and galoshes when you go out. A good soaking is a coming.

How many points did Obama add to the stock market? What was the stock market doing when he took over? What was the unemployment when he started? When he left?

That's a fair enough statement as long as you take into account the 9 trillion of national debt Obama added. But it's interesting to me how quickly you love to give Obama credit while, at the same time, refusing to give Trump any credit at all. Stinkin politics. That's all it is. Bitterness.

Really, define ALL!. Once again your view is one eyed

Record low unemployment, stock market at all time high, and highest average income on record sounds pretty good to me. If Obama had done that, you'd be singing his praises. Politics. Just stinkin politics. Sad in this whole deal where bitterness or whatever it is will not allow people to give credit where it is due.

In the meantime, AOC is now at the forefront of democratic economic ideas. Oh brother.

when I asked you to define ALL you answered with the narrow perception I expected, the narrow american point of view, however in other parts of the world these policies you laud have done damage, but you can laugh that off because you have some extra money

when I asked you to define ALL you answered with the narrow perception I expected, the narrow american point of view, however in other parts of the world these policies you laud have done damage, but you can laugh that off because you have some extra money

Since Trump is the president of the United States, I guess I thought it would be blindingly obvious that I was referring to the American people. That is his first and great priority.

What damage to the rest of the world are you referring to? I find that to be a curious comment coming from the guy who advocated that we adopt a policy of impoverishing Mexico.

That's a fair enough statement as long as you take into account the 9 trillion of national debt Obama added. But it's interesting to me how quickly you love to give Obama credit while, at the same time, refusing to give Trump any credit at all. Stinkin politics. That's all it is. Bitterness.

Make sure you add the Bush Wars into that deficit since he brought that from under the table to the light. Between you and the dufus he has all the credit he needs that he doesn't deserve. LOL at the rate he burns through money he will surpass that 9 trillion especially if you hold your nose and vote him back in. Wonder what you will do then?

LOL at the rate he burns through money he will surpass that 9 trillion

Actually, he won't come close, but his deficit spending should concern everyone. Of course the people who sat by quietly, practically worshiping every move Obama made, are not in a position now to complain without appearing to be enormous hypocrites.

Consistency of belief should be apparent. I was opposed to Obama's deficit spending, and I am opposed to Trump's. I was opposed to Obama's wholehearted support of abortion, and if Trump ever goes in that direction, I will not vote for him under any circumstances. Consistency. You ought to give it a try.


especially if you hold your nose and vote him back in. Wonder what you will do then?

If the dems nominate another titanic loser like HC, then I will once again have no choice. It's like making a choice between having a cold or having cancer. It's so easy a child can do it.

when I asked you to define ALL you answered with the narrow perception I expected, the narrow american point of view, however in other parts of the world these policies you laud have done damage, but you can laugh that off because you have some extra money

No we don't but can generate a few bucks and why are you surprised that capitalist have policies to get money from other people?

capitalist have policies to get money from other people?

Everyone has that policy. Everyone who has a job is trying to get money from someone else in exchange for his labor, skill, knowledge, or whatever. I feel very certain you did that. It has nothing to do with capitalism.

Actually, he won't come close, but his deficit spending should concern everyone. Of course the people who sat by quietly, practically worshiping every move Obama made, are not in a position now to complain without appearing to be enormous hypocrites.

Let's see, almost 4 trillion in 3 years so far, hmm and h
e's already at the debt limit, and if it's not raised or cuts made, we go broke! DEFAULT! Another shut down?


Consistency of belief should be apparent. I was opposed to Obama's deficit spending, and I am opposed to Trump's. I was opposed to Obama's wholehearted support of abortion, and if Trump ever goes in that direction, I will not vote for him under any circumstances. Consistency. You ought to give it a try.

I've been pretty consistent, but not so entrenched I cannot learn and apply new data as it registers. Yes your consistent too so entrenched in your beliefs you dismiss new data so it doesn't register. You could try being more open to different ideas.


