Althouse: "Here's a guy, Sergeant Bergdahl. We get Bergdahl, a traitor, a no-good traitor, who in the good old days would've been executed, and they get five killers who are right now out on the battlefield."

July 12, 2015

"Here's a guy, Sergeant Bergdahl. We get Bergdahl, a traitor, a no-good traitor, who in the good old days would've been executed, and they get five killers who are right now out on the battlefield."

Said Donald Trump — one quote of many in a Business Insider piece titled "Donald Trump just gave an amazingly surreal speech in Las Vegas."

Is that headline an attempt at humorously emulating Trump's way of speaking? It must be, and I'm wondering at what point the strategy of regarding him as a clown will be abandoned. I'm giving up my failed strategy, which was: If I don't view him as real, he is not real.

183 comments:

hoyden said...: Trump speaks truth to power!; 7/12/15, 8:13 AM
hoyden said...: Ann, time to apply the "Speaking Truth to Power" tag.; 7/12/15, 8:17 AM
Anonymous said...: And you think Obama is real??? hahaha!!!! good one!!!; 7/12/15, 8:18 AM
rhhardin said...: I'd say Trump is running a false flag to split the vote, using his showman schtick.

He was going out of his way to help Hillary in the primaries in 2007.; 7/12/15, 8:20 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Trump is succeeding in forcing the issue of immigration to the front, where it might have ended up anyway, but he's heating it up with elements that the polite candidates would have all, amongst themselves, acting in their own interest, suppressed.

This is volatile, and I don't know who will benefit in the end. Even if his secret plan is to help Hillary, I don't think we can see where things will end up. It's not a chess game with a chess master!; 7/12/15, 8:25 AM
Michael K said...: Trump is indicating where the voters are and that is useful but I worry he is another Perot.; 7/12/15, 8:27 AM
Birkel said...: I had to read the headline a few times. I thought surely there was some joke or subterfuge somewhere. But then I realized it was likely accurate.; 7/12/15, 8:27 AM
Bob Ellison said...: It's early in the game.; 7/12/15, 8:27 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: "Here's a guy, Sergeant Bergdahl. We get Bergdahl, a traitor, a no-good traitor, who in the good old days would've been executed, and they get five killers who are right now out on the battlefield."

I think Donald Trump actually said that.

That particular comment is not too far the mark, although it is a little bit off the mark.

Most important errors:

1) In the old days Bergdahl would NOT have been executed. This is so wrong, ir can be characterized as a lie. Trump knows better.

2) I'm not sure the Taliban released are best described as killers. They were in executive positions (which is actually worse)

The problem with Trump sayinbg that is that it is an oversimplification.

3) They are not back on the battlefield yet, as far as I know.

4) Bergdahl probably did not intend to "defect" but to go on a holiday from the war, maybe just live inAfghanistan for a while. He was probably tricked into becoming a Taliban prisoner. Things were never good for him after he left, and he at least once tried to escape.

5) Donald Trump is missinbg the most important criticism, which is that Bergdahl wa NOT being held by the Taliban, but by a different group, the Haqqani network, which, however, was also supported by Pakistan's rogue military intelligence agency, the ISI, and for much of the time he was held was actually in Pakistan.

But the administration was obliivious, or made itself oblivious, to all of this.

6) Also the Administration did not try to free anybody else from the Taliban, but only Bergdahl, because he had been a soldier. And the big reason for this is that President Obama wanted to take all U.S. troops out of Afghanistan, but the war could not be considered over as long as there were any captured soldiers in U.S. custody.; 7/12/15, 8:31 AM
Humperdink said...: America's blowhard speaketh. I am glad he has brought the issue to the forefront. It will force the other candidates to address it. Let it reach the boiling point.

Then bow out.; 7/12/15, 8:31 AM
Hagar said...: Trump may cause the candidates to start talking and actually saying something rather than just blowing it out their other end. If so, that would be a good thing.

However, I have not sen any reports of him filing his financial disclosure statement yet.; 7/12/15, 8:35 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Trump has found the hot button that gets black and white voters and legal immigrants to scream "he is right" and they are glad someone has raised the issue emphatically and wonder why OUR OWN GOVT refuses to enforce existing laws and by doing that it places its own citizens in harms way.

I can't wait til Trump asks why the president has not spoken up and why the Dem & Repub candidates have no spoken up.

I bet Scott Walker will include the issue in his announcement tomorrow.; 7/12/15, 8:36 AM
Bob Ellison said...: Sammy Finkelman said, "In the old days Bergdahl would NOT have been executed. This is so wrong, ir can be characterized as a lie. Trump knows better."

You overestimate this guy. He's a clown who knows nothing.; 7/12/15, 8:41 AM
Birkel said...: Sammy Finkelman:
How do you know Bergdahl tried to escape? Have you accepted statements not independently verified?

The Taliban 5 no longer have known whereabouts, but your statement requires metaphysical proof of reentry to the fight. That is an odd choice as a standard of proof. Credulous in one direction?

Bergdahl would likely have been executed by now in previous engagements.

The Taliban 5 were executives and killers.; 7/12/15, 8:42 AM
madAsHell said...: I worry he is another Perot.

That was the beginning of the Clinton saga.; 7/12/15, 8:43 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Ann Althouse said... 7/12/15, 8:25 AM

Trump is succeeding in forcing the issue of immigration to the front, where it might have ended up anyway, but he's heating it up with elements that the polite candidates would have all, amongst themselves, acting in their own interest, suppressed.

Well, if his idea is to make the Republican Party at least a little repulsive to 60 or 70% of the U.S. population, (and strongly repulsive to 20% to 40%) that might make sense. At the same time, he's making the true-blue Republicans or whatever you want to call them, more locked into this position.

This is volatile, and I don't know who will benefit in the end. Even if his secret plan is to help Hillary, I don't think we can see where things will end up. It's not a chess game with a chess master!

Bill Clinton is pretty good at this thing.

I've been seeing this coming for a few years. The immigration issue threatens to become the 21st century analogue of the slavery issue in the 19th century, although not quite as volatile.

The big quesiton is, is it now more 1840, or like 1848?

But you are right, you can't tell where this will end up. Hillary Clinton might
wind up not being the nominee and it would be all for nothing! Just like Bill Clinton's plan to make the House freshman class in 1975 very important. He was supposed to be leader of the freshmen. (they still cause dthe Comunist conquest of South Vietnam and Cambodia); 7/12/15, 8:46 AM
Bob Boyd said...: What if Trump said:

Its common for doctors in America to perform unnecessary amputations to make money.

One in five college girls are raped at school.

White cops are regularly murdering blacks in America without fear of consequence.

Man made climate change is an emergency that requires we abandon our constitutional legislative process and our national sovereignty to prevent the destruction of the planet.

Owning a gun makes you guilty of murdering school children.; 7/12/15, 8:46 AM
Bobber Fleck said...: Althouse said: "This is volatile, and I don't know who will benefit in the end."

Hillary stands to lose the most. She is being pushed out of the limelight. She will possibly be forced to take a position on immigration which placates the liberal base but alienates much of America. But then Sanders will voice a position that actually excites the liberal base.

Democrats in general lose as the truth about their immigration policy and enforcement come to light.

Republican candidates lose because the are afraid to take a clearly defined position, which makes them appear weak.

America wins by being educated on the realities of the immigration crisis.

The media loses when it become clear they have hidden many important facts and perspectives on immigration.; 7/12/15, 8:48 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: re: Perot.

I think Perot was not intentionally helped Clinton. He was just a fool. Ed Rollins was a double agent.

(Later on, he may have put Clinton in touch with the fire experts who could tell him how to start the Waco fire while being able to claim the Davidians set the fire. (this concerned the properties of CS tear gas, which were not established properly)

This could maybe be the only explanation for what he said after the New Jersey gubernatorial election in 1993.; 7/12/15, 8:50 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Bobber Fleck:

Excellent points!; 7/12/15, 8:52 AM
JackWayne said...: Michael K, Perot may have thrown the vote to Clinton. He also begat the Tea Party. Take the good with the possible bad. Everything I saw said the Perot vote would have divided pretty evenly between Clinton and Bush.; 7/12/15, 8:54 AM
jr565 said...: So clearly the problem with trump is not his points, but that he's overly generalizing with them. How is he wrong here?; 7/12/15, 8:54 AM
Anonymous said...: This is volatile, and I don't know who will benefit in the end. Even if his secret plan is to help Hillary,

Even if he doesn't do a Perot, which is how we got to the Bill and Hillary dynasty, he will drag the GOP candidates right and at the same time lose the GOP some moderates.

Win Win for HRC.

Bill Clinton/Al Gore (D) – 44,909,806 (43.0%)
George H. W. Bush/Dan Quayle (R) – 39,104,550 (37.4%)
Ross Perot/James Stockdale (I) – 19,743,821 (18.9%); 7/12/15, 8:55 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Bobber Fleck said...7/12/15, 8:48 AM

Hillary stands to lose the most. She is being pushed out of the limelight. She will possibly be forced to take a position on immigration which placates the liberal base but alienates much of America.

No she won't. You may not realize this, in the intellectual bibble Republicans are on, but about 60% to 70% of the U.S. population is in favor of amnesty, and not all in favor of deportation.

