Patterico's Pontifications

3/31/2021

President Biden And The Border Crisis

Filed under: General — Dana @ 12:32 pm



[guest post by Dana]

I know a number of media outlets have published stories about the media visiting the detention center in Donna, Texas. I decided to bring to your attention CBS New’s Homeland Security reporter Nicole Sganga’s blunt description about what she saw when she visited the facility:

Reporters toured the temporary border facility in Donna, TX today.

The Biden admin allowed pooled coverage for the first time.

We saw a “pod” designed for 32 migrant children under CDC guidelines now holding 615.

The facility is at 1700% pandemic capacity.

Unaccompanied migrant children ages 4 months – 9 years old are now being held in the recreational area around the clock because there’s just no room for them in the dormitory areas.

The outdoor recreational area is being used to stage COVID testing before unaccompanied migrant children are transferred to HHS facilities.

We counted more than 50 COVID positive (and largely asymptomatic) kids waiting for their quarantined bus right next to a soccer game.

More than 2000 migrants at the temporary processing facility in Donna, TX have been here for over the legal limit of 72 hours.

Senior CBP officials told reporters more than 1200 migrants are processed and waiting to be transferred to HHS facilities. HHS has nowhere to put them.

At least 39 unaccompanied migrant children have been in the temporary processing facility for more than 15 DAYS, Acting Executive Officer for RGV Operational Programs Division, Oscar Escamilla, told reporters.

The legal limit is 72 hours.

Raul Ortiz, Deputy Chief of U.S. Border Patrol, told reporters CBP agents now see “self-separation” by families expelled under Title 42.

Unaccompanied migrant children re-cross the border without their parents so they can seek legal asylum within the United States.

Deputy Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol, Raul Ortiz, told reporters @CBP anticipates *more than 1 million encounters* of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border in FY 2021 alone.

It cost $6.1 million to stand up the processing facility in Donna, TX, according to Acting Executive Officer, Oscar Escamilla.

It should cost $6 million per month for @CBP to run the facility at its 250-person capacity.

It’s so overcrowded that it costs $16 million per month.

Pool reporters stumbled upon 27 unaccompanied migrant children and young families outside of Mission, TX.

One mother of a two-month old recounted to @cbsmireya how she fled Guatemala in a raft because there was just too much violence and poverty to stay.

Reporters passed the Anzalduas International Bridge in Mission, TX, where dozens of migrants still appeared to be assembled underneath.

We asked to stop, but were not permitted.

Border agents told us @CBP does not intend to hold migrants there for more than a couple of hours.

(Make sure to click on the link to her Twitter feed to see accompanying photos.)

Another problem reported by the AP is that the US is waiving FBI checks on caregivers at new migrant facilities:

The Biden administration is not requiring FBI fingerprint background checks of caregivers at its rapidly expanding network of emergency sites to hold thousands of immigrant teenagers, alarming child welfare experts who say the waiver compromises safety.

In the rush to get children out of overcrowded and often unsuitable Border Patrol sites, President Joe Biden’s team is turning to a measure used by previous administrations: tent camps, convention centers and other huge facilities operated by private contractors and funded by U.S. Health and Human Services. In March alone, the Biden administration announced it will open eight new emergency sites across the Southwest adding 15,000 new beds, more than doubling the size of its existing system.

These emergency sites don’t have to be licensed by state authorities or provide the same services as permanent HHS facilities. They also cost far more, an estimated $775 per child per day.

And to staff the sites quickly, the Biden administration has waived vetting procedures intended to protect minors from potential harm.

Staff and volunteers directly caring for children at new emergency sites don’t have to undergo FBI fingerprint checks, which use criminal databases not accessible to the public and can overcome someone changing their name or using a false identity.

Laura Nodolf, the district attorney in Midland, Texas, where HHS opened an emergency site this month, said that without fingerprint checks, “we truly do not know who the individual is who is providing direct care.”

“That’s placing the children under care of HHS in the path, potentially, of a sex offender,” Nodolf said. “They are putting these children in a position of becoming potential victims.”

Unsurprisingly, President Biden’s approval numbers on immigration have slipped from when he took office in January, according to a new NPR/Marist Poll released yesterday:

Just a third of Americans questioned in an NPR/Marist poll released on Tuesday say they approve of Biden’s handling of the issue of immigration, with 53% saying they disapprove of his performance. While two-thirds of Democrats say they approve of how Biden has handled the issue in the first two months of his presidency, approval plunges to 27% among independents and to just 5% among Republicans…

The poll indicates that Biden’s overall approval on immigration is down four points from late January, when it stood at 38%.

Pushback from the Democrat Party seems to be coming from the progressive wing:

Biden is also facing incoming fire from the Democratic Party’s progressive left, which is increasingly frustrated with the slow progress so far by the president to deliver what he promised on the 2020 campaign trail – a more humane immigration system than the restrictive policies under former President Donald Trump’s administration.

As a reminder, during his campaign for the presidency, Joe Biden’s goals for immigration included:

The challenges we face will not be solved by a constitutionally dubious “national emergency” to build a wall, by separating families, or by denying asylum to people fleeing persecution and violence. Addressing the Trump-created humanitarian crisis at our border, bringing our nation together, reasserting our core values, and reforming our immigration system will require real leadership and real solutions. Biden is prepared on day one to deliver both.

As president, Biden will forcefully pursue policies that safeguard our security, provide a fair and just system that helps to grow and enhance our economy, and secure our cherished values. He will:

Take urgent action to undo Trump’s damage and reclaim America’s values
Modernize America’s immigration system
Welcome immigrants in our communities
Reassert America’s commitment to asylum-seekers and refugees
Tackle the root causes of irregular migration
Implement effective border screening

–Dana

133 Responses to “President Biden And The Border Crisis”

  1. A crisis, no matter how you look at it. And a heartbreaking one at that.

    Dana (fd537d)

  2. I predict Dr. Jill won’t visit a migrant children’s facility wearing a “I really don’t care do u?” jacket.

    Dave (1bb933)

  3. I predict Dr. Jill won’t visit a migrant children’s facility wearing a “I really don’t care do u?” jacket.

    Dave (1bb933) — 3/31/2021 @ 12:46 pm

    I doubt she visits at all. Too much work making sure the Emperor keeps his clothes on.

    Hoi Polloi (2f1acd)

  4. There’s nothing “heartbreaking” about this.

    Never forget: it is the ‘policy’ of America’s Swamp Party Royalists to shoot United States citizens – including women and veterans – “breaking in” to an empty corridor in the U.S. Capitol while welcoming illegal migrants, ridded with Covid 19 amidst a global pandemic, literally “breaking in” to the United States proper by assaulting the border– with free food, medical, shelter and, in San Diego, free education– no less.

    Those are not “American values.”

    President Plagiarist: you bought him; you own him.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  5. It *is* heartbreaking.

    It’s also outrageous that the cartels are taking advantage of this.

    Hate on Trump all you want, but at least he had competent policies at the border/immigration. In Biden’s zeal to be the “not-Trump”, he reversed all the gains and is complicit in this tragedy.

    whembly (a23745)

  6. @5. Don’t be surprised if a little Xi and Vlad laundered cash isn’t financing the invasion.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  7. The despiration of families who try to cross as a group, then send their kids in by themselves is what hits me. What this tells me is that the countries they are fleeing are failed states, in that they do not serve their citizens in any meaningful way. The Spanish colonial experience is a few huge landowners on top and everyone else in poverty. I don’t see how we can tolerate this for much longer. Either they come here for our law and our opportunity, or we export our law and our opportunity there.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  8. @7. Plenty of desperate families– United States citizens- in the U.S. as is.

    Zero sympathy for illegal migrants.

    Piss on them.

    For starts…

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  9. Looking at the past numbers, I don’t know why there weren’t facilities and staffing already. There very definitely should have been, but apparently not. Here are links for the numbers in the last few years (they are delineated by month, so an apples to apples comparison is possible:

    2018
    2019
    2020
    2021

    2019 was particularly god-awful. Why hasn’t the infrastructure been in place?

    Nic (896fdf)

  10. 9. Denial.

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

  11. His approval on COVID is becaause he stayed the course. On Immigration he went his own direction and bleeped the pooch.
    On the plus side Kamala’s laugh… though bad, and poorly timed, is light years better than Hillary’s

    steveg (02d731)

  12. What this tells me is that the countries they are fleeing are failed states, in that they do not serve their citizens in any meaningful way.

