The IQ and potential effectiveness of South Dakota’s Congressional delegation increases by perhaps 33% today as Dusty Johnson replaces Kristi Noem in the United States House of Representatives. In an interview with WNAX yesterday, Johnson talks about his desire for compromise and better border security without saying the word “wall”:
This should not be that hard. I think all well-intentioned people understand that there are all kinds of numbers between zero and five billion….
I don’t know exactly what the perfect border security approach looks like. You know, even even the President, I think, has refined his vision based on new data that’s popped up in the last two years, but we should be able to shut the front door to this country and additional border security is going to be needed to get that done [Rep.-Elect Dusty Johnson, interview w Jerry Oster, “SD Congressman-Elect Dusty Johnson Wants Compromise on Border Funding,” WNAX Radio, 2019.01.02].
Much as I welcome the ascent of a true policy wonk to represent us in Washington, I must take issue with two parts of Johnson’s statement. First, Donald Trump has not refined any view based on any data. Donald Trump does not read or listen; he makes decisions based on his gut and his obsessive quest for TV ratings.
Second, while I am pleased Johnson is obviously smarter than his predecessor and is carving space for his position away from the wall that he knows won’t work, his language about “compromise” and “border security” may give the false impression that his party is the only one that wants to deal and keep America safe. Democrats are offering a brilliant compromise plan that Congressman Johnson (sounds good, doesn’t it, Dusty?) could vote on today to reopen the federal government and give him a chance to negotiate with his Democratic colleagues a figure that we can all agree is worth spending to improve border security. The only non-compromiser in the room is Donald Trump, who is clinging to a campaign slogan that real policy wonks like Johnson know is a waste of government money.
We all want border security. We all (minus Trump) want fair and practical compromises. But we don’t have to compromise to approve a bad policy that wastes money and doesn’t improve border security. Take your oath, Dusty, and then show us the superior policy wonk at work: vote for the Democratic plan, and then whip your colleagues into voting to override any veto the White House sends down so we can get our government back to business.
We all want border security (You might but Dems do not in Washington).
We all (minus Trump) want fair and practical compromises (That is blatantly false if you mean Washington elected officials – there is no compromise there).
But we don’t have to compromise to approve a bad policy that wastes money and doesn’t improve border security (Bad policy? Why do people put walls up around property if it doesn’t work? If there was a wall on the Southern border what is your proof that it wouldn’t stop entry? Because so many enter by simply walking across the border and we spend over a hundred billion on illegal immigrants in this country now….an article from CNBC and others show something like 50k a month try and cross the border so that would be ended with a wall).
We all want border security (You might but Dems do not in Washington).
Okay, bigshot, prove it- let us see your empirical evidence that Dems don’t want border security.
As for your inflated cost of immigrants- https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/fact-check/2018/06/26/paul-gosar-how-much-do-undocumented-immigrants-cost-economy/691997002/
AZ Central rtes it mostly untrue. For you I will give you a bottomless Pants on Fire rating.
I’m reading a book right now called “The Age of Walls: how barriers between nations are changing our world.” It has some interesting history that I didn’t know with respect to the way the United States got control of the Spanish territories, now current US states in the southwest. It seems when Mexico gained independence, it mostly feared the Native American tribes, not the US government. It actually encouraged the settlement of the Spanish territory by US citizens in order to displace the tribes who were giving it so much trouble. Obviously that racism backfired on them, because the white settlers eventually turned on the Mexicans, too.
Anyway, the book runs through a number of historical and current examples of “walls,” and how they mostly don’t work as intended. It strikes me that racism, religious animus or ethnocentrism is at the heart of much of “border security.” It turns out that the threat to life and limb has more to do with trumped up or historical hatreds than it does about such issues as “having a country.”
With a dictator who leads a criminal gang of incompetents at our helm, I no longer feel we have America. The wall I want is a prison where we can lock up Trump and his gang of stupids. Let’s build a cell for Stace, too.
