Engorgeous George

I would not make the mistake Reagan made and which you want to repeat. I would not reward those who have violated our borders, our soveriegnty. I would deport them all. I would not listen to their sob stories that we are disrupting families or communities. The reason I would not is that it would encourage, it would justify continuing the cycle of illegal immigration, just as it has. Additionally it is an insult to those who have properly stood in line and have legally sought entry. Now me, I would expand the number of legal immigrants we take in each year. I would expand the guest worker program as well. Additionally I would allow each Congressperson and Senator to sponsor up to ten nuclear families per year so long as they otherwise qualifified for admittance and citizenship. I would massively tighten the asylum program so that not every sob story sister can get in. I would assure that asylum can only be applied for from outside our borders, not inside. I would tighten and clarify birthright citizenship including the fact that it does not come with the right to be raised in this country by parents who are illegal, it does not confer citizenship or residency rights on the parents. If illegals have kids here maybe the kid is a citizen and should be allowed to return when they reach the age of majority after their parents raise that kid in their country of citizenship. In the end you look to support and comfort those who have jumped the line, who have broken the law. I look to support and comfort those who have and are standing in line, who are honoring our law. One stance gives us borders and soveriegnty, one stance does not.

Taco Tuesday tomorrow. Local watering hole has $1 steak tacos, soft shell. They are pretty decent. I may just have to stop in.

Tonight I take unbrage with the drunken part of your cahracterization of me. I am stoe cold sober at the moment.

I would ask tom Homan the same question I asked Tim who could not answer. What does Tom Homan mean when he says violent? Does he mean physical force was applied and injury resulted? What about your garden variety stalker, is that violent? I know if my daughter were stalked by an obsessed illegal who had suggested he would hurt her if she did not take him back, or even agree to take him the first time I would not want that person to be able to remain. Say they were convicted, got 30 days and an anger management course. Would I feel safe, would my daughter? The recidivism rate there is high and frankly he would have already dome substantial violence to her psyche if not her physical being. The concept of violence is being thrown around but who knows what it means unless we get more indepth by offering comprehensive definitions..

You might want to google him before decalring him a moron or someone unworthy of being heard. He is not without accomplishments. He is also a pretty nice guy.

As a former prosecutor I had to consider at least 1000 times the ramifications of plea deals as to how those would effect immigration status. Taht is why I raised the subject of moral turpitude and violent misdemeanors. That is why I am familar with the table I linked above. I thought it would provide a more indepth understanding of issuesd. Doing so is probably not as fulfilling as name calling back and forth but I thought there may be room for it in the discussion nonetheless.

I apologize if raising a matter clearly needing consideration by Tim when he states his position may have angered you to whom the question was not addressed. You must have very big feelings for me to have hit them as I aimed, quite narrowly, for Tim.

I was not being in the least facetious. I don't think you know what you mean when you say violent felonies and i don't think you have thought through what are nonviolent felonies and what are crimes of moral turpitude. For instance what if an illegal is guilty of kidnapping or false imprisonment? They can be non-violent by some definitions and not by others. What about stautory rape, say the roman Polanski scenario. Nonviolent yet clearly a crime of moral turpitude and most of us, maybe not all but most would want that person prosecuted and deported. Frankly I suspect your thoughts on this matter are so rudimentary and unconsidered as to be essentially meaingless. I don't think you know yet what you mean other than you want to serve the platitude of violent felons and then get what you want otherwise which is essentially a country without borders. I don't think it is too much to ask you to define what you mean when you make a statement so open to interpretation.

Decent resource on Crimes of Moral Turpitude. STATUTE

He is no Jim Gustafson.

What about nonviolent felonies? What about violent misdemeanors? Waht about violent felonies which are pleaded down to violent misdemeanors? What about crimes of moral turpitude?

Define european. Do Italians count? How about Spaniards or the Irish?

I like a good nap.

No water for her citizens but money for bombing Isreal and for attempting to get nukes. Their reservoirs are dried up. The little water they have can be shut down with only a few well placed bombs. They are very vulnerable right now whether they admit it or not.

The vast majority at any rate.

If I were on the list i would throw away my cell phone, distance myself from others in command and definitely not attend meetings of large numbers of the command staff, and I would hope my 72 virgins were all female and hot.

It looks like they do. Leadership would devolve to a council until a new supreme leader is chosen. I wonder if those on such a presumptive council have all survived these initial air attacks.

Has an Ayatollah been killed in recent times by war? Aren't they supposed to be revered and with special status? Might the killing of an Ayatollah galvinize at least hardliners? I need to see if there is any comparxable example, not that such would absolutely predict reaction to this, but it might provide some insight.

Huge development if it bears out to be true. In the fog of war sometimes there are mistakes or inaccuracies reported.

We were lead to believe there was something imminent with India and several other countries. Now, silence. What happened?

No you are not. You are trying to start the rumors, but unfortunately for your efforts that is a non-starter.

I suppose No Kings!" might resonate with the people a bit more than "No Oligarchs" which was tried previously but it still misses the point rather badly. I suggest the next effort be "Trump the Tyrant". That has the alliteration ring to it which so many good disparaging titles seem to have.

Police need to exhibit more maturity and restraint than those hoping to get a rise out of them. It is a tough, nearly thankless job. I do remember one incident where I became very concerned the police with whom I had association were not going to fully exercise that maturity. Obama was going to visit Denver on a campaign stop. Multiple metro area agencies were going to be involved through an interagency cooperation agreement. We held trainings in resisting biting on the abuse anticipated to come. The event had one of the early tests of "designated free speech zones" near the speakers platform, within eyesight, but perhaps not within ear shot. (BTW those did not fully stand constitutional scrutiny though other jurisdictions trierd them as well and some still do.) One morning during training several officers showed up with t-shirts which were in contravention of the attitude we were trying to instill. The shirts read "You have to get up early if you want to beat the crowds". In the end the event went off with remarkable restraint by officers catching a fair ration of sh1t. The real lack of restraint came as the bills for the surrounding agencies' overtime came in to Denver and the Obama campaign. No blows were struck but it was touch and go there for a while.

That female officer seems attractive.