    That describes most of the world. It is NOT the responsibility of the U.S. to take in anyone who isn’t satisfied with his home country. Likewise, it is NOT the duty of the U.S. to “fix” the countries these people hail from.

    If all the unsatisfied people come to the U.S., who is going to agitate for change at the grassroots level in these countries? Let’s stop acting as a pressure valve.

    norcal (01e272)

  13. I love this statement of what Biden will do:

    Tackle the root causes of irregular migration

    In other words, he’s going to transform the Third World into the First World!

    norcal (01e272)

  14. > Zero sympathy for illegal migrants.

    > Piss on them.

    Desperate people, trying to find a better life and an end to their desperation, are still human beings, and are still worthy of respect and compassion.

    We don’t have to let them in. But this rhetoric is monstrous.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  15. >2019 was particularly god-awful. Why hasn’t the infrastructure been in place?

    Because nobody wanted to pay for it or organize it.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  16. Norcal, at 12: on what basis do you believe that they have any power to bring about change in the countries they are fleeing?

    aphrael (4c4719)

  17. > Zero sympathy for illegal migrants.

    > Piss on them.

    Desperate people, trying to find a better life and an end to their desperation, are still human beings, and are still worthy of respect and compassion.

    We don’t have to let them in. But this rhetoric is monstrous.

    Totally agree. To not have an understanding of the desperation so many of these people are experiencing to send their kids across the border is astonishing. For a parent to push their kids over the border in hopes of a better life is a desperation I’ve never experienced. But as a parent, it wrenches my heart.

    Dana (fd537d)

  18. In other words, he’s going to transform the Third World into the First World!
    norcal (01e272) — 3/31/2021 @ 4:21 pm

    Gas up the Abrams tanks – it’s time to build nations!

    Hoi Polloi (b28058)

  19. Norcal, at 12: on what basis do you believe that they have any power to bring about change in the countries they are fleeing?

    aphrael (4c4719) — 3/31/2021 @ 5:23 pm

    Agitate, advocate, protest, etc. India, South Korea, Taiwan, and Chile were all poor countries who either overcame colonial masters or transitioned from authoritarian governments to democratic ones.

    norcal (01e272)

  20. Democratic and more prosperous.

    norcal (01e272)

  21. @12. It is NOT the responsibility of the U.S. to take in anyone who isn’t satisfied with his home country. Likewise, it is NOT the duty of the U.S. to “fix” the countries these people hail from.

    Bingo.

    There the United Nations And the OA. Use it.

    _____

    @14. Desperate people, trying to find a better life and an end to their desperation, are still human beings, and are still worthy of respect and compassion. We don’t have to let them in. But this rhetoric is monstrous.

    Rubbish.

    Point is we DO let them in- and we’re being suckered by it. “Desperate people” have existed since time began. And the United States is more than willing to consider a welcome for these people to apply for entry LEGALLY.

    This ‘storm the border’ crap is sucker bait; and a warfare tactic. Where do you draw the line if not at the nation’s border? Every had fires started up in the hills near yor home by illegals who’ve siphoned gasoline out of your vehicles to light fires at night? Or rifle your mail looking for checks or cash? The list of burdens is endless on communities burdened with these criminals. These people are not onl deseae’ they’re criminally vicious.

    You can’t be a proponent of ‘law and order’ and coddle this behavior. It only encourages it. If you do, they’ll keep coming illegally–you your community $$ will pay for it. Hell, what makes you think Xi or Vlad are fronting $ so these people can assault our borders.

    Wholly support legal immigration; but illegal migrants crashing the border– no friggng way. Piss on them. Dump them back into the Rio Grande…

    For starts.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  22. ^@21. UN and OAS.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  23. @17. No sympathy.

    They’re being used.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  24. Another mass shooting tonight- Orange, CA.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  25. democrats only see this as a crisis if each and every migrant isn’t eventually allowed to vote

    JF (6fcdbe)

  26. President Trump had the correct policy on protecting our border and stopping the invasion from the south. But he had mean tweets so he had to go.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  27. . But this rhetoric is monstrous.

    Monstrous rhetoric is necessary ti keep people’s consciences quiet.

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

  28. If not monstrous rhetoric, ignorance about it.

    But the restrictions are not content with keeping most American citizens unaware.

    Possibly their goal is to eliminate or minimize any kind of economic help for American citizens because on what is that based on? Vote buying? They say so.

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

  29. @29. We’re in San Diego, Sammy- and up to our armpits with it.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  30. All that was required was to enforce our laws – and this would be the problem – that never was.
    Instead, sanctuary cities –> sanctuary counties –> sanctuary states –> sanctuary country –> failed country.

    By ignoring our Constitution and the Rule of Law – we are enabling the 3rd worlding of the United States.

    Here is a letter I wrote to the Editor of the California Lawyer Magazine in August of 2008.
    _____________________

    letters_callaw@dailyjournal.com [August, 14, 2008]

    Letter to the Editor-California Lawyer:

    Thomas Brom’s “Let Them In, Over Taken By Events – O-B-E” [August 2008] is spin. Spin out of control. First, America already generously Let’s Them In, granting legal resident status and naturalized citizenship every year, to about 2.5 million immigrants. Significantly more than any other nation.

    Second, Mr. Brom’s “Let Them In” theme reminded me of the callous quip about a woman getting raped: “Hey, why fight it, just sit back, relax and enjoy it.” That theory’s a non-starter, readily proven again by the 1993 rape, then murder, of Jennifer Ertman (14) and Elizabeth Pena (16), by illegal alien gang member Jose Ernesto Medellin (now 33). Texas just executed him. More recent, there’s SF’s triple murder of the Bologna family in June 2008, LA’s murder of Jamiel Shaw, Jr., in March 2008, and Newark’s execution-style murders of three college students in August 2007. (Illustrative, not exhaustive.) All the product of insane sanctuary city policies coddling and harboring convicted criminal illegal aliens. City, county, state and fed officials all have blood on their hands.
    Third, Mr. Brom’s piece referred to three books advocating open borders, published in 2007-8. I call Mr. Brom and raise him: Michelle Malkin’s Invasion (2002), Victor Davis Hanson’s Mexifornia: A State of Becoming (2003) and Pat Buchanan’s State of Emergency (2006). Fourth, what happened to – the Rule of Law? That America is a nation of laws, not men. That no man is above the law, and that’s what separates America from the rest of the world. Let them in? Open borders? Strange arguments coming from a lawyers’ magazine, but guess we’re just living in the world of Superman Bizarro.

    Fifth, we have not been O-B-E, but in fact have had decades of deceit, denial, dysfunction and dereliction of duty (maybe by design NAFTA, NAU, SPP), from all three branches of our federal government. Example: Plyler v. Doe, 457 US 202 (1982), a 5/4 Brennan opinion that admitted the fed’s total failure on illegal immigration, flew in the face of Fong Yu Ting (cited in Brom’s piece, but curiously absent from Plyler), opened the floodgates (see fnt. 2 in Plyler dissent, estimating 3-12 million illegal aliens as of 1981), and denied Texas the natural law remedy of self help. Then California’s Prop 187, torpedoed by a single federal judge. Example: the 1986 bi-partisan Simpson-Mizzoli bill that graciously gave amnesty to 3 million+ illegal aliens, and promised American citizens that it would be – a one-time fix. Can you say Shamnesty? Because that was a fraud, fixed nothing and spawned another 12-20 million+ illegals. Example: the recent 5/4 USSC opinions of Boumediene v. Bush and Dada v. Mukasey, foolishly giving more rights and opening further our courts, to terrorist combatants and illegals, thus making even longer ques for Americans to use their own courts. (See “[Fed] Circuit Judges Decry Immigration Case ‘Tsunami’” by Tony Mauro, 8/12/08 Legal Times and “New Nightmare Census Projections Reveal CHAIN MIGRATION Still Choking Our Future” by Roy Beck, 8/14/08 NumbersUSA.) Example: The dereliction of Presidents Carter to G.W. Bush on this issue, most notably their failure to prosecute cheating employers who hire illegals and refuse to use E-Verify.