I decided I didn’t want to live in a state that has the likes of Stace Nelson as a two-bit legislator, and I really don’t want to live in a country that would elect someone like the evil Donald Trump as President. I climbed over the wall on the eastern border and out of the cesspool of South Dakota, only to see the cesspool of cuckoo Republican thought infest Wisconsin. It’s what I suspect those poor souls who caravan from Honduras feel when they escape the criminal gangs in their own country and end up facing the criminal gang running ours.
John Lennon had the right idea in Imagine.
“Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too…”
No countries, no religion: NO WALLS
Pretty easy considering they all were for border security, statements shown repeatedly, and now they are against border protections. https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/democrats-flip-flop-on-border-security-has-everything-to-do-with-2020-and-nothing-to-do-with-immigration I know you hate Fox news but the content of this article remains true.
https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/04/11/border-wall-democrats-undergo-frontier-flip-flop
In looking further it seems above $50 billion is the cost estimated. Even factoring in their tax contribution through fake social security numbers etc. So 10% of that to curb sounds pretty good.
Why is a wall bad? Tell me please.
Rep. Johnson – The front door to America isn’t the Mexican border. It’s our seaports and airports. Border security is vital but give us a name of a terrorist who’s come across the Mexican border and terrorized USA.
We Dem’s have offered a whole lot of money to increase border security. A billion (with a B) and another third of a billion (with a B). That ain’t pheasant feed. Turning that down is wrong, shows an unwillingness to compromise and is a poor beginning to your promising tenure.
https://www.cato.org/blog/center-immigration-studies-shows-very-small-threat-terrorists-crossing-mexican-border
From Fact Check- not a right wing propaganda outlet- It’s also worth noting that the political context surrounding the 2006 vote was different, too.
Democrats normally in favor of looser immigration laws saw the Secure Fence Act of 2006 as the lesser of two evils, according to a Boston Globe report that detailed the legislative process. Around that same time, the House passed legislation that would make any undocumented immigrant a felon.
“It didn’t have anywhere near the gravity of harm,” Angela Kelley, who in 2006 was the legislative director for the National Immigration Forum, told the Boston Globe. “It was hard to vote against it because who is going to vote against a secure fence? And it was benign compared with what was out there.”
As for the census question, Drumpf’s ICE can will use that info to round up legal residence, legal immigrants and who know who else and deport them w/o due process.
So you’re saying that ICE will use the census to deport legal immigrants here in America?
Democrats are coming to town baby!! Spring is in the air and I am stepping more lively than I have for the last few years of having to put my 5 buckle overshoes on going through the republican trumpian crap storm. Check this out
“The MOST DIVERSE Congress ever will be sworn in today including 102 women!
These are the Dem majority makers🙌🏽:
* 52 Black members
* 39 Hispanics
* 8 lesbian/gay/bi
* 2 Muslim women
* 2 Native American women
Finally, we can get some things done!
In Spanish (the second most important and spoken language in the world, followed at a distant third by English), you have to be clear on the word America as it entails North, Central and South America to make it America as a whole.
“Why is a wall bad? Tell me please.”
Because it doesn’t address the problem of the influx of illegal immigrants. Assuming your wall is 100% effective at stopping illegal border crossings at the southern border, a majority of illegals enter through legal means. How do you plan on stopping the majority of illegals from entering and staying in the country? Shouldn’t we address those issues before implementing a fix that is only going to account for a fraction of those in our country illegally?
Wait, wait, no one is addressing the real pressing reason we need funding for this wall – we need to protect Donald Trump from his fear that no wall funding will make him look “foolish.”
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/donald-trump-shutdown-congress-meeting/index.html
And to think I mistakenly agreed with so many who thought that train left the station long ago.
A question for Pearson – why do you fear, hate, dislike, or whatever term you prefer, people without papers or people seeking refuge in the U.S. from violence and poverty?
And to head you off at the pass if you claim they commit a crime by coming here without papers, how are people who committed that non-violent misdemeanor any different in value as human beings than the thousands of South Dakotans who over the years made numerous internet purchases without filing legally required use taxes, another non-violent misdemeanor, although, in contrast to the “no papers” misdemeanor, one that actually stole funds from the state and the honest people in SD? Why your antagonism toward one group of offenders, but not the other?