If the dems nominate another titanic loser like HC, then I will once again have no choice. It's like making a choice between having a cold or having cancer. It's so easy a child can do it.

Could have went either way in 2016, you won, but get no bragging rights for electing your loser. No I won't vote for your loser.

Let's see, almost 4 trillion in 3 years so far, hmm and he's already at the debt limit, and if it's not raised or cuts made, we go broke! DEFAULT! Another shut down?

I stand corrected. It's worse than I thought. Sometimes I wonder why I vote republican. Of course it's a shame you didn't have this same attitude when Obama was in office.

I hope to some day join a great movement of people who say we will not vote for a person who does not commit to a balanced budget from day one. As to a government shut down, I'm all for it. Better we shut it down in a temporary fashion instead of what lies ahead in the future.


No I won't vote for your loser.

No, you'll vote for an even bigger loser like Biden or Madam Pocahontas.

YEP, or any other democrat. I don't like deficits either but I didn't really like the way Clinton balanced the budget, nor foreseee anyone repeating his effort. He had the advantage of relative peace in the world, but I sight King Reagan's example repeatedly, cut taxes and raise them when neccesary incrementally with a cooperating congress. Man that kind of creative flexibility was really impressive and he deserves credit as did the congress he had. Unfortunately for Obama, he didn't have such a congress, a fall out of the raucous rise of the T Party movement. It was subverted and diluted by repubs regaining power with no inkling of interest of reaching consensus in a bi partisan way, and thwarted every opportunity that came along. Immigration being the chief example off hand. The dufus got that play down pat with the budget deal that included wall money that he canned for whatever reason.

The dufus may be great for you your way or no way right leaners and stumblers, you like hollering bluster blaming and naming but I prefer pragmatism and discussion actually and all the dems running have that. As to debts and deficits nothing wrong with them if they are managed and planned for. Stuff happens in my house and it's needed but you have to have a plan to pay for it and sorry that trickle down from the top is not the way to go without adding a solid revenue stream because the cost of the debt adds more debt, not less, and supply side economics is to dependent on enough growth to pay for it which we have never seen ever. So nice theory, but a lot harder to achieve in the long run to be viable.

Matter of fact, it is a budget killer in the short term. Just my take on it.

you like hollering bluster blaming and naming

You mean like you do?


but I prefer pragmatism and discussion actually and all the dems running have that.

You mean the plan to spend 90 trillion in 20 years to get rid of airplanes and rebuild every building in America?


As to debts and deficits nothing wrong with them if they are managed and planned for.

Well, if you think our 23 tril in debt has been planned for and managed, you are living in a bigger fantasy world than I thought. It amounts to about 180 thousand for every taxpayer.

You mean like you do?

I can hang and bang with the best when its called for, but I am a quiet kind of guy naturally. The dufus brings out the fire in me. So do YOU sometimes.


You mean the plan to spend 90 trillion in 20 years to get rid of airplanes and rebuild every building in America?

She ain't running so what's your problem. Remember what I say about life and BS as applied to you! Go ahead get me fired up! 8)


Well, if you think our 23 tril in debt has been planned for and managed, you are living in a bigger fantasy world than I thought. It amounts to about 180 thousand for every taxpayer.

Never said that! Deficit tax cuts are legalized STEALING with no ROI in site. I'm sure I said that before.

Mr. Obama's description of what constitutes legal asylum.

https://youtu.be/ItXY1l-yB2M

The last I looked the US and Canada was still hammering out an agreement for asylum and I would imagine a treaty agreement with our southern country neighbors would also be required.

Mr. Obama's description of what constitutes legal asylum.

https://youtu.be/ItXY1l-yB2M

Yes the narrow view, stay where you are and wait. Strange, that with such a fair system, millions throughout the world keep leaving their country of origin. Every liberal minded nation should adopt this policy however there are few nations who take refugees voluntarily. Why?

