ChrisWeigant.com

One More Refugee Question

[ Posted Tuesday, November 17th, 2015 – 17:34 UTC ]

Imagine for just a moment that, right now, there were thousands of refugees from a land over the seas who not only wanted to come to America, but were actually now physically on the North American continent, heading north towards our southern border. In this scenario, the country they're fleeing has, in the past, dumped on American shores criminals and mentally disturbed people, in a wave of migrants. Up until the very recent past, this country was also officially listed as a state sponsor of terrorism. It actually sheltered terrorists who had committed acts of terror against Americans on American soil. And now 2,000 people from this country were trying desperately to get north to the United States.

The question is, how would Republicans and Democrats react?

The answer might surprise you, because Republicans would be the ones on the border with welcoming arms and automatic green cards. Yes, you read that right.

I don't really have to guess about this as a hypothetical situation (except for the part about how the politicians would react), because it is actually happening right now. Every word in that first paragraph is true, but the surprise is that the country they are fleeing is Cuba. They're currently in Costa Rica and they're trying to get into Nicaragua, with their final destination (they hope -- Nicaragua is currently refusing them entry) to be crossing into the United States from Mexico.

Due to the peculiar politics of Florida, however, it has always been the Republicans who have been on the forefront of carving out preferential treatment for them from America's immigration system. By law, if a Cuban refugee sets foot on dry land in America (the policy is actually known as "Wet Feet/Dry Feet"), he or she not only vaults to the front of the immigration line, but actually is entitled to a green card.

This policy, of course, was supposed to be a big stick in the eye to Fidel Castro. "We'll welcome in all Cubans fleeing the communist dictatorship so they can breathe in the clear air of freedom here" is an accurate representation of the message we were sending with this preferential policy. Maybe that made sense when Kennedy was president (or Johnson, or Nixon, or Ford, or Carter, or Reagan...), but it makes little sense now. Why should Cubans get better treatment than, say, Chinese or Vietnamese immigrants?

This issue is eventually going to have to be faced. This is not, I should point out, in any way related to the current panic the political world is going through over Syrian refugees -- I merely used the timing to make a completely separate point in this article, that's all. Ignoring what's currently going on in the presidential race, however, Cuban immigration policy is eventually going to have to be addressed by Congress. This likely won't happen any time soon, seeing as how the Cuban economic embargo will likely not be lifted in the near future, with Republicans controlling Congress.

Cuban immigration policy has an outsized influence on our presidential selection process, the same way ethanol subsidies do. Ethanol is a big issue in Iowa. Iowa votes first. Cuban immigration is a big issue in Florida. Florida is the biggest of the "swing" or "battleground" states, with a whopping 29 Electoral College votes. Obama won Florida twice. And remember all those hanging chads? Florida's vote was what Bush v. Gore was all about, after all. This year, we've actually got two Cuban-Americans running for president, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.

None of the Republicans is going to budge on Cuba policy. If elected, a Republican president likely couldn't move backwards much on Cuba (due to public opinion), but you can bet your bottom dollar diplomacy wouldn't move forwards much on their watch either. The embargo would continue, as would the special immigration status, for at least as long as there was a Castro in charge of the country.

President Obama will go down in history as the president who opened Cuba back up to America, though, no matter how long it takes for relations to truly thaw between the two. But eventually Democrats are going to have to take the lead on regularizing our immigration policy towards Cubans. This doesn't mean any of the drastic measures now being proposed against Syrian refugees, of course. Cuban refugees would still be eligible for refugee status, even on political refugee grounds. But they'd have to go through the same process all other refugees go through when entering America. And they certainly wouldn't get an automatic trip to the front of the line, either. They'd be lumped in with refugees from all the other countries in the world. No automatic green card. No "dry feet" policy. No special status. Just equal status with everyone else in similar circumstances from other countries.

This is going to be a hard reform to get enacted. Neither party wants to kiss Florida's electoral votes goodbye for a generation. But, like the rest of Obama's new Cuba policies, the issue will hopefully decrease in intensity over time, even in Florida. The children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren (yes, it's been that long) of Cubans who fled Castro don't care as much as their elders do about maintaining a hard-line policy towards Cuba. Instead, they want to be able to go see their families in Cuba without restriction, just like any other immigrant family in America. To gain this, though, they are quite likely going to have to give up their special immigration status. That may be a hard sell, but not as hard a sell to the younger generations of Cuban-Americans.

To everyone else, it's going to be seen as a matter of fairness. Cuba is the only country singled out in this fashion in longstanding immigration policy, and it's really just a hangover from past American anti-communist policies. Why shouldn't -- at this point in history -- Cuban immigrants be treated exactly the same as immigrants from the entire rest of the world, after all? They may be fleeing government oppression, but so are people from a lot of other countries. They may be fleeing communism, but again, so are many others. In the end, what it's going to boil down to is this: The Cold War is over. We won. So why are we still fighting it?

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

93 Comments on “One More Refugee Question”

  1. [1] 
    Hawk Owl wrote:

    One of your most thoughtful, original, ... and fair-minded columns in some time. Lots to think about here and welcomely [?!?] framed in specific and vividly illustrated narrative perspective.
    Reminds me of how valuable is really original thinking -- especially in your comparisons with the Florida perspective. Thanks.

  2. [2] 
    John M wrote:

    A re-post from another thread, but I think it is also appropriate here as well:

    Michale wrote:

    "If these people are not documented properly, you bet yer ass there is something the Governor can do.."