Dusty-strike one-you brought a sexy Russian spy into our K-12 student body to groom new Republicans, she is now in jail. Putin himself has arrested a dishonorably discharged marine for leverage it seems to get her back.
No strike two or three yet. Show us you are not just another political shill or that Paul Erickson is not your conscience
Pearson- yes!
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/when-ice-tries-to-deport-americans-who-defends-them
https://nypost.com/2018/04/27/ice-wrongfully-detained-nearly-1500-americans-report/
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/trump-administration-questioning-citizenship-of-hispanics.html
And so it begins. Maybe the 1823 decision in Johnson v M’Intosh should be revisited and remove the Doctrine of Discovery from this and all legal actions after.
Bah zing! “The new House, controlled by Democrats, has been sworn in, and BOOM: Speaker Nancy Pelosi is back. Pelosi got 219 votes to Republican Kevin McCarthy’s 192, with 18 voting for other candidates and three voting present.” Charlie McCarthy got a pretty good showing though, but still got his arse handed to him. Send Nancy some Roses for a job well done!
trump campaigned on Mexico paying for the wall. He needs to shut up and open the government because Mexico is not paying for the wall and neither should we United States Citizens. trump is lying…again.
Funny how you tag me with such negative words. Legal immigration is important. We cannot house the entire world’s people and if they are not willing to come here the correct way than what good is it? Why are these laws okay for you to ignore? How do you compare what a US citizen does to a non-citizen in a total different area? How do you not see that citizens have different rights and expectations? Why do you insist on tagging those with the opposite immigration view as you as hateful? There is no proof to the declaration.
I could care less what race comes in this country. We need talented people here and I welcome anyone that can bring value to our economy and country. I also welcome those who are having their live’s threatened and can show that but again have requirements after to make sure they integrate into America correctly and are NOT a drain on the system. I think we have enough of that.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again even though someone will say give proof. Those on the Left want these people here and free citizenship simply for a voting block that will be reliant on the (D) party. I don’t have proof and you will deny it but it is the truth.
I would be way more interested in dealing with America’s problems at home rather than causing more.
Speaking of ignoring laws, where does it say asylum seekers MUST enter the United States only at legal entrances? Where does it say Drumpf can arbitrarily boot asylum seekers out of the US? Where does the law say he can prevent asylum seekers from crossing the border? Look all you want, but those tactics of Drumpf’s are not legal.
If Drumpf was a Democrat your side would be threatening him with all kinds of mayhem for lying his ass off!
I don’t have proof and you will deny it but it is the truth.
Alternative Fact Exhibit A?
My God, I know I have stated over and over that I do not like Trump nor did I vote for him. But I am for immigration laws and stopping the illegal crossings.
Steve,
So am I. I just understand that we can stop it without a wall and for much less cost. We keep looking at the symptoms of the problem and not the actual cause. The cause for illegal immigration is increased economic opportunity. They come here to make money, so let’s make it so they can’t. A wall doesn’t stop their incentive to find a way in. In fact, a wall won’t even stop a majority of illegals entering this country if it is 100% effective. Business owners will still import immigrant labor and employ illegal laborers as long as it is cheap to do so and there are no repercussions. I would be willing to bet that a majority of illegals in SD never jumped a border. They came to work legally and stayed after it was no longer legal.
Toddler-in-Chief just couldn’t help himself late this afternoon.
With the swearing-in of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and the historic new congress Trump just had to call a press briefing. Only it wasn’t a briefing, he rolled out numerous immigration agency heads to support his racist wall. Trump claimed people were Tweeting their support for the wall and calling the White House. Only thing is, the White House switchboard is closed since the government is shut down. Neither was it a press briefing, questions weren’t allowed.
Donald Trump is a liar and his deplorables love it.
Pearson, I appreciate your response and will try to remain objective in my response. I would like to rely on undisputed facts for my position rather than speculation, opinion, or political viewpoint. FYI I am a registered republican and have been one for approximately 50 years. That said, I try to rely on facts from reliable resources, rather than propaganda or speculation to inform my view, and the views of others, about people without papers.
