• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

'Enough is Enough': While Washington Vacations, a War Rages Here at Home By Newt

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Actually some of Newts proposals are implementable now through homeland security laws. And if he had any cred with Chertoff, they could jawbone the idea to actually come up with things that could be done NOW. And more things that could be done with the proper enabling legislation.

Anyone care to quote the odds that Newt is spending any time to transform his idea from nothing but hot air into workable reality?
 
Originally posted by: loki8481
this whole thing boggles my mind... people get murdered in Newark all too frequently. and yet the GOP never really cared about doing something about the root causes (low education, high poverty, etc) until it suddenly fit their xenophobic rhetoric ....-snip-

How can crime in Newark be a federal issue? Your sherrif is likely elected by the people of Newark, the police chief is either elected by the people or hired by City Council, who the people elect. If they are not doing a good job, get replacements. It's a local matter and the leaders these people elect are responsible for it, not the federal government.

Crimes are almost always a matter of state law. If the (state) judges and/or prosecutors are doing a poor job, replace them. It's a local matter here again.

Whose "xenophobic rhetoric"? You make it seem that the GOP has been railing against illegal imigration. I haven't seen them do squat so far. The other side is even worse, they wanna give illegals rights and benefits.

Illegal immigration is a serious problem, even for us over here in the Eastern part of the US. For some reason, we seem to be attracting a criminal element. I can only guess the Mexican authorities deal far more harshly with crime than we do.

I'm on the board of an organization called Crime Stoppers (most of you probrably have a local affiliate where you live). We are in close communication with both the police and sherrif's departments. Usually about half the suspects we are looking for are illegals. Worse, many of the these criminals prey on the population of law abiding hard working illegals. They do so because they are unlikely to be reported. THis allows for a criminal element to operate unfettered by local law enforce until they screw up and victimize a *legal* person who will report them.

Illegal immigration ingeneral has put an enormous financial drain on the county where I live, particularly our schools and hospital. Violent crime by illegal immigrant criminals has become a serious problem. Our county recently created a panel too address it. But what to do? Illegal immigration is a federal issue, we don't even share a border with Mexico (or Canada). What can local communities do?
---------------------------------------

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Shades of Willie Horton...

Right, the recent murders in NY (IIRC) really do point out how the "let's parole" everybody thing is working out really really well for us.

What's one reason for early release or parole of criminals? Over crowding in jails and prisons. Do you think the illegals we have jailed contribute to that? Let's just keep them out of the country in the first place.

----------------------------------------

Originally posted by: sandorski
How long before this letter shows up on Snopes and is exposed as a hoax?

I don't see what could be a hoax here. We know who the suspects are in the murders. The article you above by Newt was basically the same as teh speech he gave in Iowa, it was televised and I saw it.

----------------------------

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Typical Newt Gingrich to all excited about some new idea.

You think the idea of deporting illegals, particularly criminals that are illegal alien is new? In case you missed it, we just had a healthy amount of discussion on this topic recently during the Immigration Reform attempt by Congress.

-snip-

But going back to the Newt argument, I could dredge up a huge number of tear jerking cases of white males doing all kinds of horrible things. And then demand that we deport the rotten lot. But until I can start to demonstrate that the target group in question is much more likely than the general population to do such horrible things, that argument is at best half baked. Then one has to go beyond that and think a lot of other things through because it changes quite a few other things.

Ridiculous, absolutley riduclous. There is no need whatsoever to proof that a certian group is more likley to engage in criminal behavior before we start to act. You're either here legally or you're not. If you're not and commit criminal acts, you need to be deported. Period. And so you can't just sneak eight back (which they obviously do) we need REAL border control.

Yes, we do need a lot of changes. In listening to Congress debate the immigration reform bill it is chrystal clear that we have little to no control over our Southern border (nor our Northern border). And to top it off, our hodge pogde of enforcement agencies have no means to communicate, no means to efficiently deport or even detain illegals, criminal or not. E.g., if you're an illegal my understanding is that upon arrest for even a serious felony you can demand deportation immediately (thus no trial). You can sneak back in with no criminal record. Jeebus, we can't even identify these people.

----------------------------------

Originally posted by: Lemon law
-snip-
Anyone care to quote the odds that Newt is spending any time to transform his idea from nothing but hot air into workable reality?

Since Newt holds no office, I don't see what he can other than make speeches and make suggestions how we ought to go about this. Both of which he's done. You might as well criticize Al Gore for not solving GW yet.

Fern
 
Poor point Fern when you say---Since Newt holds no office, I don't see what he can other than make speeches and make suggestions how we ought to go about this. Both of which he's done. You might as well criticize Al Gore for not solving GW yet.

