Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    6:13 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Children swarming southern border prove a test to Obama’s immigration policy Back to Topics
teacher_tim

Champion Author
Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: May 29, 2014 8:49:13 AM

"Children traveling without their families, including an “overwhelming” number younger than 12, are flooding across the southwestern border in the latest test of the Obama administration’s immigration policy.

Homeland Security Officials predict that 60,000 minors will cross the border this year and that the number will double next year, accounting for an astonishing percentage of people trying to jump the border — braving the tremendous perils of crossing Mexico and trying to evade border authorities, hoping to eventually connect with family in the U.S.

The administration seems powerless to stop most of the border breaches and instead has searched for ways to manage the flow of vulnerable, and politically sympathetic, immigrants.

On Thursday, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson will raise the issue with Congress. He will recount his trip this month to the border in Texas, where he saw such children, which the government calls “unaccompanied alien children,” or UACs.

“I have been closely following this emerging issue since coming into office, with a particular focus on the Rio Grande Valley,” Mr. Johnson will tell the House, according to his prepared testimony. “I traveled to McAllen, Texas, to view the situation and saw the children there firsthand — an overwhelming number of whom were under 12 years old.”

Officials are grappling with how the U.S. should handle children inside the border and whether there is any way to stop the flow.

Under U.S. law, the children are entitled to special protections and can’t be put straight into deportation proceedings, as adults are.

Instead, they are screened for trafficking concerns. Once processed, they are placed with either foster families or sent to their own families in the U.S. while they apply for asylum or a special juvenile visa, said Marc R. Rosenblum, deputy director of the Migration Policy Institute’s U.S. immigration policy program."
link to source

What kind of parents would send their children into such a dangerous situation? In addition, who is going to pay the cost of these kids' education?
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 3:23:51 PM

"Oh, you NOW decide to add in other options. I was just working with the one you had previously noted, campaign funding."

Since you're a teacher, I think you understand the concept of an exemplar.




"The programs that were cut were veterans' benefits, aid to military families, tuition assistance for vets, basically anywhere that Obama could "make it hurt"."

The Republican House leadership has the power to specify where cuts must be made. That they didn't is on them.




"Why stop at corporate?"

Because corporations are not people.




"If you just want to eliminate a part of government to save money, disband the Department of Education."

Better to limit the ability to break things or blow them up, though I'm not adverse to eliminating all the nauseating political advertisements and faux debates.




" Besides, it makes Marty feel so superior that his leg tingles."

Ah, another personal attack from the "adult" in the room. FYI, my leg does tingle from time to time, although a feeling of superiority has nothing to do with it.



[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 9/5/2014 3:25:56 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 3:10:12 PM

"So now these kids are refugees, NOT illegal immigrants. When their parents abandoned them and entered the U.S. illegally, were they "refugees", too?"

Still ignoring the facts which have been linked to multiple times...

*sigh*

"The case of Sandra, a Salvadoran woman who migrated to the United States eleven years ago, is typical. She crossed without papers and remains undocumented. Working at a laundromat in Maryland, she isn’t wealthy. But she has been able to save enough money to bring her children across. Two years ago, she paid a coyote $7,000 to bring her 15-year-old daughter to the States. A month ago, Sandra hired another to bring her 12-year-old son as well. The coyote gave her two options: she could pay $7,500 for her son to be brought to Maryland, or $4,500 for him to be taken to the US-Mexico border, where he would be handed over to the US Border Patrol. The coyote assured Sandra that he knew how the laws worked and that her son would eventually be turned over to her. Sandra chose the cheaper option. But the child was caught by authorities in southern Mexico and deported back to El
Salvador."

A completely different issue than what is being discussed - nice deflection though. ;)
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 1:59:48 PM

"Refugees are not illegal immigrants... "

Apparently they are if they are brown and have a Spanish accent."

And hey, if logic and all else fails, throw in a liberal race card. Besides, it makes Marty feel so superior that his leg tingles.

So now these kids are refugees, NOT illegal immigrants. When their parents abandoned them and entered the U.S. illegally, were they "refugees", too?

"In addition to gang activity, Zamora says that the improving economic conditions experienced by Salvadoran migrants to the United States have acted as a draw. “From sharing a single room with a group of people, now some migrants can pay $1,000 a month and rent a two-bedroom apartment for themselves in the suburbs,” he says. And that means “more people can pay to bring their children to the US.”