The only sticking point is the logic trap under which it is supposed to be the last amnesty. Of course the idea that it would be the last one is a non-starter.

America wins by being educated on the realities of the immigration crisis.

The reality is there is no crisis. Immigration only brings economic benefits. The only drawbacks are cultural, and for tghe United states, minor.

Just because something is against the law, doesn't mean the law makes sense, and even less that the law is vital.

I'd sure like to kmnow the name of the defunct economist whom practical men in authority are the slaves of.; 7/12/15, 8:56 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: But what if a leftwinger or liberal also runs as a third or fourth party candidate?; 7/12/15, 8:57 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: What about the low information voters who watch TV shows like the Kardashians and The Apprentice? Will they tend to support a candidate like Trump?; 7/12/15, 8:59 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Jack Wayne said...7/12/15, 8:54 AM

Everything I saw said the Perot vote would have divided pretty evenly between Clinton and Bush.

In the final analysis, becauyse many people went back to the Republican.

The Perot boomlet almost got too bog for Bill Clinton.; 7/12/15, 8:59 AM
Bob Ellison said...: That's a big liberal theme: Perot stole half and half from Bush and Clinton.

Oh, please.; 7/12/15, 9:03 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: jr565 said... 7/12/15, 8:54 AM

So clearly the problem with trump is not his points, but that he's overly generalizing with them. How is he wrong here?

Only with some of his points is he not essentially wrong, and even there he says things in such a way so that can be easily rebutted, and that does not stand up under close examination.

Trump is now saying that the Mexican government is engaged in a conspiracy to send criminalas to the United States (and also that most of the people who cross the border illegally, fit into that category!)

Well, now really?

Trump is actually helpng himself with this claim about the Mexican government. It gives him something he can retract.; 7/12/15, 9:04 AM
Paco Wové said...: "about 60% to 70% of the U.S. population is in favor of amnesty,"

Got a link? 'Cause my link says you're wrong.; 7/12/15, 9:04 AM
Bob Ellison said...: And while we're on the subject of billionaire blow-hards, can we remind ourselves how Perot and Trump are both corporatists, suckers at the government tit, atheist assholes who have more in common with Barack Obama than the pope has with Jesus?; 7/12/15, 9:06 AM
Birkel said...: No crisis. Just billions in services promised by the government to people who contribute little, as they work illegally. And billions more spent on law enforcement issues. And depressed wages for low-skilled work.

Hurry toward the economic collapse! We haven't time to tarry.; 7/12/15, 9:06 AM
Tank said...: Paco Wové said...

"about 60% to 70% of the U.S. population is in favor of amnesty,"

Got a link? 'Cause my link says you're wrong.

I suspect this is a lot like the "consensus" on global warming.; 7/12/15, 9:10 AM
tim in vermont said...: Immigration only brings economic benefits

Like low wages for unskilled workers.; 7/12/15, 9:13 AM
DanTheMan said...: >> to go on a holiday from the war, maybe just live in Afghanistan for a while.

You say "holiday", UCMJ Article 99 says "desertion".

It's a capital offense.; 7/12/15, 9:13 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Insty regularly laments the low quality of our political class.

So mock Trump all you want but I bet an outsider will have enormous and broad voter appeal if he does not divide the legal electorate [Obama and the Dems have divided the legal electorate for years].

So far Trump is only pissing off those who want to ignore illegal immigrant tsunami for ethnic [La Raza] or political reasons [Dems and the media].; 7/12/15, 9:13 AM
Bob Ellison said...: By the way, Ross Perot won not one, but two Presidential elections for Bill Clinton. 1992 and 1996. Clinton would be but a footnote in history but for the jerk that is Ross Perot.

And this new idiot claims to be a Republican. And lots of people seem to believe him.; 7/12/15, 9:22 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Bob: Can you give me an example of who is a Republican to you?; 7/12/15, 9:24 AM
Bob Ellison said...: Uh, Ronald Reagan, AJ Lynch. Abraham Lincoln. Do you need more examples?; 7/12/15, 9:27 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Yes can you please provide a living, active example. And btw,Reagan was a Dem for many years as far as I know.; 7/12/15, 9:30 AM
Rusty said...: Immigration only brings economic benefits

Legal immigration, yes.
Illegal immigration, and the left wants you to forget that amnesty is all about illegal immigration, brings crime, disease, and misery.; 7/12/15, 9:32 AM
Bob Ellison said...: Yes, AJ. Reagan was a Democrat. Right. Run with it.

Shall we go Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, and Scott Walker?; 7/12/15, 9:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Tank to Paco: "Got a link? 'Cause my link says you're wrong."

I suspect this is a lot like the "consensus" on global warming.

I think you can get the kind of poll results that Kool-Aid Sammy is peddling if you phrase the questions properly. E.g. "Should we Comprehensively Reform our Broken Immigration System by 1)providing a 'path to citizenship' for non-criminals after thorough background checks and payment of back taxes and a hefty fine, or 2)rounding up all illegals via midnight raids with AK-47s and tasers and billy clubs, followed by herding them into cattle cars bound for the Atacama desert after tearing the babies from their mothers' breasts and flinging them into the fire at the temple of Ba'al?"; 7/12/15, 9:33 AM
Michael K said...: "Everything I saw said the Perot vote would have divided pretty evenly between Clinton and Bush."

We cannot know the answer but Trump has said that the Perot vote came from Bush voters. Intent, as prosecutors say.

The Tea Party is another phenomenon unrelated to Perot. Lots of Perot voters swung to Ron Paul, I believe.

"60% to 70% of the U.S. population is in favor of amnesty, and not all in favor of deportation. "

I think this is not only wrong but disingenuous. You don't distinguish legal and illegal. You don't distinguish status such as long time residents with jobs and no criminal record. I am in favor of some sort of amnesty ONCE THE BORDER IS CLOSED !

You sound like a leftist, Sammy.; 7/12/15, 9:33 AM
Michael K said...: Good link, Paco.; 7/12/15, 9:34 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Thanks Bob Those are real Repubs in my mind too. Walker is my first choice for the nomination btw.

And yes Reagan was a Dem before he became a Repub. I am surprised you don't know that. See this link if you don't believe me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZMafGzDJdo; 7/12/15, 9:39 AM
Skeptical Voter said...: Uh Sammy---you're as wrong as Trump on just a couple of points.

1. Illegal immigration only brings economic benefits. If you lived in California, you just might have a different view on that. Adding large numbers to the welfare rolls is hardly an economic benefit for the rest of us.

2. President Obama couldn't declare the war in Afghanistan over if a soldier--Bergdahl--was left in Afghanistan? Well a couple of years after Bergdahl was released, we still have quite a few soldiers left in Afghanistan. And some of the Korean War "Bergdahls" didn't come home for more than 50 years---and Eisenhower was able to declare the Korean War over in the mid 1950's.

Of course just as Ms. Althouse can't decide whether Trump is real (a multibillionaire blowhard with a significant touch of clown) or whether she'd rather believe he is not real, Obama is free to declare whatever "reality" he wants. It's a habit of his--and a bad one.; 7/12/15, 9:39 AM
Paco Wové said...: I do have to give Sammy credit for previewing the next model pro-amnesty argument for us: opposing amnesty is just like favoring... slavery!!!!.; 7/12/15, 9:40 AM
Bob Ellison said...: AJ, knew that. You might be surprised at how much people know.; 7/12/15, 9:45 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Bob -sorry but your earlier comment led me to believe you had doubts about that. No reason for you to get your back up about it.; 7/12/15, 9:49 AM
rhhardin said...: Real Audio, here is Trump on Imus April 3, 2007 real audio.

The next day Imus said nappy headed ho' in passing and Media Matters shopped it to the MSM.

So Trump was working with Media Matters.; 7/12/15, 9:50 AM
Bob Ellison said...: I "had doubts"?

Sorry; this just seems silly. I have time on my hands, and I like to pursue strange trends.

Let's say, for example, that citizen X saw a UFO over the sky of, say, Madison, WI, and told the TV media that it had rotating red lights and made a weird "woo-woo" sound as it sailed over the city.

I have doubts.; 7/12/15, 9:54 AM
Unknown said...: No more rinos. Elect as many democrats as you want america and live with the consequences; 7/12/15, 9:58 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: No mas Bob. Let's forget this exchange ever occurred.; 7/12/15, 9:59 AM
khesanh0802 said...: Hyperbole is a sure tool for Trump. In most hyperbole there is a grain of truth to build upon. He is saying things that a lot of people who are less sophisticated have been dying to say.

Is Trump real? Of course he is. Unlike many other candidates he can keep running at the mouth with his own money. Would he be any good as a president? Certainly no worse than Obama. Although what he stands for beside himself we don't know.

I would like to see him crash and burn at the earliest moment. I have a visceral reaction to him and it is not a good one. I hope he will not wear well in the campaign.

Bergdahl was, in fact, a deserter and will be court martialed as such.; 7/12/15, 10:06 AM
virgil xenophon said...: SPORTSFANS/

Last data I've seen on costs of illegals is 113, BILLION/yr for medical, schools welfare & depressed wages--a net LOSS to the economy. Medical costs for illegals alone is driving several hospitals in SoCal into bankruptcy even as we speak..