Its quite clear you don't understand or choose to reject every point I make about Newt.

Next week and next year will very likely see Al Gore still working on GW, by next week ole Newt will be off chasing another idea and doing a poor job of it. Its nothing to do with how valid or invalid the idea is, its about Newt.

 
If this kind of blatant failure on part of our government continues I would not be surprised if we start seeing vigilantism rear it's head in the near future.
 
Originally posted by: Fern
I'm on the board of an organization called Crime Stoppers (most of you probrably have a local affiliate where you live). We are in close communication with both the police and sherrif's departments. Usually about half the suspects we are looking for are illegals. Worse, many of the these criminals prey on the population of law abiding hard working illegals. They do so because they are unlikely to be reported. THis allows for a criminal element to operate unfettered by local law enforce until they screw up and victimize a *legal* person who will report them.

Crimestoppers!?! Lol!

In the town of Durham, North Carolina, as I understand it, the "Crimestoppers" attempted to go after some INNOCENT, falsely accused lacrosse players from Duke University. Consequently, I think the name "Crimestoppers" led to the formation of a group of blog hooligans called "Liestoppers" who played a role in helping to unravel the case.

http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/

(Search the blog for "Crimestoppers" and then search the resulting articles with your browser.)

As far as I know, Crimestoppers has yet to apologize for going after innocent victims of a false accusation. Why would you want to be affiliated with such an organization? I hope that the victims sue the Crimestoppers for huge amounts of money.

From the Liestoppers blog:

On March 28, Durham Police Department CrimeStoppers? Coordinator, Corporal David Addison, composed an e-mail that described the false accusation in graphic detail and as if it was indisputedly true.

Here are links to four blog articles about the "Crimestoppers".

http://liestoppers.blogspot.co.../03/march-28-2006.html

http://liestoppers.blogspot.co.../03/march-28-2006.html

These Crimestoppers wanted posters look worthy of defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress lawsuits--what do you think?

http://liestoppers.blogspot.co...vigilante-posters.html

http://liestoppers.blogspot.co...ets-off-her-chair.html

 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Poor point Fern when you say---Since Newt holds no office, I don't see what he can other than make speeches and make suggestions how we ought to go about this. Both of which he's done. You might as well criticize Al Gore for not solving GW yet.

Its quite clear you don't understand or choose to reject every point I make about Newt.

Next week and next year will very likely see Al Gore still working on GW, by next week ole Newt will be off chasing another idea and doing a poor job of it. Its nothing to do with how valid or invalid the idea is, its about Newt.

Yes, I know Newt's an idea a minute kinda person. That's what makes him interesting. Anybody expecting him to be a single issue- type person (like Gore seems these days) is gonna be dissapointed. Personally, I don't see where that's a bad thing either. But again, other than practicaly writing the bill for Congress, I don't see what he can do. Do you have any suggestions about what he can do?

Fern

 
To Fern,

Who asks do I have any suggestions about whom.? Gore or Gingrich?

But my point about Newt is and remains that Newt sheds heat and no light regarding the issues. Such people never do much of any positive good even when they flirt with a valid issue.

Gore paradoxically has the opposite problem. He got too far into the old science and now we are learning GW is far more complex than Gore or anyone else ever could conceive. And now Gore's ego won't allow him to back down, rethink, and then move forward. And instead is now somewhat discredited and therefore less able to advance.

Maybe Gore and Gingrich are two sides of the same counterfeit coin. But still, Gore will end up doing some good and Newt won't.

The point being, both GW and illegals committing crimes are somewhat complex social issues and interact with other complex issues. Until one invests the hard work to make new social policy into a complete whole, the idea remains unrealized. And I did actually suggest some things that Gingrich could do as a private citizen to start that process. I still remain skeptical any of those things will be done. And that in itself is a verifiable reality test of how serious Newt is.
 
Newt Gingrich and the rest of republican need to wake up and see that illegal immigrants are here to stay and they better learn to deal with them in a positive way. Pointing BS stat like illegal immigrants killing is just divisive and non-productive.

First of all, you don't have the money and man power to deport all illegal immigrants. Second, the social cost to deport all illegal immigrants would be high, not only to low cost producers in this country who rely on those immigrants, there are many legal immigrant and American citizen who is associated with those illegal immigrants one way or the other. Those people are here already, if you keep brushing them aside and don't give them job, education, social support, a big portion of them will end up doing something bad, just like any other race would if they don't have job, education, welfare.

