tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post985407234424624672..comments2024-03-13T02:17:39.644-07:00Comments on Restating the Obvious: The United States should pay for immigrantsHarry Eagarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-19252591764831652842018-06-25T08:56:07.173-07:002018-06-25T08:56:07.173-07:00[Harry:] I think the Restaurant Revolt may be sign...<i>[Harry:] I think the Restaurant Revolt may be significant. </i><br /><br />In that it points out what flaming hypocrites progressives are, I completely agree.<br />Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-9176617927556285672018-06-25T07:15:56.124-07:002018-06-25T07:15:56.124-07:00Thanks, Harry, this is truly interesting.Thanks, Harry, this is truly interesting.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-87639125877616297012018-06-25T00:13:57.828-07:002018-06-25T00:13:57.828-07:00Bill Clinton, Nazi.
And Fordham law professor Jen...<a href="http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/mar/29/florida-immigrant-coalition/do-undocumented-immigrants-have-constitutional-rig/" rel="nofollow">Bill Clinton, Nazi.</a><br /><br /><i>And Fordham law professor Jennifer Gordon said that some undocumented immigrants get almost no due process in removal proceedings.<br /><br />In 1996, Congress created expedited removal for undocumented immigrants without a hearing. Initially it only applied at the U.S. border. Then it was expanded to within 100 miles of a border for undocumented immigrants who had been in the country less than 14 days.</i><br /><br />You'd think the NYT could hire some fact checkers.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-91269708936279362982018-06-24T23:33:16.193-07:002018-06-24T23:33:16.193-07:00[Harry:] So, Trump today said law should not apply...<i>[Harry:] <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/24/us/politics/trump-immigration-judges-due-process.html" rel="nofollow">So, Trump today said law should not apply at the border.</a> As I said a few days ago, no one would dispute the complete nazification of the US government, at least in the executive branch.</i><br /><br />Oh, really?<br /><br /><i>The Fifth Amendment mandates the due process of law, and the 14th Amendment, in part, expanded due process rights for immigrants, with case law asserting those rights dating back to 1886. <b>But Justice Department lawyers under both Democratic and Republican administrations have argued that noncitizens apprehended at the border lack due process protections</b>, said Adam Cox, a law professor at New York University, and the Supreme Court has never clearly resolved the dispute.</i><br /><br />Who knew nazification went back so far?Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-12673006333235467612018-06-24T23:29:55.215-07:002018-06-24T23:29:55.215-07:00Harry, your link proves you, and Jennifer Mendelso...Harry, your link proves you, and Jennifer Mendelsohn, don't understand what is going on.<br /><br />The question isn't whether we should allow immigration, but rather how much illegal immigration we should tolerate.<br /><br />And the next question is what kind of legal immigration is in the country's best interests.<br /><br />Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-51388112086878273742018-06-24T23:26:58.948-07:002018-06-24T23:26:58.948-07:00Clovis, that wasn't harassment. Rather, I poi...Clovis, that wasn't harassment. Rather, I pointed out that you provided an answer for the future, not the here and now.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-77469829635737298732018-06-24T23:16:57.966-07:002018-06-24T23:16:57.966-07:00The Internet isa wonderful place. It has Jennifer ...The Internet isa wonderful place. It has Jennifer Mendelsohn in it, and she is making mincemeat of all the anti-immigrant politicians.<br /><br />https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/24/us/immigration-resistance-genealogy-jennifer-mendelsohn-trnd/index.htmlHarry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-15187231835504022922018-06-24T22:57:16.359-07:002018-06-24T22:57:16.359-07:00In which he argues for the wall, a solution I gave...In which he argues for the wall, a solution I gave here before too, only to be harassed by you. Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-70836965330798390922018-06-24T13:00:28.464-07:002018-06-24T13:00:28.464-07:00Andrew Sullivan says what I've been trying to ...<a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/to-end-the-border-crisis-for-good-give-trump-his-wall.html" rel="nofollow">Andrew Sullivan says what I've been trying to say, except way, way better.