    You just answered your own question Michale. And if they ARE documented properly??? Then there is squat that any governor can do....

    "How is Obama going to FORCE states to take in undocumented refugees??"

    Hmmm, I guess you never heard of federalizing the National Guard? If segregationist southern governors could not stop integration, how do you think modern governors are going to stop bus loads of refugees? They could not even stop refugees being distributed among the various states in the 1980's from Cuba. Or do you not remember the Mariel boatlift and Krome detention center, etc.?

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    You just answered your own question Michale. And if they ARE documented properly??? Then there is squat that any governor can do....

    And where will those refugees be while they are being documented properly?? Is Obama just going to hand out documents in the host countries??

    Well, I wouldn't put it past him. He is so desperate to mint fresh new Dem voters...

    Hmmm, I guess you never heard of federalizing the National Guard? If segregationist southern governors could not stop integration, how do you think modern governors are going to stop bus loads of refugees?

    Murrieta, CA

    'nuff said..

    Michale

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    JM,

    You just don't get it..

    Over 470 in Paris are dead are wounded because of Syrian refugees...

    Germany is on high alert after a foiled attack.. What does Germany have in common with France??

    Syrian refugees...

    We have thousands of Syrian refugees here in the US and Obama wants to bring in tens of thousands more..

    Un-vetted refugees whose backgrounds are COMPLETELY unknown..

    And you think that the US is going to be spared what is happening in France and Germany??

    Based on what??? Hopey Changey crap???

    Michale

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    Stretched FBI braces for Islamic State holiday terror attacks

    Bureau officials are deeply worried they don’t have enough resources to track a growing number of radicalized Americans inspired by the Islamic State, with more possibly entering as President Obama opens the borders to thousands of Syrian refugees.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/17/fbi-braces-for-isis-holiday-terror-attacks/

    One of these days, ya'all will realize and acknowledge that when it comes to these issues, I *DO* know what I am talking about...

    Michale

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    By the way JM...

    The count is up to 27 states refusing to settle Syrian refugees...

    It's only a matter of time, days, a week at the most, before Obama is forced to suspend his Syrian refugee, AKA Minting Fresh New Democrat Voter program..

    I also noticed how you ignored the fact that muslim refugees are being accepted over christian refugees by a factor of 20 to 1...

    There is a reason for that..

    As you yourself said, christian voters would likely vote GOP.. Hence, the discrimination against christians..

    Michale

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    If ya'all are so gung-ho about Syrian refugees, why don't you put up a couple dozen at your homes with YOUR families at risk??

    {{chirrrrppp}} {{{chirrrrrrpppppp}}}

    Yea... That's what I thought...

    The Left Wingery is ALWAYS so magnanimous and ALWAYS so giving...

    As long as it's someone else who has to give... :^/

    Michale

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    how do you think modern governors are going to stop bus loads of refugees?

    Murrieta, CA

    'nuff said..

    And THAT was just a bunch a fed-up Americans..

    Imagine what can be accomplished when a State Governor mobilizes their National Guards to prevent buses carrying potential terrorist from dropping off said terrorists in the state...

    Does Obama really want to start a war between State and Federal forces??

    Well, like with the document issue, I wouldn't put it past Obama to do that...

    Michale

  9. [9] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    You've got be impressed when über-christianists Terd Cruz and Huckabilly and Trump treat desperate, needy people like the new Ebola.

    . . . and Jesus said "Blessed are the Real American knuckle-draggers for they shall inherit part of North America from their genocidal fore-fathers." and "Do unto others as necessary to win the election."

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    You've got be impressed when über-christianists Terd Cruz and Huckabilly and Trump treat desperate, needy people like the new Ebola.

    It's funny how those who would be more than happy to throw christians into a pit of lions at the drop of a gay couple are all of the sudden defenders of the faith when it suits their political agenda.. :D

    What part of POTENTIAL TERRORISTS do you not understand??

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "sudden defenders of the faith"

    LOL! Your reading comprehension issue is worse than ever chatbot.

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    LOL! Your reading comprehension issue is worse than ever chatbot.

    And your inability to converse with a "chatbot" is on display for all to see.. :D

    To paraphrase Bobby n James Purify...

    "Yer my puppet"

    Dance, little puppet, dance... heh :D

    Michale
    AKA The Puppet Master

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Seriously..

    The ONLY time ya'all want christians to act like what YOU think christians should act like is when it serves YA'ALL'S agenda...

    I mean, frak letting christians have their OWN set of beliefs, etc etc..

    "DO IT OUR WAY OR GO POUND SALT"

    The Democrat Way....

    Michale

  14. [14] 
    Mopshell wrote:

    You're the one siding with the terrorists, Michale. Daesh (formerly known inappropriately as ISIS) have made it crystal clear that they will do whatever they can to get get western countries to reject Syrian refugees. They figure that, if every country rejects them, then they'll have no choice but to surrender themselves to Daesh. You and your Republican buddies are doing a first class job of aiding and abetting them in their cause, Michale. I notice you're also spreading discredited rumors to support them too. Way to go, Michale.

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again, Obama sticks his massive ego into his mouth..

    Hours after taunting the GOP about "widows and orphans" the female of the Paris Attack Squad blew herself up with a suicide vest, killing 3...

    In the dictionary under CRIMINALLY CLUELESS, there is a picture of our President, Barack Obama...