First, I offered you an alternative – “whatever term you would prefer” – to fear, hatred, or dislike as a factual description of your espoused views against people without papers or people seeking refuge in the U.S. from violence and poverty. While it is true that “fear, hatred or dislike” seem to be “negative” descriptive terms, they also appear factually accurate. If not, then what term would you prefer and recommend that is a more factually accurate descrisption of the desire to exclude people without papers or people seeking refuge in the U.S. from violence and poverty? You didn’t set forth one in your post.
Second, you seem to say that U.S. citizens who break the law deserve a different response from you than non-citizens. But you don’t give any factual reason why you conclude this disparate treatment is appropriate. Can you? How is it that anyone can justify treating non-violent lawbreakers differently based on characteristics over which the offender has no choice or control, such as national origin?
Third, you do seem to state a reason for advocating the exclusion of particular people in need, namely, personal self interest. Thus, you support encouraging people you believe can do something for you to come to the U.S., but apparently discourage other people that need help from the U.S. from coming here. In effect, to paraphase JFK, you ask what an immigrant can do for you, not what the U.S. can do for an immigrant in need. Factually, I think the term to describe such a view is self interest, a/k/a, selfishness. Can you come up with a more positve factual term to accurately describe or characterize the factual nature of this reason?
You also indicate you would welcome those whose lives are threatened. That is seems a positive trait. But then you say they must first “show that” threat and then “follow requirements.” Factually, how would you propose we assist them make such a showing and comply with our “requirements?”
None of the above questions are intended to be political questions or advocate for or against anyone. Perhaps by addressing them you can add some insight and understanding to the desire to exclude people without papers and people needing our help.
Mr. Buresh, just to clarify, and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, labeling a group of people “illegal” because they have violated a particular immigration law, while not using the term to describe all other lawbreakers, including murderers, rapists, thieves, speeders, tax dodgers, etc, has two factual problems.
First, it makes no gramatical or definitional sense.
Second, using such terminology harms both the persons so labeled, and the community that hears and begins to normalize the use of such labels.
https://www.cnn.com/2012/07/05/opinion/garcia-illegal-immigrants/index.html
http://ideas.time.com/2012/09/21/immigration-debate-the-problem-with-the-word-illegal/
I respectfully implore you, please stop doing this.
Social Security withdrawals for Medicare Supplements are not being drawn to pay for this insurance do to the trump shutdown of government. Please advise your elderly parents or even yourselves of that so they can take action.
“Some people ain’t no damn good
You can’t trust ’em, you can’t love em
No good deed goes unpunished
And I don’t mind being their whipping boy
I’ve had that pleasure for years and years
No, no I never was a sinner-tell me what else can I do
Second best is what you get-till you learn to bend this rules
Time respects no person-what you lift up must fall
They’re waiting outside-to claim my crumblin’ walls”
Thanks John Mellencamp
Sing along https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=61&v=PErUiAyVoGc
Trump and Pearson ignore an even bigger point:
Right now, several important and useful federal agencies are not performing their normal functions.
The National Park Service is closed. Why not pass a bill funding NPS for the rest of the fiscal year? How is the country harmed by doing that or strengthened by not doing that?
Housing and Urban Development may not be able to deliver payments to local agencies. Why not pass a bill funding HUD for the rest of the year? How are we harmed by reopening HUD or strengthened by leaving it closed?
This Commerce Dept. is unable to provide the usual economic data (hey, does that mean no unemployment report Friday?) that helps us understand our economic performance and needs for improvement. Why not pass a bill funding Commerce for the rest of FY2019? How are we harmed by reopneing Commerce or strengthened by leaving ourselves in the economic dark?
Coast Guard members get no more paychecks. Why not pass a bill paying these officers for the work they do protecting our country?
Why do we not enact any of those funding planks right now? Is there any good reason, based solely on the merits of each of those agencies, to leave each agency closed, or to drag its workers to the office and not pay them?
I just heard Marketplace say that the IRS says our taxes are still due, but the shutdownm means they won’t be processing our refunds yet. Nuts to that: let’s fund the IRS right now so folks can get their money back from the federal government, pay their debts, and stimulate their local economies! What’s wrong with that plan?
Bcb,
I use the name my opponents use so as not to devolve the conversation into something about semantics which makes the entire conversation pointless. I get what you are saying and I would agree, but those who hate undocumented Americans need that deragotory name to make them feel like their position is warranted. When they don’t hear people call them illegal, they think that is another attempt to justify them being here.
The Dow just fell 660 points and Apple is falling like an anvil tossed off a pier. The trump shutdown is making its mark on the economy.
“”Apple is still premium-brand luxury, but it is only as good as its last smartphone. In China it comes up against local rivals such as Huawei, Oppo, Vivo and Xiaomi which not only match but exceed the iPhone, and at a far lower price. Huawei is now the second biggest smartphone maker in the world and its devices can cost as little as half as much as Apple’s.
“Chinese brands are out-competing and out-marketing Apple on design, mobile-first innovations and value ,” said Shah.
He expects demand in the Chinese smartphone market to have shrunk by 9%-11% in 2018, but the iPhone to have shrunk by 15%-17%.
It is not all doom and gloom for Apple. Ryan Reith, of the analysts IDC, said that while the firm has lost market share, primarily to Huawei, “Apple still has 73% of the premium segment ($600+) in China”.
But the biggest issue for Apple is the importance of China to its future growth. Having effectively been priced out of India, which is one of the world’s smartphone markets that is still growing, China is crucial – and as a trade war between Washington and Beijing looms, Apple’s problems could get worse.” https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/03/apple-woes-go-far-beyond-slowdown-in-chinese-economy
So there you go, the sad fact is that the downfall of any empire is its failure to collect the taxes owed to support war. Used to be a shooting war, now, we have the trump trade war and the trump shutdown on top of the trump tariffs. trump is like an STD, the drip continues.
DB, I appreciate your response. I am not sure that it is a useful strategy or tactic in any debate, however, to join in efforts by one’s opponents to change the normal meaning of words into implicitly dehumanizing meanings, especially when, as a matter of fact rather than opinion, those dehumanizing terms actually result in harm to other individuals as well as negatively manipulating a free society, as described by George Orwell. I again urge reconsideration of such a debate strategy or tactic.
Perhaps Cory, the debate teacher and coach, can weigh in on the effectiveness of the strategy or tactic in question?
Steve, how is it possible for the government to be shut down? The GOP House. and the GOP Senate gave a spending bill to the GOP President. The GOP President dug in his heels about funding that Mexico was to provide?
This all sounds like GOP needs house cleaning.
I wish I could find it now, but I remember hearing Johnson interviewed on SDPB (last spring maybe? late summer?), when asked about Trump’s wall, replying something to the effect of we all know he made wild promises and used rhetorical hyperbole to get elected but we shouldn’t be so silly as to take it literally. The conversation lasted a while, so maybe the “Dakota Mid-day” program?
Because it’s the law bear. They aren’t US Citizens. We need logical immigration laws that make sense for the US as a whole. Life isn’t fair and we can’t save everyone, it is impossible and to think so is ignorant.
US Citizens do get a different response because they are citizens, plain and simple. It’s black and white. Not racial.
There is nothing wrong with making sure people are going to bring value to the US. Funny how you turn that into a negative attack against me too. Claim I’m selfish. No sir. It’s about our country and the need to protect our country, our financial systems, our govt. Because at the end of the day regardless of what you think the US Govt exists for Citizens of the US. NOT for people outside of this country. We have immigration laws for a reason. And my opinion is that we should make sure people that we allow here permanently bring a value. That may seem unfair to you but I think it is important so that taxpaying Americans are protected. Not racially motivated. Simply a financial decision, especially knowing how in debt we are…
And please refrain from lying that you are a “Republican.” I imagine you are just like Morning Joe….
You see what head banging, heavy metal music has done for America? Trying to reason with Drumpfistas and others has everyone banging their heads…..against immovable objects.
On a ten scale of USA problems, immigration/border security improvement is a two. Any elevated concern has racist, nationalist roots. Immigration isn’t a zero sum game. There is, has been and always will be enough America for all. Being selfish is a psychological impairment calling for self inspection and rehabilitation.
