Page 20 of 22 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 211

Thread: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

  1. #191
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,520

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post



    No where in that article does it say that Him not being able to speak English was the CAUSE of the accident...
    Nor did I suggest that the accident was caused by his inability to speak English. However, I think it's highly possible that his inability to speak English hampered his ability to properly communicate and respond the accident. Was he, at anytime, able to communicate safety procedures to his passengers?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  2. #192
    Sage
    mike2810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    arizona
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    15,032

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Tea:
    I think you have taken the bait ,hook, line and sinker when it comes to 1070 propaganda. You are mislead that it was a racial profiling bill. Yes it was modified to clarify some of the language that some thought was defined enough. Show me other than some rag paper or proillegal web site that proves that SB1070 was a racial profile bill.

    Believe what you want, but the bill is far from that.
    "I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"

  3. #193
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Good discussion BmanMcfly

    Definitely there are totally legitimate reasons to either favor or oppose Sotomayor. I'm not saying at all that everybody needs to support her or they're a racist or something. But they should have steered well clear of the racial stuff. I wouldn't call "hot tempered" a "slur" really, but it is definitely the dominant stereotype, and that phrasing of it in particular is a standard way to attack hispanics. Like I said, maybe the senators were completely unaware of that, but at that level, where they have whole staffs of people helping plan their questions and whatnot... Where they're responsible for governing 40 million hispanics, that isn't really excusable even if it was inadvertent.
    Look at Keagan (sp?) would it have been racist to say she looked like a rabid beast up there with that sickening scowl???

    I never saw this situation, but it would be a benefit to look at the situation TRULY objectively. These politicians really are only people... they are fallible.


    Yeah, she is opposed to it. That's a huge one for me too.
    Let's see if she sticks by it.

    That is definitely how it was spun on the right, but I really don't think that is supported by the facts. If you read the stuff she's had to say on the topic of hispanics in the legal profession it's really clear. There are hardly any hispanics in high profile positions in the legal profession and she was constantly cheerleading for the notion that they can be good judges. The wise latina comment was basically to say "hey, there are advantages to having people on the bench that come from different backgrounds because their experiences give them a perspective that is underrepresented in the courts", which I think is a valid, and certainly not racist, point.
    I don't doubt that hispanics can make good judges, but, with her, she has declared herself as against the second amendment, which, is a big deal to alot of people.

    Arpaio in particular. He is sheriff of 60% of the population of AZ and he has been sued MANY times for racial profiling. He has lost a ton of civil suits, costing Maricopa county somewhere around $100 million in settlements. ICE revoked his immigration enforcement powers following an investigation they did where they found rampant racial profiling. And the FBI is currently investigating him for it as well. But, the voters keep voting him in and 1070 restores and expands his immigration enforcement powers, so he's going to keep at it.
    Ya, he's got a tough spot, even if I'm going to assume that he's trying to do the best he can to honestly find faithfully look for the illegal immigrants.


    Yeah, they are being challenged on their constitutionality. The DoJ announced that they are putting the cases together. Actually, the one about kids born here to illegal immigrants is the most clearly unconstitutional. The 14th amendment explicitly says that if you're born here, you're a citizen and the states cannot deny you any priviledge or immunity of law, which a birth certificate definitely is.
    Ya... I guess could give the baby his birth certificate, but take the lot of them to the border, so when the kid is old enough he can move in legitimately.

    There is some truth to that... The problems are related. But I think the solutions are not so related. For example, border patrol addresses both problems, but programs designed to catch illegal immigrants or drug traffickers inside the country are totally distinct. People use drug trafficking as an argument to target illegal immigrants inside the US and that doesn't really make sense.
    Specifically, for the drug traffickers, consider; they are organized, they are determined, they are well armed, and they don't hesitate to kill. In many ways, they are an unsanctioned mexican army. Anything less then the national guard for the occupied territory is more or less suicide.

    No way you believe that I'm betting you believe that a politician is always looking for an angle. Don't you really? Competing at that level politically is a cut throat game. The ones that don't use every angle at their disposal get beat out.
    Do you understand the criminal charge that represents against Obama???? That would be at the very least an impeacheable offense, to knowingly not do his best to defend the country... to, if this negligence of his duty was intentional and purposeful to give the enemy an advantage in a conflict, by letting them through the gates, that would be TREASON. However, that requires two witnesses.

  4. #194
    Stigmatized! End R Word! Kali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last Seen
    08-19-12 @ 12:29 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    13,334
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Why is it that most of us consider profiling to be efficient LE when it comes to terrorism...young, male, bearded and smelly muslim, but it is wrong when looking at the majority illegal alien demographic?