Thousands of migrants from Central America are ineligible for temporary protected status—not because they’ve violated any law but because they missed the cutoff dates. The United States offers a mere 5,000 visas for low-skilled workers every year. For many, the only chance for gaining legal status in the United States is the asylum process, and it’s a long shot. Over the last few decades, in part as a response to the wave of Central American migrants fleeing the civil wars, the United States has narrowed the definition of who qualifies for asylum. Because most of those fleeing Central America are not doing so because of their “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion,” they are ineligible.

I recently asked two immigration lawyers from California and North Carolina how many requests for asylum they file each week. “At least ten,” they said. They’ve lost track of how many migrants they’ve represented over the years. But the tally of those who have been successful is easy to remember: none.

“Parents don’t see any chance of bringing their children legally to the US,” Zamora says, “so what options are left for them?”

The case of Sandra, a Salvadoran woman who migrated to the United States eleven years ago, is typical. She crossed without papers and remains undocumented. Working at a laundromat in Maryland, she isn’t wealthy. But she has been able to save enough money to bring her children across. Two years ago, she paid a coyote $7,000 to bring her 15-year-old daughter to the States. A month ago, Sandra hired another to bring her 12-year-old son as well. The coyote gave her two options: she could pay $7,500 for her son to be brought to Maryland, or $4,500 for him to be taken to the US-Mexico border, where he would be handed over to the US Border Patrol. The coyote assured Sandra that he knew how the laws worked and that her son would eventually be turned over to her. Sandra chose the cheaper option. But the child was caught by authorities in southern Mexico and deported back to El
Salvador."

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 9/5/2014 2:04:47 PM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 1:45:04 PM


"The only way? Really? We could take the funds needed out of the DoD or the corporate subsidy petty cash envelope tomorrow and never skip a beat."

Oh, you NOW decide to add in other options. I was just working with the one you had previously noted, campaign funding.

OK, let's look at what happened when the Republicans agreed to slash the Defense budget, along with several other government budgets, during the shutdown last year. The programs that were cut were veterans' benefits, aid to military families, tuition assistance for vets, basically anywhere that Obama could "make it hurt". The fact that he was trying to "make it hurt" is extremely well documented and we both have been through the results here in this forum. If you are suggesting reducing the numbers or sizes of bases or the amount of planes, ships, etc for defense, that has already been done to a degree that defense experts doubt our ability to handle a real war on more than one front. I would welcome seeing your analysis of what should be cut from the defense budget.

I'm thinking we finally axe the Joint Task Force fighter completely, engine and all. I would also keep a squadron or two of A-10 Warthogs available. Although they are slow and "obselete", there is no better close-support aircraft, as was proved in Bosnia and Serbia where the "Devil's Crosses" struck terror into the hearts of our enemies. Hopefully, the Russia-Ukraine situation points out the need for a strong military.

"Corporate Subsidy Petty Cash Envelope" sounds like liberal buzz, but hey, I'm down with it. Why stop at corporate? Let's eliminate all government subsidies for anything. No tax breaks, no tax incentives or write-offs, no agricultural or solar subsidies, no Cash for Clunkers or any other type of subsidy. Personally, I like the idea of a flat tax for any income from any source and no tax exempt organizations of any kind. Not churches or nonprofit [an oxymoron if ever there was one] or hospitals or advocacy groups or anything elese. Everyone pays taxes, period. No deductions for "government approved" things either. Not for anything, including children and electric cars.

If you just want to eliminate a part of government to save money, disband the Department of Education.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,103
Points:419,485
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 11:25:22 AM

AC-302: " But is it the US's responsibility to solve the problem by taking every kid into the US, even if they are illegal?"