Data from the last election shows that if conservative whites who sat on their hands for Romney ACTUALLY VOTED in the numbers they had in previous elections, Romney would have won without a single extra black or hispanic/latino vote. Romney needed white votes, not black or brown ones..; 7/12/15, 10:26 AM
libertariansafetyguy said...: We're at a silly part of the campaign. And he's a silly candidate. But it doesn't mean serious work or damage isn't done during the silly part.; 7/12/15, 10:30 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Virgil:

That is why Ann Coulter recommends Repubs focus more on white voters and peel them away from Dems and give non-voters a reason to vote for a Repub.; 7/12/15, 10:30 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: I predict Walker's announcement tomorrow will be a barometer if he piggybacks on Trump's wave. Repubs have to take this immigration issue and run with it intelligently. T; 7/12/15, 10:33 AM
Ann Althouse said...: @Sammy

Eddie Slovik.; 7/12/15, 10:40 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Paco Wové said... 7/12/15, 9:04 AM

"about 60% to 70% of the U.S. population is in favor of amnesty,"

Got a link? 'Cause my link says you're wrong.

Your link is not talking about the same thing. There the questions is about doing it through an extra-legal executive order, while the public is in favor of doing it through legislation. I know you may think there is no difference - the difference is only about process, but this whole argument is about process.

Also, the public tends to be in favor of sealing the border at the same time, or before granting amnesty. But they are not against amnesty - they are for it, especially when the idea of imposing some kind of conditions is added.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/immigration-pathway-to-citizenship-poll-107613.html

Poll: 62 percent support pathway to citizenship....

....When it comes to undocumented immigrants, 62 percent of Americans believe they should be allowed to gain citizenship if they meet certain requirements, while 17 percent would support green cards but not citizenship for them. Meanwhile, 19 percent think the undocumented immigrants should be deported.

So that's 79% in favor of amnesty for most illegal immigrants and 62% for eventual citizenship. (70% of Democrats, 61% of independents and 51% of Republicans. Now this poll, as with most polls, probably has a liberal bias, but it shouldn't be more tahn about10% or 15%.

It looks like this poll offered respondents only 3 choices: pathway to cotizenship, a (pathway to a) green card and deportation. Even among self-described Tea Party members, only 37% supported deportation.

Another link about the same poll:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/10/us/poll-shows-path-to-citizenship-is-favored.html

Now there is another poll.; 7/12/15, 10:49 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Yes, but Eddie slovak was an exception.; 7/12/15, 10:50 AM
Birches said...: about 60% to 70% of the U.S. population is in favor of amnesty, and not all in favor of deportation.

You act like those are the only two options.; 7/12/15, 10:55 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Angelyne: Your poll question example was spot on unfortunately.; 7/12/15, 10:59 AM
Birkel said...: And in Korea and Viet Nam, many were executed without courts martial.; 7/12/15, 11:02 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: One poll showed 62% for pathway to citizenship (where the alternatives were pathway to citizenship, green card or deportation) This was 1,538 people who took the same poll in 2013 and were re-polled in 2014. 17% were for only green card and 21% for deportation.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/immigration-pathway-to-citizenship-poll-107613.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/10/us/poll-shows-path-to-citizenship-is-favored.html

Now here is an NBC-Wall Street Journal poll from last November:

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WSJNBCpoll11192014.pdf

1000 Adults, including 350 respondents with a cell phone only and 25 respondents reached on a cell phone but who also have a landline.

There are several different questions starting with question 21, and this goes from,
39% support and 48% opposed, with a lot of the opposition tilted to strongly oppose, to well over 70% support, depending on what precisely is asked. There seems to be about the same number of people who support or oppose the President doing it as support or oppose Congress doing it.; 7/12/15, 11:03 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: SF: about 60% to 70% of the U.S. population is in favor of amnesty, and not all in favor of deportation.

Birches said.../12/15, 10:55 AM

You act like those are the only two options.

That's what the poll question was, except that they offered the third alternative of only a green card.

Of course, those are not the only alternative. Continuing with the status quo is also an alternative.; 7/12/15, 11:06 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: virgil xenophon said...7/12/15, 10:26 AM

Last data I've seen on costs of illegals is 113, BILLION/yr for medical, schools welfare & depressed wages--a net LOSS to the economy. Medical costs for illegals alone is driving several hospitals in SoCal into bankruptcy even as we speak..

And you beleive that statistic?

It would be just as easy to prove that nearly every birth is a net loss to the economy!; 7/12/15, 11:09 AM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: Will Bergdahl sue Trump for slander? I would think it would be easy to find a lawyer willing to go after Trump's billions, or even hundred millions.; 7/12/15, 11:09 AM
cubanbob said...: Trump is on a roll. Imagine that, a populist billionaire. Hyperbole notwithstanding he is saying what a large number of people in this country are saying but the candidates running for president are not. Trump could cut to the chase and simply dare any candidate running to answer the following question "do you think this country has a shortage of poor people and needs to import more poor people?"; 7/12/15, 11:11 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Paco Wové said...7/12/15, 9:40 AM

I do have to give Sammy credit for previewing the next model pro-amnesty argument for us: opposing amnesty is just like favoring... slavery!!!!.

Not like favoring slavery, but they are aspects of the same thing. Slavery deprives people of liberty, and opposing amnesty deproves people of the pursuit of happiness.; 7/12/15, 11:12 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: cubanbob said...7/12/15, 11:11 AM

Trump is on a roll. Imagine that, a populist billionaire. Hyperbole notwithstanding he is saying what a large number of people in this country are saying but the candidates running for president are not. Trump could cut to the chase and simply dare any candidate running to answer the following question "do you think this country has a shortage of poor people and needs to import more poor people?"

In your old age, would you rather be in a nursing home, or have a poor person help take care of you?; 7/12/15, 11:14 AM
Anonymous said...: We cannot know the answer but Trump has said that the Perot vote came from Bush voters. Intent, as prosecutors say.

To believe it was 50/50, you need to believe tat Perot was on the ticket to win Dems and Stockdale was there to bring in the GOP.; 7/12/15, 11:14 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Left Bank of the Charles said... 7/12/15, 11:09 AM

Will Bergdahl sue Trump for slander? I would think it would be easy to find a lawyer willing to go after Trump's billions, or even hundred millions.

Bergdahl is a public figure, Trump can't reasonably be expected to know the full facts (but he also doesn't care about the facts) and he didn't damage Bergdahl's reputation. He's playing off Bergdahl's ad reputation.

I forgot to mention one thing about the negotiations the Obama Administration had about Bergdahl.

They let their negotiating partners know that they were very worried about Bergdahl dying in captivity, and they would really, really want to get him out of there is there was a risk of that.

So the Qataris et al let the U.S. know his health wa sin danger - not imminent danger because then there would be no chance to negotiate anything in time , but medium term danger.; 7/12/15, 11:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Sammy Finkelman: Of course, those are not the only alternative. Continuing with the status quo is also an alternative.

Granting yet another amnesty is the status quo.

But you'd have to be aware of things that happened before two weeks ago to know that. It will solve absolutely nothing. (Which is exactly the solution wanted by the political donor class.); 7/12/15, 11:20 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Perot really was 50/50 at the end, because many people who did not want Clinton to become president, eventually cast their votes for Bush. But this is only with respect to the final vote totals. Earlier, he was drawing more from people who didn't want to vote for Bush/Quayle. Most of the votes Perot lost in the final weeks went to Bush.; 7/12/15, 11:21 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: They would really, really want to get Bergdahl out of there IF there was a risk of him dying in captivity.

This was partially an internal U.S. government debate.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bowe-bergdahl-safety-and-health-were-both-in-jeopardy-hagel-says/

The Qataris arranged to give the Obama Administration the "facts" they needed to arrange this trade for Bergdahl.; 7/12/15, 11:25 AM
Bob Ellison said...: Right. 50/50.; 7/12/15, 11:25 AM
virgil xenophon said...: Sammy F @ 11:09/

Faulty logic and ignorance of the facts, sir. HUGE numbers of illegals are illiterate in even their own language and have no discernible skills whatsoever, and thus will forever be a net loss to the economy as they quickly join the welfare/housing rolls and avail themselves of free medical care. American babies, by contrast can become well educated and productive members of society...a net gain.; 7/12/15, 11:27 AM
Swifty Quick said...: I like the way some commenters here not only think but are willing to say that a couple of well-educated self-made billionaires (Perot and Trump) are fools and idiots who know nothing. Perot knew exactly what he was doing. He didn't like Bush, so he took him out of play in 1992. Quite effectively too. I'd wager that Trump likewise knows exactly what he is doing too. What it is will become evident in the fullness of time.; 7/12/15, 11:28 AM
Bob Ellison said...: And Hagel...Hagel...there's a bag of hammers if ever I heard one fall off the roof.; 7/12/15, 11:28 AM
virgil xenophon said...: Sammy F/

FWIW those net loss costs are 1) definitely measurable and 2) are ALREADY on the books for several years now..; 7/12/15, 11:31 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: "Granting yet another amnesty is the status quo."

There hasn't been one (general amnesty) since 1986. That's the problem.

The idea that there should never be anotehr amnesty is what's holding this whole thing up.