    Separation of powers, the so-called checks & balances? Phooey! The Rule of Law? Phooey! We are trillions in debt, yet the politicos and judges never ask, who or how we will pay for their frolics. We get the shaft from all three branches, plus we get to pay the “check” for the actually not so cheaper labor. The same is true for too many state, county and city governments/ officials (sanctuary cities); the media (Mr. Brom’s own “It’s why an editor… may choose to bury a story rather than put it on the front page.”); and, the big corp bandits & pirates (that out-source American jobs, hire the illegals and push for more H-1B visas to in-source more foreign workers). The Dems want more voters; the Repubs (and US Chamber of Commerce) want cheap labor. It can be argued, we are well down the road to anarchy. (See HBO’s “The Second Civil War” (1997).) But the Will of the People has always been clear: STOP IT! Most recently rising up to stop the bogus bi-partisan “comprehensive” shamnesty bill. Yet all ever required was leadership and integrity. To simply apply reason, enforce our existing laws, and follow the advice of Deputy Barney Fife (of Andy of Mayberry): “Nip it. Nip it. Nip it in the bud.” The situation then would have been – the problem that never was.

    But that takes courage. Instead, our politicos have chosen to pick the low hanging fruit, and to come up with one gimmick, scam, scheme and bogus compromise, after another. We must look in the mirror. We must ask: Are we still capable of governing ourselves? Because at present, America has no real Rule of Law – with 12-20 million illegal aliens, it would be foolish to argue otherwise.  Fact is, everything has been reduced to politics. Because if baseball used to be America’s pastime, it can be readily argued that today, our pastime now is – lying, cheating, stealing & spin. And it’s everywhere. And it’s destroying our American constitution, country, communities, culture and courts. And it’s killing us.

    Open borders – NO! Enforce our laws – YES! Si se puede!
    ___________________________________
    My name is Gary L. Zerman. I am a licensed California attorney. You have my permission to print/publish my above letter. GLZ.
    ____________________________________
    California Lawyer called me after I submitted my letter to confirm that I was the author and advised they were considering publishing it; they eventually elected not to publish the letter.
    Here is the link to “LET THEM IN – Three New Books Argue That Open Borders Serve The National Interest” by Thomas Brom, from his monthly column “Full Disclosure”, August 2008 issue California Lawyer Magazine. http://www.callawyer.com/index.cfm?NewIssueDate=08-01-08 – end –

    Gary L. Zerman (a1521c)

  31. Here is a follow up to #31.

    BREAKING: Footage Shows Migrants, Children Held Under Bridge Enduring Inhumane Conditions In Makeshift Processing Center At Southern Border
    by Project Veritas

    https://www.infowars.com/posts/breaking-footage-shows-migrants-children-held-under-bridge-enduring-inhumane-conditions-in-makeshift-processing-center-at-southern-border/

    Liberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.

    Gary L. Zerman (a1521c)

  32. Likewise, it is NOT the duty of the U.S. to “fix” the countries these people hail from.

    Not all of them, certainly, but certainly Guatemala more than Afghanistan. Consider it the “Dormant Monroe Doctrine”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  33. In the past, the US has had no problem sending in Marines to prop up monstrous Central American regimes to the benefit of American resource companies. We should be using out influence there, and our investments, to make Honduras, Guatemala, etc, places where people aren’t desperate.

    What exactly is the difference between people fleeing Cuba in leaky boats (who then have an absolute right of entry) and those walking with their kids from Honduras to our border, through GKW danger on the way, in an uncertain hope of entry? Cuba sucks, but Guatemala and Honduras seem to suck worse.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  34. BTW, I am not arguing for open borders. I am arguing for changing the conditions that drive people here from places they can walk from.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  35. DCSCA, it’s possible to turn them away without pissing on them, and it’s possible to recognize them as desperate humans taking crazy risks in search of a better life without saying we have to allow them into the country.

    Mentally dehumanizing them is evil.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  36. I am tempted to say the same thing, inspired by Ludacris, to DCSCA as I was to Victor Davis Hanson after reading his weekly columns, but who the hell should leave climactic paradise on earth?

    urbanleftbehind (08db65)

  37. 31.

    All that was required was to enforce our laws – and this would be the problem – that never was.

    what gives you the notion that it is possible to enforce such a law> It never happened. Only war or an iron curtain with the risk of death for border crossing can more or less enforce it. Do you have anby examples anywhere in the world where such a law was enforced?
    Instead, sanctuary cities –> sanctuary counties –> sanctuary states –> sanctuary country –> failed country. That doesn’t say much for the free market.

    Letting people out of jail can damage a country. Not a million or two peaceful people. Less than 1%.

    By ignoring our Constitution and the Rule of Law – we are enabling the 3rd worlding of the United States.

    Wait a second. Who’s ignoring the constitution?

    The Tenth amendment says:

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

    And anti-immigration laws are not in the article 1 section 8 enumerated powers of the federal government.

    Therefore such power belongs to the states.

    Furthermore, the constitution specifically describes it as a state power in Article I, Section 9, Clause 1:

    The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

    Congress was only granted power over naturalization, and that was probably why in the 1850s no national restrictions pm immigration was proposed by the so-called “Know nothing” (American) party.

    In the same way, Congress only has power over bankruptcy, but not contracts

    There is also the power to regulate foreign commerce, and there’s national defense – we can say the border. But internal enforcement? Where do you get that from?

    Sanctuary states? What gives Congress the right to overrule a state in this matter??

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

  38. @36. No, it’s not. The evil is breaking the law and breaking in to the U.S. ILLEGALLY in the first place.

    It’s foolish to believe these people are so docile, so naïve or desperate as to resort to this. In fact, they’re pretty damn savvy; motivated to break the law, clever, and know who to contact and how– and WHEN to make the ‘run for the border.’ And President Plagiarist’s passive position isn’t helping.

    Again, where do you draw the line if not at the border? The U.S. is more than willing to consider welcoming individuals who apply for entry LEGALLY.

    This ‘storm the border’ crap is sucker bait; and a warfare tactic. Ever had fires started up in the hills near your home by illegals who’ve siphoned $4.50/gal., gasoline out of your vehicles overnight to light campfires? Or rifle your mail looking to steal checks or cash? Or swipe tools out of your yard in the darkness of night? The list of burdens is endless on American communities burdened with the invasion of these criminals. These people are not only diseased, they’re criminally vicious as well if you catch or confront them. They’re ‘here’ and once so, are defiant, know they won’t be tagged, bagged and sent back out.

    ‘Folks’ on this blog have been railing about the failure of our institutions enforcing ‘law and order.’ Well, securing the borders of the United States is pretty basic law and order stuff. You can’t be an advocate for ‘law and order’ and coddle- or worse, encourage or make excuses for– this illegal behavior in any way, shape or form.

    Never forget: it is the ‘policy’ of America’s Swamp Party Royalists to shoot United States citizens – including women and veterans – “breaking in” to an empty corridor in the U.S. Capitol while welcoming illegal migrants, ridded with Covid 19 amidst a global pandemic, literally “breaking in” to the United States proper by assaulting the border– with free food, medical attention, shelter and now, in San Diego, free education– no less. While American kids in San Diego, U.S citizens, still can’t get in-person schooling due to Covid. And as of last night, over 80 of those illegal migrants shipped to SD [eating, sleeping an cared for better than many American seniors and homeless U.S. veterans BTW] have tested positive for Covid– and now get the freebies.

    Wholly support legal immigration but not illegal migrants storming the border. It’s stupid policy. If anything illegal migrants deserve the same “welcome” for ‘breaking in’ to the United States proper as the “welcome” Alisha Babbitt, a U.S. citizen, woman and veteran, received ‘breaking in’ to an empty corridor of the U.S. Capitol. You can bet your ass if these people were storming the halls of Congress and not American neighborhoods 2,000 miles away, they would, too.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  39. @37. See #39.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  40. If the United States does not fix countries like…China, they will cause trouble later. They could, at a minimum, spread disease. It may be impossible to fix, but then it is impossible to avoid trouble. And not just directly from China.

    The fact is, opportunities to do something about China may arise and they should be taken advantage of, if the opportunity can be recognized.

    Meanwhile officials in China should be reminded that the system in place will not last forever, and even if it lasts it will not reward loyalty, and we can look forward to a successor of Xi Jin Ping delivering a secret speech.

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

  41. People can do bad things and still be *people* and still be deserving of sympathy.

    People can break the law and still be *people* and still be deserving of sympathy.

