Nightmare for Democrat crowers - My Pleasure

[Svnla]

Originally Posted by jstern01

Only to you. This country was founded on immigration, and hundreds of thousands, if not millions enter here during the first 125 years of this nations existence. And if the republicans at least had the balls to do what the 'W' wanted, we would be in a better spot now.

You do know there are two different things, right?

ILLEGAL immigration vs. LEGAL immigration. They are not the same. STOP painting them in the same broad brush.

One more thing, can you give us one, just one, developed country on Earth that would let ILLEGALS to break its border and immigration law AND then reward those ILLEGALS with amnesty/path to citizenship? I will be waiting. There is no such country exists.

[First]

Originally Posted by Svnla

You do know there are two different things, right?

ILLEGAL immigration vs. LEGAL immigration. They are not the same. STOP painting them in the same broad brush.

One more thing, can you give us one, just one, developed country on Earth that would let ILLEGALS to break its border and immigration law AND then reward those ILLEGALS with amnesty/path to citizenship? I will be waiting. There is no such country exists.

Why the hell are you looking to other countries for immigration policy? Lol.

By the way; name the worst offense to your sensibility of illegal immigrants coming to this country, troll.

[monovillage]

Originally Posted by First

..........<snip>

By the way; name the worst offense to your sensibility of illegal immigrants coming to this country.

One of the worst is the fact that illegal immigrants don't have the full spectrum of vaccines required in this country, by coming into the U.S. illegally they bypass all our health regulations and put the entire population at risk of disease.

Another one is that by coming here illegally there's no way to screen out the career criminals, sexual predators and/or violent felons. They've entered illegally and bypassed sane regulation on who we allow into the country.

[sigurros81]

Originally Posted by monovillage

One of the worst is the fact that illegal immigrants don't have the full spectrum of vaccines required in this country, by coming into the U.S. illegally they bypass all our health regulations and put the entire population at risk of disease.

Another one is that by coming here illegally there's no way to screen out the career criminals, sexual predators and/or violent felons. They've entered illegally and bypassed sane regulation on who we allow into the country.

That is the dumbest shit I've heard in quite a while. Put the entire population at risk of disease? Lol. When was the last time you caught the bubonic plague from an undocumented Mexican? This isn't the 1300s where diseases and immunity are localized geographically. Man, the load of bullshit dumbasses like you spew makes me feel embarrassed for humanity. Do you even think before you type up crap like this?

[monovillage]

Originally Posted by sigurros81

That is the dumbest shit I've heard in quite a while. Put the entire population at risk of disease? Lol. When was the last time you caught the bubonic plague from an undocumented Mexican? This isn't the 1300s where diseases and immunity are localized geographically. Man, the load of bullshit dumbasses like you spew makes me feel embarrassed for humanity. Do you even think before you type up crap like this?

Talk about imported strains of tuberculosis, hepatitis, dengue fever, chagas or even the old time favorite Hansen's disease if you don't think that they are a problem then you're just displaying your ignorance. Check with the CDC.
http://www.ajtmh.org/content/69/1/115.full

INFECTIOUS DISEASES IN IMMIGRANTS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A TROPICAL MEDICINE REFERRAL UNIT

R. LÓPEZ-VÉLEZ,
H. HUERGA and
M. C. TURRIENTES

+ Author Affiliations

Tropical Medicine and Clinical Parasitology Unit, Infectious Diseases Department and Microbiology Department, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain


Next Section
Abstract

Immigrants from less developed countries to Europe are growing in number and could contribute to the emergence of some infectious diseases. To address this issue, we conducted a descriptive study of 988 immigrants, of whom 79.9% were sub-Saharan Africans and 72% were of undocumented origin. Fever, pruritus, eosinophilia, visceromegaly, and anemia were more frequent in Africans, while a cough was more common Latin Americans (P < 0.005). The most frequent diagnoses were previous hepatitis B (46.5%), latent tuberculosis (44.2%), filariasis (24.8%), infection with intestinal helminths (15.4%), malaria (15.1%), infection with intestinal protozoa (10%), hepatitis C (8.8%), other non-parasitic infections (7.8%), active hepatitis B (7.6%), sexually transmitted diseases (7.5%), active tuberculosis (5.8%), and infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (5.2%). Past and active hepatitis B and C, active tuberculosis, infection with HIV, malaria, and filariasis were more frequent in Africans (P < 0.005). Thirty-two other tropical diseases were also diagnosed.