"As thousands of children like Auner, Chele and Pitbull arrive at the US border, it is important to remember the role the United States has played in creating this mass migration. In the 1970s and ’80s, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras were in the midst of either bloody civil wars or fierce government repression in which the United States played an iron-fisted role. Fearing the spread of communism in Latin America, the United States supported the autocratic military governments of these three countries, which in turn generated thousands of northbound migrants. Some of these migrants went on to join gangs in California. The 18th Street Gang and the Mara Salvatrucha were not formed in El Salvador, Honduras or Guatemala but in the United States. Some fifty years ago, the 18th Street Gang splintered off from Clanton 14 in Southern California. The Mara Salvatrucha formed in Los Angeles in the late 1970s. At the end of the ’80s and the start of the ’90s, the United States deported close to 4,000 gang members. When they arrived back in Central America, they found fertile conditions in which to increase their numbers: countries devastated by war and poverty, with thousands upon thousands of corruptible and abandoned children."

Why the Children Fleeing Central America Will Not Stop Coming
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 11:15:23 AM

"I beg to differ, Marty. The only way to come up with the biilions needed to care for these children [the ones who aren't really 35 years old] would have to be that drastic. We would need all the TV ad revenue, print revenue, yard sign revenue and far more to "fund the shortfall"

It's okay with me if your opinion differs; no need to beg.

The only way? Really? We could take the funds needed out of the DoD or the corporate subsidy petty cash envelope tomorrow and never skip a beat.

"But is it the US's responsibility to solve the problem by taking every kid into the US, even if they are illegal? Or is it the responsibility of the people and the citizens of their respective countries to "clean up their acts"?

We shouldn't be taking every kid into the US, only the ones that seek refuge here. Other countries take care of far greater numbers of refugees than we do. What exactly is our problem?




"Refugees are not illegal immigrants... "

Apparently they are if they are brown and have a Spanish accent.






[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 9/5/2014 11:16:48 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 10:42:18 AM

"But is it the US's responsibility to solve the problem by taking every kid into the US, even if they are illegal? Or is it the responsibility of the people and the citizens of their respective countries to "clean up their acts"?"

Refugees are not illegal immigrants...
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 10:41:00 AM

"1st I didn't put words in your mouth."

You did - the very definition of, actually. I specified the recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that turned out to be mistakes due to long-standing sectarian bias that we can not help solve. Lessons learned, hopefully. Certainly an expensive one.

"So are you for funding of wars????"

What kind of nebulous question is this now, and how does this tangent that you are doggedly going down relate at all to the subject?
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,722
Points:3,408,795
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 10:05:50 AM

SemiSteve - that's a very touching emotional appeal. But is it the US's responsibility to solve the problem by taking every kid into the US, even if they are illegal? Or is it the responsibility of the people and the citizens of their respective countries to "clean up their acts"?

Don't think I don't have compassion for people trying to escape their poor, 3rd world countries for a better life. I most certainly do. But here, now, how do we feed, clothe, house and educate everyone who wants to come here, here and now, using today's dollars and resources?

And further than that, are we controlling our borders or are we not? And why, if we're not going to enforce it, do we have an immigration policy at all? Speaking of which, do you or do you not agree with the intent of US immigration policy? Do you understand why we have an immigration policy and border control? If so, and I presume you do, where do you see this as wrong, or what do you propose to change and how? (and no, I'm not getting after you, I'm trying to open up a serious conversation with you on a serious issue, not lecture you) (and, no, it's not useful if you pull out that "You're callous and heartless" card. Issues only, please, not emotional appeal)
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,103
Points:419,485
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 9:45:50 AM

"David's murder wasn't widely reported in the country. It was yet another incident of violence—a terrible one, but one of many. The day before David was killed, two other teenagers, 15 and 16, had their throats slit and were dumped in another abandoned field on the outskirts of the capital"

-The Nation
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,103
Points:419,485
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 9:37:06 AM

"
Why the Children Fleeing Central America Will Not Stop Coming
(Illustration by Edel Rodriguez)
Editor's note: This article was translated from Spanish by Daniela Maria Ugaz and John Washington.

On Friday, June 11, David de la O disappeared. He was walking home from school in rural Santa Cruz Michapa, a small city in El Salvador about an hour's drive from San Salvador, the nation's capital. David's family searched for him all night, without success. The next morning, his remains were found buried in an abandoned field outside town. He had been stabbed four times in the torso; his head, arms and legs had been severed. David was only 11 years old. In fourth grade, he had been learning long division and multiplication and practicing verb tenses. With no leads to go on, the police speculated that David was killed and dismembered by gang members because he refused to join their ranks. (He went to school in an area controlled by one gang and lived in a neighborhood dominated by another.)"