Of course we need a policy that specifies when and if amnesty is granted and need to stop pretending that there will never be another amnesty.

This could either be once every 7 years, or once any individual has been here seven years, (or ewhatever period of years you like, but medieval Egland had a 7-year amnesty policy for serfs who went to the cities) or when the number reaches a cerftain point, or maybe what? Anytime the Democrats get a big majority in Congress?

You don't "solve" this any more than you :solve" inflation.; 7/12/15, 11:31 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: virgil xenophon said...

Sammy F/

FWIW those net loss costs are 1) definitely measurable and 2) are ALREADY on the books for several years now..

That is not what the Congressional Budget Office says.

Now maybe they are just talking about legalization, as the medical costs (what a place to save money on - this is like death panels) are going to incurred anyway.; 7/12/15, 11:36 AM
Paco Wové said...: I stand (somewhat) corrected. 62%, "provided they meet certain requirements". Vs. 17% allowing residency, and 19% favoring the reductio ad absurdum "round 'em up and deport 'em".

"opposing amnesty deproves people of the pursuit of happiness."

I don't think the United States is obliged to provide all the peoples of the world the means for the 'pursuit of happiness'.; 7/12/15, 11:38 AM
Anonymous said...: If the polls show Trump's attitudes about immigration resonating, the next step will be to try and ignore him as much as possible. If they don't resonate, then the coverage of Trump will turn a bit more serious, since the press would love to give the Republicans immigration heartburn, especially via someone as volatile as Trump.

The Republicans have nobody to blame for this scenario but themselves for not having a plan to secure the borders. Trump saw the opening and is exploiting it for all it's worth.; 7/12/15, 11:38 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: virgil xenophon said...

Sammy F @ 11:09/

Faulty logic and ignorance of the facts, sir. HUGE numbers of illegals are illiterate in even their own language and have no discernible skills whatsoever, and thus will forever be a net loss to the economy as they quickly join the welfare/housing rolls and avail themselves of free medical care.

Doesn't that depend on what the welfare rules are? And how are they surviving now? The fact is, they are working.

American babies, by contrast can become well educated and productive members of society...a net gain.

Many illegal immigants come as chldren, and spend fewer years in school.

And I meantioned children also, because we have a prgessive tax system, and most people do not pay their own way. But this overlooks the fact that the incomes of wealthy people who pay taxes rise when there are more people in the market/country.; 7/12/15, 11:40 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Trump's views don't resonate, especially when he makes up pr believes factoids.

This is a point of view thst captures maximum about 35% of the votes, and really is more like around 20%.; 7/12/15, 11:42 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: There's a difference between not helping people, and actively interfering with their efforts to help themselves. (on the theory that preventing them from bettering their lives, makes other people's lives better or keeps them from getting worse)

But if you beleive that the rich are rich because the poor are poor, you have to believe that consistently.; 7/12/15, 11:44 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Zeb Quinn said...

I like the way some commenters here not only think but are willing to say that a couple of well-educated self-made billionaires (Perot and Trump) are fools and idiots who know nothing

Perot wass an idiot not only when it came to believing who, if anyone, was going to disrupt his daughter's wedding, and about the supposed importance of balancing the budget and the supposed way to do that...

(the budget was eventually balanced, but not his way, but through economic growth)

But he was also an idiot when it came to GM, I think it is fair to say.

You don't have to get a whole lot of things right to get rich, but just the right thing.; 7/12/15, 11:48 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: cyrus83 said...7/12/15, 11:38 AM

The Republicans have nobody to blame for this scenario but themselves for not having a plan to secure the borders.

The dirty little secret is, no such plan is possible.; 7/12/15, 11:49 AM
Paco Wové said...: Yes, I admit I do support "actively interfering with the efforts of people to help themselves" if their efforts involve illegal activities.; 7/12/15, 11:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Sammy keeps 'em coming:

Not like favoring slavery, but they are aspects of the same thing. Slavery deprives people of liberty, and opposing amnesty deproves people of the pursuit of happiness.

In your old age, would you rather be in a nursing home, or have a poor person help take care of you?

Lol. Sammy, where do you get this stuff? The stale Chamber-of-Commerce-press-release tripe you're peddling is no longer being bought by even the dimmest conservatives, and even the frothing lefties in NYT and HuffPo comments can be counted on these days to blow raspberries at your non-economic appeals. ("Pursuit of happiness", lol. Everybody in the world has the right to move to the United States - the Constitution says so! Open-borders shills really need to up their game, they're embarrassing themselves. Well, they would be if they were people with a proper sense of shame.)

Re your comment @11:31 AM: Yeah, well, we already knew you were a mindless open-borders crank.

So, which is it? You either 1)benefit personally from uncontrolled immigration, 2)are on the payroll of someone who benefits from uncontrolled immigration, or 3) you're peddling this lame propaganda for free.; 7/12/15, 11:52 AM
Paco Wové said...: "no such plan is possible."

So... what's your endpoint, Sammy? Perpetual amnesty? No controls whatsoever? Is there any level of uncontrolled immigration that would bother you at all?; 7/12/15, 11:55 AM
Michael K said...: "opposing amnesty deproves people of the pursuit of happiness."

Sammy, your comments on Patterico seemed more intelligent than this. I spent 12 years reviewing workers comp claims in California. I think I know a bit more about Mexican immigrants than you do. About 1/3 of claims were Hispanics, most claiming "second grade" education in Mexico. Most were illiterate in Spanish.

There is an argument that employers take advantage of stupidity and ignorance among illegals and a guy I know who is an investigator for SCIF (The work comp insurer) says that many do and that increases claims from that demographic of workers.

However, their contribution to the economy is almost certainly less than their cost. I wish I had a dollar for every night I spent operating on an illegal who had done something dumb.

Texas has less of a problem because their state government is smaller and it is almost completely funded by sales tax. California has not only income tax but sales tax at least equal to Texas. The welfare state in California draws them heavily and that is why California has more Hispanics and more illegals than anywhere else.; 7/12/15, 11:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Polls and elections results clearly indicated the American voter was against Gay marriage.

Polls in Greece indicated that Greeks would be split on the last referendum. Greeks overwhelmingly voted for "Oxi."

Folks, please don't respond to trolls like Sammy, it muddies the stream of thought that is supposed to be the reason for the thread. He is most likely set up with a pair of computers, one permanently showing Wikipedia and the other focused here.

As to Althouse whose strategy was to ignore Trump, well as my favorite Russian immigrant said:

“We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand.; 7/12/15, 11:59 AM
Birkel said...: Somebody really cares about this issue. That somebody is a Democrat.; 7/12/15, 12:03 PM
Vet66 said...: Telling the truth is surreal? That is 'telling'!; 7/12/15, 12:08 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: A narcissist fails to recognize the self-destructive course of a fellow narcissist. It's pretty remarkable.; 7/12/15, 12:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Prediction: If it ever turned out that illegal immigrants favored the GOP, the Democrats would be on the streets demanding effective border control, deportations, no path to citizenship, strict voter ID, probably have the media on their side, and would likely have the establishment Republicans eager cave to their demands.

I bet it would also turn out that securing the border isn't as impossible as it's made out to be.; 7/12/15, 12:17 PM
Michael K said...: "I bet it would also turn out that securing the border isn't as impossible as it's made out to be."

A fence in San Diego shifted the problem to Arizona. A fence along most of the border would solve 75% and a few other measures, like enforcing eVerify, would solve the rest.,; 7/12/15, 12:26 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Cyrus- exactly right. And groups like La Raza would be unheard of.

George Bush helped to set the stage for this lawlessnes and John McCain voted for a bill to build a wall that has never been completed. Both parties are guilty but the Dems are getting new voters- wtf are the dumbass Repubs getting out of it?; 7/12/15, 12:30 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: How yawning a blind-spot does one have to have to not see that there is nothing positive that can be gained from a statement as execrably stupid as this:

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best... They're sending people that have lots of problems... They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

The only issue it forced to the forefront is a complete reexamination of the assumption that Mexican arrivals are criminals (it was found that they're less likely to commit crime, actually).

Trump is a total buffoon. Willing to say anything for shock value alone without any regard for its accuracy or usefulness. He's an example of why guys like Rush Limbaugh (despite his ugliness) could never run for public office. He's the embodiment of the right-wing's ability to believe fervently in things so outrageous, stupid and ugly that they know they dare not repeat them in public. Of course they love him for it. He is to politics what Howard Stern is to show business. Not even a non-entity: A negative entity.; 7/12/15, 12:31 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: I'm giving up my failed strategy, which was: If I don't view him as real, he is not real.

All his withdrawn sponsors view him as real. Really bad for business.; 7/12/15, 12:33 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: cyrus83 said...
I bet it would also turn out that securing the border isn't as impossible as it's made out to be.

Bush and the Republicans controlled congress and the presidency for 6 years. Remind me again, exactly how secure they made the border. What did they do to stop employers employing illegal immigrants.; 7/12/15, 12:34 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: AJ Lynch said...
wtf are the dumbass Repubs getting out of it?

Cheap labor and depressed wages.; 7/12/15, 12:35 PM
Goju said...: Securing the border is not going to happen until both sides cease to have an interest in not securing it. The Dems are pandering for votes,and the GOP is pandering to its base. Trump is shaking the tree and the nuts are starting to fall.

