Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GingerCoffee
    Offline

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    17,605
    Likes Received:
    5,878
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.

    News Fail: Immigration Crisis In the Bizarro World of the GOP

    Discussion in 'Debate Room' started by GingerCoffee, Jul 10, 2014.

    [Abbreviations: GOP- the Republicans
    POTUS - President of the US
    MSNBC - the one mainstream news broadcaster that leans a little to the left (but is not dishonestly political in the same way Rupert Murdoch's Fox News is)]

    [RANT :rant: ]
    The news driving me nuts (it's on mute currently). Even MSNBC can't pull themselves away from the GOP talking points that pass for news.

    The President didn't go to the border to see the problem of the surge of minors first hand.

    Are they serious? You have to see an overcrowded facility full of kids to understand there's a problem? It's ignorant. Not to mention you can be certain that had the POTUS gone to the border the harping would just be something else like, he waited too long, or it was just a photo op. Andrea Mitchell (MSNBC) just told us that "you do learn something from seeing it first hand". Really Andrea? Care to tell us what that thing is we can't tell by the pictures and the reports? :rolleyes:

    And then there is a Democratic Congressman or two who are throwing the POTUS under the bus by agreeing with the GOP talking points, I assume for their own election and fund raising needs.

    It's bad enough the GOP sends out talking points memos telling every one of them just which slogan to repeat over and over, colored with faux outrage of course. But when the news media uses those talking points because it's cheaper than actual investigative reporting, there's no hope for an informed public actually voting in any foreseeable future elections.

    Does the news media even ask the talking heads for what specifically they think the POTUS should be doing that he's not? Well, they ask and get a talking points answer, "secure the border."

    Which is actually the second logic fail: The President needs to secure the border. Hellooo. The crisis is, we've stopped all these people. They did not make it. They are in immigration detention facilities.

    Are the GOPers suggesting were these kids collecting on the Mexican side of the border and unable to cross into the US there wouldn't be a crisis? Can you imagine 50,000 teenagers and mothers with young children camping on the Mexican side of the border within view of armed guards on the US side blocking them from going any further?

    Do any newscasters ask the question, "how exactly?", when they are holding the mic in front of a talking head repeating the mantra, "The President needs to secure the border"? Of course not. Or if they don ask and the talking head avoids answering, the news reporters don't follow up. That would require actual reporting. And why should they when the money is in ads and you get just as many sponsors holding the mic in front of a talking head as you would if you sent reporters down to Central America to find out what really did change in the last couple years to cause the current surge of refugees.

    Are these kids and mothers with children simply following a rumor they can stay if they get here? Is it just that coyotes have begun marketing/exploiting that rumor? Has the violence increased? Are the drug cartels changing? Why is it only Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala? What's different about Nicaragua and Mexico? [Belize, Panama and Costa Rica do not have severe problems that the other countries have.]

    The GOP claims: some obscure action Obama took involving the Dream Act is the cause. How do we know that is true without any investigating?


    Then there's the nonsense, the POTUS is acting illegally on his own, which of course cannot be reconciled with, Obama's not doing anything. But do newscasters ever confront a GOP talking head about this contradiction?

    The GOP claims they plan to sue the POTUS for violating the Constitution.
    Does it violate the Constitution when the Congress refuses to fund enforcement of enacted laws? That is a regular GOP tactic. We should sue them for shutting the government down.

    [/rant]
     
  2. stevesh
    Offline

    stevesh Banned Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    968
    Likes Received:
    646
    Location:
    Mid-Michigan USA
    I'll surely regret this, but:

    President Obama has requested $3.7 billion to deal with the current 'crisis'. Only $1.8 billion was to be used to 'strengthen border and customs efforts (in wholly undefined ways), with the rest to be used to pay the President's lawyer cronies and bureaucratic union slugs in HHS to 'process' the illegal immigrants here now from the latest onslaught.

    globalsecurity.org says:

    "A 2,000 mile state-of-the-art border fence has been estimated to cost between four and eight billion dollars. Costs for a wall that would run the entire length of the border might be as low as $851 million for a standard 10-foot prison chain link fence topped by razor wire. For another $362 million, the fence could be electrified. A larger 12-foot tall, two-foot-thick concrete wall painted on both sides would run about $2 billion. Initially it was estimated that the San Diego fence would cost $14 million -- about $1 million a mile. The first 11 miles of the fence eventually cost $42 million -- $3.8 million per mile, and the last 3.5 miles may cost even more since they cover more difficult terrain. An additional $35 million to complete the final 3.5 miles was approved in 2005 by the Department of Homeland Security -- $10 million per mile."

