Third Party & Independents Archives

Plea To President Trump

PRESIDENT TRUMP, PLEASE WORK WITH THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT TO FUND AND BUILD THE WALL.

Posted by Roy Ellis at December 17, 2018 9:26 PM
Comments
Comment #435851

I think Trump knows that a wall from the Pacific to the Gulf is not feasible. I’d rather see a 24/7 appearance of drones, sensors, and satellites along the border, along with the manpower to interdict those the hardware exposes. This would be the perfect place to fine tune the Rapid Deployment Forces the military have been talking about since the end of the cold war.

We’re already seeing illegals from the convoy being captured after crossing the border. This was while the military put up a wall of concertina wire. A wall would be fine in major population centers, but in the outskirts and in the deserts there needs to be the 21st century technology to take over the identification and the RDF to go get them.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 18, 2018 1:21 PM
Comment #435853

I don’t think satellites would cost anything to deploy above the border. They’re already up there, why not use them here instead of over Guam or Tanzania!?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 18, 2018 1:34 PM
Comment #435854

I thought Mexico was going to pay for the Wall.

Posted by: phx8 at December 18, 2018 2:18 PM
Comment #435855

The incoming Democrat (Adam Smith of 9th District of the sanctuary state of Washington) said:

    If Trump thinks he can simply order the military to do it [i.e. build the wall], he’s mistaken. We can’t steal money from there… So, he [Trump] cannot do it on his own, legally, and Congress, both Republicans and Democrats do not think the DOD money should go toward building a wall on the border.”
Nevermind that the NUMBER 1 priority of the military is national security, and on average, there are 3,580 homicides per year by illegal immigrants, in only 5 states (Arizona, California, Florida, New York, and Texas), and that is only based on a study group of 249,000 of a total of 364,950 illegal immigrants in U.S. jails and prisons between 2003 and 2009 (i.e. there was a total of 25,064 homicides by illegal immigrants during those 7 years). Also, 32% of everyone in federal prisons are illegal immigrants. 3,580 homicides is 21% of the total number (17,250) of homicides in the U.S. in year 2016.

IF there are 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., which has a population of 328 Million, that is 3.66% of the total U.S. population.
However, 32% of everyone in federal prison is an illegal immigrant.
And, 21% (or more) of all homicides in the U.S., per year, are by a study group of 249,000 illegal immigrants (68% of about 365,000 in all U.S. prisons and jails) in only 5 states (AZ,CA,FL,NY,TX). How could crime by illegal immigrants be less, when illegal immigrants are less than 3.66% of the total U.S. population, and 21% of all homicides in the U.S., per year, were committed by illegal immigrants in only 5 states?

Adam Smith (D-WA), and many other Democrats and others on the left do not care about the crime, and (a)constantly lie that illegal immigrants commit less crime than U.S. citizens, and (b)constantly lie that illegal immigrant provide a net benefit to the U.S. (actually, costing the U.S. over $296+ Billion per year in net losses, which does not include all costs, and does not include all of the costs of crime by illegal immigrants. Source: www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/21/mass-immigration-costs-govt-296-billion-year-natio/).

Weary Willie wrote: I’d rather see a 24/7 appearance of drones, sensors, and satellites along the border, along with the manpower to interdict those the hardware exposes.
No offense Weary Willie, but (1)both border-walls, border-fences, and (2)electronic surveillance are required in highly populated areas, in order to prevent large groups of hundreds, or thousands of illegal immigrants (i.e. caravans) from storming across the border simultaneously (as occurred at Mexico’s southern border). Also, because it would require too many border agents to successfully stop large groups (e.g. hundreds or thousands) from storming across the borders simultaneously.
Walls and fences work.

Electronic surveillance is adequate only for remote, low-population regions.
About 354 miles already have pedestrian barriers (i.e. fences), and 300 miles of vehicle barriers (posts).
U.S. State-Mexico Border Lengths (total: about 1,933 miles):

  • Texas: 1,241
  • Arizona: 373 miles
  • New Mexico: 180 miles
  • California: 140 miles

Posted by: d.a.n at December 18, 2018 2:48 PM
Comment #435856

From what problems they are having with the caravan in TJ they are paying dearly, phx8. I bet Mexico will build a wall on it’s Southern Boarder after this fiasco,phx8.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at December 18, 2018 2:51 PM
Comment #435857

We have already witnessed illegals penetrating the wall in TJ. Just how did the little 7 yo. girl who died get into the custody of the border patrol in the first place? Many other instances of illegal apprehensions have been documented.