    Most US citizens can speak English with at least mediocre fluency. But when, you come across someone who "No habla ingles", they are illegals.

    LE (ICE, BP, local PD, etc., have a specific number of officers and time to perform their duties. Paying extra attention to, the "no hablo ingles"crowd is more likely to result in unearthing or unwrapping an illegal alien than trying to spread it around to everyone.
    Because don't ya know we gotta walk on eggshells and be all PC about illegals.
    ~Following My Own Flow~

  5. #195
    Stigmatized! End R Word! Kali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last Seen
    08-19-12 @ 12:29 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    13,334
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Profiling is a TOTALLY ineffective way to fight terrorism. Any predictable pattern in enforcement like that is a weakness, not a strength. How hard would it be, in a world of 7 billion, to find a middle aged white lady who was willing to blow up a plane? Not as hard as people think. If that's all it takes to get around the attention of TSA, that's who they'll send.

    But, even putting that aside, we're more willing to accept abridgements of our civil rights to prevent terrorism than we are to fight illegal immigration. Terrorism is just a much bigger deal, so people get scared more easily and back down on their principles more quickly.



    No way. To be able to become a citizen you really only need a very basic command of English and lots of people just manage to study up enough for the test and then go back to speaking their native language.

    Have you ever tried to learn a language later in life? It's really hard... I thought it was really hard when I was in Jr High, but now just in my 30s I tried it again and found it almost impossible... I can't even imagine trying to do it in my 50s... I think it is a good thing for people to learn the language of course, but, you know, old dogs, new tricks and all... Realistically, it's usually the younger generation that really becomes fluent and people who move here as adults struggle.
    The thing is the next step is gonna being sending those terrorist groups in via our unsecure borders. So the two go hand in hand to me.

    And again: you have no rights when you are trying to come into our country in a Criminal way.
    Last edited by Kali; 07-06-10 at 01:54 AM.
    ~Following My Own Flow~

  6. #196
    Stigmatized! End R Word! Kali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last Seen
    08-19-12 @ 12:29 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    13,334
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    If that person gets a job driving a truck that hauls hazardous materials; do you think it would be a good idea that he have more than just a basic command of English? Or, should he be fluent, so he can properly read hazardous materials transportation regulations, read hazmat shipping papers and be able to communicate a hazardous situation in the event of the accidental release of hazardous materials?

    The driver of this bus couldn't speak English. 24 people died on this bus.



    24 nursing home evacuees die in bus fire | Hurricane Rita | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle
    This is just one example of people who have died due to the illegals not being able to speak and read English. There are many more and a lot of them (criminals/illegals) have been killed too.
    ~Following My Own Flow~

  7. #197
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    If a cop sees a 20-something Muslim male acting nervous at airport security ...Hmm, he's thinking. maybe that dude needs further screening.
    Not so much. First of all, he has no way to know who is a muslim. Muslims come in all races. Secondly, if all you need to do NOT to get more careful screening is not to look muslim, then they just won't look muslim. And, even if you could somehow always tell who was a muslim accurately and there was nothing they could do to hide it, they could just recruit non-muslims to do it.

    But, even putting all that aside, if we were to imagine that only muslims committed terrorism and that they were readily and accurately identifiable, it still would be a TERRIBLY weak indicator of probability to blow up a plan. Just in the US we can estimate that about 100,000 muslims fly a day, so that's about 36.5 million muslims getting on flights a year. We have been averaging about 1 attempted terrorist attack on a plan every 3 years or so. So, that means that about 1 out of every 100 million times a muslim boards a plane in the US turns out to be attempting a terrorist attack... It's basically statistically irrelevant. Things like looking nervous, buying a one way ticket, no luggage, travel to watch list countries, the actual no fly list, bringing certain types of items with you, how you paid for your ticket, etc, etc, are infinitely better predicters. If somebody flags because of a combination of those factors, you should search them no matter what religion you guess they follow. If they don't raise any of those flags, you don't really statistically have any more reason to search them than the guy behind them in line.

    But, whether even those far stronger predictors are actually useful is also very much in question. A lot of people argue that having any predictable patterns like that just make us easier to fool. Anybody who watches the news knows that if you want to blow up a plane, you buy a round trip ticket, pick a person who doesn't look muslim, dress like everybody else, check a bag, buy the ticket with a credit card, avoid picking a person who has been to the middle east, etc. If us regular joes know that, don't you think the terrorists do too?