    You can bet that when (not IF but WHEN) an ISIS co-ordinated terrorist attack hits the United States, it will be Obama and the Democrats who will bear the near totality of responsibility for the attack..

    And rightly so....

    Michale

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    You're the one siding with the terrorists, Michale. Daesh (formerly known inappropriately as ISIS) have made it crystal clear that they will do whatever they can to get get western countries to reject Syrian refugees. They figure that, if every country rejects them, then they'll have no choice but to surrender themselves to Daesh. You and your Republican buddies are doing a first class job of aiding and abetting them in their cause, Michale. I notice you're also spreading discredited rumors to support them too. Way to go, Michale.

    Yea, that's a nice thought..

    But it has absolutely NOTHING to do with reality..

    That's like saying that Al Qaeda exists all because of Gitmo..

    It's a nice red herring, but has absolutely NOTHING to do with reality..

    But hay.. I am a fair guy...

    You want Syrian refugees in the US??

    Open up your home to them..

    Unvetted, unknown Syrians..

    What!?? You don't want to do that!??

    Well, I guess that means you are siding with the terrorists, eh? :D

    When you open up YOUR home to them, THEN you will have a moral argument to make..

    What part of SECURITY THREAT do you not understand??

    Let me know when you open up your home. THEN we can have a real discussion with you having the moral ground to speak...

    Michale

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hours after taunting the GOP about "widows and orphans" the female of the Paris Attack Squad blew herself up with a suicide vest, killing 3...

    AND a Paris cop....

    Yea... Women aren't a threat.. :^/

    Could Obama be more sexist??

    Michale

  18. [18] 
    Mopshell wrote:

    Yes of course I will open our home to refugees! I'm not cowed by irrational fear. I won't turn away the vulnerable and the needy. I will happily take in Syrian refugees and have registered to be a local guide to those settling in the area.

    Unlike you, I am not afraid of them nor am I afraid of their children. Anyone afraid of orphans under 5 years old needs close attention from a good psychiatrist.

    You cannot deny that what you are doing is exactly what Daesh want. Therefore you are aiding and abetting them. It makes no difference to say that you don't want to help them when you are bending over backwards to help their cause. The FACT is inescapable. By rejecting the Syrian refugees, you are playing right into Daesh's hands and you are doing it knowing that it is what they want you to do.

    They set you up with propaganda to reject Syrian refugees and what do you and your Republican buddies do? Fall for it hook, line and sinker. You fall for the old fake Syrian passport routine because it just never occurs to you to ask why a suicide bomber would have a passport and why they would toss it away from their body just as they were about to blow themselves up. Fortunately, the French authorities aren't that gullible. They knew the passports were fake even before they identified the terrorists holding them as Belgium, not Syrian or Egyptian.

    You are so easy, Michale. Dangle fear and hatred under your nose and you fall for that scam every time. Label it "security threat" and you fall over yourself embracing the scam and screaming "SECURITY THREAT" in capital letters as if anyone's impressed by these toddler tantrum antics.

    You never question anything the Republicans and their Right Wing media say. You lap it up. It suits your narrative so you perpetuate their zombie lies.

    Now you're gibbering away about this European woman who blew herself up - by the way, she was not Syrian nor was she a refugee. To insinuate that she was is a big fat LIE. The explosion killed a police dog named Diesel, not a Paris policeman though five policemen were injured, none critically.

    So should the U.S. ban all women from Belgium now because you and your buddies are scared they might blow themselves up at any moment?

    Obama told the truth. Republicans are liars and cowards and they are aiding and abetting the enemy and you are helping them.

  19. [19] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    I like the disconnect with the right. A bunch of candidates and other high level republicans criticize the French for their stance on guns. If only Paris has concealed carry this would have never have happened. Then look at the states that are trying to refuse refugees: almost all support the most liberal of the conceal carry laws. When the shit hits the fan (real or imagined) I guess conceal carry is not all that it's cracked up to be. The wussification of the right is approaching it's completion...

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    You cannot deny that what you are doing is exactly what Daesh want. Therefore you are aiding and abetting them.

    Actually it is ya'all who are doing EXACTLY what Daesh wants..

    They WANT Syrian refugees to go into the West. That's how they infiltrate...

    Like I am fond of saying... Leave security and military matters to the experts...

    But it doesn't really matter... The Left will push and push for the refugees to be placed in the US and then, when an ISIS terrorist attack happens (and it will) all the innocent blood will be on ya'all's hands...

    We'll see how proud ya'all are then, pushing your agenda no matter how many innocent men women and children have to pay the price with their lives..

    Michale

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Then look at the states that are trying to refuse refugees: almost all support the most liberal of the conceal carry laws. When the shit hits the fan (real or imagined) I guess conceal carry is not all that it's cracked up to be. The wussification of the right is approaching it's completion...

    Only a liberal would think that conceal carry would be the answer to AK-47s and Suicide Vests... :^/ And that those who are more knowledgeable and prudent about conceal carry firearms and their capabilities equates to "wussification"...

    I am actually surprised at you Bashi... Who knew you had such an irrational and illogical John Wayne/It Works In The Movies complex.... :D

    Michale

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    You never question anything the Republicans and their Right Wing media say. You lap it up.

    This is factually not accurate and you know it..

    But you are reacting emotionally so I can understand why you would say it..

    Now you're gibbering away about this European woman who blew herself up - by the way, she was not Syrian nor was she a refugee. To insinuate that she was is a big fat LIE. The explosion killed a police dog named Diesel, not a Paris policeman though five policemen were injured, none critically.