"Violence is no less prevalent to the north or west. In 2013, the United Nations identified neighboring Honduras, which had ninety murders per 100,000 people in 2012, as the most violent country in the world. El Salvador was the fourth most violent; Guatemala, with forty murders per 100,000 people in 2012, the fifth.

Let's put those numbers in perspective. The United Nations considers a rate of ten murders per 100,000 people an epidemic. If we were to apply the Honduran murder rate to New York City, where the yearly homicide rate is five per 100,000, more than 7,000 New Yorkers would be murdered per year. The rate of violence in Honduras is nearly twice that of America's most violent city, Detroit, which has a homicide rate of fifty-five per 100,000."

The Nation Magazine



[Edited by: SemiSteve at 9/5/2014 9:41:40 AM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,881
Points:2,376,750
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 9:22:29 AM

Weasle posted reb4's quote: "So Weasle, your idea of Fiscal responsibility is not funding sectarian bias wars... you don't care if there are wars, and for that matter they can be funded?"

Weasle then posted : "That is certainly not what I said. Nice try at putting words in my mouth, though ;)"Well weasle,

1st I didn't put words in your mouth. You specifically put qualifications in your statement on funding of wars...

2nd there was a question mark behind the comment... looking for your response?So are you for funding of wars???? DO you thing there should be some thought on counting the cost of going to war??? Sectarian or otherwise??? or is it just sectarian wars?
By the way please note several questions there...And related to the topic, should there not be some finacial responsibility and forethought as to what the costs will be to our actions on the border>???
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 5, 2014 8:38:42 AM

By Marty on Tuesday
"Conservative compassion... measured in almighty dollars. Let us use political campaign contributions to fund the shortfall."

Posted by me
"I agree with Marty! [Someone get him some smelling salts, please.]

No money may be spent on campaigning at all. Each candidate gets 100,000 copies print out of a two-sided 8 and 1/2 by 11 resume of their stance on issues and their past experience. Those may be distributed anywhere but not at polls or on election days. Every single candidate gets ten one-minute commericials where they are a talking head giving the same information in more detail. There will be six televised debates where each candidate has five minutes to give a presentation and one minute to rebut after all candidates have spoken. Any candidate who interrupts another candidate's time will be assessed a one minute penalty per offense. When their time has expired, the camera goes dark and the microphone goes dead.

What?! You mean there's no opportunity for huge corporate payoffs for political favors or for millions in illicit offshore donations? Well shoot, you might as well make a flat tax and eliminate every tax deduction and every highly-paid political patronage job, too!

um, OK, works for me. What say you, Marty? Shall we take back our government?"

Posted by Marty
"None of that has anything to do with your Tuesday post to which I replied, namely financing the cost of educating unaccompanied minors. "I beg to differ, Marty. The only way to come up with the biilions needed to care for these children [the ones who aren't really 35 years old] would have to be that drastic. We would need all the TV ad revenue, print revenue, yard sign revenue and far more to "fund the shortfall"
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Sep 4, 2014 11:46:59 AM

"So Weasle, your idea of Fiscal responsibility is not funding sectarian bias wars... you don't care if there are wars, and for that matter they can be funded?"

That is certainly not what I said. Nice try at putting words in my mouth, though ;)
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,881
Points:2,376,750
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 4, 2014 10:48:41 AM

weasle quoted reb4: "Weasle, how about showing some fiscal responsibility..."Weasle then posted: "I agree - no more wars which have sectarian bias at their root. Everything else is a drop in the bucket in comparison..."So Weasle, your idea of Fiscal responsibility is not funding sectarian bias wars... you don't care if there are wars, and for that matter they can be funded?

In other words, you are a big believer of ponsy plans...

Got it....
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Sep 4, 2014 9:00:10 AM

"Weasle, how about showing some fiscal responsibility..."

I agree - no more wars which have sectarian bias at their root. Everything else is a drop in the bucket in comparison...
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 5:22:37 PM

None of that has anything to do with your Tuesday post to which I replied, namely financing the cost of educating unaccompanied minors.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 4:50:43 PM

I agree with Marty! [Someone get him some smelling salts, please.]