Why don't the GOP concentrate on sealing off border and making the immigration process more efficient already and still debating on this stupid topic of deportation.
 
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Originally posted by: Fern

-snip-

Crimestoppers!?! Lol!

In the town of Durham, North Carolina, as I understand it, the "Crimestoppers" attempted to go after some INNOCENT, falsely accused lacrosse players from Duke University.

I'm not sure what there is to LOL about. That site dorked my PC, I had to reset to get control of it. So I don't know what liestoppers is about etc.

But Crime Stoppers can't "go after" anybody. Clearly you're not familiar with it.

The sole purpose is to take anonymous tips from the general public as to the whereabouts of a person with an active arrest warrent, or recieve tips about a crime being currently committed. These are passed along to the police or sherrif's department

Some people just don't wanna talk to the police.

So, all it is is answering the phone, taking down the info and relaying it.

There's no "going after" anyone.

I don't even understand what a Crime Stoppers organization would be doing in the Duke case. I don't see any role for them at all.

Fern
 
Originally posted by: rchiu
Newt Gingrich and the rest of republican need to wake up and see that illegal immigrants are here to stay and they better learn to deal with them in a positive way. Pointing BS stat like illegal immigrants killing is just divisive and non-productive.

First of all, you don't have the money and man power to deport all illegal immigrants. Second, the social cost to deport all illegal immigrants would be high, not only to low cost producers in this country who rely on those immigrants, there are many legal immigrant and American citizen who is associated with those illegal immigrants one way or the other. Those people are here already, if you keep brushing them aside and don't give them job, education, social support, a big portion of them will end up doing something bad, just like any other race would if they don't have job, education, welfare.

Why don't the GOP concentrate on sealing off border and making the immigration process more efficient already and still debating on this stupid topic of deportation.
Where does he say deport ALL illegal aliens?? He said deport illegal aliens who commit crimes.

A person comes to this country illegally, commits a crime, and is convicted of that crime.
Give me ONE reason why we should not deport that person the second their jail sentence is up.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Anyone care to quote the odds that Newt is spending any time to transform his idea from nothing but hot air into workable reality?

So wait, you think that Newt, a guy who doesn't even hold any office, should be spending time "transforming his ideas into workable reality", but you make excuses all day long for the Democrats not transforming their ideas into workable reality because they don't hold an overwhelming majority in congress? Absolutely ridiculous.
 
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Anyone care to quote the odds that Newt is spending any time to transform his idea from nothing but hot air into workable reality?

So wait, you think that Newt, a guy who doesn't even hold any office, should be spending time "transforming his ideas into workable reality", but you make excuses all day long for the Democrats not transforming their ideas into workable reality because they don't hold an overwhelming majority in congress? Absolutely ridiculous.

You'll have a leg to stand on if Republicans stop filibustering and Bush stops vetoing.
 
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Anyone care to quote the odds that Newt is spending any time to transform his idea from nothing but hot air into workable reality?

So wait, you think that Newt, a guy who doesn't even hold any office, should be spending time "transforming his ideas into workable reality", but you make excuses all day long for the Democrats not transforming their ideas into workable reality because they don't hold an overwhelming majority in congress? Absolutely ridiculous.

You'll have a leg to stand on if Republicans stop filibustering and Bush stops vetoing.

The people that voted those Republicans into office voted them in to do just that. Let them do what they were put into office to do (isn't that what you always say?), which is to counter the Dems that were put into office.
 
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Anyone care to quote the odds that Newt is spending any time to transform his idea from nothing but hot air into workable reality?

So wait, you think that Newt, a guy who doesn't even hold any office, should be spending time "transforming his ideas into workable reality", but you make excuses all day long for the Democrats not transforming their ideas into workable reality because they don't hold an overwhelming majority in congress? Absolutely ridiculous.

You'll have a leg to stand on if Republicans stop filibustering and Bush stops vetoing.

The people that voted those Republicans into office voted them in to do just that. Let them do what they were put into office to do (isn't that what you always say?), which is to counter the Dems that were put into office.

And? Still they are the ones blocking Democrats from transforming their ideas into a workable reality. And there will be a price to pay for that in 2008. More Republicans are up for reelection in the Senate, plus of course the presidency. Going to be a bad year for the GOP.
 
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Anyone care to quote the odds that Newt is spending any time to transform his idea from nothing but hot air into workable reality?

So wait, you think that Newt, a guy who doesn't even hold any office, should be spending time "transforming his ideas into workable reality", but you make excuses all day long for the Democrats not transforming their ideas into workable reality because they don't hold an overwhelming majority in congress? Absolutely ridiculous.