    K9 or Human, he was still a cop...

    Again, you don't know this because you are ignorant of the entire issue..

    So you can be forgiven for such ignorance..

    Obama told the truth.

    Yea??

    He said ISIS was contained..

    He called ISIS "the JV"..

    So, either he was lying or he is materially and utterly incompetent..

    Either way, he is a BAD President...

    Michale

  23. [23] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Only a liberal would think that conceal carry would be the answer to AK-47s and Suicide Vests.

    I had not realized Donald Trump, Ann Coulter and Newt Gingrich were liberals. Tell me more.

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    I had not realized Donald Trump, Ann Coulter and Newt Gingrich were liberals. Tell me more.

    No, they are just morons..

    A point I had already made several days ago... But it was lost in all the orgasmic Right bashing that passes for intellectual discussion around here.. :D

    Michale

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    I had not realized Donald Trump, Ann Coulter and Newt Gingrich were liberals. Tell me more.

    But I had not realized that you have elevated the likes of Trump, Coulter and Gingrich to the level of critical thinkers that you follow and quote...

    Tell me more... :D

    heh

    Michale

  26. [26] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    But I had not realized that you have elevated the likes of Trump, Coulter and Gingrich to the level of critical thinkers that you follow and quote...

    Tell me more... :D

    Yawn.

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bashi,

    I mean, think about it... Think about exactly what you are saying..

    You are saying that Republican governors should WELCOME Syrian refugees that likely contain terrorist elements because the citzenry is armed....

    In essence, you are advocating that we let enemy combatants into the area so that the armed citizenry can take them out...

    That's insane..

    Such insanity from a liberal is.... interesting.....

    Surely the more logical and rational course of action would be to deny the enemy combatants entry....

    I mean, com'on!! That's not rocket science or brain surgery...

    It's common sense...

    I realize that asking rabid and hysterical partisans to show a little common sense is asking too much...

    But geeezee...

    Michale

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Surely the more logical and rational course of action would be to deny the enemy combatants entry....

    "Oma teaches the evil of my subconscious is too strong to resist. The only way to win is to deny it battle."
    -Shifu, STARGATE SG1, Absolute Power

    Michale

  29. [29] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    I mean, com'on!! That's not rocket science or brain surgery...

    It's common sense...

    No, it's fear. And again you play right in to the terrorist's hands...

    "Oma teaches the evil of my subconscious is too strong to resist. The only way to win is to deny it battle."
    -Shifu, STARGATE SG1, Absolute Power

    And fear is the evil of your subconscious...

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    No, it's fear. And again you play right in to the terrorist's hands...

    It's prudence...

    "We want to AVOID a fight. Not insist on one.."

    What YA'ALL are doing is fear...

    Fear ya'all are going to lose the election and lose in pursuit of your agenda...

    Michale

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Oma teaches the evil of my subconscious is too strong to resist. The only way to win is to deny it battle."
    -Shifu, STARGATE SG1, Absolute Power

    And fear is the evil of your subconscious...

    "Chewy!!??? Have you even SEEN Star Wars!??"
    -Oscar, ARMAGEDDON

    :D

    Michale

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yawn.

    TRANSLATION:
    I got nuttin'...

    :D

    Michale

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    The American people have spoken..

    http://assets.bwbx.io/images/iYXoNww9I4n8/v1/-1x-1.jpg

    Of course, that means our dumbshit POTUS will do the exact opposite and all the useful idiots will follow him no matter how many innocent men, women and children are butchered...

    :^/

    Don't worry.. When the attacks here in the US happens and there are hundreds dead and wounded......

    I'll be here to point out the blood that's on ya'all's hands....

    Michale

  34. [34] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    I got nuttin'...

    "Yawn" was about all I could muster to counter a weak and petty ad hominem. Of course if the subject really interests you lets apply the same logic to everyone you quote...

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Yawn" was about all I could muster to counter a weak and petty ad hominem. Of course if the subject really interests you lets apply the same logic to everyone you quote...

    Knock yerself out..

    To date, the ONLY "logic" ya'all can muster is "OH MY GODS, THINK OF THE REFUGEE CHILDREN!!!"

    I realize that's what passes for "logic" around here...

    But still.....

    Give me ONE SINGLE logical, objective, factual and non-emotional reason why we should allow Syrian refugees..

    Just one...

    Michale

  36. [36] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Give me ONE SINGLE logical, objective, factual and non-emotional reason why we should allow Syrian refugees..

    "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!"

    Because it's who were are. Or should be when not hiding from our own shadow...

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    Because it's who were are. Or should be when not hiding from our own shadow...

    In other words, an emotional reason..

    OK... Now, let's adjust the playing pieces...

    Pretend we have a GOP POTUS and tens of thousands of CHRISTIAN Syrian refugees wanting to come in..

    You would be making the EXACT same arguments that I am making..

    All of the sudden, "It's who we are" would be a ridiculously emotional argument...

    Don't bother denying it because you and I both know it's completely factual...

    So spare me yer tearful hysterical emotionalism.. I know it's nothing more than a cover for the obvious partisan agenda...

    Michale

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    How many of these Syrian refugees are you going to take into your home, Bashi??

    {chiirrrrppppp} {{{chirrrrrpppp}}}

    Yea... That's what I thought....