Trump's biggest threat to politicians is that he knows how to read an analyze ledgers and budgets. That is a direct threat to the grafters living off the so-called "waste" in govt. spending. Just watch how fast and hard all the pols go after Trump. He is a direct and immediate threat to their donor base.

I had never been a fan of Trump. But he is really pissing off all he right people. And has no trouble rubbing their noses in heir own excrement.; 7/12/15, 12:39 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Anyway, it's time to bring out that electoral Trump map again.

As long as our hostess remains such a big fan of visuals...; 7/12/15, 12:47 PM
Anonymous said...: The welfare state in California draws them heavily and that is why California has more Hispanics and more illegals than anywhere else.

There are four reasons why California used to be the richest state in the country with the best education system and now it's one of the poorest as measured by the percentage of people in poverty, and on medicaid and it isn't prop 13. The Dems took over the state, the welfare system is wide open and generous, the Public unions rule the Capitol, and the border is wide open.

all are linked.; 7/12/15, 12:49 PM
Etienne said...: The funny thing is, all the manufacturers went to Mexico, and yet Mexicans continue to flee the country.

It's a conundrum.; 7/12/15, 12:50 PM
Anonymous said...: The welfare state in California draws them heavily and that is why California has more Hispanics and more illegals than anywhere else.

There are four reasons why California used to be the richest state in the country with the best education system and now it's one of the poorest as measured by the percentage of people in poverty, and on medicaid and it isn't prop 13. The Dems took over the state, the welfare system is wide open and generous, the Public unions rule the Capitol, and the border is wide open.

all are linked.; 7/12/15, 12:50 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: The border's been "secured" to less than a trickle of what it ever was… under Obama.

Someone please explain to me how the Republican strategy became an effort to cast Obama as a failed president, by promising to do a better job of all the things that he's done better than just about any predecessor in his situation.

I guess no one ever accused them of making sense.

At least they have interesting hair, though.

And Rick Perry's new thick eyeglass frames. Usually when someone wants to look intelligent they have to wipe the permanently dumbfounded eyebrow stare and slack jaw off their face.

But these are Republicans. They have their own way of doing things.

Have a fun campaign!; 7/12/15, 12:52 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Drill Sgt: no other country in the world would allow its best state to be overrun and its economy destroyed by illegal immigrants. It is a tragedy IMO.; 7/12/15, 12:53 PM
Goju said...: Securing the border is not going to happen until both sides cease to have an interest in not securing it. The Dems are pandering for votes,and the GOP is pandering to its base. Trump is shaking the tree and the nuts are starting to fall.

Trump's biggest threat to politicians is that he knows how to read an analyze ledgers and budgets. That is a direct threat to the grafters living off the so-called "waste" in govt. spending. Just watch how fast and hard all the pols go after Trump. He is a direct and immediate threat to their donor base.

I had never been a fan of Trump. But he is really pissing off all he right people. And has no trouble rubbing their noses in heir own excrement.; 7/12/15, 12:59 PM
Michael K said...: "Remind me again, exactly how secure they made the border. What did they do to stop employers employing illegal immigrants."

ARM, I assume you don't know about the fence bill that was passed and signed shortly before the Democrats took over Congress in 2006.

Authorizes the construction of hundreds of miles of additional fencing along our Southern border;
Authorizes more vehicle barriers, checkpoints, and lighting to help prevent people from entering our country illegally;
Authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to increase the use of advanced technology like cameras, satellites, and unmanned aerial vehicles to reinforce our infrastructure at the border.

The history of that law is interesting.

By April 2009 Homeland Security had erected about 613 miles of new pedestrian fencing and vehicle barriers along the southwest border from California to Texas.[5]

In May 2010, Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) unsuccessfully reintroduced his “Finish the Fence” amendment for the second time, which would require Homeland Security to construct an additional 353 miles (568 km) of fencing along the US-Mexico border.[6]

The Republican Party's 2012 platform highlighted the fact that the rest of the double fencing was never built and stated that "The double-layered fencing on the border that was enacted by Congress in 2006, but never completed, must finally be built."[7] The Washington Office on Latin America alleges on its Border Fact Check site that the extremely high cost of complying with the Secure Fence Act's mandate-estimated at US$4.1 billion, or more than the Border Patrol’s entire annual budget of US$3.55 billion- was the main reason that it was not fulfilled.[8] In reality Congress failed to fund the project sufficiently in order to finish building the fence.

You're welcome, ARM; 7/12/15, 1:01 PM
Goju said...: "If I don't view him as real,he's not real." Wow. Just f'ing wow. And you say Trump has a big ego.; 7/12/15, 1:04 PM
Anonymous said...: AJ Lynch: Cyrus- exactly right. And groups like La Raza would be unheard of.

George Bush helped to set the stage for this lawlessnes and John McCain voted for a bill to build a wall that has never been completed. Both parties are guilty but the Dems are getting new voters- wtf are the dumbass Repubs getting out of it?

You could do worse than start here to get some insight into the mindset of the Republican establishment. (Author was a foreign relations advisor to former Mexican president Fox who worked with American pols. He remarks on how much they seemed to dislike non-elite Americans and the American system, openly expressing a preference for the joys of clientelismo.) Also see the links to a couple of other articles here.; 7/12/15, 1:10 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: The border will never prevent 100% of unauthorized crossings. Just like background checks will never prevent 100% of illegal gun purchases.

The commenters told me this on yesterday's thread.

If we treated the first one the way they treat the latter, we would repeal both efforts entirely.

But that would be less hypocritical.; 7/12/15, 1:16 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Six fucking years and they only got around to it 'shortly before the Democrats took over congress'. You drink deeply of the Kool-Aid, my friend.; 7/12/15, 1:19 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: The border has a lot in common with the deficit as far as Republicans are concerned. For six years the Repubs did everything they could to make the economy uniquely vulnerable to catastrophic collapse. Then, having achieved their idiotic goal, suddenly, deficits matter, when there finally was a good reason to run a deficit to keep the economy afloat.

Same thing with the border fence. Smoke and mirrors to achieve their goal of cheap pliant labor.; 7/12/15, 1:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael K: ARM, I assume you don't know about the fence bill that was passed and signed shortly before the Democrats took over Congress in 2006.

Sorry, but ARM's point is sound. With a handful of exceptions, the Republicans in Congress don't want the border secured any more than the Democrats do. They take turns posturing to their despised based, when the fear of God is on 'em (i.e., election time, unsafe seat). And e-Verify is the last thing in the world they'd allow to be enforced properly.; 7/12/15, 1:51 PM
Michael K said...: "Six fucking years and they only got around to it 'shortly before the Democrats took over congress'. You drink deeply of the Kool-Aid, my friend."

I try to treat you with some regard, ARM. You must lash out as you see the failure of your life model.

"For six years the Repubs did everything they could to make the economy uniquely vulnerable to catastrophic collapse. "

This is so ignorant it is almost funny. Read Nicole Gelinas' book about what happened.
http://www.amazon.com/After-Fall-Saving-Capitalism-Washington/dp/1594032610
You're welcome.; 7/12/15, 1:54 PM
Michael K said...: "When I aided the foreign relations of presidential candidate and president-elect Vicente Fox back in 1999 and 2000,"

Excellent Anglelyne. You quote an aide to the Mexican presidente on our border problem.; 7/12/15, 1:56 PM
Unknown said...: ---1) In the old days Bergdahl would NOT have been executed.

Tell that to Pvt Eddie Slovak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Slovik; 7/12/15, 2:03 PM
Michael K said...: Eddie Slovak bragged about deserting and said he would do it again. Eisenhower made him an example. He wasn't the only one executed for desertion in the face of the enemy though. They were shot by their officers or NCOs.

Nobody mentions that Bergdahl was booted out of Coast Guard boot camp. The Army should never have taken him.; 7/12/15, 2:06 PM
Mike Sylwester said...: If it ever turned out that illegal immigrants favored the GOP, the Democrats would be on the streets demanding effective border control, deportations, no path to citizenship, strict voter ID, probably have the media on their side.

At the end of the Vietnam War, California Governor Jerry Brown opposed the resettlement of Vietnamese refugees in California because he assumed that most of them would vote Republican.; 7/12/15, 2:09 PM
Unknown said...: ----Immigration only brings economic benefits.

Wow, Sammy you are usually in the same solar system as the mark.

The percentage of federal prisoners who are criminal aliens is about 27 percent;

In 2004, there were 49,000 such prisoners in federal jails;

In 2002, the federal government gave reimbursements to the 50 states under the “State Criminal Alien Assistance Program” (SCAAP) for incarcerating another 77,000 illegal aliens in state prisons; and
At the local level in 2002, the federal government reimbursed 750 local governments under SCAAP for incarcerating an additional 138,000 criminal illegal aliens, which jumped to 147,000 prisoners in 2003.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05337r.pdf

The second GAO report (GAO-05-646R), released on May 9, 2005, looked at the crimes committed by 55,322 aliens who “had entered the country illegally and were still illegally in the country at the time of their incarceration in federal or state prison or local jail during fiscal year 2003.”