    It’s funny to me. I’m being very clear here that I’m not saying that we need to admit them into the country, or advocating any particular policy for how to deal with their presence.

    All i’m saying is that rhetorically pissing on them and dehumanizing them is *in and of itself* bad behavior.

    The lives you are describing are miserable lives. What must have come before, for *these lives* to be an improvement?

    aphrael (4c4719)

  42. @42. These ‘folks’ know what they’re doing; they’re breaking the law: illegally breaking into the United States of America is the ‘bad behavior’ in question.

    No sympathy.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  43. Why does breaking the law render someone unworthy of sympathy, in your mind?

    Does this apply to *all* laws, or just *some* laws?

    aphrael (4c4719)

  44. @44. =sigh= ‘Folks’ on this blog have been railing about the failure of our institutions enforcing ‘law and order.’ Well, securing the borders of the United States is pretty basic law and order stuff. You can’t be an advocate for ‘law and order’ and coddle- or worse, encourage or make excuses for– this illegal behavior in any way, shape or form.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  45. You – Patterico et al – were hellbent on getting rid of Orange Man Bad, and you are to blame for this idiocy. Suck on it a while.

    [Suck on being banned from the site, Gravel. – JVW]

    Gravel (6d804d)

  46. For a parent to push their kids over the border in hopes of a better life is a desperation I’ve never experienced. But as a parent, it wrenches my heart.

    Legal vs. Illegal:

    The latest ‘viral video’ of two kids from Ecuador being dropped by smugglers -not parents- over the 14 foot high border fence near El Paso, complete w/a satchel containing the children’s passports and a cellphone, is the problem in a nutshell. Interviewed on Fox by Cavuto, the BPO said the kids are fine but preliminary investigations, via the cellphone and the passport data, officials discovered the mother is in… New York.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  47. President Trump had the correct policy on protecting our border and stopping the invasion from the south. But he had mean tweets so he had to go.

    The current surge of unaccompanied minors started while Trump was still in office.

    Dave (1bb933)

  48. DCSCA, you ignored my question, so i’ll put it to you again.

    You are arguing that these children and their families are unworthy of sympathy because they’ve broken the law in coming here.

    So i’m asking, *why* does the act of breaking the law render someone per se unworthy of sympathy in your view?

    I’m also asking, is *anyone* who breaks the law unworthy of sympathy, in your view? Or just people who break some laws?

    Your response is to rail against coddling, encouraging, or making excuses for illegal behavior.

    But I’m not asking you to do that. I’m asking you to explain the reasons why, for you, lawbreaking renders someone unworthy of sympathy *per se*, and to explain how that is or isn’t confined in your mind.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  49. My good friend aphrael wrote:

    Zero sympathy for illegal migrants.

    > Piss on them.

    Desperate people, trying to find a better life and an end to their desperation, are still human beings, and are still worthy of respect and compassion.

    We don’t have to let them in. But this rhetoric is monstrous.

    This is the part of being a conservative no one wants to admit, but is absolutely necessary: to be a conservative, you have to be willing to be an [insert slang term for the rectum here]. You have to be willing to say, “No!”, even to the suffering, even to those in need, even to those in pitiable plights.

    When we tell the illegal immigrants that no, they can’t come in, does it really matter whether we say it nicely, or put it the way DCSCA put it? No is still no.

    Illegal migrants minors in ‘cages’? That’s designed to pull at your heartstrings, because it’s designed to get you to say yes, they can come in. The answer has to be no, and being a nice guy, not being willing to be an [insert slang term for the rectum here], weakens the resolve to do the right thing and say, “No!”

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  50. Mr M wrote:

    BTW, I am not arguing for open borders. I am arguing for changing the conditions that drive people here from places they can walk from.

    I’m the guy who lives in eastern Kentucky, and I can see, with my own eyes, that the conditions that drive people from Guatemala and Honduras are conditions we haven’t been able to completely fix even in the United States! There are plenty of American citizens who live it deep, deep poverty, plenty of Americans who live in absolute shacks, and we haven’t been able to change those conditions here.

    This is a photo of President Johnson, in 1964, near Beattyville, Kentucky, when he declared his ‘war on poverty.’ You see that house he used as a setting? That ain’t brick, but a heavy tarpaper made to look like brick siding, and there are homes all over Lee and Owsley and Floyd counties that look like that today. Really, with the slow death of the coal industry, things have gotten worse, not better.

    If we can’t change those conditions in the United States, how the f(ornicate) are we going to change them in Latin America?

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  51. @49. Again, #45 “answers your question.”

    You keep seeking to excuse the inexcusable.

    ‘Unworthy of sympathy’…

    No doubt good hearted robbers break into banks and steal out of ‘desperation’ too. And Josef no doubt loved daughter Svetlana while Adolf adored his Blondi … and so on and so on…

    Piss on ’em.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  52. I cannot post photos on this site, but this tweet from me shows a house, not that far from my own, which is occupied by the owner, a guy named Steve, not a squatter. He actually does have running water there, but no electricity. He heats his home in the winter with a wood stove. He has no vehicle, and I see him, almost daily, walking down a county highway.

    Click on the photo in the tweet to see it in expanded form. The cage on the immediate left; Steve has a pig living in that.

    These are the things that I see with my own brown eyes, every day. They’re things I had kind of forgotten when I lived in cities in Virginia and Delaware and Pennsylvania, and they’re things that our oh-so-noble elites don’t know about or don’t want to know about, but they’re there. I really don’t want to hear that we need to fix things abroad when our own American citizens live like this.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  53. “While Democrats argue the surge began before President Joe Biden took office, Republicans argue Biden’s welcoming policies are to blame. A rise in border apprehensions did begin prior to the election under then-President Donald Trump. But the increase in unaccompanied children has spiked significantly in the first full month of the Biden administration.'” -source, https://www.factcheck.org/2021/03/the-facts-on-the-increase-in-illegal-immigration/

    OTOH, always; Reaganomics:

    A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants

    As the nation’s attention turns back to the fractured debate over immigration, it might be helpful to remember that in 1986, Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. It was sold as a crackdown: There would be tighter security at the Mexican border, and employers would face strict penalties for hiring undocumented workers [LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.]

    But the bill also made any immigrant who’d entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty — a word not usually associated with the father of modern conservatism.

    In his renewed push for an immigration overhaul this week, President Obama called for Republican support for a bill to address the growing population of illegal immigrants in the country. This time, however, Republicans know better than to tread near the politically toxic A-word.

    Part of this aversion is due to what is widely seen as the failure of Reagan’s 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. However, one of the lead authors of the bill says that unlike most immigration reform efforts of the past 20 years, amnesty wasn’t the pitfall.

    “We used the word ‘legalization,’ ” former Wyoming Sen. Alan K. Simpson tells NPR’s Guy Raz. “And everybody fell asleep lightly for a while, and we were able to do legalization.”
    – source, https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128303672

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  54. #45 does not answer my question, DCSCA.

    It’s structurally equivalent to:

    “Why do you believe [x]?”

    “[X]!!!!!”

    Do you feel this vitriolic about speeders? Jaywalkers? People who engage in fraud? Are all of them unworthy of sympathy in your eyes? Would you piss on all of them?

    aphrael (4c4719)

  55. > When we tell the illegal immigrants that no, they can’t come in, does it really matter whether we say it nicely, or put it the way DCSCA put it?

    It absolutely matters, because it’s the difference between interacting with human beings and interacting with something we’ve come to view as less than human. That viewing of other humans as less than human is, IMO, one of the fundamental roots of evil.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  56. BTW, I am not arguing for open borders. I am arguing for changing the conditions that drive people here from places they can walk from.

    Check the map– and measure “the walk” from Ecuador.

    Helluva hike.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  57. Dana in Kentucky — serious question, here: how would you go about fixing them? how can we as a country help Steve and those like him?

    and how can we, at the same time, help the people living in tents on the streets of San Francisco and Los Angeles?

    aphrael (4c4719)

  58. @56. Again: the evil is breaking the law and breaking in to the United States. ILLEGALLY in the first place rather than applying for entry legally.