    So, for a little over $1 billion, we can have a 10-foot, prison-grade electrified fence along the border with Mexico, a much better investment than $3.7 billion for the President's campaign contributors to piss away. Add another $2 billion for more border patrol officers and some more anti-illegal technology, and we might be on the way to fixing this mess.

    I'll believe that President Obama gives a fat rat's ass about illegal immigration when I read that he has instructed his Central- and South American ambassadors to issue clear statements to their respective countries' populace that children (and adults, for that matter) who come into this country illegally will be returned as soon as transportation can be arranged. No 'processing', no weeks of detention, no 'free' health care.
     
    Mike Hill likes this.
  3. GingerCoffee
    Offline

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    17,605
    Likes Received:
    5,878
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.
    I'm happy to bite at that apple as long as you try to stick to specifics in your answers.

    You claim the legal people who will benefit from processing the people in immigration are somehow Obama cronies. Do you have anything specific on that? Because I'm trying to figure out how expanding immigration processing is connected to Obama.

    But more importantly, there is a law that says those detained kids must have a day in court. The reason for this law was to address sex trafficking of undocumented minors and young women.

    So how do you propose we provide that legally required immigration hearing given the backlog and inadequate facilities to house the thousands of minors?

    What specifically do you think should be done about the kids: dump them in Mexico? Flights back to Central America and dump them at the airports?

    Finally, are you aware that the US has contributed to the conditions in Latin America with our foreign policies over the last century and our failure to stop the drug trade for which we are the primary customer?


    Edited to add one more question: Should the border be impenetrable, would you ignore thousands of kids amassing on the other side?

    Is that electrified fence going to be lethal? I don't suppose you know that solution is an unworkable right wing fantasy. That's probably expanding the thread a bit broader than it can handle so I'll go along with the premise one could actually seal the border even though the Berlin Wall comes to mind.
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2014
  4. Mike Hill
    Offline

    Mike Hill Natural born citizen of republic of Finland.

    Joined:
    May 12, 2014
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    70
    Location:
    Finland
    Few points.
    If USA would legalize almost all drugs like Portugal, I think, it would do much more good than bad.
    I'm an outsider so I'm biased in this, but, I would want these rules to my country as well.
    I think that if somebody goes to USA, and knows that illegal immigrant live is not going to be all Hollywood, but, still goes and if thrown out still keeps coming back. He most really love that land. If he doesn't do crime I think he should be allowed to stay.
    Of course he could be she I just didn't bother to write he/she:)
    Excuse my language, but I have to tell it like it is.
    Shiit, I would marry any women, man or dog in order to get to states. I'm soon 18 so if any USA citizen want's a "gingerish" Finnish boy contact me;)
    Seriously Finland is not a bad place, but I don't want to stay in here my whole life. I desperately want to get to states so I think I understood why people are doing the most ridiculous things to get there.
    I'm just going to get my free university education and leave others to pay for it:D
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2014
    Simpson17866 likes this.
  5. chicagoliz
    Offline

    chicagoliz Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,295
    Likes Received:
    815
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    The situation at the border is a complete outrage, but not for any of the reasons the press generally reports. These children are generally in fear for their lives. They should be treated as what they really are -- refugees. Even places like Jordan and Syria have been able to cope with much higher numbers of refugees, with a smaller population base, and obvious other problems that are currently plaguing them. The U.S. has contributed to the terrible situation of many Latin American countries -- one example being the orchestrated overthrow of the democratically elected government in Guatemala back in 1954.

    Sonia Nazario, who wrote an incredible book called Enrique's Journey (which I believe everyone should read) spent time in Honduras and recently wrote an OpEd and appeared on The Daily Show, stating that she has personally gone back to Honduras and it is much worse than it was ten years ago, with drug gangs completely taking over daily life in many areas, forcing young children to work for the gangs.
    See: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/13/opinion/sunday/a-refugee-crisis-not-an-immigration-crisis.html?ref=opinion&_r=2
    and
    http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/the-border-crisis-takes-a-pause-from-politics-20140730
    (The most striking statement is: "I don't want to go back to my country because I don't want to die."
    and
    how about having a body cut up and left on your doorstep as a warning -- is that sufficient to make you scared?
    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/are-kids-showing-border-really-refugees
    or not wanting your young daughters raped:
    http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2014/07/31/3463460/migrant-womans-story/

    I am truly utterly disgusted by the response of some of our citizens to this crisis, as well as by the lack of action even among those who don't advocate for things like shooting the unaccompanied children who cross the border.

    Also, I don't think keeping the children in animal kennels is proper, either:
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/22/1315753/-Keeping-kids-in-kennels?showAll=yes#
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2014
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page