The path of destruction weaved by these 55,322 illegal aliens was truly shocking. According to GAO, these criminal aliens:
Were arrested a total of 459,614 times, averaging about eight arrests per illegal alien;

97 percent had more than one arrest, while 26 percent had over 11 arrests;

Committed almost 700,000 criminal offenses, averaging 13 offenses per illegal alien;

10 percent of these illegal aliens were arrested for committing 26 or more offenses;

Out of all of the arrests, 12 percent were for violent crimes such as murder, robbery, assault and sex-related crimes; 15 percent were for burglary, larceny, theft and property damage; 24 percent were for drug offenses; and the remaining offenses were for DUI, fraud, forgery, counterfeiting, weapons, immigration and obstruction of justice; and

80 percent of the arrests occurred in just three states: California, Texas, and Arizona; 7/12/15, 2:09 PM
Unknown said...: ---He wasn't the only one executed for desertion in the face of the enemy though. They were shot by their officers or NCOs.

That really wouldn’t reflect well on military discipline. Recall the uproar when Patton slapped a private being treated for what would now be called PTSD. I’d like to see a citation substantiating this.

This captcha discriminates against nearsighted people.; 7/12/15, 2:26 PM
Michael K said...: " I’d like to see a citation substantiating this. "

Pretty hard to find anything. It was technically illegal, of course, and I doubt anyone admits it.

It's interesting that WEB Griffin, a novelist who wrote a series of military novels and who was in Korea during that war, has written a major part of one story about a summary execution in the early days of the war and a court martial. I wonder if that is one of the stories he knows and has written about in fiction. There are a number of other stories he has written that came from private information.; 7/12/15, 2:59 PM
Opus One Media said...: Good to know that the right wing crazies are still lurking here on the Althouse Blog. I just hope someone locks the doors and turns out the lights at night.; 7/12/15, 3:02 PM
Chris N said...: Donald Trump is the most successful businessmen of all time. This fabulously wealthy investor has become a cultural icon, and emblazoned his logo upon the very heavens.; 7/12/15, 3:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael K: Excellent Anglelyne. You quote an aide to the Mexican presidente on our border problem.

Yes, I did. Did you bother to follow the link(s)? I found them interesting, and some of his observations jibe with my own experience in rather less exalted strata.

You do seem to get irritated with any expression of impiety toward the Republican establishment, but implying that an immigration-restriction site (the source I linked) is shilling for the Mexican government is simply silly.; 7/12/15, 3:22 PM
Etienne said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/12/15, 3:24 PM
Etienne said...: Trump:

In October 1968, he was declared medically unfit to serve except "in time of national emergency," even though he had been declared fit to serve in 1966.

In 1972, Trump was ultimately declared ineligible for service and given a final 4-F deferment.

He received student deferments in college, which he finally graduated in 1968.

He claimed to have received a high lottery number while in school, however he had graduated a year before the lottery was started.

He's the same coin as Bergdahl, just the opposite side. Heads or Tails, we don't know.

Trump is a draft dodger, and being 4F for the military, means he is 4F for commander in chief.

What was his disability: was it a mental thing, or a physical thing?; 7/12/15, 3:42 PM
Michael K said...: "Good to know that the right wing crazies are still lurking here on the Althouse Blog."

What a brilliant comment ! We need more astute observers like you.; 7/12/15, 3:44 PM
Michael K said...: "What was his disability: was it a mental thing, or a physical thing?"

I'm not voting for Trump for anything but this has has been said about John Wayne and Ward Bond and both had had significant injuries that made them 4F. Wayne had dislocated a shoulder playing football and Bond was in a severe auto accident that left him with leg pain the rest of his life.

A student deferment does not require a physical AFAIK and 4F may follow a physical later.

I am not a Trump fan as I fear he may be another Perot but he is saying things that need to be said.; 7/12/15, 3:47 PM
n.n said...: Save a deserter, while sacrificing an ambassador and other Americans. Pro-choice logic.; 7/12/15, 3:47 PM
Anonymous said...: That really wouldn’t reflect well on military discipline. Recall the uproar when Patton slapped a private being treated for what would now be called PTSD. I’d like to see a citation substantiating this.

Those things don't get cited in reports. Officers and men that run are "killed in action" not shot for cowardice by their commander. It's one of those white lies that are told to benefit all concerned.

I don't know of any Vietnam stories, and I was there. I know of early Korean war stories, particularly in the 24th Div, the first unit to arrive in Korea.; 7/12/15, 3:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Unknown said...
This captcha discriminates against nearsighted people.

I ignore proving anything and just hit publish; 7/12/15, 3:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Unknown said...
I’d like to see a citation substantiating this.

google "Bug out fever"; 7/12/15, 3:55 PM
cubanbob said...: Sammy Finkelman said...

cubanbob said...7/12/15, 11:11 AM

Trump is on a roll. Imagine that, a populist billionaire. Hyperbole notwithstanding he is saying what a large number of people in this country are saying but the candidates running for president are not. Trump could cut to the chase and simply dare any candidate running to answer the following question "do you think this country has a shortage of poor people and needs to import more poor people?"

In your old age, would you rather be in a nursing home, or have a poor person help take care of you?

7/12/15, 11:14 AM

So you dodge the point with some nonsense observation. So what are you saying? That American's who could be doing the work you imply should be on welfare instead of working thus requiring the importation of people to do what those who are on welfare ought to be doing? So tell us again, is there a shortage of poor American citizens requiring us to import them from Mexico?; 7/12/15, 3:56 PM
Rusty said...: A student deferment does not require a physical AFAIK and 4F may follow a physical later.

It was automatic as long as you were in school. Of course if you got the letter you better show up.; 7/12/15, 3:59 PM
cubanbob said...: Sammy Finkelman said...

Paco Wové said...7/12/15, 9:40 AM

I do have to give Sammy credit for previewing the next model pro-amnesty argument for us: opposing amnesty is just like favoring... slavery!!!!.

Not like favoring slavery, but they are aspects of the same thing. Slavery deprives people of liberty, and opposing amnesty deproves people of the pursuit of happiness."

Compulsory taxation to support left wing bullshit and welfare deadbeats is a form of slavery.; 7/12/15, 4:01 PM
n.n said...: Illegal immigration is a source of corruption in both America and abroad, and causes displacement, dislocation, and misalignment in the target communities. Illegal immigration is a violation of Americans' civil rights. Illegal immigrants are the source of elevated risk, including committing murder, rape, etc., which is a violation of Americans' human rights. For every dreamer, there is an American displaced or aborted through the government's established pro-choice doctrine.; 7/12/15, 4:04 PM
n.n said...: Trump also discussed inequitable trade policies that favor special interests (e.g. businesses, minority leaders, civil rights groups) and second and third-world nations (e.g. Mexico). Policies that are notably designed to compensate for excessive immigration, including unmeasured or illegal immigration, and liberal fiscal policies (e.g. Obamacare) that function to preserve inflated valuations, benefits, and other schemes that devalue capital and labor, marginalize availability, and manufacture leverage.; 7/12/15, 4:10 PM
Birkel said...: I know of at least two deserters who were shot, one in Korea and one in Viet Nam. The one in Korea was an officer, newly graduated from the academy, who ran and was shot in the back by the ranking NCO. The line held. The embarrassment to the brass kept the NCO from facing a court martial.; 7/12/15, 4:15 PM
Michael K said...: "particularly in the 24th Div, the first unit to arrive in Korea."

This was one of Griffin's stories. The other was in Greece. His tales keep being shown as true. He was in Korea but not in Greece.; 7/12/15, 4:21 PM
cubanbob said...: While Trump has struck a nerve as can be observed from the leftist loons the Republicans have offered no real solution to illegal immigration. The alternatives are always portrayed as mass deportations and the Stalinesque implications or mass unconditional amnesty. In reality most of the illegals come for work to send funds home and or game the US welfare system. If the Nestor decision regarding Social Security conceptually applies to unearned benefits Congress could simply change the programs to be only available to US citizens. That right there takes a lot of the incentive out of coming. The other move would be the elimination of the money transfers to Mexico and Central American countries by non US citizens who have no legal status here. Another major disincentive. A third disincentive would be to allow employers to first verify legal status before hiring. None of these steps are particularly onerous to implement, require mass forcible deportations and would not be a political obstacle for the party the actually proposes them. While it result in all illegals leaving? No. Will it cause most of the recent arrivals to leave, probably not but it would encourage quite a lot of them to leave and prevent most from coming.; 7/12/15, 4:26 PM
Anonymous said...: It's interesting that WEB Griffin, a novelist who wrote a series of military novels and who was in Korea during that war, has written a major part of one story about a summary execution in the early days of the war and a court martial..

actually 4 incidents. 1, Greece, second in early Korea. The third is the one that precipitates the Court Martial, then there is the general reference to the fact that the Tank Company of the Regiment under Parker, was the only unit that had not "bugged out" on at least one occasion.; 7/12/15, 4:26 PM
Bob Ellison said...: A few days ago, an Army guy referred to me as a "civilian", without rancor. It seemed like a tell.; 7/12/15, 4:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Bob Ellison said...
A few days ago, an Army guy referred to me as a "civilian"

I'm 65 and interact with uniformed types young enough to be sons or grand-sons. I find that instead of a flag pin on my lapel, i wear the little Bronze Star Pin that comes with the medal. I got tired of being lectured by Majors about war. And the flag with 2 Blue Stars is too big to haul around (no, not the Admiral's flag, the one for 2 members of the family serving :)

The BSM pin demonstrates to the young lads, that, though our experiences may have differed, like Winston once said, “There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at with no result.”; 7/12/15, 4:41 PM
Michael K said...: Another WEB Griffin reader (actually Butterworth reader).