    The right way is the good; the wrong way is the evil– just look at the Hell it has created and is inflicting on all involved.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  59. @55.Yes it does. You just won’t accept the answer.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  60. DCSCA, responding to #59 while noting that you still have not answered my question :), I would argue that the minute we start thinking of other human beings as unworthy as sympathy, we take a step in the direction of becoming monsters.

    I believe we all have the capacity to sympathize with someone and still tell them that they can’t get what they want. I believe that we all have the capacity to sympathize with someone and still tell them that the way they are doing something is wrong or harmful.

    But the minute we stop seeing them as human and extending them sympathy for the pain they have experienced and the harms they have suffered, we give up some of our own humanity by doing so.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  61. aphrael wrote:

    When we tell the illegal immigrants that no, they can’t come in, does it really matter whether we say it nicely, or put it the way DCSCA put it?

    It absolutely matters, because it’s the difference between interacting with human beings and interacting with something we’ve come to view as less than human. That viewing of other humans as less than human is, IMO, one of the fundamental roots of evil.

    Is it not also the giving of false hope?

    If we tell them nicely, “Sorry, we hear you knocking but you can’t come in,” might they not hear “You can’t come in this time”? When we express ourselves the way DCSCA did, might the illegals not hear more “You ain’t welcome and you’ll never be welcome”?

    President Trump was an [insert slang term for the rectum here], and the illegals heard the words that they were not welcome and would never be welcome as long as he was President. Then Joe Biden was elected, and shazamm! we get more people trying to break in.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  62. It’s not that I won’t accept the answer.

    “[x]” is simply not an answer to “why do you believe [x]?”

    aphrael (4c4719)

  63. It could very well give rise to false hope, yes.

    But the fact that people might misinterpret us treating them as humans worthy of sympathy is *not* a justification for not treating them as humans worthy of sympathy.

    [Note that i’ve lost friends due to doing a bad job of making this point, with regard to very different people, in 2017-18. This isn’t about the illegal immigrents *per se* for me].

    aphrael (4c4719)

  64. @63. Except it is.

    You just won’t accept that “X” is illegal and “Y” is legal; ‘folks’ on this blog have been railing about the failure of our institutions enforcing ‘law and order’ for years. Well, securing the borders of the United States is a pretty basic ‘law and order’ procedure.

    You can’t be an advocate for ‘law and order’ and coddle- or worse, encourage or make excuses for– this illegal behavior in any way, shape or form.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  65. [a] I am perfectly willing to accept that X is legal and Y is illegal.

    [b] Nothing I have said has any bearing on whether we should secure the borders or what policies we should adopt in doing so.

    [c] my specific question is why you believe breaking the law renders someone unworthy of sympathy, and if you extend that to all laws or merely some.

    You are avoiding the question; instead of answering it, you simply reiterate that [x] is illegal and that something must be done about people breaking the law. That reiteration does not even *attempt* to explain why you believe that breaking the law renders someone unworthy of sympathy.

    In some ways I suppose I could infer that you are claiming that you would show a similar lack of sympathy to all lawbreakers, but I don’t want to make that inference without you explicitly saying so, because *if that is what you are claiming*, then the claim is extraordinarily hard to believe.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  66. aphrael asked me:

    Dana in Kentucky — serious question, here: how would you go about fixing them? how can we as a country help Steve and those like him?

    and how can we, at the same time, help the people living in tents on the streets of San Francisco and Los Angeles?

    I’m not sure that we really can.

    The problems of Appalachia are problems of a lack of economic opportunity. Remember when Jeff Bezos was looking for a second headquarters for Amazon? He specified things that were required, and they were all heavily urban things. What we need are companies which will invest in more rural areas.

    If I had a billion dollars, I’d build factories in eastern Kentucky. We already have the rail infrastructure, left over from coal days; river transportation ended, and the Kentucky River locks are now permanently closed. Because wages are low here, I could hire workers for less, and because better jobs are fewer and further between, I’d have less turnover.

    But the real investors don’t look at it that way; they are the urban people themselves, and they want to be able to go to a show on Broadway or a fancy restaurant on Baahston. The industry that used to be here, coal and chemicals, died out. Because we have chosen imports, so many of our own industries failed, and the market for chemicals faded. (There are some chemical plants remaining in far eastern Kentucky, around Ashland, and in West Virginia, near Charleston.)

    Welfare didn’t work. Welfare was supposed to be temporary assistance until people could get on the feet, but with no real economic opportunity here, people can’t get on their feet unless they move away. The population here is decreasing, as younger people move away.

    The homeless in our big cities? Many are just plain mentally ill, and can’t be helped. That sounds cruel, but we all know that it’s true. But think of what you have. There are services for the homeless in the urban areas, far more than in smaller towns, so that attracts the homeless. But rents are also much higher there, so the opportunity to get off the streets and into actual housing winds up being far less for them.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  67. @62. OTOH, they’re more than welcome to apply for considiation to enter the United States LEGALLY.
    What is so difficult for illegal migrants to grasp about this? Nothing, of course. Let’em come in legally. Swell! Great! All for it!! But this ‘storming the border’ illegally crap is just that. It’s a warfare tactic and any sympathy, coddling or awww-but-they-re-just-kiddies excuses for it is bull. It’s ‘breaking in’ to the country just as much as it would be ‘breaking in’ to your home or your bank account.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  68. aphrael wrote:

    It could very well give rise to false hope, yes.

    But the fact that people might misinterpret us treating them as humans worthy of sympathy is *not* a justification for not treating them as humans worthy of sympathy.

    [Note that i’ve lost friends due to doing a bad job of making this point, with regard to very different people, in 2017-18. This isn’t about the illegal immigrents *per se* for me].

    I tend to speak and write very bluntly, but that doesn’t mean I somehow hate the people with whom I disagree. You and I disagree on almost everything, but if you showed up at my door, I’d invite you in.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  69. @66. Answered repeatedly- you just won’t accept it.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  70. Follow up to #53.
    PRESCIENT DIATRIBE – As True Today As It Was in 1976
    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2021/04/01/prescient-diatribe-as-true-today-as-it-was-in-1976/

    Liberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.

    Gary L. Zerman (a1521c)

  71. DCSCA, at 70, pretend i’m an idiot and explain to me how exactly your purported answers have answered my question.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  72. Dana in Kentucky, at 69: I thank you for that, and I would do likewise, because for me that’s a fundamental basic rule for how humans should interact with one another.

    But I would struggle to do that for DCSCA, because his rhetoric tells me that he thinks of other humans as not being worthy of sympathy or respect, and for me that violates a fundamental rule for how humans should interact with one another.

    *shrug* this has gone way off into the weeds and I have things I need to do today. So i’ll wander off with the note that i’m utterly baffled that the concept “we should treat all people with a basic level of respect and sympathy” is so … controversial.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  73. @72. At 70, you should know; it’s there, you just won’t accept it. Hell, I’m nearly the same age and do.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  74. But I would struggle to do that for DCSCA, because his rhetoric tells me that he thinks of other humans as not being worthy of sympathy or respect, and for me that violates a fundamental rule for how humans should interact with one another.

    According to what he’s told us, Deezy-eska doesn’t believe morality is a thing.

    Neanderthal thinking.

    Dave (1bb933)

  75. I believe we all have the capacity to sympathize with someone and still tell them that they can’t get what they want. I believe that we all have the capacity to sympathize with someone and still tell them that the way they are doing something is wrong or harmful.

    But the minute we stop seeing them as human and extending them sympathy for the pain they have experienced and the harms they have suffered, we give up some of our own humanity by doing so.

    aphrael (4c4719) — 4/1/2021 @ 3:22 pm

    This. All day long.

    I was an immigration officer for 22 years. My job was to tell people no. (If “no” is never to be said, then immigration officers would be moot. :)) While I was somewhat rigid at the beginning of my career, I learned to sympathize with the applicants and treat them with kindness. This was not only the right thing to do, but it helped me with my own mental health. I saw far too many co-workers who would go about their jobs with the attitude that they were at war.

    It’s a balancing act, this process of having to deny certain people while being civil.

    My mother said she could never be an immigration officer because she would just let everybody in.

    norcal (01e272)

  76. By the way, you are doing the same thing Trump did, DCSCA. You pick a policy that has some merit, and then poison it with divisive and hateful rhetoric.