    Michale

  39. [39] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "Your inability to converse with a "chatbot" is on display for all to see."

    LOL! So true, but once again that's not because of some problem on my end. It's impossible to "converse" with mind-numbingly idiotic Republican talking points cut and pasted from Palin's email spam.

    "The ONLY time ya'all want christians to act like what YOU think christians should act like is when it serves YA'ALL'S agenda...I mean, frak letting christians have their OWN set of beliefs"

    LOL! WWJD? It amuses me when you display your severe reading comprehension issue for all to see and, once it's pointed out for all to see, it's downright hilarious when you double down like you did just there.

    Dunce, little chatbot, dunce!

    BTW - congratulations on your Winning! Maybe you can score a hat trick now. See if you can C&P another extra stupid comment to prove that you still don't understand my original comment. Pretty please.

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    On a more humorous note..

    http://www.laughfactory.com/channels/new-releases/1977

    Better check out that comedy club link before Hillary shuts it down... :D

    It's hilarious.. :D

    Michale

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    BTW - congratulations on your Winning! Maybe you can score a hat trick now. See if you can C&P another extra stupid comment to prove that you still don't understand my original comment. Pretty please.

    What the hell you talking about, Puppet??

    *YOU* don't even understand your original comment..

    Your comments are UTTERLY incomprehensible to anyone with more than 2 brain cells to rub together..

    You epitomize Jumpin Jack Flash..

    DOG BARKING CAN'T FLY HOME WITHOUT UMBRELLA

    It's not that I have a reading comprehension problem..

    It's that YOU have a english language problem...

    But, by all means.. Continue to debate with your "chat bot"... :D

    Dance, puppet.. Dance... :D

    Michale
    AKA THE PUPPET MASTER

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    *YOU* don't even understand your original comment..

    Your comments are UTTERLY incomprehensible to anyone with more than 2 brain cells to rub together..

    http://18c2v8j0lff1sper1sofs0rc.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Lincoln50s2.gif

    That's our JFC....

    So impressed with his own "cool"....

    But everyone else is just laughing.. :D

    Michale

  43. [43] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Pretend we have a GOP POTUS and tens of thousands of CHRISTIAN Syrian refugees wanting to come in..

    You would be making the EXACT same arguments that I am making..

    Bullshit. I've posted many times on his blog during the Bush administration. Please point out exactly where I have argued against immigration when the GOP were for it? Or anything in the same ballpark?

    How many of these Syrian refugees are you going to take into your home, Bashi??

    Really? Why don't you regale me of all the times you hosted refugees that you approved of coming to the US first. Or is it pure xenophobia?

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bullshit. I've posted many times on his blog during the Bush administration.

    I wasn't aware Bush HAD a blog..

    Please point out exactly where I have argued against immigration when the GOP were for it?

    You claim you posted FOR immigration from a war torn area that would include terrorists???

    PROVE IT....

    You can't because you never did..

    Really? Why don't you regale me of all the times you hosted refugees that you approved of coming to the US first. Or is it pure xenophobia?

    TRANSLATION:

    Hell no I won't take any potential terrorists into my home!!! With my family!!!!

    Congrats.. That's the first SMART thing you have said in a long time...

    Michale

  45. [45] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Missed the 'T', sue me. Point still stands you just made an accusation and can't back it up. I don't need to back up my side as I did not make the accusation.

    Hell no I won't take any potential terrorists into my home!!! With my family!!!!

    I did not say that. I'm just not falling for your appeal to emotion. Whether or not I take in refugees has nothing to do with supporting a policy or not. On the other hand if you want to play holier than thou, then please show me all the refugees you have housed...

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    Missed the 'T', sue me. Point still stands you just made an accusation and can't back it up. I don't need to back up my side as I did not make the accusation.

    Ahhh My apologies.. It really had me wondering...

    You claimed:

    "Bullshit. I've posted many times on his blog during the Bush administration."

    Now back it up..

    I claim you didn't... I can't prove a negative..

    You CAN prove a positive.. If there are any posts, that is..

    I did not say that. I'm just not falling for your appeal to emotion.

    Says the guy who whined about "who we are"... :D

    Whether or not I take in refugees has nothing to do with supporting a policy or not.

    Has EVERYTHING to do with it..

    If you aren't willing to put your own home on the line, why the hell should anyone else??

    On the other hand if you want to play holier than thou, then please show me all the refugees you have housed...

    *I* am not the one supporting bringing terrorists into our communities..

    YOU are...

    Michale

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Think about what ya'all are saying..

    Ya'all are willing to risk a terrorist attack (and there IS a risk, there is no denying that) just to protect Obama's ego...

    That is as sad as it gets...

    Michale

  48. [48] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    This is a sad excuse for enlightened discussion.

    :(

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    *I* am not the one supporting bringing terrorists into our communities..

    I am also constrained to point out that 34 States are ALSO not going to take in Syrian refugees...

    If it was a Constitutional Amendment decision, ya'all are VERY close to losing....

    Once again ya'all and Obama are on one side of the issue and the vast majority of the American people are on the other side of the issue..

    Funny how that almost always is the case, eh?? :D

    Michale

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    This is a sad excuse for enlightened discussion.

    We can't HAVE an "enlightened" discussion because one side of the issue is always about Obama's ego...

    That negates ANY possibility of any enlightened or intelligent discussion...

    If ya'all could acknowledge the reality of the issue, that it IS a threat, then there might be a chance...