Deficit tax cuts are legalized STEALING with no ROI in site.

How is that different from vastly increasing spending with no method for paying for it? You end up in a hole one way or the other.

Yes the narrow view, stay where you are and wait. Strange, that with such a fair system, millions throughout the world keep leaving their country of origin. Every liberal minded nation should adopt this policy however there are few nations who take refugees voluntarily. Why?

It's such a hassle to treat desperate people with a modicum of dignity, and easier just to dismiss that desperation. The US processes millions of criminals a year, feeds clothes bathes and free tv, move them about the country, in an orderly fashion yet hollers at doing the same for men, women, and children. Such hypocrisy, that they can do for criminals and not refugees and immigrants.

, in an orderly fashion yet hollers at doing the same for men, women, and children. Such hypocrisy, that they can do for criminals and not refugees and immigrants.

Name the country that has accepted as many refugees and immigrants as the United States. Name the country that has accepted half as many, or a third as many.

And that's what you call hypocrisy??? This is the most generous nation on the face of the earth. Far from perfect, but our history has been of bending over backwards to help others, even to the shedding of much American blood.

How is that different from vastly increasing spending with no method for paying for it? You end up in a hole one way or the other.

A clue would be maybe to understand how Clinton balanced the budget during a relative peace time. Of course no one thinks of taxing people to pay for the military, and certainly not those international cheap labor driven corporations. I know of the taxes the rich pay, but if you have 90% of the wealth why is paying 90% of the tax burden so unthinkable?

Where the fight comes is what to cut to pay for whatever, or what to raises taxes on. Maybe a combination of both. Perhaps we could charge those poor states MORE and send them LESS.

Name the country that has accepted as many refugees and immigrants as the United States. Name the country that has accepted half as many, or a third as many.

And that's what you call hypocrisy??? This is the most generous nation on the face of the earth. Far from perfect, but our history has been of bending over backwards to help others, even to the shedding of much American blood.

That's not the issue! How you treat the criminal so well and the traveler so cruel is the issue. Forget what others do! If you cannot lead by a good example then you cannot lead!

and the traveler so cruel is the issue.

Given the choice between being at one of those detention centers versus being in a federal prison, I'll take the detention center every day and twice on Sunday. It's not even a close choice.

Given the choice between being at one of those detention centers versus being in a federal prison, I'll take the detention center every day and twice on Sunday. It's not even a close choice.
Why are those the only two choices?

Why are those the only two choices?

There is another choice; go back where you came from and yet another; don't break the law

Given the choice between being at one of those detention centers versus being in a federal prison, I'll take the detention center every day and twice on Sunday. It's not even a close choice.

Those are not the choices, they are YOUR examples. Do I need to repeat a very simple question? You can feed clothe and house millions of criminals a year, even build new prisons, for profit I may add, and not do the same for a weary traveler, for profit no less? You can refer to your own boble if you wish since you seem to always defer to it on other issues.


There is another choice; go back where you came from and yet another; don't break the law

That's not a choice nor solution and under the law asylum is not illegal. Even if it was the process is for a judge to decide so I ask where are the judges? What's patently illegal in our current situation is the lack of due process afforded under our law established for this situation.

So let's be clear who is really breaking the law and clearly that falls on the ones charged with administering it. No way around that LEGALLY.

That's not the issue! How you treat the criminal so well and the traveler so cruel is the issue.

You presented the choices between the travelers (detention centers) and criminals (prisons). You even restate it when you say, "Do I need to repeat a very simple question? You can feed clothe and house millions of criminals a year, even build new prisons, for profit I may add, and not do the same for a weary traveler, for profit no less?"

If you really believe those prisons are better places than the detention centers, then I think you are poorly informed.

If this was happening under Obama (and it did), then you would be completely quiet. This is just an opportunity for liberals to criticize Trump.

Stinkin politics.

Where the fight comes is what to cut to pay for whatever, or what to raises taxes on. Maybe a combination of both. Perhaps we could charge those poor states MORE and send them LESS.

Anytime you want to get serious about cutting welfare funding and thus payments to our state, then I'm all with you on that. Until then, you might as well not complain about it. You can't have it both ways.

Your doing it again, adding to my simple question with making a difference between a detention center where one is held for futher processing, requires no judge or court order, and a prison that is an end process that does require a judge. It's no wonder you cannot answer the simple question even with consultation of your bible.

Ask Jesus/God/ or whomever your conscious or beliefs guide you to, but stop avoiding a straight answer. Dude this ain't politics so stop making it about politics. Could you kind of hurry up, since of course I have more questions, more facts and revelations to discuss. You know CURRENT EVENTS.

Anytime you want to get serious about cutting welfare funding and thus payments to our state, then I'm all with you on that. Until then, you might as well not complain about it. You can't have it both ways.

Then we disagree again because cutting welfare benefits especially in your state will bring abject poverty to the already impoverished. I believe that is a very cruel path to embark on.

Then we disagree again because cutting welfare benefits especially in your state will bring abject poverty to the already impoverished. I believe that is a very cruel path to embark on.

That's fine, but there's no use in you complaining about the taxing/spending differential in our state or any other. That's the reason it exists.

With a trillion dollar deficit, which is an outrage and a blight on the Trump admin, spending has to be cut. There is no way at all to raise an additional trillion dollars in revenue.

The whole "tax fairness" nonsense being put forward by the dems has no relationship to the truth. The top 1% earn about 20% of the income but pay almost 40% of the taxes. And even if you DOUBLED what is collected in taxes from them, you would not even cut the deficit in half. And then when every democrat candidate for pres has endorsed the idea from Mars known as the Green New Deal, which is the spending plan from hell, there is no path to a balanced budget anywhere is sight.

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2016-update/

If you really believe those prisons are better places than the detention centers, then I think you are poorly informed.
My nephew was in a state prison system for six years. He had a roomy cell all to himself, a cot to sleep on, was allowed out of his cell to eat and socialize (with fellow pod inmates who were RPGers), he attended computer classes offered by the state university, and because of good behavior got a job in the prison kitchen. Sounds like prison beats the detention camps at our southern border.

That's fine, but there's no use in you complaining about the taxing/spending differential in our state or any other. That's the reason it exists.

I don't complain I merely interpret the data with my own twist of derision and sarcasm at YOUR interpretation. The logic does not compute at all if you insist on comparing rich to poor and calling it equitable. Much more accurate to take govt revenues which is calculate yearly against government spending which should also be yearly and ad the interest on the debt. That is the deficit for any given year. You cannot compare the total debt to total revenues because while the debt is constant or RISING, revenues are ESTIMATED going forward. Using this method clear to see that revenues will never overtake the debt without twice the growth we have shown so far which makes a lie of the supply side argument the tax cuts pay for themselves. In addition it also shows the foolishness of investment in the rich as a way to grow the economy which is also a supply side LIE!

I put forth that even Reagan realized this and used taxes as revenues to avoid deficit spending yet he delivered tax cuts at the same time. So I respectfully point out the obvious flaws in your interpretation of the factual data, that while new tax revenues are needed to address the current debts they cannot wipe out the debt, nor should they be expected to, but pay on it yearly as DESIGNED since debt calculus is on a TEN year table. So the trillion bucks of spending is actually and accurately one hundred billion yearly and the tax cuts 1.2 billion a year, which is 2.2 trillion YEARLY of new debt. That leaves you with the choices to raise revenues by cutting spending, or raise taxes or a sensible combination of both. That of course does NOT take account any other spending increases due to unforeseen stuff happening, be it weather, disaster or war. This is why I hinted at how Clinton balanced the budget for new spending as an insight of debt/deficit MANAGEMENT, and how impossible and foolish to balance a budget after deficit funded tax cuts and no GROWTH plan.

Damn repubs! Obvious mismanagement, and or intentional stealing.


With a trillion dollar deficit, which is an outrage and a blight on the Trump admin, spending has to be cut. There is no way at all to raise an additional trillion dollars in revenue.

The blight is giving his friends a lot of money like he said.


The whole "tax fairness" nonsense being put forward by the dems has no relationship to the truth. The top 1% earn about 20% of the income but pay almost 40% of the taxes. And even if you DOUBLED what is collected in taxes from them, you would not even cut the deficit in half. And then when every democrat candidate for pres has endorsed the idea from Mars known as the Green New Deal, which is the spending plan from hell, there is no path to a balanced budget anywhere is sight.

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2016-update/

To be clear the deficit on need be cut by 10% or even less per year to be manageable. Have you ever in your adult life been debt free? You would be alone if you answer yes and no way if you have a mortgage or wealth in the fiscal lingo. Probably pop your head if you read the latest data from THIS year.

Much more accurate to take govt revenues which is calculate yearly against government spending which should also be yearly and ad the interest on the debt. That is the deficit for any given year. You cannot compare the total debt to total revenues because while the debt is constant or RISING, revenues are ESTIMATED going forward. Using this method clear to see that revenues will never overtake the debt without twice the growth we have shown so far which makes a lie of the supply side argument the tax cuts pay for themselves. In addition it also shows the foolishness of investment in the rich as a way to grow the economy which is also a supply side LIE!

I put forth that even Reagan realized this and used taxes as revenues to avoid deficit spending yet he delivered tax cuts at the same time. So I respectfully point out the obvious flaws in your interpretation of the factual data, that while new tax revenues are needed to address the current debts they cannot wipe out the debt, nor should they be expected to, but pay on it yearly as DESIGNED since debt calculus is on a TEN year table. So the trillion bucks of spending is actually and accurately one hundred billion yearly and the tax cuts 1.2 billion a year, which is 2.2 trillion YEARLY of new debt. That leaves you with the choices to raise revenues by cutting spending, or raise taxes or a sensible combination of both. That of course does NOT take account any other spending increases due to unforeseen stuff happening, be it weather, disaster or war. This is why I hinted at how Clinton balanced the budget for new spending as an insight of debt/deficit MANAGEMENT, and how impossible and foolish to balance a budget after deficit funded tax cuts and no GROWTH plan.

Let's simplify all of that. Spending minus tax revenues = budget deficit. Accumulated budget deficits, representing borrowed money, = national debt. With a deficit of a trillion dollars, it is not realistic to think you can raise tax revenue by that much. Spending must be cut.


So I respectfully point out the obvious flaws in your interpretation of the factual data, that while new tax revenues are needed to address the current debts they cannot wipe out the debt, nor should they be expected to, but pay on it yearly as DESIGNED since debt calculus is on a TEN year table. So the trillion bucks of spending is actually and accurately one hundred billion yearly and the tax cuts 1.2 billion a year, which is 2.2 trillion YEARLY of new debt.

Some spending is projected over ten years, but the current budget is for this year only. You are completely incorrect in what you are saying. The budget deficit for this year only is about a trillion dollars. It does not get spread over ten years. The underlined part makes no sense at all. How can a tax cut of 1.2 bil result in over 2 tril in new debt??

As for paying down the debt, in the last forty years, that has occurred in only 3 of those years. Good luck with that.

My nephew was in a state prison system for six years. He had a roomy cell all to himself, a cot to sleep on, was allowed out of his cell to eat and socialize (with fellow pod inmates who were RPGers), he attended computer classes offered by the state university, and because of good behavior got a job in the prison kitchen. Sounds like prison beats the detention camps at our southern border.