What good would a border wall do in the middle of the desert if people can just climb over it? Electronics are needed where eyes are absent. If electronics are present the physical wall is not needed.

I agree fully with a wall through population centers. I agree with walls between natural barriers as well, but a 30 foot wall in the middle of a desert, in my opinion, is a waste of money.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 18, 2018 3:27 PM
Comment #435859

The real question is, “What’s the point to a wall if they get escorted through checkpoints by politicians and lawyers?”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/12/18/democrat-reps-lawyers-escort-migrants-across-the-border/

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 18, 2018 3:53 PM
Comment #435861
Weary Willie wrote: The real question is, “What’s the point to a wall if they get escorted through checkpoints by politicians and lawyers?”
That is a big problem too, of many problems (see below) that are rendered useless, unless all are addressed.

We need more than ONLY a wall and electronic surveillance, and the majority of conservative voters understand this quite well.
We also need to:

  • [1] Secure and continuously monitor the borders; the cost to do so will be far less than the $279 -to- $296 Billion in annual net losses due to illegal immigration (source#1: www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jan/23/donald-trump/does-immigration-policy-impose-300-billion-annuall/ ; source#2: www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/21/mass-immigration-costs-govt-296-billion-year-natio/ ; source#3: fairus.org/search?keywords=cost+of+illegal+immigration );
  • [2] Pass laws to require eVerify (and/or similar services) to verify eligibility for employment in the U.S., and harshly prosecute greedy illegal employers with harsh fines that double, triple, or quadruple for subsequent violations, with jail-time for the administrators and/or owners of companies who are repeat offenders, and despicably pit U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for profits;
  • [3] Arrest and deport ALL criminal illegal immigrants that have committed felonies; some criminal illegal immigrants are too dangerous to release since they could return; many illegal immigrants will self-deport when all of the magnets that attract illegal immigrants to the U.S. are eliminated;
  • [4] Protect U.S. citizens’ benefits and privileges, and deny those benefits and privileges to all illegal immigrants (i.e. welfare; food stamps; free healthcare; Medicaid; free housing; free education; jobs; driver licenses; voting; voter registration; etc.); Source#1: www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/010179.html#434193 ; Source#2: www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/010179.html#434260 ;
  • [5] Also, amend the 14th amendment to remove birthright citizenship; Also, pass a law that makes the first illegal trespass of the U.S. border a felony (not merely a misdemeanor); 2nd and subsequent illegal border trespasses are already a felony; also pass a law to end “catch and release”, and incarcerate illegal immigrants (who have already violated U.S. law(s)) until their disposition is decided by the court(s); also ensure that there are sufficient resources to house and maintain illegal immigrants until their dispostion is decided by the court(s);
  • [6] ONLY after the above are implemented, consider a pathway to citizenship (not amnesty) for illegal immigrants who can prove that they were brought to the United States by a parent when very young (when less than age X1-to-X2), have been living in the U.S. for Y1-to-Y2 years, have attended U.S. schools for Z1-to-Z2 years), have no parents or gaurdians that support them, can pass a basic English test, and have little or no connection to the nation in which they were born. That privilege does not extend to any other members or acquaintances of their family. This will be an expensive and painful process, and it won’t be perfect, but it will only get much worse the longer we wait to do it. The amnesty of 1986 quadrupled the number of illegal immigrants within the U.S.A.;
  • [7] Then, after [3] is mostly complete, deport ALL illegal immigrants that have committed misdemeanor crimes (i.e. assault; using fake ID; driving without a driver license, which they should not have anyway, and is therefore probably a fake license; speeding; reckless driving; disorderly conduct; vandalism; identity theft; illegal working in the U.S.; using fake Social Security numbers; etc.);
  • [8] Carefully scrutinize all requests for asylum, and change the asylum laws to prevent catch-and-release; and then enforce the laws required to obtain asylum in the U.S.;
Democrats have nefarious (actually, despicable) motives.
Harvard-Harris Poll (17-to-19-JAN-2018; 980 persons polled):
79%: (87%Rep, 79%Ind, 72%Dem): Want Merit Based Immigration
79%: (93%Rep, 80%Ind, 68%Dem): Want Secure Borders
61%: (84%Rep, 64%Ind, 40%Dem): Say Current Border is Inadequate
68%: (78%Rep, 65%Ind, 62%Dem): Want to End the VISA Lottery
54%: (85%Rep, 54%Ind, 30%Dem): Want physical and electronic border barrier
60%: (93%Rep, 80%Ind, 68%Dem): Say NO to DACA Relatives