Then address my other point.

[Meghan54]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

.




How is giving aid and comfort to illegal foreign invaders not treason?

Then you better dig up old Ronald Reagan and convict his corpse for treason. Forget that in 1986 Ronald Reagan signed into law an amnesty program. Forget about that?

He signed amnesty into law in 1986, inviting three million ‘illegals’ to become ‘legals.’ He even defended the idea in his 1984 Debate with Fritz Mondale: “I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally.” Would he do otherwise now? Would the man who didn’t want to deport 3 million of God’s children, now deport 15 or 20 million of them? Reagan had a completely different idea about immigration and the border from the wall/moat/electrocution/drone model. His diaries show an emotional discomfort with militarized borders with Mexico. He met with the President of Mexico to try to discuss ways to do something better with the border then to turn it into a fence. Reagan was concerned about a fence, while the recent crop of would-be-Reagans spout nonsense about walls with moats topped by electrified fences.


Reagan was influenced by free-market thought in this regard. Milton Friedman believed that immigration, even illegal immigration, was good for freedom. His argument, which was in this regard identical to Austrian economists like Ludwig Von Mises, was that human capital should be free to cross borders just like financial capital should be. Forcible interventions into immigration were really just forcible interventions into the labor market.



Latinos are religious, morally conservative and tend disproportionately to join the military. They also tend to be hard working and entrepreneurial. Do we really have too many of them?




Do we really want to pack them up, forcibly, by the millions in the greatest forced migration in human history? How many are there, 15, maybe 20 million? No one has ever moved 15 million people against their will. No one has ever moved half that many without concentration camps, forced marches of one form or another and mass death through plague.


If there's another way to do it, please tell me what it is. But I haven’t heard one. What I hear is slogans like ‘what part of illegal don’t you understand’ and attacks on ‘amnesty.’ Slogans move callers to dial in to talk radio, but they don’t move 20 million people voluntarily back into poverty and squalor. Soldiers do that (unhappy ones); box cars full of people do that. Camps surrounded by barbed wire do that. In the end you either let them stay or you herd them out. If you want to call it amnesty, go ahead.


After all, what’s wrong with amnesty? The idea has a well-worn legal tradition, one strongly associated with the Christian faith. It means forgiveness. After the Civil War, Lincoln offered amnesty to rebel soldiers. Was he wrong to do so? They had taken up arms against their own government; they had killed hundreds of thousands. But Lincoln (as opposed to the radical republicans) had the wisdom to offer forgiveness. What about runaway slaves after emancipation? They had broken the law, shouldn’t they have had to pay the price even after the laws were changed? Of course not. Why should immigration laws be any different?


The anti-immigrant impulse falls short of the Biblical writings, which not only encourages immigration, but even encourages immigrants to participate in the social relief system of Ancient Israel.


The anti-immigrant impulse falls short of the vision of the Founders. This is one issue where the TEA Parties have to diligently study the writings of the Fathers to get things right. The Founders wanted a big and growing country with lots of immigrants. In fact, immigration was one of the causes for the War for Independence.


What does the Constitution say about immigration? Really only two things: first that it’s generally up to Congress what the rules should be—they can loosen and tighten the standards as they see fit. Second, it makes an exception: No matter what Congress says, children born here (with the exception of those born to families such as diplomats who are not under our legal jurisdiction) are citizens. No amount of torturing the text can change the fact that the children of illegal immigrants are citizens. So what are the family values conservatives going to do, send the parents or grandparents packing, while the kids stay here? This is pro-family?