    It’s not entertaining.

    norcal (01e272)

  77. I’m the guy who lives in eastern Kentucky, and I can see, with my own eyes, that the conditions that drive people from Guatemala and Honduras are conditions we haven’t been able to completely fix even in the United States! There are plenty of American citizens who live it deep, deep poverty, plenty of Americans who live in absolute shacks, and we haven’t been able to change those conditions here.

    Well, heck, maybe they should pick up their stuff and go where there are jobs. That they are willing to sit in their misery is not a reason to diss those who want better for their kids.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  78. A “War on Poverty” that is comprised of sending people checks, then taking them away if they get a job or a husband is not really a war on poverty. It’s a war on the appearance of poverty.

    These folks who are flooding over our borders are not here to get a check (despite what the Trumpian racists say). They are here to work hard in return for a chance to succeed. I lived a long time in Southern Cal, and the Mexican and central American immigrants I saw were the most hardworking people possible. They displaced a lot of Ame4ricans, sure, but it’s not because they were lazy.

    Even the Hispanics trying to get money at intersections were selling fruit, not just begging.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  79. @73. See #52.

    No doubt good hearted robbers break into banks and steal your money out of ‘desperation’ too. Empathize with their plight. But then “Thou shalt not steal” sound familiar? B&E illegals are doing just that–on our dime. Let’em apply to come in legally.

    “…that violates a fundamental rule for how humans should interact with one another…”

    ‘Course Josef no doubt loved daughter Svetlana… while Adolf adored his Blondi … and so on and so on… and of course, Speer was the good Nazi… he was human, too.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n_4t7KcJsQ

    “One man may seem incompetent; another not make sense; while others look like quite a waste, of company expense; they need a brother’s leadership, so please don’t do them in; remember mediocrity is not a mortal sin…”

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  80. OTOH, the people who are most likely to support open borders are also the people who clutch their pearls at the thought of Honduran “sweatshops”. Having work and getting paid for it beats the doors off being a sex toy for El Padrone.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  81. @77. Rubbish. There’s nothing hateful about it unless you’re codifying/embracing/excusing/weeping over illegal behavior.

    This is as clear as glass for any American: apply to come in to the usually welcoming United States LEGALLY.

    End of story.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  82. It’s not hateful to say someone is undeserving of sympathy or to advocate pissing on them?

    That’s … astonishing.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  83. @75. ‘According to what he’s told us, Deezy-eska doesn’t believe morality is a thing. Neanderthal thinking.’

    Morality is a transient.

    Unless you still blush when you spy an ankle.

    Idiot.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  84. DCSCA wrote:

    @62. OTOH, they’re more than welcome to apply for considiation to enter the United States LEGALLY.
    What is so difficult for illegal migrants to grasp about this?

    They understand that. They also know that only a small percentage of them would be allowed in legally.

    This isn’t just Joe Biden’s fault, or Barack Hussein Obama’s fault; this is the fault of the American people, who vote every two years against the illegals at the ballot box, but vote for the illegals every single day with their wallets, at convenience store who hire them, by buying houses that they know full well were built with illegal immigrants doing the concrete, the framing, the roofing and the landscaping, by patronizing restaurants that everyone knows have illegals washing the dishes in the back.

    Unlike the idiotic ‘vaccine passports,’ in which we presume everyone without one — once that program is implemented — is guilty and a carrier of the virus, we have decided to assume that everyone who we see who looks to be foreign born is here legally, and don’t do anything about it. Is it wrong to decline to patronize the Seven/Eleven with the obviously Mexican guy working there, when he might well be here legally? Most people don’t do that, which means if he’s here illegally, we are supporting him and his employment whenever we buy a cup of coffee there.

    So, being the very direct and blunt guy that I am, I’ll ask the obvious question: are you willing to discriminate against the guy who looks foreign, are you willing to refuse your business to the good American business owner who employs him? If you ask the business owner, of course he’ll say that Esteban is here legally, because he’s never going to admit the truth if his employee is an illegal.

    The illegals don’t look any different from legal immigrants. Esteban just might be here legally, might even have been born here and be a citizen. But unless you, unless a whole lot of people, are willing to seriously discriminate against all Hispanics, the encouragement for those south of the border to sneak in will continue unabated.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  85. @83. Ashli Babbitt, U.S. citizen, woman and veteran, might agree– but she can’t, can she.

    That’s… astonishing.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  86. Mr M wrote:

    Well, heck, maybe they should pick up their stuff and go where there are jobs. That they are willing to sit in their misery is not a reason to diss those who want better for their kids.

    Many have; the population in many counties here is declining.

    But the people who are leaving are the kids, not the parents. The man who made a good living as a unionized mine worker is not going to find a decent job in Lexington or Nashville when he’s already 57 years old.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  87. But unless you, unless a whole lot of people, are willing to seriously discriminate against all Hispanics, the encouragement for those south of the border to sneak in will continue unabated.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836) — 4/1/2021 @ 4:27 pm

    This is a callous and false dichotomy. Either discriminate against Hispanics, or encourage them to sneak in. I can only hope that this is satire.

    The best tool against illegal immigration is mandatory E-Verify, and no public benefits for the undocumented, with robust enforcement. If people can’t work or obtain welfare, the attraction is gone.

    norcal (01e272)

  88. @85. They understand that. They also know that only a small percentage of them would be allowed in legally.

    Do they? Or don’t they? Either way they’re not ignorant, desperate hoards of innocent victims then.

    Of course they know what they’re doing– and how to go about doing it. And once in, scatter like like seeds on the wind. Open arms and legally is the right way to come in otherwise, all those imbeciles standing in line, doing the right thing, legally, are fools. And it makes America look all the more a joke to the world.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  89. Dana in Kentucky: I live in a household of seven people, all of whom are US citizens, all of whom were *born in this country*, but four of whom look foreign.

    No, I’m not going to discriminate against people who look foreign and presume that they’re guilty of a crime just because of how they look.

    aphrael (b52e12)

  90. DCSCA: someone with characteristic [x] murdered someone else, so therefore I should judge all people with characteristic [x] as beyond sympathy?

    What you’re arguing here is indistinguishable from the argument that, since people with white skins murdered millions of Jews, all people with white skins are undeserving of sympathy.

    Both arguments are deeply and profoundly immoral.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  91. @88. The best tool against illegal immigration is mandatory E-Verify, and no public benefits for the undocumented, with robust enforcement. If people can’t work or obtain welfare, the attraction is gone.

    See #54; Reagan tried the fine and quash the incentive thing: never going to work. This country is going to have to get hard-assed by example about this illegally ‘breaking in’ to the United States thing.

    Because that’s literally what it is.

    Ashli Babbitt would likely agree– but she can’t, can she.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  92. Someone really gung-ho about Dana of Kentucky’s status verification plan probably will give Dana himself the stern once over based on an ambiguously southern European surname, IIRC.

    urbanleftbehind (08db65)

  93. Mr M wrote:

    Well, heck, maybe they should pick up their stuff and go where there are jobs. That they are willing to sit in their misery is not a reason to diss those who want better for their kids.

    Why am I back in the Bluegrass State after having spent my career on the east coast? The reason is family; my family are here, as are my wife’s. But another part of it is that things are inexpensive here. We found a small farm, 7.92 acres, with roughly 500 feet of river frontage, and a livable, if still a fixer-upper, house, for $75,000.

    No, that isn’t a typo. $75,000. A lot of the people in eastern Kentucky own their homes and land outright, but they wouldn’t get anything for their homes if they tried to sell. Makes it rough for them to sell out and move to better job areas. I’m retired now, so I don’t have to worry about the job market.

    And yes, there are abandoned houses around here. You can look at them and just tell: the grass isn’t cut, and there are no signs of life. If they’ve been abandoned too long, you’ll see windows broken out and some with visibly leaking roofs.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  94. > maybe they should pick up their stuff and go where there are jobs

    for a lot of people, that’s easier said than done.

    moving to a new area can be difficult.

    it’s one thing if you have a network of people in your destination who will put you up for a bit while you get on your feet. but if not, then you either have to be able to rent a place with no income until you have a job (a dicey proposition) or convince someone to hire you on the promise that you’ll move (which a lot of people won’t do). or you have to trust that the location you’re moving to has either charity or government support to help you get on your feet in the new location.

    this is not a trivial problem.

    it’s not *insurmountable*, but it’s hard, and it’s way easier for someone in their 20s than someone in their 50s.

    which is, i guess, to say that sympathy for illegal immigrants shouldn’t preclude sympathy for the poor of appalachia, too.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  95. @91. Morality is a transient. So Speer really was ‘the good Nazi’ after all, eh. Got it.