You'll have a leg to stand on if Republicans stop filibustering and Bush stops vetoing.

The people that voted those Republicans into office voted them in to do just that. Let them do what they were put into office to do (isn't that what you always say?), which is to counter the Dems that were put into office.

And? Still they are the ones blocking Democrats from transforming their ideas into a workable reality. And there will be a price to pay for that in 2008. More Republicans are up for reelection in the Senate, plus of course the presidency. Going to be a bad year for the GOP.

What do you mean "and"? Thats my point. Lemon expects Newt to get off his ass and do something but thinks its ok for the Dems to not do anything because they don't have an overwhelming majority in congress. Well Newt isn't even in congress so what the hell is he going to do?

 
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Anyone care to quote the odds that Newt is spending any time to transform his idea from nothing but hot air into workable reality?

So wait, you think that Newt, a guy who doesn't even hold any office, should be spending time "transforming his ideas into workable reality", but you make excuses all day long for the Democrats not transforming their ideas into workable reality because they don't hold an overwhelming majority in congress? Absolutely ridiculous.

You'll have a leg to stand on if Republicans stop filibustering and Bush stops vetoing.

The people that voted those Republicans into office voted them in to do just that. Let them do what they were put into office to do (isn't that what you always say?), which is to counter the Dems that were put into office.

And? Still they are the ones blocking Democrats from transforming their ideas into a workable reality. And there will be a price to pay for that in 2008. More Republicans are up for reelection in the Senate, plus of course the presidency. Going to be a bad year for the GOP.

What do you mean "and"? Thats my point. Lemon expects Newt to get off his ass and do something but thinks its ok for the Dems to not do anything because they don't have an overwhelming majority in congress. Well Newt isn't even in congress so what the hell is he going to do?
Well, it's not OK for Democrats to not do anything, but if they do something and Republicans block or veto it, then it's OK for the Dems to not get it done, because they did all within their power. Newt did absolutely nothing about illegal immigration when he was leading the Republican Congress. He didn't even try hard enough to get it filibustered and or vetoed, so he is much more culpable here.
 
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Originally posted by: Fern

I don't even understand what a Crime Stoppers organization would be doing in the Duke case. I don't see any role for them at all.

Here's a link to what they did. I'm under the impression based on what I've read that these posters were tacked up all over Durham:

http://liestoppers.blogspot.co...vigilante-posters.html

Well, I'll take your word for it.

Looks like they are a bit of a *rouge* group. Sometimes that happens. Hehe, I wouldn't be surprised if their leadership got into a lot trouble about this.

Not to many parties look good in that case in hindsight - A crime that never happened.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Looks like something important to bring up to our local group. I'll keep checking it out to see HOW much trouble they may actually be in (lawsuits?).

Fern
 

You couldn't pull up that page? They had a single poster with individual pictures of the faces of all the Lacrosse team players reminiscent of a wanted poster. I sure hope that that group has to explain it under oath in a court of law while defending against numerous lawsuits.
 
Originally posted by: lyssword
Murder in America: 100,000 murdered since 2001 http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/14/0412/54253
So, how much % of those are done by illegals?

1 is too many. We can prevent murders by those who should not be here, by stopping them from being here to commit the murders.

Yes, 100,000 murders is a greater problem, but there is no excuse to pile onto it and make matters worse through lack of enforcement where enforcement can/should be achieved.
 
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

You couldn't pull up that page? They had a single poster with individual pictures of the faces of all the Lacrosse team players reminiscent of a wanted poster. I sure hope that that group has to explain it under oath in a court of law while defending against numerous lawsuits.

Yeah, they labeled the first (top) poster as Crimestoppers (although I couldn't see a logo on it- I don't have good enough rez on my monitor- I'll take theri word for it). The lower poster with all the players pictures on it was labeled as a Vigilanti poster.

So, I didn't take the second poster to be from Crimestoppers. Wait, I can barely make out some reference to Crimestoppers, maybe they did it?

The first one, I can see as something possible by Crimestoppers. Although we don't that sort of thing over here.

The second one, somebody outta be sued for that.

Fern
 
Newt isn't even good at being a democratic hitman. Its obvious partisan pandering.

Since when are we at "war" with illegals in the US?! Doesn't that frighten anyone??
 
Originally posted by: OrByte
Newt isn't even good at being a democratic hitman. Its obvious partisan pandering.

Since when are we at "war" with illegals in the US?! Doesn't that frighten anyone??

It panders to the the hard core right who eat up these comments like a kid eats candy.

Newt must be planning to run, or is testing the waters.....
 
Back
Top