I never got into the OSS series. But I've read all the others. He's getting pretty old and his son has done a poor job with the last couple. Stephen Ambrose son tried to carry on too.

My military career was quite short but most of it was an an EM so I can tell the recruits I examine every week what boot camp was like.; 7/12/15, 4:46 PM
Drago said...: Coupe: "Trump is a draft dodger, and being 4F for the military, means he is 4F for commander in chief."

I'm afraid that quaint little notion was rendered inoperative with little Billy Jeff.; 7/12/15, 4:47 PM
Bob Ellison said...: The Drill SGT, the Army guy I referred to was recruiting one of my sons. I once asked another Army recruiter whether they could use a middle-aged diabetic epileptic, and he said simply, "No." (A friend said I should have said, "They could use me for target practice!")

My sons would be the best they can get, and I'd be proud.; 7/12/15, 4:51 PM
Emil Blatz said...: Trump is a joke. But even a joke can raise serious and important issues in a campaign. While a lot of Democrats are assuming Trump is a problem for the GOP - what if he raises a lot of media attention to certain sensitive issues, activates a voter block, then gracefully withdraws (or, refuses to move forward) as a candidate? He may queue up a lot of attention to issues that do not break for the Democrats, and then if he, individually and with all of his faults, is no longer a candidate, do those issues immediately evaporate? I don't think so.

I think he goes away before he has to explicitly disclose his financial picture. He released a rather tortured statement of his assets (roughly $8.7B) but not his liabilities. I do not think he can afford to publically acknowledge that, because the difference between $8.7B and his cumulative liabilities is a lot smaller than he wants people to believe.; 7/12/15, 5:11 PM
Gahrie said...: Another WEB Griffin reader (actually Butterworth reader).

I never got into the OSS series. But I've read all the others. He's getting pretty old and his son has done a poor job with the last couple. Stephen Ambrose son tried to carry on too.

I've been reading him since the M*A*S*H* books.

I've read all the books he's published as W.E.B. Griffin. Good books, but he seriously needed a better editor. Facts change from book to book.

Anne McCaffrey's son tried to take over her PERN books also. He did a pretty poor job.; 7/12/15, 5:30 PM
viator said...: "Well, if his idea is to make the Republican Party at least a little repulsive to 60 or 70% of the U.S. population, (and strongly repulsive to 20% to 40%) that might make sense. At the same time, he's making the true-blue Republicans or whatever you want to call them, more locked into this position."

I guess you didn't pay much attention to the elections of 2010 and 2014.; 7/12/15, 5:39 PM
viator said...: Donald Trump will never be President, but here is the whole thing, guaranteed to raise the hopes of some and make other's blood boil.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls3m7NUOqxs'>Trump speech</a>; 7/12/15, 5:44 PM
sinz52 said...: The GOP base doesn't want a GOP plan to secure the borders. Those plans exist. That wouldn't satisfy most of them.

The GOP base wants a plan for mass deportation of the 12+ million illegal aliens who are already here.

But such a plan cannot exist. The fact that the Supreme Court ruled that birthright citizenship of immigrants' children is a constitutional right, makes such a mass ethnic cleansing impossible.

Marco Rubio has had the guts to tell the GOP base that the illegal aliens who are already here aren't going to be deported unless they have committed additional crimes here. The GOP base didn't like that and rejected his candidacy.; 7/12/15, 6:03 PM
campy said...: "I've read all the books he's published as W.E.B. Griffin. Good books, but he seriously needed a better editor. Facts change from book to book."

I see that as commentary on how the soldiers tell the stories differently over time.; 7/12/15, 6:12 PM
Drago said...: viator: "Donald Trump will never be President...."

That is correct.

Because this entire operation is not really a serious attempt at becoming President. It is instead an international business play on the part of Trump. And, of course, it will work.

Trump is about his brand. And his brand represents luxury and quality across the globe. Which is why so many international entities pay him for the privilege of slapping his name on the sides of their properties.

Trump has clearly determined that is where the future revenue streams for Trump enterprises will be found, so who cares who he alienates in the US?

What Trump probably didn't expect, or maybe he did, was that we've become so politically correct that we are not allowed to utter basic, right-before-your-eyes irrefutably true facts which are guaranteed to generate the one thing the Trump brand absolutely requires: publicity.

That illegal aliens commit crimes in massive disproportionate numbers is not arguable. That the MSM refuses to go anywhere near that fact while simultaneously pretending anyone who mentions it is a (what else?) racist, was a gift from the left to one Senor Trump.

And he will be cashing in for a generation on it.

When the political environment becomes absolutely toxic for anyone willing to utter some truths and the establishment politicians run screaming from those facts, you are just begging for someone to step in and cash in.

And there you go.; 7/12/15, 6:45 PM
Gahrie said...: "I've read all the books he's published as W.E.B. Griffin. Good books, but he seriously needed a better editor. Facts change from book to book."

I see that as commentary on how the soldiers tell the stories differently over time.

No, I'm talking about characters meeting each other in one book, and then being introduced to each other in a later book, that type of stuff.

For instance in the series about Marines, Ernest Zimmerman and Ernestine Sage meet each twice. In the book about the Army, the details of Oliver's truck stop change from book to book, that type of thing.; 7/12/15, 6:47 PM
Anonymous said...: I see that as commentary on how the soldiers tell the stories differently over time

No, it's poor editing on basics like back story, and calibers of weapons, facts that a reader knows are wrong.

There are both continuity issues, and technical detail errors of the kind you would not find it a Clancy novel. His readership is loyal, but when you write a 6 volume series, of which he must have 10, then you need to commit to some record keeping about your universe and backstory.

It need not be the author, It could be some bright ROTC Grad who majored in English...; 7/12/15, 6:47 PM
Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/12/15, 6:50 PM
Skeptical Voter said...: There's a great Bud Schulberg novel, "What Makes Sammy Run". Schulberg explains the Hollywood system of the 30's and 40's.

Somewhere out there there's a social scientist who can write a treatise entitled, "What Makes Sammy Finkelstein Run At The Mouth" --with phony statistics.

And Drill Sgt., your four reasons for the decline of California are spot on. My father brought the family to Southern California in 1956 because he was a civil engineer for the Federal government, and had 3 bright children to educate on a GS-12's salary (which was about $9 grand a year at the time---got all the way up to $13K as a GS 13 in 1963 when he hit 55 and retired). My siblings and I got world class educations for virtually free--at least tuition wise.; 7/12/15, 6:51 PM
traditionalguy said...: The Donald is shouting "the king has no clothes on" and a lot of wimps are calling the truth speaker. A clown.

Trump laughs at the Greek Chorus of serious acting blind men.; 7/12/15, 6:54 PM
Michael K said...: "Facts change from book to book."

That's true. The daughter of the general changed names. There are several lapses like that. Still, aside from a slightly annoying tendency to have each character grow in talent as the series goes on and a tendency for them to grow in affluence, they stay pretty well on the target.

I disagree about the GOP base wanting mass deportation. All we want is the border closed and visa security so Mohammed Atta doesn't get his visa renewal after the Twin Towers are rubble.

In 1986, Simpson Mazzoli promised border security in return for amnesty. It never happened. Bush and Rove had a fantasy that they could get a big share of the Hispanic vote. It will be 50 years at least. It took that long for the Irish to shift and for the Italians.

The British Labour Party did this with Muslims. At least we don't have that problem.; 7/12/15, 6:54 PM
chuck said...: I don't know of any Vietnam stories

I heard one. It involved an commanding officer who was chatting with a visiting officer while a patrol out in the jungle was under attack. The patrol made it back and the patrol leader, hand stuck to his chest by a star bayonet, came up and shot the commanding officer in front of the visitor. That resulted in a killed in action report. I don't recall any ranks, they went right by me as I've never been in the military.; 7/12/15, 7:00 PM
Sammy Finkelman said...: n.n said...7/12/15, 4:04 PM

Illegal immigration is a source of corruption in both America and abroad,

That is definitely true to some degree, and the more you crack down, the more corruption - and violence - there will be.

and causes displacement, dislocation, and misalignment in the target communities.

Not really. It tends to prevent displacement and dislocationit, because they are not criminals, and often prevent criminals from moving in.

Illegal immigration is a violation of Americans' civil rights.

What kind of imaginary civil rights are you thinking about??

Illegal immigrants are the source of elevated risk, including committing murder, rape, etc., which is a violation of Americans' human rights.

Now wait a second. That's simply not true. I do know what category of people is associated with elevated risk, including committing murder, rape, etc. and it's people who trace their ancestry in the United States back further than almost anybody else, if they could trace it. If you are going to be against whole groups of people, at least pick the right group!

For every dreamer, there is an American displaced or aborted through the government's established pro-choice doctrine.