</a>Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-46236626699883730622018-06-24T12:35:24.023-07:002018-06-24T12:35:24.023-07:00[Harry:] So, Trump today said law should not apply...<i>[Harry:] So, Trump today said law should not apply at the border. As I said a few days ago, no one would dispute the complete nazification of the US government, at least in the executive branch.<br /><br />Time for Trumpters to admit their nazi ideals or get out.</i><br /><br />Do you not know how links work, Harry?<br /><br />If not, don't be ashamed, I can give you a quick tutorial.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-83223780408882964252018-06-24T12:31:47.276-07:002018-06-24T12:31:47.276-07:00[Clovis:] I can only conclude you have not been r...<i>[Clovis:] I can only conclude you have not been reading what I write. Back at GG, your preferred solution ("an EO negating Flores and establishing facilities to keep parents and their children together") was given only *after* I wrote, replying your question of "What's the answer?" </i><br /><br />Kind of, but that is likely because I wasn't specific enough with the question.<br /><br />Nothing isn't an option, and what you proposed is post-hoc. What I should have asked is this: The perverse incentive was in place. What is the best way — keeping in mind the risk to children of making that trek for the purpose of getting the get-out-of-jail-free card if caught — of ending it?<br /><br /><i>You are making arguments over and over about what is The Law. I posted three consecutive links, all related to the same message, and you look to have completely missed it anyway. What do you think I was possibly pointing to?</i><br /><br />The first effectively promoted open borders, the second made the case that Arendt swung and missed, and the last excoriates ICE enforcement for insufficient discretion:<br /><br /><i>There are 11 million unauthorized </i>[sic]<i> immigrants in this country. Every past administration has used some discretion in targeting whom to deport. They targeted those who were destroying society, not building it. They tried to take account of particular contexts, and they tried to show some sense of basic humanity.</i><br /><br />There are two problems here. First, it elevates illegal immigrants above US citizens, who get arrested for violating the law. Second, granting the assertion that massive illegal immigration is harmful (I'm not asking you to agree with it; rather, it is a significant reason Trump got elected, and it is a point of view that beats by more than three to one open borders.) <br /><br />Probably the most effective way to secure the border is a physical barrier — the Chinese have proven it can be done. However, until it is in place, hi-profile disincentives are the next best option.<br /><br />I have no idea how Arendt got into this.<br /><br />This isn't the first lap around this track. There have been previous deals that traded amnesty for enhanced border security. The amnesties happened, security never did. <br /><br />In case anyone is wondering why amnesty is such a dirty word.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-51112105193020165462018-06-24T12:03:51.868-07:002018-06-24T12:03:51.868-07:00[Clovis:] Quite sincerely, Skipper, I am aghast a...<i>[Clovis:] Quite sincerely, Skipper, I am aghast at your text interpretation. No, that link does not "essentially advocates open borders", and no, the author did not express a view, in those lines, that "any laws restricting immigration are unjust".</i><br /><br />From the link:<br /><br /><i>Instead I want to suggest that this distinction </i>[between legislation and law]<i> is helpful for understanding why those of us who are deeply appalled at the latest cruelty of U.S. immigration policy are correct to insist that this policy is so outrageously immoral that it should be disobeyed by all who are in positions to disobey it.<br /><br />The policy that I write of is the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy toward immigrant border crossings, including the forced separation of children from parents.</i><br /><br />This is part of the reason why I said he is essentially arguing for open borders. Distilling these sentences, the author is appalled at the "zero tolerance" policy, full stop: it is so outrageously immoral that it should be disobeyed. <br /><br />Please explain to me how that isn't arguing for open borders. He goes on to say:<br /><br /><i>The people currently victimized by the Trump administration are guilty of nothing other than what the ancestors of all Americans were guilty of: wanting to live in America. Acting to make that wish come true is itself not a crime; it is not, as lawyers say, </i>malum in se<i>. Acting on that wish is a crime only because the state declares it to be so; it is, as lawyers say, </i>malum prohibitum.<br /><br />I'm not sure where he got his legal training, but there are plenty of things that are crimes regardless of mental state. Improperly securing classified information is just one example.<br /><br />Then:<br /><br /><i>I submit that the law is violated by the Trump administration and those U.S. government officials who follow the Trump administration’s commands to separate children from their peaceful parents.</i><br /><br />So it is a violation of some law to put an end to a perverse incentive, because the law, and court settlements, requires separating children from their parents after an arrest.<br /><br />Which leaves him in the position of advocating open borders, because no allowable implementation of law impedes illegal immigrants with children from being arrested: they must be released.<br /><br />What's worse, though, is the astonishingly superficial viewpoint: the worst, most unconscionable thing is forcefully separating children from their parents. (NB: I have no idea why a judge prohibited holding children for more than twenty days with their arrested parents, but there it is. Which means the administration can't remove this perverse incentive without itself violating the law, which it is constitutionally prohibited from doing. So the administration must rely upon an extra-legal EO to circumvent a baffling restriction which the judge will not remove.)<br /><br />The perverse incentive exists, and is directly responsible for an increasing number of illegal immigrants bringing children with them. Which means subjecting these children to very fraught, dangerous passages from Central America, or even further away. <br /><br />Now, I have utterly no idea if the administration thought through the serious, concomitant, consequences of catch-and-release when children are present, but they are there, nonetheless.<br /><br />Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-60511444793534334482018-06-24T11:23:07.663-07:002018-06-24T11:23:07.663-07:00So, Trump today said law should not apply at the b...So, Trump today said law should not apply at the border. As I said a few days ago, no one would dispute the complete nazification of the US government, at least in the executive branch.<br /><br />Time for Trumpters to admit their nazi ideals or get out.<br /><br />I think the Restaurant Revolt may be significant. <br /><br />Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-75400193113285462312018-06-23T18:38:15.261-07:002018-06-23T18:38:15.261-07:00Skipper,
---
[Clovis:] Did you read this link I g...Skipper,<br /><br />---<br />[Clovis:] Did you read this link I gave the other day at GG?<br /><br />Yes, I did.<br /><br />It essentially advocates open borders, so, in that author's view any laws restricting immigration are unjust. I think his argument for open borders is extremely weak. <br />---<br /><br />Quite sincerely, Skipper, I am aghast at your text interpretation. No, that link does not "essentially advocates open borders", and no, the author did not express a view, in those lines, that "any laws restricting immigration are unjust".<br /><br />Please, give it a second try, this time with 2 or 3 doses less of whatever you were drinking.<br /><br />---<br />So when I keep asking you to resolve the contradiction, you continually fail to address the elements of the problem, weigh them, and provide some sort of way out.<br />---<br />I can only conclude you have not been reading what I write. Back at GG, your preferred solution ("an EO negating Flores and establishing facilities to keep parents and their children together") was given only *after* I wrote, replying your question of "What's the answer?":<br /><br />"There are far too many trivial solutions (among them, the one presently adopted by Trump's EO). What you are asking me though is "How do I make my Congress to stop kicking the can and solving this utterly trivial issue?". "<br /><br />IOW, I gave your own answer before yourself (not because I am a genius, but because this is trivial), and here you are scolding me for not providing any answer.<br /><br /><br /><br />---<br />BTW, have you really never relfected upon the lessons H. Arendt drew from Adolph Eichmann? <br /><br />Remember when I said you provide insults where arguments belong?<br />---<br />Here I am, aghast again. <br /><br />You are making arguments over and over about what is The Law. I posted three consecutive links, all related to the same message, and you look to have completely missed it anyway. What do you think I was possibly pointing to?