No money may be spent on campaigning at all. Each candidate gets 100,000 copies print out of a two-sided 8 and 1/2 by 11 resume of their stance on issues and their past experience. Those may be distributed anywhere but not at polls or on election days. Every single candidate gets ten one-minute commericials where they are a talking head giving the same information in more detail. There will be six televised debates where each candidate has five minutes to give a presentation and one minute to rebut after all candidates have spoken. Any candidate who interrupts another candidate's time will be assessed a one minute penalty per offense. When their time has expired, the camera goes dark and the microphone goes dead.

What?! You mean there's no opportunity for huge corporate payoffs for political favors or for millions in illicit offshore donations? Well shoot, you might as well make a flat tax and eliminate every tax deduction and every highly-paid political patronage job, too!

um, OK, works for me. What say you, Marty? Shall we take back our government?
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 3:19:43 PM

"You didn't just mean conservative campaign money ... Did you?"

I said what I meant. Read it again if you're confused.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,722
Points:3,408,795
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 9:46:42 AM

Weasel said: "So these kids aren't going to contribute after receiving this schooling?"

--OK, but after how much money has to be poured into them and their families? The ROI is pretty crummy in this case. And there's no guarantee they'll be productive citizens, rather than welfare bums. However, in fairness, after 2 - 3 generations, it seems like most immigrants from wherever enter the middle class.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,722
Points:3,408,795
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 9:43:58 AM

I agree with others here. Don't we already have enough poor people in the US without importing more from the rest of the world? And how does importing people with no skills or education benefit the United States? And for those who compassionately want to have open borders, would you be willing to "sponsor" one or two families coming up from S. Mexico or Guatamala - let them live on your property, and provide their sustenance until they can support themselves? Why or why not?

US immigration policy allows for between 800,000 to about 1 Million people to enter the US legally every year. Isn't that enough? The current system is a bit dysfunctional. To wit - to be "fair" we allocate the same number of "slots" of people to come to the US from Luxembourg or Lichtenstein as we do from all of Mexico. Possibly this needs to be reexamined. But it is true that we can only handle so many folks at once, as this crisis is proving.

I posted a YouTube link some time ago. Look up "Immigration, World Poverty and Gumballs" on YouTube. It's by an economist named Roy Beck. The video is very telling, and is right on the mark. Watch it and comment..
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,881
Points:2,376,750
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 9:42:31 AM

761 Million dollars... based on government numbers...Weasle, how about showing some fiscal responsibility...
At the same time Democrats are wanting to arm Ukranians ...

Where is the money tree????
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 9:27:47 AM

Of course some of these kids, if allowed to stay in the U.S. would eventually contribute to our country, and some will become welfare, SNAP and WIC recipients.

My point was that we ALREADY HAVE millions of poor kids WHO ARE CITIZENS, and who also need special programs and funding to be successful and contribute to society. There is a finite pool of resources available to fund such things. Shouldn't we focus on our own problems first, rather than invite even more? If you want to help them, fly down there on a mission and help establish schools and sanitation facilities, vaccinations and parenting skills. Feel free to use your own money and that money you fundraise from others who feel the same as you to facilitate your efforts. Let me know where to send the check.

If you feel the need to help children in other countries, Kiwanis is currently trying to eradicate Maternal and Neonatal Tetanus around the world. I helped raise thousands of dollars for this effort in the past couple of years. You can, too. Link to The ELIMINATE Project

I wouldn't know what Tea Partiers think, weaslespit, I'm not a member. Maybe ask Passer, they seem to be some kind of obsession with him.


[Edited by: teacher_tim at 9/3/2014 9:30:43 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 8:49:06 AM

"Just this school year it will cost an extra $530 million dollars for those students for their education. How's YOUR local school system? Flush with cash? I doubt it. That's not to mention the cost of healthcare, food, shelter, clothing, etc for those kids. Obama needed BILLIONS just to temporarily house them for a few months."

So these kids aren't going to contribute after receiving this schooling?

I would venture a guess that Tea Partiers only see future welfare recipients, no?
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,881
Points:2,376,750
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 7:22:55 AM

"Conservative compassion... measured in almighty dollars. Let us use political campaign contributions to fund the shortfall"




MiddletownMarty, I think that should be floated as a good use of campaign money...