I'm not sure how you can make the comparison without having had a nephew in a border detention center. I'm just going on the idea that spending a few weeks in a detention center where things are not perfect but I'm safe and fed versus spending months or years in a federal prison where it is tough beyond description would just seem to be a no-brainer to me.

Fed prison is not a picnic. Try watching this. Twenty minutes long and full of bad language, but you'll think a little differently after watching it. I know I did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I4imzTOpQM

I'm not sure how you can make the comparison without having had a nephew in a border detention center. I'm just going on the idea that spending a few weeks in a detention center where things are not perfect but I'm safe and fed versus spending months or years in a federal prison where it is tough beyond description would just seem to be a no-brainer to me.

Fed prison is not a picnic. Try watching this. Twenty minutes long and full of bad language, but you'll think a little differently after watching it. I know I did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I4imzTOpQM
A FEW WEEKS in a detention center??? SAFE AND FED??? Nirvana for sure.... and now it's FEDERAL prison....

Tal -- That's not a choice nor solution and under the law. Asylum is not illegal. Even if it was the process is for a judge to decide so I ask where are the judges? What's patently illegal in our current situation is the lack of due process afforded under our law established for this situation.
Exactly! This needs to be repeated.

A FEW WEEKS in a detention center??? SAFE AND FED??? Nirvana for sure....

If you have some reliable evidence to the contrary, other than AOC or someone who spoke to someone who spoke to someone, then bring it forward. I mean it. I know there have been some issues, but I haven't seen anything to contradict that the people in the detention centers, on the whole, are not safe and fed. Perhaps it is months rather than weeks, but they are still being fed and housed by the taxpayers of this country. Yesterday the rehab center I help at had Spaghetti-O's for lunch. Things are not wonderful everywhere.


and now it's FEDERAL prison....

It was from the beginning. My original statement: "Given the choice between being at one of those detention centers versus being in a federal prison, I'll take the detention center every day and twice on Sunday."

Politics. I'll say it again. If Obama was still pres, I think you guys would be just fine with the whole deal.

Politics. I'll say it again. If Obama was still pres, I think you guys would be just fine with the whole deal.
Obama as president again??? From your lips to God's ears!

I thought Trump has us swimming in wealth! Spaghetti-Os for lunch??? The insult! Even at our worst lunch at the rehab where I spent nine weeks total, we didn't have that.

I thought Trump has us swimming in wealth! Spaghetti-Os for lunch??? The insult! Even at our worst lunch at the rehab where I spent nine weeks total, we didn't have that.

I'm not sure what your point is. I've been going to this place for over ten years. The food is perfectly acceptable to me and is sometimes fantastic due to the many Christian groups that come out and cook for the forty or more guys. Still waiting on our first atheist support group to come help. Nonetheless, they eat what is set in front of them or do without. Makes it hard for me to feel sorry for anyone who is getting three meals a day free at the expense of the American taxpayer.

And yes, the economy is much better than it was with Obama. Thanks for pointing that out!

Makes it hard for me to feel sorry for anyone who is getting three meals a day free at the expense of the American taxpayer.
I had to pay for my healthcare rehab food. Would you choose Spaghetti-Os?

Guess you didn't notice this was in a sarcasm font, JL: "I thought Trump had us swimming in wealth!"

Would you choose Spaghetti-Os?

I'd sure choose them over going hungry. I ate with them so that was my lunch, too.


Guess you didn't notice this was in a sarcasm font, JL: "I thought Trump had us swimming in wealth!"

Maybe so, but it sure is true. Best unemployment figures in practically forever, and no signs of slowing down yet.

The dufus said he took the money we got from the tariffs and gave them to the farmers....WHA? Anybody else see the stupidity in that statement? Or believe the obvious LIE!

I'd sure choose them over going hungry. I ate with them so that was my lunch, too.
A sympathy lunch.