<br />Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-19983655636779146342018-06-23T18:36:03.032-07:002018-06-23T18:36:03.032-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-23909464413983732122018-06-23T06:03:10.760-07:002018-06-23T06:03:10.760-07:00[Harry:] At least 200,000 Indians murdered by evan...<i>[Harry:] At least 200,000 Indians murdered by evangelical Christians in Guatemala.</i><br /><br />One and a half million killed during the partition of India. Bangladesh genocide, 3 million. Hutus and Tutsis, a million plus. Soviet Union and the PRC, over 60 million.<br /><br />Is there nothing those evangelical Christians won't do?Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-56842280132847303752018-06-23T04:54:25.319-07:002018-06-23T04:54:25.319-07:00[Clovis:] Did you read this link I gave the other ...<i>[Clovis:] Did you read this link I gave the other day at GG?</i><br /><br />Yes, I did.<br /><br />It essentially advocates open borders, so, in that author's view <i>any</i> laws restricting immigration are unjust. I think his argument for open borders is extremely weak. But never mind that, per a very recent Economist/YouGuv poll, Americans by more than 3 to 1 support arresting illegal aliens.<br /><br />So, the extent that government policy should reflect the desires of the citizens, then US policy should be borders secure to the extent that the difference between legal and total immigration is very small.<br /><br />That means there is a very real contradiction between law — supported by the vast majority of Americans — and reality on the ground.<br /><br />And that reality on the ground is a very predictable outcome of the Obama administration's policies. <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/html/whos-really-blame-border-15986.html?utm_source=City+Journal+Update&utm_campaign=ef8a631d99-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_06_22_08_24&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6c08930f2b-ef8a631d99-109347713" rel="nofollow">They positively incentivized adults bringing children across the border</a>.<br /><br />Word got out, and it started a wave of child-involved illegal immigration.<br /><br />So when I keep asking you to resolve the contradiction, you continually fail to address the elements of the problem, weigh them, and provide some sort of way out. <br /><br />Just as you, and Harry, fail to recognize that the Trump administration is only applying more thoroughly policies the Obama administration was itself applying. In fact, there has been a great deal of propaganda relying on pictures and incidents that happened before Trump became president. This week, Time magazine's front cover was yet another instance of completely fake news.<br /><br />Which is why, above, Harry has shown himself once again to be completely incontinent when it comes to his list of slanders. <br /><br /><i>Whatever you have in the books to deal with the parents, there are other laws, concerning the well being of children, as well as international treaties among nations ratified by your Congress, that are of no less importance. </i><br /><br />Okay, fine. Be specific. What are they?<br /><br /><i>[Hey Skipper:] "Your alternative is no alternative at all."<br />---<br />[Clovis:] Considering you voted for it, the joke is on you then.</i><br /><br />Two things. First, regardless of my vote, your alternative is no alternative at all, since the fundamental problem exists regardless of Trump, or my vote.<br /><br />Second, nothing is not an option. Existing policy incentivized unacceptable outcomes. In my ideal world, we would have a secure border that would render all of this moot.<br /><br />But we don't, and, won't any time soon.<br /><br />So, until then, what is your solution?<br /><br /><i>BTW, have you really never relfected upon the lessons H. Arendt drew from Adolph Eichmann? </i><br /><br />Remember when I said you provide insults where arguments belong?Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-81863991701261543802018-06-22T13:08:44.441-07:002018-06-22T13:08:44.441-07:00Skipper,
---