    And nobody has introduced any ethnicities into any of this except you and D from KY. So stop trying to bait a hook.

    This is about ‘law and order’-that’s all; about what is legal versus what is clearly illegal. There is a legal path into th United States. All the have to do is follow our laws and it. If they won’t want makes you think they’ll adhere to any other laws they find inconvenient America. No sir; no sympathy. No illegal entry.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  96. Mr Behind wrote:

    Someone really gung-ho about Dana of Kentucky’s status verification plan probably will give Dana himself the stern once over based on an ambiguously southern European surname, IIRC.

    Perhaps so; my surname is Portuguese, as my father’s family immigrated to Mau’i in the 1880s. But my earliest American ancestor, Richard Warren, arrived on the Mayflower, and no American looking at me would classify me as anything other than American.

    I like to look at it as we aren’t immigrants at all. My mother’s side of the family were already here when the United States was created, and my father’s family were already in Hawai’i when the United States annexed it. 🙂

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  97. DCSCA wrote:

    Morality is a transient. So Speer really was ‘the good Nazi’ after all, eh. Got it.

    And nobody has introduced any ethnicities into any of this except you and D from KY. So stop trying to bait a hook.

    Remember: our esteemed had banned me for a while because I noted that, to the Germans propagandized by the Nazis, it was perfectly moral to hand the Jews over to the Schutzstaffel, and perfectly reasonable to the SS members to try to kill them all.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  98. Reagan tried the fine and quash the incentive thing: never going to work.

    Reagan didn’t have E-Verify, and many other technological tools.

    Plus, I said “robust” enforcement, not random, and not for short periods of time.

    norcal (01e272)

  99. I’m not arguing that morality is transient, DCSCA. I’m arguing that there is a base level of sympathy and respect that all humans are due simply by virtue of being human. This is a *fixed rule* for me, not a transient one.

    My point in #91 was that by holding all illegal immigrants rhetorically responsible for the actions of one wrongdoer, you are holding people responsible for acts they did not commit, just because they share some characteristic with the person who committed them. That is a deeply immoral act.

    My broader point, which you clearly disagree with, is that the mere act of violating the law does not render someone unworthy of the basic respect and sympathy they earn simply by being human. You insist that it does.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  100. @88. You’re going to have to get rid of sanctuary towns, cites, states- whatever, too. Once they’re illegally in, they’re shielded. It’s madness and it’s expensive, too.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  101. Dana in Kentucky, at 98: my perspective on that argument was that you were trying to say that *the Germans who believed in the propaganda believed it to be moral* but you were using words that very clearly conveyed that you were saying that it *was* moral.

    The distinction between the (wrong, and deeply immoral) *believed* morality of the wartime Germans and the *real underlying* morality of the situation is an important one.

    I find it massively odd that I, a liberal and something of a cultural relativist, would be making this point to a conservative Christian. 🙂

    aphrael (4c4719)

  102. norcal wrote:

    Reagan tried the fine and quash the incentive thing: never going to work.

    Reagan didn’t have E-Verify, and many other technological tools.

    Plus, I said “robust” enforcement, not random, and not for short periods of time.

    When a prospective employee is hired, he is required by law to produce documents verifying his eligibility to work in the United States. Companies copy those document and fill out the Form I-9. However, under the law, the I-9 is then maintained at the company’s main office for examination by ICE at ICE’s leisure. It is never sent in to the federal government!

    If an applicant produces faked documents, the employer is required to prove they are faked, or assume that they are genuine. E-Verify exists, but let’s be honest; employers who want to hire illegals don’t use it, and it is not required to use it.

    The Infernal Revenue Service is well aware of income, Social Security and Medicare taxes sent in to bogus or duplicate Social Security numbers, but to them, that’s great: they are receiving the taxes without the obligation of paying Social Security and Medicare back out to the guy who paid those taxes!

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  103. aphrael wrote:

    Dana in Kentucky, at 98: my perspective on that argument was that you were trying to say that *the Germans who believed in the propaganda believed it to be moral* but you were using words that very clearly conveyed that you were saying that it *was* moral.

    The distinction between the (wrong, and deeply immoral) *believed* morality of the wartime Germans and the *real underlying* morality of the situation is an important one.

    I find it massively odd that I, a liberal and something of a cultural relativist, would be making this point to a conservative Christian. 🙂

    I was saying that, to them it was moral. Many Germans went to their eternal rewards believing that they were doing the right thing. I thought that I was clear enough on that point, but perhaps I wasn’t clear enough for some readers.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  104. E-Verify exists, but let’s be honest; employers who want to hire illegals don’t use it, and it is not required to use it.

    Hence my statement that E-Verify should be mandated everywhere by federal law, to be followed by robust enforcement at the worksite by ICE officers. That way, employers would be punished for hiring undocumented workers.

    norcal (01e272)

  105. DCSCA wrote:

    You’re going to have to get rid of sanctuary towns, cites, states- whatever, too. Once they’re illegally in, they’re shielded. It’s madness and it’s expensive, too.

    I noted several days ago that The Philadelphia Inquirer was openly identifying an ‘undocumented’ domestic worker, knowing that, with President Trump gone, ICE wasn’t going to scoop her up and send he back to the Dominican Republic. While Mr Trump was in office, the Inquirer obscured personal details in situations like that.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  106. for a lot of people, that’s easier said than done.

    moving to a new area can be difficult.

    There is no guarantee that life will be easy, and there never has been.

    It’s arguably easier to relocate today than ever in the past. Vastly greater accessibility of information on jobs and housing. More “safety net” resources.

    Compared to 100 years ago, it’s an order of magnitude easier, at least.

    Dave (1bb933)

  107. DCSCA wrote:

    Hence my statement that E-Verify should be mandated everywhere by federal law, to be followed by robust enforcement at the worksite by ICE officers. That way, employers would be punished for hiring undocumented workers.

    President Trump did not get that passed in 2017-2018, when the Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress, and it sure won’t get passed while the Democrats control anything.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  108. @99. It’s not a technology thing but an enforcement thing– and businesses aren’t going to cut themselves off from a cheap labor supply– they’ll craft work arounds. Sanctuary cities, parking lots– anything– it will always be a local enforcement thing and local sheriffs aren’t going to mess with the local economies of their towns. Harden the border and make examples of lawbreakers. It’ll likely be bloody at first, too. But that’s due to neglect and kicking this problem down the road for decades. That’s the only way the message will ‘trickle down’ Mexico Way–and further south. You’re dealing with well armed criminal cartels and smugglers now running things. ‘Course the U.S. could always invade northern Mexico, occupy and set up a buffer zone… but Mexico might not like that. OTOH, ‘Revenge For The Alamo’ makes for a good battle cry rally. 😉

    _______

    @100.I’m arguing that there is a base level of sympathy and respect that all humans are due simply by virtue of being human. This is a *fixed rule* for me, not a transient one.

    Then kudos to you for finding “a base level of sympathy and respect that all humans are due” in the like of a Speer, or Hitler, Stalin, Tojo, Mao, Bin Laden and Hussein.

    … and Putin smiled.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  109. Dave wrote:

    It’s arguably easier to relocate today than ever in the past. Vastly greater accessibility of information on jobs and housing. More “safety net” resources.

    Is it? Now to rent an apartment you need first and last month’s rent, plus pass a credit check. The impediments are different, and you don’t have to load up the Conestoga wagon, but impediments are there, more so than forty years ago.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  110. @108. I didn’t write that, norcal did.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  111. DCSCA wrote:

    Hence my statement that E-Verify should be mandated everywhere by federal law, to be followed by robust enforcement at the worksite by ICE officers. That way, employers would be punished for hiring undocumented workers.