Maybe so, but it sure is true. Best unemployment figures in practically forever, and no signs of slowing down yet.
All those farmers etc. who got screwed because of the tariffs have to look for work somewhere.

A sympathy lunch.

I was raised that way. Set food in front of you and eat it. Be glad to have it.

I was raised that way. Set food in front of you and eat it. Be glad to have it.
Yup, this PK grew up slurping Spaghetti-Os. The plain ones were the cheapest. Great for toothless old people in healthcare facilities.

a traveller who enters another country illegally is a criminal

Under US law, a judge is the only one with standing to pass sentence. LOL, repubs rail against socialist, communists and holler about the unamericans, unpatriotics, whose illegal whose not, what's illegal, and what's not, like they are entitled to ignore the law. Whatever happened to proving your case in a court of law rather than dictate the outcome you want?

Maybe their case has holes in it, so the hollering is about all they can do hoping the noise will be loud enough to hide the holes. At least that's what the dufus thinks, and repubs follow the liar at their own peril, because if he is who they count on to deliver them from their worst fears, they are in for one huge nightmare. Unfortunately, if re elected, he will bring us all into the nightmare repubs are headed for.

If he is not, he probably goes to jail like the rest of his minions have.

a traveller who enters another country illegally is a criminal
What meanest thou by "traveler" and "illegally"?

What meanest thou by "traveler" and "illegally"?

Are you serious?

Obviously not

I guess not. Strange question.

comment #205 before all the spaghetti-o responses .

I guess not. Strange question.
Nope. Asylum seekers are "travelers." When they set foot in our country, that's not illegal.

wrong
Individuals may apply for asylum at a port of entry without illegally entering the country.Once they cross the border without being granted asylum they are illegals

wrong
Individuals may apply for asylum at a port of entry without illegally entering the country.Once they cross the border without being granted asylum they are illegals

They have to set foot in our country in order to get to that port of entry.

Individuals can apply for asylum anywhere in or out of our country. Can't believe YOU haven't looked up the law Tom.

they can apply after they enter the country ILLEGALLY during hearings to determine if they are eligible or should be deported . That is the f~n loophole that has hundreds of thousands of them attempting it .I disagree with the law . Build the wall or use A-10s on them to prevent this invasion .
The open border people encouraged this crisis with typical radical lefty
Cloward and Piven thinking . You know and I know that the only real purpose of this is to overwhelm the social safety net by granting benefits to more people than the system can provide for . That is why ALL the candidates in the Dem debates raised their hand when asked if they would provide free health care for all illegals . I really don't know who you think you are fooling . Cloward and Pivin outlined this strategergy in 1966 .

Why didn't repubs change the law when they had the votes? Go ahead and say it, they were incompetent, or they think it's a wedge issue to rile up the base. Yeah we need Mitch to give us an excuse why that didn't happen and why you now blame dems and liberals for that open borders BS. As JL says nothing but election year politics.

We both know undocumented migrants can get work, and do, just ask the dufus how many low wage workers he wants.

I dont give Repubs a pass . Part of the reason for this is that there are too many Chamber of Commerce Repubs who only think of cheap labor. These illegals take jobs from American minorities ,legal Hispanic African American Americans who made a big investment in studying a trade . So go ahead and continue looking out for the interests of the illegals over working Americans .

Well if you're going to be a nation of laws seems you should follow that law to me. Going around or against the law is a definition of criminality which is illegal. If 90% of migrants are adjudicated in court and deported then the law works and that's in our interests.

Hey did I just describe the dufus, he thinks he is above the law, and those men, women, and children who walked miles for safety and security and yes freedom are rapists, criminals and terrorists, which we know are LIES. How is that in our interests? Capitalists don't believe in the law or something?

What a week for Trump! He was against it, then for it, than against it again - all within 24 hours. His head must be spinning. The oh so brave Republicans remain silent as always, even in the face of a clear evil. About 4 spoke out.