Racism and Nationalism are not one and the same. And if you think so it shows your intelligence level.
My intelligence isn’t in question. All racists aren’t nationalists but all nationalists are racist.
True that Porter, true that.
Pearson, I appreciate your comment at 8:53. Again, in response I will try to stick with actual facts, and try to avoid emotional statements or speculative assertions.
First, as a matter of fact, there is no “law” requiring you to single out people without papers for derision and dehumanization over people with papers, like U.S. citizens, who have committed crimes. So when you comment “its the law” as a justification for supporting policies that harm people in need, you are mistaken. The decision to argue in favor of laws that harm others is a choice not compelled by law. And to the extent that we have laws designed and intended to harm other people, under the excuse of protecting ourselves, there is in fact no law against seeking to change these nor prioritizing enforcement in a more humane manner.
I am glad you raised the “we can’t help everyone” argument. I have seen that before and given it some consideration. First, it seems based on a premise without fact – that “everyone” would seek help or seek to migrate to the U.S. It should be somewhat obvious that most people would prefer to live in areas they already know and trust with their own family, people, customs, geography and language.
Second, while it may be true that we can’t help everyone in need, it is a factually weak excuse to deny help to those we can help. Here is an illustration:
A ship capsizes and you find yourself in a life raft with ten other people. The raft has the capacity to hold thirty people. You see about twenty people who are drowning, but fear there might be even more people out there. Do you turn away the people you can see because “you can’t help everyone” and you fear, without evidence, there just might turn out to be too many to save from drowning? And do you speculate whether each person who reaches your raft can give you something of value before allowing them to board? Actual facts suggest the best answer to both questions is no. You save everyone you factually can before, not prior to, turning anyone away. And you base your decision on the fact that you can save a person from drowning, rather than mere speculation whether it might or might not benefit you to save them.
And as a final fact that seems inconsistent with your argument, there is little, if any, credible evidence, rather than mere speculation or hyperbole, that the immigration status of people without papers are a cause of, or even correlated with, “harm” to you or anyone else. Just as U.S. citizens will commit horrible violent crimes or steal your property, so will some people without papers. But the fact is that there is simply no evidence that any criminal behavior (other than the non-violent, non-harmful offense of being without papers) is caused by or correlated with foreign national origin or immigration status. Indeed, crime statistics show people without papers commit fewer violent and property crimes than U.S. citizens. Hence, as a matter of fact, U.S. citizens do not have any need for greater protection from people without papers than people with papers, like you and me.
And one more inquiry – what is your factual basis for your claim I have lied about my voter registration? You and I do not know each other so you seem to have no basis to claim any independent knowledge about the veracity of what I have revealed about my political registration (with some embarassment). While I find it distressing to read and hear views today of many other people who have registered as republicans. Especially those who espouse claims that are objectively contrary to facts and subjectively inconsistent with the moral qualities of republicans that influenced my registration, I have no factual basis to question their republican registration. What is your factual basis for questioning mine – do you think the only people today who register republicans have become so stupid that they cannot accept facts that undermine the anti-immigrant talking points they hear on FOX or that their moral values must support using the government to harm people in need?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkgkThdzX-8
John Lennon’s beautiful Imagine song needs to be played more often in the mean-spirited racist times we are living in under Trump.
“Imagine all the people living life in peace! I hope someday you’ll join us….and the world will be as one!”
BCB wrote:
First, as a matter of fact, there is no “law” requiring you to single out people without papers for derision and dehumanization over people with papers, like U.S. citizens, who have committed crimes.
All illegal aliens have broken the law. ICE is in charge of enforcing ALL of the immigration laws and has no choice in the matter.
BCB and Democrats seem to have a problem following laws they don’t like.
Pearson – My app shows that your phraseology, linguistic patterns and contempt for Mr. Heidelberger are eerily similar to Miranda Gohn. Did you get another new internet connection, Jason? Hmmmmm? Got any opinions on Muslims, Pears? Still promoting those hate speech rallies? (the fact that you answer for Pearson is a tell, also)
Jenny,
They can live in Peace after they have immigrated to the US the legal way.
I wonder what John Lennon thought about people who break the law?
What trolls don’t like is the law that says we allow asylum seekers into the US before not legally elected bogus potus condemns them.
Plus, it does not matter where they enter the US, they are entitled to be treated with dignity and have their cases adjudicated before you salivating SOBs get to gnaw on their bones.
Troll, is seeking asylum in the US legal? Of course it is. There is nothing illegal about it.
Steve Pearson: “Because it’s the law bear. They aren’t US Citizens. We need logical immigration laws that make sense for the US as a whole. Life isn’t fair and we can’t save everyone, it is impossible and to think so is ignorant.”
Six million died in Hitler’s ovens, and the Pearson’s of the world excused themselves with the trite idea that “life isn’t fair, and we can’t save everyone.”
Well, we could have saved those who were on a ship waiting to be admitted. Instead, we didn’t allow them to land. Nearly all ended up in Hitler’s gas chambers.
There was another who said much the same thing as Pearson. His name was Pontius Pilot.
Jason has not challenged the factual accuracy of any of my statement with his statement about what he describes as ICE statutory duties. Note that he links no statute requiring ICE nor anyone else to “single out people without papers for derision and dehumanization.”
The fact is that just as no law requires law enforcement to “single out people [who don’t pay use taxes or speed or commit any other criminal offense] for derision and dehumanization,” no law requires ICE to engage in such behavior.
Enforcement is not equivilant to, nor synonymous with “derision and dehumanization.”
And please do not attribute my comments to all members of my party, namely republicans, nor any other political party. I speak only for myself, although I sincerely hope that most other people share the values I espouse.
And speaking only for myself, I do not like laws that, in fact, harm people. I would like to see such laws repealed, amended, or be given the lowest priority in enforcement.
I also admire people in history who have disobeyed unjust laws. People who violated the law in the 1930’s and 40’s by hiding Jewish people from German SS agents were, in my view, some of the bravest and most moral people in history. I admire people like Johannes Kleiman, Victor Kugler, Miep Gies, and Bep Voskuijl!
I tracked down the Johnson radio interview on SDPB I mentioned in a previous comment: It was in the first hour of “In the Moment” with Lori Walsh, on 2/15/18, and the wall comments are at near the midpoint: http://listen.sdpb.org/post/dusty-johnson-his-candidacy-us-house . He steps back from Trump’s promise of one, big, Mexico-funded wall as “aspirational” and “a concept,” and isn’t clear about just which elements of the promise are unrealistic pandering, but, in fairness to Johnson, he also said (as the President himself has since) that physical barriers of lesser size, where appropriate, are reasonable. And of course they are.
But that wasn’t the campaign promise Trump used to rally everyone around. He always said “a wall” and “the wall,” that it would be big–AND THAT MEXICO WOULD PAY FOR IT.
I will never understand the eagerness of so many respected people, who have worked hard to earn their level of esteem, to cover for this guy’s reckless impulsivity and absurd statements. Just for once, can we hold him to his words? Dude stuts around like a tough guy but constantly has to walk back or even deny stuff he said a half hour ago. “Of course I was joking–unless it works, in which case I meant it all!” Talk about a beta wuss.
So no, not a dime for your wall.
Speaking of Trump’s words, I heard him tell us on TV a short time ago in his press conference that he, as President, has the executive power to go ahead and fund building his wall without the need for Congressional authorization.
Doesn’t this stable genius (his words, not mine) realize he just said he has no legitimate reason to shut down the government over a lack of congressional funding he tells us he does not need to do what he wants?
And then, we have this: When ya get no pay, you cannot expect to work the day.
“At New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport, as many as 170 TSA employees have called out each day this week, Thomas tells CNN. Officers from a morning shift were required to work extra hours to cover the gaps.
Call outs have increased by 200%-300% at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, where typically 25 to 30 TSA employees call out from an average shift according to a local TSA official familiar with the situation.”