You didn't just mean conservative campaign money ... Did you?

[Edited by: reb4 at 9/3/2014 7:23:49 AM EST]
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 7:14:19 AM

"Liberal compassion, also measured in almighty dollars... someone else's tax dollars that is."

They're my tax dollars too.
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:17,519
Points:2,075,815
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 6:58:17 AM

IMPEACH HIM! He hate us and our way of life!
Profile Pic
mweyant
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,801
Points:1,497,215
Joined:Feb 2010
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 4:38:33 AM

Many children found alone at the U.S. border released in Gwinnett

9-2

"The children Salmon sees coming into the Gwinnett area are mostly from places like Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Mexico. Often, they don’t have parents to protect them at home, she said, and some are “terrified” to go back.

Salmon’s clients typically make it to Mexico by hitching rides or hopping trains. Then, they meet with “criminals” at the border, who “extort” the kids before letting them pass, she said.

Once detained in America, the Office of Refuge Resettlement, a federal agency under the umbrella of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, is required by law to feed, cloth and provide medical treatment to the children, or release them to a competent sponsor. The sponsors must pass a background check and see that the children follow any court orders to leave the country.

Gwinnett County Division of Family and Children Services has seen no impact from the children coming in the county, according D’Anna K. Liber, director of the agency.

Exactly where the children have been released in Gwinnett isn’t clear. Spokespeople for The Office of Refuge Resettlement couldn’t be reached for comment Tuesday. But the agency’s report says it does not release much information on the kids.

(The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) has strong policies in place to ensure the privacy and safety of unaccompanied children by maintaining the confidentiality of their personal information,” the report says. “These children may have histories of abuse or may be seeking safety from threats of violence. They may have been trafficked or smuggled. HHS cannot release information about individual children that could compromise the child’s location or identity.”

God bless these children. I see only one new ESL student at our school this year, who came to America a year ago from Mexico. Some parents, however, do not allow their students to be labeled "ESL."
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 10:51:07 PM

Liberal compassion, also measured in almighty dollars... someone else's tax dollars that is.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 5:52:44 PM

Conservative compassion... measured in almighty dollars. Let us use political campaign contributions to fund the shortfall.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 2:23:16 PM

"For the purposes of its study, FAIR said it estimated the per pupil cost of educating the unaccompanied minors to be 0.75 more than each state’s average cost per student.

“These kids will require special Limited English Proficient (LEP) classes conducted in Spanish, or in other languages indigenous to Central American, as well as other taxpayer funded services, such as free and reduced school meals. Once again the costs of federal government’s failed immigration policies are borne at the local level, and the nation's public school system is where the costs are most visible,” FAIR said.

FAIR analyzed the cost state by state. The states with the highest cost were also those with the highest numbers of unaccompanied minors in the states.

California, for example is host to more than 3,900 unaccompanied minors and the cost of educating the 98 percent FAIR estimated would be enrolling in public schools is $63,908,143. Florida, home to more than 3,800 unaccompanied minors, could see the cost of educating those of school age to be $56,773,589.

Other high unaccompanied minor population, high cost states include New York at $147,731,339, Texas at $77,655,584, Maryland at $67,937,602, New Jersey at $57,698,181, and Virginia at $54,182,412."
link to source
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 1:02:15 PM

Gee Weas,
Like announcing that we won't deport minors immediately and 50,000 plus show up at our southern border?

Just this school year it will cost an extra $530 million dollars for those students for their education. How's YOUR local school system? Flush with cash? I doubt it. That's not to mention the cost of healthcare, food, shelter, clothing, etc for those kids. Obama needed BILLIONS just to temporarily house them for a few months.
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,652
Points:14,165
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 9:16:10 AM

"It is OK, Chicken Little... The sky is not falling - but saying so sure is dramatic, if not sensational for the purpose of propaganda!"

Appeal to ridicule. By the ridiculous!

Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 8:56:06 AM

"Yes, I heard that late yesterday. No proof needed, or even verifiable. Any woman who says she is a victim of abuse in any country with laxer laws than ours can come here and it's OK.

U.S. population may well double if the women can get here. Maybe we should just annex Mexico and Central America now to save time."