    For general law enforcement using racial profiling, what the studies typically find is that police don't only racially profile, they overdo it beyond what the stats could possibly support. For example (just making up numbers to clarify what I mean) say that in a particular precinct 40% more blacks per capita are convicted of stealing a car, then they study how frequently police pull somebody over on suspicion of a stolen car when it turns out to have been their own car, and they pretty consistently find that the cops are pulling black people over like that maybe 250% more often. At that point it really is completely unjustifiable. It's not just a violation of people's civil rights to treat them differently because of the color of their skin, but on top of that it is just bad, ineffective, law enforcement. If they're pulling over blacks too much that means they're not pulling over whites enough for example. They would make more legitimate arrests if they pulled over fewer blacks and more whites instead. I've actually never seen a single study that found that a police department did not racially profile at all. Out of dozens I've read, I've only seen two that found that the police did profile, but roughly in line with the actual statistics- Manhatten and some small town in Texas. At least in the case of Manhatten, just to get that point- where they are not overprofiling- took a massive program to fight racial profiling, extensive training, extensive statistical information being shared with the cops... And Manhatten is just an intrinsically less bigotry prone place because it is so diverse that people just hardly think about it any more. So, pretty much anywhere in the country, law enforcement would actually be more effective if they racially profiled less.

  8. #198
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by Kali View Post
    The thing is the next step is gonna being sending those terrorist groups in via our unsecure borders. So the two go hand in hand to me.
    Not really. They have no need to come here illegally. So far, they've all been legal residents. I see no reason that would change. These people are professionals. This is what they do. They plan and pick the right person for the job and spend years and years setting it up just right and they don't like risks. They not only have been citizens, but they've all gone to lengths to fit in. Joining softball leagues and making friend with their neighbors and stuff. To come here illegally would just introduce a huge flaw into the plan for no real reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kali View Post
    And again: you have no rights when you are trying to come into our country in a Criminal way.
    Yeah, but you do have rights when you're a citizen and the AZ laws effect hispanic citizens more than they effect illegal immigrants.

  9. #199
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Let's see if she sticks by it.
    She will. That's a pretty standard partisan split in judges. Every justice nominated by a Republican voted in favor of corporate citizenship, every justice nominated by a Democrat voted against it.

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Ya, he's got a tough spot, even if I'm going to assume that he's trying to do the best he can to honestly find faithfully look for the illegal immigrants.
    It's more like he is obsesed with trying to find illegal immigrants and he is willing to ignore the constitution to do it.

    As a side note, the guy is out of control generally... He has arrested a handful of reporters for writing stories critical of him, he arrested a city councilman for proposing an investigation into him, he lost several civil trials for basically killing somebody with brutal treatment. For one example, he arrested a mentally handicapped person for "refusal to leave a store", he chained him up in a chair, hooded him, and left him unattended for three days. When he came back, the guy had choked to death on his own vomit... He lost a civil trial for $10 million of the county's money on that one. There are all kinds of stories like that about him, many of which have resulted in lost court cases... It drives me nuts that many on the right treat him like a hero... I get that they want a tough-on-illegal-immigration hero, but this aint the guy.

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Do you understand the criminal charge that represents against Obama???? That would be at the very least an impeacheable offense, to knowingly not do his best to defend the country... to, if this negligence of his duty was intentional and purposeful to give the enemy an advantage in a conflict, by letting them through the gates, that would be TREASON. However, that requires two witnesses.
    Not really. I don't think the guy is totally lying. The shocking-sounding part is really his interpretation, not so much what he claims Obama actually said even. I imagine what Obama said was something along the lines of "I don't want to address border security until we have a comprehensive plan". Somebody could interpret that as "Obama says he won't help unless we agree to amnesty!", but that's really just spin...

  10. #200
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Napolitano: ‘You’re Never Going to Totally Seal That Border’

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Not really. I don't think the guy is totally lying. The shocking-sounding part is really his interpretation, not so much what he claims Obama actually said even. I imagine what Obama said was something along the lines of "I don't want to address border security until we have a comprehensive plan". Somebody could interpret that as "Obama says he won't help unless we agree to amnesty!", but that's really just spin...
    Ok... here's where we differ :

    If you're willing to accept that he would have said 'I don't want to address border security until we have a comprehensive plan' WHEN he was there asking for help on the issue... at the very least is a deriliction of duty.

    He wasn't asking for beaurocrats to sit on the issue for 6 months while cops as well as citizens are being killed. He wanted ACTION. But in order to have Obama take action, you needed to have the paperwork filled out 6 months before the election.

    Frankly, this situation really is one where it would be legal to call a vote towards a declaration of war. Do YOU, even if you are hispanic, want illegal immigrants coming into the country and further driving down wages??

Page 20 of 22 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •