Liberal solution to illegal immigration
in [Golf]
|
Prev: March of the Titans (brief video re: White Race, 1 min, 30sec)
Next: What the heck is Tiger doing?
From: BAR on 12 May 2010 07:29 In article <5a38d791-d9d1-4ae9-a3d1- 9308397c4fbc(a)k2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > > > > I believe I answered the question earlier. �Bert is wrong about this but at > > least he has the guts to offer a solution. �I don't believe securing our > > borders is particularily complicated. �It's a matter of political will. > > > > My question to John remains. �He seems to imply that an illegal should have > > a chance to prove himself. �I think not. > > > > -Greg > > The guts? Are you serious? It takes guts to post on a golf newsgroup > that illegal entrants to the US should be shot? That's the dumbest > thing I've heard in a long time. > > As for your question, I don't remember seeing it. And I don't know > what you mean by an illegal having a chance to prove himself. > > What's your suggestion. Oh, that's right, the problem is too complicated for you to comprehend or address. If you are not willing to participate then go watch TV.
From: BAR on 12 May 2010 07:29 In article <wclark2-552823.19492411052010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > > > No, I said we should tattoo those caught here as illegal aliens and then > > > > deport them. The scarlet letter has its uses. > > > > > > Why not just tattoo a number on their arms and then send them to > > > extermination camps? Oh, wait, someone else tried that, didn't they? > > > > Do you carry your green card with you at all times. It is US federal > > law. > > So you do think the "camps" are a good idea. What a real charmer. Become a citizen and then get the law changed.
From: BAR on 12 May 2010 07:29 In article <wclark2-8CAE1E.19521511052010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > In article <84to04FsbmU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > "William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > > news:clark-0EE06F.13513011052010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > > > > > Increased incarceration rates are one of many factors that have > > > > lowered the crime rate. It's not even the principal one. > > > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > Name the other factors. > > > > > > > > -Greg > > > > > > Increased investment in policing. Duh. > > > > Bad guys were being caught. That was never the issue, especially since most > > criminals are pretty dumb. The problem is that they were having their hands > > slapped in the name of probation or parole and released. > > > > Duh. > > > > -Greg > > It was always the issue. Once you put a greater police presence on the > ground you a) catch the bad guys, and b) drive them out of the area. > Incarceration in the US system is proven to be neither a deterrent nor > reforming. Where do you "b) drive them out of the area" to? Aren't you just making them someone else's problem rather than actually fixing the problem?
From: BAR on 12 May 2010 08:27 In article <6hsju5ps13t3chal0m69rq4ad9lvt1h89u(a)4ax.com>, bknight(a)conramp.net says... > > On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:02:10 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > >Your problem Bobby is that you refuse to address the hard problems. And, > >your refusal to adress the hard problems is then transferred to everyone > >else. You would rather sit back, throw your hands in the air and say > >live and let live. When in reality that attitude is what continually > >gets us in trouble. > > > Your problem, Bert, is that you've established yourself as a loony, > idiotic, half-baked, fool. You excise those parts of others' posts > that show these traits and simply go on as you actually have a > reasonable thought. The newsreader I use has a habit of only grabbing part of the previous content when I click on follow up so I choose to only include the most recent information. If you want to follow the entire thread then you can refer to the headers to get the information that you so desperately seek. > The issue is whether or not a person should lose their life over > simply crossing a border illegally. If you truly believe this you're > to be pitied. Every simple-minded example you've given has shown > this. You can't compare a border crossing with someone entering your > home. One has absolute probabilities of causing bodily harm, the > other doesn't. However, in your shallow thinking they're the same. > Tattooing is also a suggestion of yours and you don't even see the > parallels of this to Germany in the 30s, or maybe you think that was a > good idea. The issue is what is your solution to the illegal immigration problem. You failure to propose a solution is telling of your desire to not address the problem. My solution is just a starting point, a point from one perspective to start the discussion. You fail to participate in the discussion. Propose a solution. Saying the problem is too big and too complicated is a cop out. > You're a cretin and a fool. At leat I am willing to do something about problems.
From: BAR on 12 May 2010 08:28
In article <4be9f994$0$4884$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:02:10 -0400, BAR wrote: > > In article <m44ju5hbdrpf9b2o5revnestdf2k4kt3m0(a)4ax.com>, > > bknight(a)conramp.net says... > >> On Tue, 11 May 2010 10:16:25 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> A chance to do what? > >> > >> C'mon Greg. That's perfectly clear. I wouldn't dare ask you, or > >> anyone else, for the answer to the illegal alien problem because its > >> so complicated, , but I will ask you this: > >> > >> Do you think BAR's suggestion (now said four times here) that anyone > >> crossing our borders illegally should be summarily killed? > >> > >> That only requires a simple yes or no. > > > > Your problem Bobby is that you refuse to address the hard problems. > > And, your refusal to adress the hard problems is then transferred to > > everyone else. You would rather sit back, throw your hands in the air > > and say live and let live. When in reality that attitude is what > > continually gets us in trouble. > > And your problem is that you insist on simple answers when there are > none to be had. You don't know if there is a simple answer. You reject all possibilities except open borders. |