It is OK, Chicken Little... The sky is not falling - but saying so sure is dramatic, if not sensational for the purpose of propaganda!
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 1, 2014 2:08:56 AM

"Cindy Carcamo, Los Angeles Times TUCSON, Ariz. -- Naira Zapata might seem a typical candidate for the Obama administration's deferred deportation program. Her family smuggled her across the U.S.-Mexican border when she was 12.

But Zapata, now 20, dropped out of high school three years ago after giving birth to her first child. She never received her diploma, hindered by poor finances and having to care for her two young children. She still lives with her parents in Phoenix.

Zapata is a sharp departure from what immigrant rights organizers once presented as a poster child for those who would benefit from Obama's immigration relief program: a high school graduate clad in a cap and gown, bound for the Ivy League.

Instead, Zapata is representative of those left behind. An estimated 426,000 young people nationwide meet all but one of the requirements of the immigration program launched two years ago: a high school diploma or GED.

Stifled by financial strain and discouraged by misinformation and a perception that they don't fit the image of the ideal recipient, many fail to apply for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. DACA, as the program is known, gives a work permit and deportation reprieve to people who were brought to the U.S. as children and stayed illegally.

In response, immigrant rights activists are making a big push to get more people like Zapata to return to school.

Yadira Garcia, lead field organizer for an outreach campaign in Phoenix, said one of the biggest challenges is getting potential applicants to see themselves as "Dreamers," as youth brought into the country as children are often called.

"They don't identify with the Dreamer narrative that was pushed for so long," Garcia said. "We're trying to demystify who can and cannot qualify."

Garcia is part of a trio of activists who hit the streets to find DACA applicants, targeting immigrant youth at the local Mexican consulate office, public events and forums around the Phoenix metropolitan area.

People are surprised to hear that a dropout can still qualify -- if they return to school."

Read more at http://www.arcamax.com/currentnews/newsheadlines/s-1562560?source=outbrain#Uo4kzs7Rb1OrTuzg.99

This will, unfortunately, be the story of many of the 50,000 plus illegal immigrant children flooding the border.

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 9/1/2014 2:10:03 AM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 28, 2014 12:18:57 PM

Yes, I heard that late yesterday. No proof needed, or even verifiable. Any woman who says she is a victim of abuse in any country with laxer laws than ours can come here and it's OK.

U.S. population may well double if the women can get here. Maybe we should just annex Mexico and Central America now to save time.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 28, 2014 12:13:31 PM

"The most sweeping, controversial step under consideration involves halting deportation for millions, a major expansion of a 2012 Obama program that deferred prosecutions for those brought here illegally as children. Roughly half a million have benefited from that program, known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA."

THAT Obama program encouraging the swarming of children to the U.S. border.
link to source
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,386
Points:2,987,795
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 4:03:26 PM

How did I miss this one yesterday.......Justice Dept. Opens New Asylum Gate For Guatemalans
"The Department of Justice’s board of immigration appeals has decided to let Guatemalan women win asylum in the United States if they claim to be victims of domestic violence."

"The decision creates a huge new incentive for Guatemalan women to cross the U.S. border, because if their asylum claim is accepted, their children get U.S. citizenship, plus the use of federal health, education and retirement programs, regardless of their initial education and work skills."

Did you see the qualifying word, "claim" to be a victim of domestic violence?
All these past months we have been heart-wrenched at the spector of gangs and drug cartels and dangerous streets in these Central American nations. Now we have to open the door and roll out the welcome mat for claims that women are "victims of domestic violence". And if they come here with such a claim, we of course accept them and their children become citizens automatically?

In whose insane world is any of this happening?!?!

In case you detect a trend, here's another trend:
Pew Survey: 1/3 of Mexicans Want to Move to America; 60% Disapprove of Peña Nieto's Economy

Warm up the food stamp printing machines! They Are Coming! THEY ARE COMING !!!



[Edited by: I75at7AM at 8/27/2014 4:04:24 PM EST]
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:55:47 AM

"So it had nothing to do with Obama announcing that he would not follow U.S. law and send illegal immigrants back?"

President Obama is following U. S. law by not sending those children back immediately.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:31:02 AM

"Seriously?! So it had nothing to do with Obama announcing that he would not follow U.S. law and send illegal immigrants back?

Why do you think they're swarming now and didn't before?"