The oh so brave Republicans remain silent as always, even in the face of a clear evil. About 4 spoke out.

About as brave and silent as the dems were when Obama had the VA scandal, the IRS scandal, the Benghazi disaster, and the Clinton email scandal. No one was ever held responsible for any of them.

Politics. Stinkin politics.

About as brave and silent as the dems were when Obama had the VA scandal, the IRS scandal, the Benghazi disaster, and the Clinton email scandal. No one was ever held responsible for any of them.


The VA scandal had little/nothing to do with Obama. In fact, he investigated and made improvements to the degree that both Reps and Dems agreed that VA service was about the same as private hospital service.

The IRS scandal was even less. The evidence showed that both left and right orgs were looked at. The investigation, promoted by Republicans, was ended and even Trump did not re-open it.

Benghazi has been done to death here and elsewhere. After 8+ investigations, no fault of HC was determined. But the loony right just won't give it up.

Clinton emails were released through the Russians after Trump made a public request to them. Trump says he was joking, but the timing makes him a liar, as usual.

You end by complaining no one was ever held responsible for them. But you are blaming the Dems silence??

I'm surprised you didn't bring up the Uranium business - a favorite of the loonies. Have they finally given up on that one? (Rhetorical).

After two years and millions of dollars, Mueller's team of liberal democrats could not demonstrate there was any collusion between the Russkies and the Trump team. At least we do know that there was a VA scandal, there was a Clinton email scandal, and there were four Americans needlessly killed in Benghazi, and that no one was ever held accountable for any of it. And now we have the silliness of Trump and four pathetic congresswomen.

Maybe it's time to move on and try to solve some real problems like skyrocketing medical costs, the budget deficit, and how to secure the southern border.

After two years and millions of dollars, Mueller's team of liberal democrats could not demonstrate there was any collusion between the Russkies and the Trump team. At least we do know that there was a VA scandal, there was a Clinton email scandal, and there were four Americans needlessly killed in Benghazi, and that no one was ever held accountable for any of it. And now we have the silliness of Trump and four pathetic congresswomen.

Maybe it's time to move on and try to solve some real problems like skyrocketing medical costs, the budget deficit, and how to secure the southern border.

Mueller's a Repub. Liberal Democrats? Did you mean investigative attorneys and FBI investigators? "Liberal Democrats" is right out of the mouth of Trump. So you are charging Mueller with bias? What's the evidence?

Mueller clearly pointed out the attempts of the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election - probably swinging the election to Trump, Russia's choice. I can't prove that, but it seems pretty clear based on the attempts of the Russians to make connections to Trump's campaign and their obvious efforts at Facebook and other internet areas. Read the report.

Mueller showed at least 10 instances of obstructions of justice by Trump. They're as plain as the nose on your face. Stay tuned. Trump will be perp-walking January 20, 2021.

Liberal Democrats? Did you mean investigative attorneys and FBI investigators? "Liberal Democrats" is right out of the mouth of Trump.

It was documented by the Wash Post that the people Mueller hired were democrat party donors. I've never met a conservative democrat, so that they are liberal is practically a matter of definition. I am not suggesting they were dishonest. In fact, it is just the opposite. They had ample reason to turn over every rock possible to try and demonstrate guilt and were unable, so let's move on. Enough is enough.



Mueller clearly pointed out the attempts of the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election - probably swinging the election to Trump, Russia's choice. I can't prove that,

"Probably swinging" and "I can't prove that" demonstrate why we need to move on. The dems whined and whined until the Mueller probe was started, confident it would accomplish their wishes. Now that their hopes have been dashed, they insist on yet more public hearings. It's all stinkin politics. That the party of Hillary Clinton would pretend to be outraged about corrupt politics is quite a scene.

There is a large forest of other issues that need attention. I've had it with this nonsense. The dems were not elected to do this. Move on and try to tackle the truly difficult issues, hopefully not led by your four inept, amateur congresswomen.