    President Trump did not get that passed in 2017-2018, when the Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress, and it sure won’t get passed while the Democrats control anything.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836) — 4/1/2021 @ 5:21 pm

    On the topic of compassion for fellow humans: Please do not confuse me with DCSCA.

    norcal (01e272)

  112. President Trump did not get that passed in 2017-2018, when the Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress, and it sure won’t get passed while the Democrats control anything.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836) — 4/1/2021 @ 5:21 pm

    To be clear, I am making prescriptive rather than descriptive, or even predictive, statements.

    norcal (01e272)

  113. On the topic of compassion for fellow humans: Please do not confuse me with DCSCA.

    That’s right: when it comes to illegal immigration, it is now clearly a form of warfare — with humans being the ammunition; live, volatile… and expendable.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  114. Yes, DCSCA, it’s a problem, but the way you’re addressing it is counterproductive at best, and inflammatory at worst.

    norcal (01e272)

  115. Here’s more follow up to my #53 responding to #38, where he wrote:‘what gives you the notion that it is possible to enforce such a law> It never happened. Only war or an iron curtain with the risk of death for border crossing can more or less enforce it. Do you have anby examples anywhere in the world where such a law was enforced?’

    Following what I wrote in #53, here’s the more.

    Montana Governor Gianforte sign bill banning sanctuary cities: “Immigration laws will be enforced’
    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/04/01/montana-gov-gianforte-signs-bill-banning-sanctuary-cities-immigration-laws-will-be-enforced/

    See, easy peasy.

    Liberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.

    Gary L. Zerman (a1521c)

  116. Montana Governor Gianforte sign bill banning sanctuary cities: “Immigration laws will be enforced’.
    See, easy peasy.

    Except sanctuary cities do not violate any federal law.

    Dave (1bb933)

  117. Previous court decisions have held emphatically that states cannot attempt to meddle with or “improve” federal immigration law. And that law was written to make compliance with administrative detainers by local law-enforcement voluntary.

    So we’ll see what happens.

    Dave (1bb933)

  118. @115. Rubbish.

    It’s illegal. Grow a pair.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  119. @119 I’m understanding more and more your support of Trump.

    norcal (01e272)

  120. It absolutely matters, because it’s the difference between interacting with human beings and interacting with something we’ve come to view as less than human. That viewing of other humans as less than human is, IMO, one of the fundamental roots of evil.

    aphrael (4c4719) — 4/1/2021 @ 3:11 pm

    I mean this respectfully aphrael as you are polite and considerate in discussions, but ask your friends to do the same in their interactions with Trump voters and see how they respond.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  121. @120. No, you don’t — so don’t try to place labels or do the thinking of others. The objective was to neuter the modern ideological conservative movement and render it irrelevant. Didn’t matter who. That the old guard of the GOP collapsed so easily on Trump’s watch speaks volumes about how hollow that movement had become. But it could have been anybody.

    Illegal migration is a simple matter of legal versus illegal actions. There is no middle ground in this. There’s a choice: the legal pathway available into the U.S. Or they break-in to the U.S. illegally. If you’re a proponent of ‘law and order’ — as so many of those on this forum claim to be– the choice should be a clear and easy one.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  122. https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1377655303022460934?

    Last year, we had the lowest illegal immigration IN 45 YEARS.

    This year, we have the highest in 20 years.

    What changed?

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  123. The man who made a good living as a unionized mine worker is not going to find a decent job in Lexington or Nashville when he’s already 57 years old.

    He wasn’t going to find much of a living in a unionized mine at 57 either. In case you haven’t ehard, coal mining is hard on the body.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  124. > maybe they should pick up their stuff and go where there are jobs

    for a lot of people, that’s easier said than done.

    The point I was trying to make, now lost, is that those people south of the border are doing just that. Dana in KY was comparing their plight to Appalachia, and I was pointing out the people in Appalachia CAN move to the places we won’t let those Hondurans go.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  125. Mr M wrote:

    The point I was trying to make, now lost, is that those people south of the border are doing just that. Dana in KY was comparing their plight to Appalachia, and I was pointing out the people in Appalachia CAN move to the places we won’t let those Hondurans go.

    Which is as it should be, but, sadly, without actual enforcement of our immigration laws, we do seem to allow those Hondurans to go there.

    Realistically, once they’ve sneaked over the border, the Hondurans and others have more freedom to go to those places, because they’ve already taken the step of abandoning their old homes.

    The Dana in Kentucky (88b836)

  126. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 3/31/2021 @ 2:45 pm

    or we export our law and our opportunity there.

    That’s unfortunately considered imperialism.

    It still could be done by agreement.

    E’re exporting law a little bit enemy but very inefficiently.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-56589088

    Honduras drugs: President’s brother gets life in prison

    Published 2 days ago

    Former Congressman Juan Antonio “Tony” Hernández was found guilty in October 2019 of smuggling tonnes of cocaine into the US.

    Prosecutors said he had bribed law enforcement officials and was also complicit in at least two murders. [he is also accused of having bribed his brother, the president)

    President Juan Orlando Hernández called his brother’s sentence “outrageous”…. While anti-government protests and opposition politicians have accused President Hernández of running a “narco-state” for years, the life sentence for his brother has drawn international attention to
    Honduras…

    …President Hernández has rejected all allegations, saying they are part of a political vendetta against him by drug traffickers.

    He has repeatedly said that drug seizures have gone up since he took office and that his family is being targeted by disgruntled drug gangs.

    “I find it unbelievable that the false testimonies of self-confessed murderers are listened to and valued in this way,” he said reacting to his brother’s sentence.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Guatemala

    Rates of crime in Guatemala are very high. An average of 101 murders per week were reported in 2018. (citation needed) The countries with the highest crime and violence rates in Central America are El Salvador and Honduras….

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

  127. Tackle the root causes of irregular migration

    The root cause if irregular migration is very simple:

    Legal migration has been reduced way below the demand for it. It can easily be cut in half. Maybe down to one sixth. Or it can be diverted. But when, given the degree of communication between different arts of the world, and previous migration, it gets cut back by a power of ten or more, you get irregular migration. Also when the wage differential is too high.

    Implement effective border screening

    –Dana

    Sammy Finkelman (6975b4)

  128. The highest ratings in the poll are the things whose success he chose to co-opt from Trump.
    The other one, he decided to change (immigration, drastically)
    The border deal with Mexico was working. Why not just keep it?

    On the economy I see Biden is taking credit for job growth which has a direct corelation to COVID vaccine competency and backwards tested to what Trump was trying to facilitate, which was a fast recovery.

    Oh well at least he kept 2 of 3.
    On foreign policy Biden will bat 0-5 and probably send troops back to Iraq and Afghanistan… to no avail

    steveg (02d731)

  129. Re post #31 – that stated in pertinent part:
    All that was required was to enforce our laws – and this would be the problem – that never was. Instead, sanctuary cities –> sanctuary counties –> sanctuary states –> sanctuary country –> failed country.

    Sanctuary Country – Told YA!

    BIDEN’S ‘SANCTUARY COUNTRY’ ORDERS Cut Deportations By 50%
    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/04/05/bidens-sanctuary-country-orders-cut-deportations-by-50-percent/

    Sanctuary Country –> Failed County.
    Liberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.

    Gary L. Zerman (a1521c)

  130. Follow up re post #130: More Told YA! – on Sanctuary Country.

    SANCTUARY COUNTRY: CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS IN ICE CUSTODY CUT BY 70 PERCENT https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/04/15/sanctuary-country-criminal-illegal-aliens-in-ice-custody-cut-by-70-percent/

    So much for the Constitution, a Rule of Law – and being a country.

    Wake Up America – this is an INVASION and picnic for criminals.

    You have a government that no longer represents and protects YOU.
    Liberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.

    Gary L. Zerman (a1521c)

  131. You – Patterico et al – were hellbent on getting rid of Orange Man Bad, and you are to blame for this idiocy. Suck on it a while.

    [Suck on being banned from the site, Gravel. – JVW]
    Gravel (6d804d) — 4/1/2021 @ 1:19 pm

    @JVW:

    I very much approve of publishing the (final)comment that results in a ban; it helps define where the line that leads to being banned is drawn.

    felipe (484255)

  132. Re post #132 – more follow up on Sanctuary Country.

    Report: Joe Biden’s ‘Sanctuary Country’ orders – freeing thousands of criminal illegal aliens into U.S. communities
    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/04/27/report-biden-sanctuary-country-orders-freeing-thousands-criminal-illegal-aliens-usa/

    Coming to a community near you.

    Biden & Harris are leading an invasion into the U.S. So much for the Rule of Law, a Constitution
    or a country.

    So, How ya gonna blame this on Trump?

    Liberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.

    Gary L. Zerman (a1521c)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2316 secs.