Uh, those kids were already here - this has been escalating for nearly 2 years, well before his announcement.

Again, this is why they are swarming, apparently it needs to be repeated;

"The US is not 'encouraging' these kids who have 'swarmed' our borders over the past 18 months to come North, the gangs in their own country are through terrorism."

Might want to get your facts straight.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:23:11 AM

Seriously?! So it had nothing to do with Obama announcing that he would not follow U.S. law and send illegal immigrants back?

Why do you think they're swarming now and didn't before? Why don't they have 10 cent beer night in Cleveland again?
Basically, if you give something away cheap or for free just for getting there...
This kind of thing happens
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 8:34:42 AM

"It's like the billions of dollars and hundreds of lives we lost in Iraq, only to see it turn into exactly what we DIDN'T want to happen."

And what does Iraq's inability to move past religious intolerance have to do with the gang violence in Central America?

We gave Iraq a chance to move forward, they chose not to. Their collapse is certainly disappointing, but they are a sovereign nation, other countries can't hold their hands forever.

"That's money that could have been spent securing our borders and ports, as well as providing aid to the countries whose parents are sending their children by the Death Train to certain opportunity for being raped and murdered by coyotes and human traffickers."

Except the gang violence wasn't present as it is today when the Iraq money was spent, so...
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,657
Points:527,385
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 8:31:27 AM

"How many should die as a result of our encouraging them to be subjected to the perils of the journey, sex traffickers and coyotes before they matter to you?"

Seriously? The US is not 'encouraging' these kids who have 'swarmed' our borders over the past 18 months to come North, the gangs in their own country are through terrorism.

Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 12:56:09 AM

Sorry you're sad, Marty. Reality does that sometimes.

It's like the billions of dollars and hundreds of lives we lost in Iraq, only to see it turn into exactly what we DIDN'T want to happen.

That's money that could have been spent securing our borders and ports, as well as providing aid to the countries whose parents are sending their children by the Death Train to certain opportunity for being raped and murdered by coyotes and human traffickers. Far better for us to try to effect change there instead of taking them from their families.

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 8/25/2014 12:57:42 AM EST]
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,579
Points:1,828,775
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 8:47:40 PM

tt: "It is comfortable enough, but very difficult to escape from."


Sounds a lot like heroin to me, which is precisely what the left wants. Dependent people do as they are told and vote as they are told.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,386
Points:2,987,795
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 8:41:49 PM

Realism is more optimistic. Sad that some people don't understand reality.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 3:43:35 PM

"Works for me, Marty."

How utterly sad.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 2:39:17 PM

Works for me, Marty. Time to unscrew it.

It was placed there LONG before social security, welfare, guaranteed health care and student loans, etc. It was placed there when America was expanding westward and had plenty of land and opportunity for anyone willing to hazard their lives and fortunes [or lack thereof] in pursuit of a dim hope through the opportunites afforded by hard work, sacrifice, and thrift to get ahead for their children to have a better life.

I'm pretty certain that SNAP EBT cards, Obama phones, questionable disability payments and the rest of the government "trough" of goodies ISN'T in the poem nor was it considered at the time.

I've heard the "social safety net" described as a cross between a hammock and a spider's web. It is comfortable enough, but very difficult to escape from. We certainly DON'T need to be adding more people to it. Besides, it is an impossibility for the U.S. to keep offering citizens' benefits to every person who feels like wandering in for them. The third world birthrate precludes that.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,580
Points:318,775
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 2:16:51 PM

"We SHOULD NOT be encouraging large numbers of people from other countries to come here."

Then let us begin by removing "The New Colossus" from the lower level of the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. Truth in advertising.


Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,926
Points:817,605
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 12:57:01 PM

That's wonderful, mweyant! We SHOULD help legal immigrants acclimatize to America.

We SHOULD NOT be encouraging large numbers of people from other countries to come here. We should instead be focusing our money and energies on improving the situations of citizens already here. Liberals are fond of pointing out the crime and poverty rates and lack of job opportunities and lousy schools in places like Ferguson, but instead use our finite resources to encourage MORE people who are poor, violent, uneducated and lacking job skills to come. Stop digging the hole deeper and start respecting our national borders and laws.
Post a reply Back to Topics