This is senseless nonsense. One thing has nothing to do with the other.; 7/12/15, 7:02 PM
Anonymous said...: And Drill Sgt., your four reasons for the decline of California are spot on. My father brought the family to Southern California in 1956 because he was a civil engineer for the Federal government, and had 3 bright children to educate on a GS-12's salary (which was about $9 grand a year at the time---got all the way up to $13K as a GS 13 in 1963 when he hit 55 and retired). My siblings and I got world class educations for virtually free--at least tuition wise.

And he built roads, dams, bridges and water projects. The infrastructure that is now crumbling or purposely being torn down. Imagine his Grandson in the same job today, engineering the breaching of those same dams to try and revive the salmon runs, dumping water in the bay to save the smelt and planning a RR right of way for a train that will never run from nowhere to nowhere. Enough to bring tears to your eyes.

PS: I'm a double degree UC system grad with units from UCD, UCB, UCLA and UCI.; 7/12/15, 7:03 PM
Paco Wové said...: So, to repeat:

what's your endpoint, Sammy? Perpetual amnesty? No controls whatsoever? Is there any level of uncontrolled immigration that would bother you at all?; 7/12/15, 7:07 PM
Drago said...: Paco WovéSo, to repeat:

what's your endpoint, Sammy? Perpetual amnesty? No controls whatsoever? Is there any level of uncontrolled immigration that would bother you at all?"

Once a built-in lifetime advantage for dem politicians is baked in via uncontrolled immigration of 3rd world illiterates needing generational gov't assistance and possessing the classic 3rd world socialist viewpoints, then I'm sure Sammy would be more than pleased to begin discussions about how to lessen the tide.

But not until then.; 7/12/15, 7:34 PM
Unknown said...: ---The patrol made it back and the patrol leader, hand stuck to his chest by a star bayonet, came up and shot the commanding officer in front of the visitor. ---

That’s not a desertion or cowardice story.

BTW I googled bug out fever and nothing came up about military cowardice.

Now lets get back to Bergdahl and the consensus among his platoon mates that he was deserting and that he aided the enemy in making their attacks more effective. Then there is the small matter of additional US soldiers dying while out looking for him.

Frankly, it makes me feel contempt for Sammy Finkleman for defending this POS.; 7/12/15, 7:38 PM
n.n said...: Sammy Finkelman:

Illegal immigration is a violation of law in America. Its amnesty supports progressive (i.e. unreconciled) conditions in second and third-world nations.

Illegal immigration is unmeasured immigration that causes dislocation through introduction of a large number of unplanned individuals into a community that creates both natural and social stresses.

Illegal immigration is a violation of Americans' civil rights by virtue of placing aliens' rights before Americans men, women, and children.

Within any population, there are a number of dysfunctional and deviant individuals. The illegal alien population is such a population. It also contains an elevated threat on the basis that a majority of women and girls are raped during their travel.

Immigration, both legal and illegal, compensate for the reproductive dysfunction in American populations, as well as the consequences of pro-choice (e.g. selective-child) policy that normalizes indiscriminate killing (i.e. abortion) of around one million Americans annually.; 7/12/15, 7:43 PM
n.n said...: Michael K:

Deportation is a poor option. While we cannot tolerate an incentive to violate Americans' human and civil rights, mass deportation would create an extraordinary human crisis a la Libya, Syria, Yemen, Ukraine, Sudan, Europe, and, following a premature evacuation, Iraq. The second and third-world nations do not want their citizens back nor are they prepared to receive them. Also, the impact (e.g. displacement, dislocation, misalignment) of unmeasured immigration has already produced its effects, and communities are struggling to recover.

As for securing the border, that is not forthcoming. The overlapping and convergent interests in both parties are simply incompatible with Americans' will and The Constitution. Both parties want the cheap labor. The Democrats, on principle and as a strategy, further want to exploit democratic leverage to depress Americans' rights, and need to compensate for the consequences of their wicked solutions.; 7/12/15, 7:58 PM
damikesc said...: Why is Trump a clown but Hillary is dead serious? Is there an atoms worth of differene?; 7/12/15, 8:09 PM
Michael K said...: "Deportation is a poor option."

I agree. When Romney mentioned "self-deportation" he was ridiculed but that happened as thousands of Mexican went home during the 2008 construction collapse.

"As for securing the border, that is not forthcoming."

It could be. It is a matter of political will California did it at San Diego and it worked.

"Both parties want the cheap labor."

Agreed. There was a Bracero program that worked and which has been mentioned by Bobby Jindal. It was attacked by the AFL-CIO in the 50s and ended. It could be revived as many Mexican immigrants go back and forth and many plan to retire in Mexico were living costs are cheaper.

The Democrats want voters; the Republicans, the corporate class, want cheap labor but the Bracero program provided that.

The French and Indian War was fought, at least in part, because the French came as traders and did not bring families. Some married Indian women. The English brought families and thus were a bigger threat to the Indian tribes.

It still surprises me that blacks have not figured out that illegal immigrants are a stake aimed at their hearts.; 7/12/15, 8:12 PM
cf said...: We have gotten conditioned to an exaggerated demonization of the other side by our President, surely the most arrogant demagogue to hold the office I my lifetime.

Seems to me Trump is as blunt and "in your face" as that, and we are all supposed to clutch our pearls? At the worst, he plays Biden/Quayle role the trickster truthtelling Fool. There is a need for that.

rippin up the script in the face Now of our BigBlueGovt enlightened overseering Class is exactly Excellent. The intelligentsia is mad to narrow down our deep pool of talent, and suddenly it is breaking even more wide open.

Everyone can get even deeper in their own skin and speak their truth now. Want an exciting bunch of ideas babbling out of only One Party. The feeble few of hobbling old-timers leading other side (Reid? Pelosi?! Hillary?!! sanders?!! ) what a bunch of pterodactyls from another century.

Wahoo!

si! soy Republicana. La abuelita que siente afuera de un mercado en Brooklyn, y vende sus Tamales -- Ella tambien es una Republicana Los .democratos nada mas quieren exclavier. Es tiempo Por Independencia. Los democratos son Por Dependencia.)

Fight, Carly, fight. Fight, you gorgeous stable of republican Leading Men, Fight!

Godspeed, America.; 7/12/15, 8:26 PM
jr565 said...: "Trump is now saying that the Mexican government is engaged in a conspiracy to send criminalas to the United States (and also that most of the people who cross the border illegally, fit into that category!)"
Well cuba certainly did. ANd while its true that most Mexicans crossing the border are not murderers, they are breaking the law. And there are a lot of murderers almost getting a pass until what they do is so bad people have to respond. Like murder people, after being deported 5 times.
Is Mexico sending thugs here deliberately? I've not heard evidence of that. But it would be in their interest to do so. They would rather we dealt with them than they did.
if there is intent or not, the borders are so porous really WHAT"S THE DIFFERENCE?

THis was from 2013:
http://union-bulletin.com/news/2013/apr/01/mexican-drug-cartels-make-inroads-into-us/

and this is from 2011:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/19/violent-mexican-drug-gang-expands-into-us/?page=all

Mexican drug gangs making serious inroads into the US. As far back as 2011. WHat has Mexico done to curtail this influx?; 7/12/15, 9:35 PM
furious_a said...: The freed Taliban are less of an outrage (they would have been paroled/released at aom epoint) than the six troop from Bergdahl's unit unit who perished trying to retrieve him.; 7/12/15, 11:47 PM
Carnifex said...: Sammy F wrote--The dirty little secret is, no such plan is possible.

The dirty little secret is, no such plan is possible, because the donor class likes their low wage serfs. FIFY

I can design and have a plan implemented in 6 months. 1) if you're here illegally, for any reason we take everything you own, and deport your ass outta the country. no if's, and's, or but's. 2) if you employ an illegal for any reason, we will take everything you own. no if's, and's, or but's 3) US Army to lay concertina wire and landmines across the entire MEX border. you cross it you die. No if's, and's or but's. 4) if you're here LEGALLY and want to become a citizen... welcome to the UNITED STATES of KICK ASS!!; 7/13/15, 12:05 AM
damikesc said...: ANd while its true that most Mexicans crossing the border are not murderers, they are breaking the law.

Mexico is exporting its POVERTY. They are having us care for their brokest member because expecting a new immigrant to be able to care for themselves is just too much.

Republicans see what Trump is doing. Why is no "respectable" candidate picking up that baton? Fiorina is coming close.

Not really. It tends to prevent displacement and dislocationit, because they are not criminals, and often prevent criminals from moving in.

The discussion is of ILLEGAL immigration. The first alone disproves your theory. They ARE criminals. I don't want or need anybody whose FIRST action as an "American" was to ignore our laws.

And I love that the border is just too big a problem for us to tackle. Why is it that any policy Democrats oppose is just too big to tackle? They had few qualms about, say, healthcare...; 7/13/15, 12:35 PM
Paul said...: Mexico, like most other countries, have sentences of YEARS for those who illegally enter their country.

And like Cuba, they send us the bottom of the barrel.

Yes close the borders, now. Use those Ft. Hood soldiers that are right training here in Texas.

Use UAVs, use goon towers, use dogs, and if necessary, put up a wall. Israel put one up and it does stop a lot of terrorist.; 7/13/15, 6:37 PM