[Meghan54]

Originally Posted by michal1980

The current left plan w/support from latinos is "Let the law breakers get a free pass".

Talk about pandering.

No pandering, just repeating the same thing Ronald Reagan did back in 1986 when he signed into law an amnesty for illegal aliens in the U.S.

Just trying to emulate the "Father of Modern Conservatism".

[Pr0d1gy]

Originally Posted by Meghan54

No pandering, just repeating the same thing Ronald Reagan did back in 1986 when he signed into law an amnesty for illegal aliens in the U.S.

Just trying to emulate the "Father of Modern Conservatism".

Isn't it shocking that Saint Righty Reagan was actually a liberal? He increased federal spending, gave amnesty to immigrants, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.....

Republicans need to wake up, seriously.

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally Posted by Pr0d1gy

Republicans need to wake up, seriously.

Democrats need to wake up as well

This two party system is incredibly broken

[Svnla]

Originally Posted by First

Why the hell are you looking to other countries for immigration policy? Lol.

By the way; name the worst offense to your sensibility of illegal immigrants coming to this country, troll.

Ah, can't debate with FACTS ==> name calling. Color me shock, NOT.

Can you find a post that I said what Reagan did in the 80's was right? As a matter of fact, I did bash him more than once for what he did. Do the same ole thing (amnesty/path to citizenship in this case) and expect different result = crazy and stupid.

Again, one country, just one? Just what I thought.

Didn't the liberals cite other developed countries to justify Obamacare? Why not now? LOL.

[Ausm]

Originally Posted by EagleKeeper

Democrats do not have companies that employ workers?

Where are the stats that show Democrats employ the cheapest labor besides you Rightists claim all Democrats are "Takers" want "free" stuff.

[Ausm]

Originally Posted by zinfamous

Of course not! Democrats make up the entirety of the 47% moocher class in this country.

Isn't that what this election, and what ATP&N has been saying over the last ~2 months?

+1

[sigurros81]

Originally Posted by monovillage

Talk about imported strains of tuberculosis, hepatitis, dengue fever, chagas or even the old time favorite Hansen's disease if you don't think that they are a problem then you're just displaying your ignorance. Check with the CDC.
http://www.ajtmh.org/content/69/1/115.full



Then address my other point.

Bahaha. You reference a bunch of diseases that anyone can get and we have treatments for. This is the kind of fearmongering that makes you look like a complete buffoon. Has there been a zombie outbreak or a large population being contaminated by a Hispanic sneaking into this country illegally? Oh no, the next time I get malaria, it might be because that Mexican waiter bit me! shut the fuck up already.

To address your point: you're just a fucking idiot. Trying to make a big deal out of a non issue.

[shira]

Originally Posted by jstern01

1% of the vote is probably the margin of error of the exit poll. Essentially he won the same percentage.

Right you are. From Edison Research, which carries out the exit polling for all of the major networks:

http://www.edisonresearch.com/exit_poll_faq.php

What is the National Election Pool (NEP)?

The National Election Pool is a consortium of ABC News, Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News. It was formed in 2003 in order to provide information on Election Night about the vote count, election analysis and election projections. NEP contracted with Edison Research to make projections and provide Exit Poll analysis. In addition, the NEP retained the Associated Press to conduct a tabulation of the vote throughout the country.


What is the Margin of Error for an Exit Poll?

Exit Polls are surveys. As in all surveys, there is a margin of error due to sampling. The margin of error for a 95% confidence interval is about +/- 3% for a typical characteristic from the national Exit Poll and +/-4% for a typical state Exit Poll. Characteristics that are more concentrated in a few polling places, such as race, have larger sampling errors. Other non sampling factors may increase the total error.

So a 1% difference from year to year is essentially meaningless.