"Interesting. Trump's shame...Skipper,<br /><br />---<br />"Interesting. Trump's shameful act is to enforce existing law."<br />---<br />Did you read <a href="https://cafehayek.com/2018/06/law-legislation-trump-administrations-cruelty.html" rel="nofollow">this link</a> I gave the other day at GG?<br /><br />BTW, have you really never relfected <a href="https://aeon.co/ideas/what-did-hannah-arendt-really-mean-by-the-banality-of-evil" rel="nofollow"> upon the lessons </a> H. Arendt drew from Adolph Eichmann? Do you <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/18/opinion/amnesty-deportation-immigration-family-separation.html" rel="nofollow">really see yourself</a> as a conservative?<br /><br /><br />---<br />"And what responsibility do adults dragging children through hazardous conditions to violate US law bear?"<br />---<br />You know the main reason the executive must exercize discretion when applying the legislated laws? There are far too many of them, and you can easily violate one when trying to apply another. <br /><br />Whatever you have in the books to deal with the parents, there are other laws, concerning the well being of children, as well as international treaties among nations ratified by your Congress, that are of no less importance. <br /><br />The real scandal here is that you need to be remembered of such trivial things, given your insistence of parroting this "Law & Order" shallow narrative.<br /><br /><br />---<br />"Your alternative is no alternative at all."<br />---<br />Considering you voted for it, the joke is on you then.<br /><br />Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-3623912432437023092018-06-22T12:35:50.392-07:002018-06-22T12:35:50.392-07:00Interesting. Trump's shameful act is to enfor...Interesting. Trump's shameful act is to enforce existing law. Assuming the wall won't get built tomorrow, or next week even (how quickly you ignore Democrat opposition to building it), what to do until then?<br /><br />And what responsibility do adults dragging children through hazardous conditions to violate US law bear?<br /><br />Your alternative is no alternative at all.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-88740777192382193702018-06-22T09:03:17.675-07:002018-06-22T09:03:17.675-07:00"What's your alternative?"
I alread..."What's your alternative?"<br /><br />I already answered that. I've meant every word. If Trump opens up a donation campaign to build that Wall, I may well contribute.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-71831906389622214732018-06-22T08:24:28.867-07:002018-06-22T08:24:28.867-07:00[Harry:] At least 200,000 Indians murdered by evan...<i>[Harry:] At least 200,000 Indians murdered by evangelical Christians in Guatemala.</i><br /><br />I trust you have a point.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-1357390656073690482018-06-22T08:23:31.042-07:002018-06-22T08:23:31.042-07:00It is the reason I advanced the conclusion of this...<i>It is the reason I advanced the conclusion of this sad matter to you: he is a coward who takes children hostages to advance his political agenda. And so are you for supporting his shameful acts.</i><br /><br />What's your alternative?Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-19888405874442658972018-06-22T07:20:14.346-07:002018-06-22T07:20:14.346-07:00"What you haven't accounted for is that v..."What you haven't accounted for is that very often the only way to resolve a problem is to force the contradiction."<br /><br />It is the reason I advanced the conclusion of this sad matter to you: he is a coward who takes children hostages to advance his political agenda. And so are you for supporting his shameful acts.<br />Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-50928840711081786342018-06-22T00:55:36.834-07:002018-06-22T00:55:36.834-07:00At least 200,000 Indians murdered by evangelical C...At least 200,000 Indians murdered by evangelical Christians in Guatemala.Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6666208467022745303.post-89509273601075561002018-06-21T22:35:28.762-07:002018-06-21T22:35:28.762-07:00Harry, you have just proven once again that you ha...Harry, you have just proven once again that you have absolutely no idea what the word "racism"* means. Just as you have proven you have absolutely no idea what the issues here are, and refuse to take them on board.<br /><br />*Alternatively, using the definition of the word "racism", and, using direct quotes, demonstrate how what I have written is racist. I'm quite comfortable that you can't, and you know it. That makes you a liar, which I very much wish you'd stop doing.<br /><br /><i>The way Donald did, sure it is. He is a political stuntman. He needs to keep the hoi polloi always entertained by his tricks.</i><br /><br />What you haven't accounted for is that very often the only way to resolve a problem is to force the contradiction. Existing immigration law had become unenforceable, yet Congress refused (and still refuses) to do anything about it.<br /><br />What's your alternative?Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.com