The trump/republican shut down looks like it’s really working well, they gave themselves a raise in pay today, big’un too. More and more people are seeing how republicans govern, not to pretty is it? So what is Dirty Johnson gonna do? Probably wishes he could hang tough with is rootin tootin gun toting Russian red head instead of being at logger-heads with trump and his goons. Who knows, maybe he is a goonie.
“Government shut-down affects USDA research to combat threats to global wheat and barley crop.” As Dirty Johnson will attest, South Dakota only grows soybeans and corn, we here are not a bunch of wheat growers. No such thing. Barley, who cares if you can’t have a beer or something, we don’t grow barley here in South Dakota so who cares.
Our tall Number 2 and his sidekick, well they have never understood agriculture so we shouldn’t care about their ignorance so long as they keep poisoning our water. No money for research means no solutions for solving the problems we face. Keep voting for these clowns as if their checkbooks depend upon it. https://www.globalrust.org/about-bgri
Great lists, Jerry. The shutdown stopped the USDA planting and crop insurance plans and schemes. It should shutdown grazing on federal lands this spring. Let’s see how self-reliant those folks operate for months or years without the government teat. The saw mills will get empty this spring. Loggers will scramble to private lands – finding their cutting delayed for calving season, for the potential of ruts in the spring, and then for guided hunting in the fall.
But but, we’ve got Nelson and his goons making the dumbest resolutions ever, so you can tell they are just as ignorant about agriculture as our boys in Washington are. When the ag community cannot even get the subsidies that keep their barn doors closed in the wind, maybe they might want to rethink how they vote…naw. Dirty Johnson will have to consult with Butina to see if it is possible to vote against the Russian in charge as will our tall Number 2 and his brainless sidekick. In the meantime, South Korea, is the canary in the proverbial coal mine. “SEOUL, Jan 1 (Reuters) – South Korean exports fell slightly in December from a year earlier, official data showed on Tuesday, missing even the most pessimistic forecast from a Reuters survey and providing fresh evidence of a cooling global economy.
Economists said the data was hardly surprising as the tariff war between the United States and China clouds the outlook for global trade and as U.S. economic growth moderates.” Gonna get harder and harder to dig ourselves out of this toilet hole.
The Airline Pilot’s Association International sent a scathing letter to the orange prince telling him to stop, think, and end his government shutdown for the sake of aviation safety.
The letter artfully explained that the airspace transportation system is a complex transportation network requiring government and industry to properly function.
The letter described the dual regulator and service provider roles of the Departments of Transportation and Homeland Security. The shutdown effects routine airliner safety inspections, regulatory oversight, the gaps in oversight of the increasing numbers of privately operated drones, the gaps and shortages among transportation security agents and air traffic controllers.
The letter did not waste ink with ‘both sides’ nonsense or address immigration or wall issues. The letter is a warning; foreshadowing that any fatalities directly related to the shutdown roost with the president.
http://www.alpa.org/-/media/ALPA/Files/pdfs/news-events/letters/010219-shutdown-trump.pdf
Our senator pilot would know the safety implications of the shutdown . . . if he paid any attention during his training and routine re-certifications. One then has to wonder why senator rounds is mute – does he care about aviation safety.
I remember one of the many heroes from the crash/landing of United Flight 232 in Soo City nearly 27 years ago. Captain Al Haines, for all his heroics and his modesty, was forced to retire at age 60, a few short years after that horrific miracle.
Dirty Johnson and his gal pal Butina will be talking about “walls” in the ongoing spy saga of South Dakota politics and the Russian government. I have to wonder what the Russians have promised our locals regarding compensation. How much do you get for selling out your country? https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/bolton-relationship-with-butina-to-get-closer-scrutiny-from-house-1431017539593
Incoming! http://www.the-immoral-minority.com/man-uses-drone-to-fly-methamphetamine-over-the-southern-border-into-america/
There ain’t a horse that cain’t be rode
or a wall that cain’t be over-flowed.
By a drone on its own delivering methamphetamine to yer home. Doo Dah.
New play on old memo ( i claim no credit) –Where’s Wall Dough?
Wingnuts say the most obvious stuff- https://www.rawstory.com/2019/01/alaskas-gop-senator-admits-colleagues-cared-shutdown-going-airport-security/