    But all ya'all see is milk and honey, koom-bye-ya and Everything Is Awesome..

    It's as if Paris never happened...

    How can ANY discussion, enlightened or otherwise, be possible under such circumstances??

    Michale

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    Because it's who were are. Or should be when not hiding from our own shadow...

    Iddn't it funny how it's only "who we are" when it comes to MUSLIM refugees??

    But when it comes to CHRISTIAN refugees, apparently it's NOT "who we are"...

    Of course, the fact that muslims vote Democrat and christians vote GOP has absolutely NOTHING to do with the decision to bring in 99% muslims and 1% christians..

    That was sarcasm, in case it went over your head... :^/

    Michale

  52. [52] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    "Bullshit. I've posted many times on This blog during the Bush administration."

    Here mister pedantic, your "T". Now back up your accusation or take it back.

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ted Cruz Challenges President Obama to Debate on Syrian Refugees
    http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/11/18/ted-cruz-challenges-president-obama-to-debate-on-syrian-refugees/

    Cruz is just wasting his breath...

    Obama's a pussy.. He would never accept a face to face debate...

    Sicking the IRS or the DOJ on people...

    That's more Obama's speed...

    Michale

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    Here mister pedantic, your "T". Now back up your accusation or take it back.

    Why should I take it back??

    I said you never posted anything during the Bush administration in support of a group of refugees from a war torn area that has the potential of bringing in terrorists..

    YOU claim you have...

    I am not going to take it back until you prove to me that I am wrong...

    "Dooooyyyyyyyy"
    -Vaillope Von Schweetz, WRECK IT RALPH

    :D

    Michale

  55. [55] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    YOU claim you have...

    Did I really? Can you point it out? Because I'm thinking I said no such thing and you are making stuff up...Not that that is surprising.

  56. [56] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    How can ANY discussion, enlightened or otherwise, be possible under such circumstances??

    Well, Michale ... I'm only interested in enlightened discussion, not otherwise...that's number one ... and, number two, "such circumstances", as you endlessly describe, exist only in your head, as far as I am aware.

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, Michale ... I'm only interested in enlightened discussion, not otherwise...that's number one ... and, number two, "such circumstances", as you endlessly describe, exist only in your head, as far as I am aware.

    As far as you are aware.. :D

    Michale

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    Did I really? Can you point it out? Because I'm thinking I said no such thing and you are making stuff up...Not that that is surprising.

    If you are going to ignore recent RECENT history and your own comments, then any discussion is pointless..

    Michale

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    The problem with an "enlightened" discussion is that ya'all start from the assumption that Obama is perfect and everything he does is perfect...

    Over 470 people in Paris are dead and wounded...

    A Syrian "refugee" was part of the terrorists who committed the heinous act..

    Obama wants to bring 10,000 of those "refugees" here to the United States with, in the words of FBI Director Comey, little or no vetting...

    And YA'ALL cannot even conceive that this could be a problem..

    So, I axe ya... :D

    What is an "enlightened" discussion on this issue look like around here??

    "Obama is awesome!!"

    "Yea!! And Democrats are being really really awesome!!"

    "Oh I dunno.. I think Obama is really stupendous, not just awesome!!"

    "You know what!? I think you are right!! Obama is stupendous!!"

    "I disagree.. Obama is stupendous AND awesome!!"

    "And how about those Democrats!! WOW!! They are really awesome. And, after all, it's who we are!!"

    "You are absolutely right!! We are awesome!!"

    THAT is the idea of "enlightened" discussion around here of late...

    One wonders what the "enlightened" discussion will look like after hundreds of innocent American men, women and children are brutally murdered by Syrian "refugees" here in the US... :^/

    Obama is wrong to continue to let unvetted Syrian refugees into the US solely for the purpose of minting fresh new Democrat voters...

    Bashi said above (although he will probably deny it now) "It's who we are.."

    He is partially right.. Ignoring the will of the American people and putting Americans at risk solely for the purposes of furthering a partisan agenda...

    It's who we DEMOCRATS are

    Abso-frakin'-loutly...

    Michale

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama is awesome???

    Obama is the luser who described the brutal murder and wounding of over 470 innocents as "a setback"...

    A SETBACK!!!???

    Maybe that's what it takes to be awesome in ya'all's book..

    My standards are a little more strict...

    Michale

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/151118103332-ben-carson-photo-1-exlarge-169.jpg

    What part of "NO" do ya'all and Obama not understand???

    Michale

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    I mean, seriously, people..

    http://abcnews.go.com/International/terrorists-refugee-program-settle-us/story?id=35252500

    It's a documented fact that terrorists have used refugee programs to smuggle in their troops...

    Ya'all want to ignore the facts, just to pursue a Democrat Party agenda of minting fresh new Democrat voters..

    Don't you think that's a tad ridiculous, considering the threat??

    Or are votes more important than American lives???

    Michale

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/19/americas_ridiculous_refugee_debate__128776.html

    Apparently, Obama doesn't share your desire for an "enlightened" discussion..

    He would just rather attack and ridicule anyone who disagrees with him.. And he doesn't even have the balls to do it on American soil. He was to run away overseas and take potshots at fellow Americans..

    THAT is the Left's idea of "enlightened" discussion..

    Until you are ready to call Obama on his being such an asshole, no "enlightened" discussion is possible..

    Michale

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3324310/First-footage-Paris-terror-attacks-shows-diners-diving-cover-AK47-wielding-jihadist-sprays-caf-bullets-victim-escaped-gun-jammed.html

    Pretty dramatic video there...

    And this is what ya'all want to bring to the United States...

    And for what!?? A few tens of thousands fresh new Democrat voters????

    Seriously!!????

    Michale

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    “You can go to the Syrian government today and say to them, ‘I need a piece of paper that says I’m Tony Caterpillar.’ And they give it to you. These are not forged documents. These are written out by a government employee who needs money, whose family has no food. So when they tell you that [the refugees] are vetted, are you out of your mind?”
    -Aarafat “Ralph” Succar, Syrian Community Leader
    http://nypost.com/2015/11/19/syrian-community-leader-isis-is-already-in-new-york-city/

    Keep sticking your heads in the sand, people..

    Just makes it easier for terrorists to kill Americans... If the Democrat Party is lucky, the terrorists will kill a lot of Republican voters...

    A Two-Fer for the Democrat Party.... :^/

    Nice.....

    Michale

  66. [66] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    If you are going to ignore recent RECENT history and your own comments, then any discussion is pointless..

    Well, it certainly is pointless if you are just going to turn to lying and baseless accusations...

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, it certainly is pointless if you are just going to turn to lying and baseless accusations...

    Michale: Pretend we have a GOP POTUS and tens of thousands of CHRISTIAN Syrian refugees wanting to come in..

    You would be making the EXACT same arguments that I am making..

    Bashi: Bullshit. I've posted many times on (t)his blog during the Bush administration.

    Please post this "many" times you posted to this blog during the Bush administration in support of the GOP immigration plans that concern war torn areas and involve the immigration of known terrorists...

    You can't post any because you never DID post any...

    The ONLY reason you are for this type of immigration is to protect Obama's ego and his agenda of minting fresh new Democrat voters..

    Why else is he bringing in more than 9% muslims and less than 1% christians???

    The facts are clear...

    Continue to bury your head in the sand...

    Michale

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just step back for a moment and TRY to look at the situation as if you can think for yourself, without an partisan and bigoted hysteria...

    What do you think is going to happen if Obama gets his way and continues his Syrian refugee program w/o any changes as if Paris never happened and then there is a Paris style attack here in the US..

    What do you think the reaction from the American people will be??

    You know and I know how utterly devastating it's going to be to the Democrat Party...

    Now, don't you think that THAT is worth preventing??

    Michale

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why else is he bringing in more than 9% muslims and less than 1% christians???

    Course that should read 99% muslims...

    My bust... :D

    Michale

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Even Obama's SecDef is saying we need to change our operations...

    9 will get you 10 Ashe is going to be Patraeus-ified here soon...

    Michale

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    JM,

    Or do you not remember the Mariel boat lift

    The Mariel boat lift??

    Oh yea... I remember that..

    That's when Governor Of Arkansas Bill Clinton threatened to close all state roads to federal refugee traffic because he didn't want the Cuban refugees in his state...

    Is THAT the Mariel Boat lift you are referring to??

    :D

    Michale

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's when Governor Of Arkansas Bill Clinton threatened to close all state roads to federal refugee traffic because he didn't want the Cuban refugees in his state...

    Awaiting the sputtering.. "Well... that's different!!"

    :D

    Michale

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    Man calls all Muslims terrorists during Va. meeting

    Shalaby is a trustee of the Islamic Center of Fredericksburg, an organization which has been there for nearly 30 years. He said parents are now afraid to send their children to Sunday school at the center because of the threats made at Tuesday night's meeting.
    http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/local/virginia/2015/11/18/hate-speech-closes-spotsylvania-public-meeting/76027308/

    What a bunch of hysterical fear mongering..

    Parents afraid to send their kids to school because of some bigoted loud-mouth... Jeeesh....

    Michale

  74. [74] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Awaiting the sputtering.. "Well... that's different!!""

    Actually NOT. Bill Clinton was just as wrong as Governor then also. Happy? My whole point was that no governor, neither liberal nor conservative, neither Republican or Democrat, has either the power or constitutional authority to stop people from taking up residence in his state. PERIOD. Allowing someone into the USA is entirely up to the Federal government ONLY, not to ANY individual state or group of states.

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    While you are technically correct, Governors CAN withhold state support of any refugee action, thereby rendering ANY federal action impossible to accomplish..

    Further, Governors can withhold state funds from church and charity organizations that normally would service refugees...

    So, yea.. Governors can shut down the federal refugee program quicker than you can say TERRORIST ATTACK...

    Again, these are the facts whether you like it or not...

    Michale

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    I also must point out that the House just passed the STOP TERRORIST INFILTRATION legislation with a VETO PROOF majority...

    Sorry, Obozo... No minting fresh Democrat voters for you.... :D

    Michale

  77. [77] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Murrieta, CA
    'nuff said..
    And THAT was just a bunch a fed-up Americans..
    Imagine what can be accomplished when a State Governor mobilizes their National Guards to prevent buses carrying potential terrorist from dropping off said terrorists in the state...
    Does Obama really want to start a war between State and Federal forces??"

    The detainees were sent to a different city in the state of California instead. So what exactly did the protesters accomplish? They were still transferred from Texas to California, just the same.

    Also, there are NO state forces. The National Guard is a reserve military force, and as such, is part of the United States Armed Forces. Though nominally National Guard units are under the dual control of the state and the federal government, when "Federalized" the President of the United States then becomes the commander-in-chief of the state militias "when called into the actual Service of the United States." according to Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution.

  78. [78] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's a moot point...

    Obama will not be able to mint fresh new Democrat voters unless he completely ignores the law..

    Granted, Obama is well known for doing just that...

    Michale

  79. [79] 
    John M wrote:

    Elizabeth wrote:

    "This is a sad excuse for enlightened discussion."

    I meant to respond to this before. On the one hand, in terms of on an intellectual level, I certainly have to agree with you. On the other hand, it could be argued that it is very enlightening on a whole other level, since it is certainly bringing out all kinds of raw emotional responses from various people, and depending on your perspective, their various prejudices, fears, etc, to light. Bringing that all out into the open can be the first step to understanding and resolution, if handled well.

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    I meant to respond to this before. On the one hand, in terms of on an intellectual level, I certainly have to agree with you. On the other hand, it could be argued that it is very enlightening on a whole other level, since it is certainly bringing out all kinds of raw emotional responses from various people, and depending on your perspective, their various prejudices, fears, etc, to light. Bringing that all out into the open can be the first step to understanding and resolution, if handled well.

    I completely agree...

    The problem is, it's NOT being "handled well" because ya'all can't get past the "OBAMA IS GOD, OBAMA IS PERFECT" state of mind...

    Michale

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    I mean, look at it...

    Obama called over 470 dead and wounded in Paris a "setback"..

    That is a BONE HEAD thing to say..

    I know ya'all well enough to know that YA'ALL think it's a bone head thing to say..

    But no one here can admit it because no one can speak out against The Messiah.. The One...

    Until ya'all are at the stage where you can be just as aggressive and passionate against Obama as ya'all were against Bush, then NO amount of "enlightened" dialogue is possible..

    Because you can't be enlightened if you can't admit yer wrong...

    Michale

  82. [82] 
    Michale wrote:

    Until ya'all are at the stage where you can be just as aggressive and passionate against Obama as ya'all were against Bush, then NO amount of "enlightened" dialogue is possible..

    "Are you saying I have to DIE before you will discuss your feelings on death with me?"
    -Dr Leonard McCoy, STAR TREK IV, THE VOYAGE HOME

    :D

    Michale

  83. [83] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    ... Bringing that all out into the open can be the first step to understanding and resolution, if handled well.

    It could be, if handled well, as you say. But, I think we both know that it ain't going to be handled anywhere near well. :(

  84. [84] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    John,

    it is certainly bringing out all kinds of raw emotional responses from various people, and depending on your perspective, their various prejudices, fears, etc, to light.

    Do you really believe that is what's happening here? I don't. I believe it's akin to throwing a grenade every five minutes and basking in the fallout. How's that for an analogy?

    In any event, that's the only explanation that makes any sense to me at this point.

  85. [85] 
    Michale wrote:

    I believe it's akin to throwing a grenade every five minutes and basking in the fallout. How's that for an analogy?

    Graphic..

    But entirely inaccurate.. :D

    Michale

  86. [86] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hardly. That is precisely what happens here on a daily and even hourly basis. You may not be able to see it, Michale - I'll grant you that much - probably because you're right in the middle of it and have been for such a long time.

    Frankly, I'm pretty much done with it. A bad time of the year to contemplate such things but, what are you gonna do?

  87. [87] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    But entirely inaccurate.. :D

    Very funny.

    Actually, that's precisely why the analogy is so applicable. :)

  88. [88] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    We debate with the partners we have, not with the partners we wish we had..

    The problem is people simply want confirmation of their beliefs and opinions..

    They don't want them challenged..

    They want a "safe spot" where they can bask in affirmation and not have to listen to the fact that the emperor is buck-assed nekkid.....

    Where they can slam the GOP for "fear mongering" but not have to be confronted with how much fear mongering the Left wallows in...

    In short, people want a Huffpoop or a DailyKOS.... :^/

    Michale

  89. [89] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Here's what I understand, Michale ...

    Comments that incessantly make the argument that Democrats are as bad as Republicans and that make the ridiculous claim that "NPA'ers" rise above petty partisanship are a lot easier to tap out than engaging in solutions-based discussion in search of policies that would address the critical challenges of our times.

  90. [90] 
    Michale wrote:

    When ya'all quit slamming Republicans then I'll quit pointing out that Democrats are no better..

    Howz that?? :D

    Michale

  91. [91] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I've concluded that life is too short and complicated to tolerate this sort of tedious discourse.

  92. [92] 
    Michale wrote:

    On that we agree..

    And yet.. here I am.. :D

    Michale

  93. [93] 
    altohone wrote:

    A few lies need to be addressed... late as it is.

    The Left didn't support the war in Iraq.
    The Left did not and does not support the regime change war in Syria using terrorist proxies and their Syrian sympathizers.

    The right wing Establishment neolibcon foreign policy of Bush/Obama/Clinton is responsible for both.

    It is this bipartisan right wing interventionism that created ISIS and the refugee flow out of Syria.

    Micha attacking the neolibcon policies he otherwise defends because they aren't interventionist ENOUGH does not make them the policies of the Left.

    Until the discussion centers around ending US support for the terrorist proxies and the support they continue to get from our "allies" (Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Israel, UAE), nobody should take the half-assed rhetoric seriously.

    The bickering about the EFFECTS of our right wing interventionist policies for political gain is designed to prevent discussion about the ongoing policies that are the CAUSE.

    A

Comments for this article are closed.