QUESTION: Why do 68% of Democrats say they want secure borders, but only 30% of Democrats support physical and electronic barriers?
ANSWER: Because many Democrats want the votes, Democrats are pandering for votes, and that is despicable.
Democrats despicably pit U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes, by 30+ years of Democrats pandering to illegal immigrants, for votes (via more representation in the House, via more U.S. House representatives, via apportionment of representatives (and electoral votes), based on population, based on the decennial CENSUS, which does not verify U.S. citizenship. And still, the Democrats are also fighting against that Citizenship checkbox on the CENSUS form.

Many Democrats and others on the left do not care that 3,580 people murdered per year by illegal immigrants (and that is only for 5 states: AZ,CA,FL,NY,TX and for a study group of only 249,000 of about 365,0000 convicted illegal immigrants from 2003 to 2009; Source: www.gao.gov/assets/320/316959.pdf).

Compare that average of 3,580 homicides per year by illegal immigrants (from 2003 to 2009) to the total of all 17,250 homicides in the U.S. in 2016.
That means 21% of all homicides are committed by illegal immigrants, despite the total illegal immigrant population (12 Million) being 3.66% of the total U.S. population (328 Million).
The costs are estimated to be as high as $296 Billion in net losses (Source: www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/21/mass-immigration-costs-govt-296-billion-year-natio/).
Yet, the Main Stream Media gets away with lying about the crime (lying that it is less that crime by U.S. citizens), and cost (lying that illegal immigration is a net benefit, despite the costs in the hundreds of billion$ in net losses).

Despite the estimated costs of $296 Billion in net losses, due to illegal immigration, and despite 3,580 homicides per year by 249,000 illegal immigrants in only 5 states (for 2003 to 2009), many Democrats and others on the left refuse to allow $5 Billion to be spent on border barriers, and refuse to reform the immigration laws that are abused daily.
The non-criminal only looking for work are not the true villains.
The true villains are many Democrats and others on the left, who despicably pit U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 18, 2018 5:11 PM
Comment #435862

Thank you for that d.a.n. Agree with your comments in entirety.

Never been more livid in my life. How is it that Obama was able to send $175B in cash to a major enemy of the US and President Trump, who has responsibility to protect US borders, is not able to spend $50B and use the military to fund and build the wall?

Posted by: Roy Ellis at December 18, 2018 5:26 PM
Comment #435864

“”The 71-year-old judge also questioned whether Flynn committed treason before he walked back those comments. He said he wasn’t suggesting Flynn did, in fact, commit treason but asked prosecutors about the potential crime because he was “just curious.” “”

A graduate of Howard U. at his best…

Posted by: Roy Ellis at December 18, 2018 7:56 PM
Comment #435876

Judge Emmet Sullivan said: “Arguably, you [Flynn] sold your country out.”, and falsely accused Flynn of treason and being a foreign agent.

Yet, the charges against Flynn, which he pleaded guilty, was “lying to the FBI” (punishable by up to 5 years in prison); not treason, and Judge Emmet Sullivan subsequently rescinded that statement, and said that he was not suggesting Flynn did commit treason.

The Obama administration asked the FBI if a “quid pro quo” had been discussed on a call between Flynn and Sergey I. Kislyak (the Russian ambassador to the United States), and the answer came back as “NO”.
The FBI said the topic of sanctions came up in the call, but NO deals were negotiated.

Strange. Judge Emmet Sullivan sounded confused, or possibly conflicted due to bias, as Sullivan made, and then rescinded his statement that accused Flynn of treason ?

The FBI already cleared Flynn of not violating any laws during his conversation with Sergey I. Kislyak (the Russian ambassador to the United States).
Flynn’s crime is lying about the call.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 19, 2018 10:10 AM
Comment #435880

So you guys buy into the Trump lies about Mexico paying for the wall! During the campaign it was “mexico will pay for the wall”. Then after his electoral college victory he told us “Mexico will pay us back for the wall” and now it is “where is 5 billion for the wall”. Meanwhile the liar in cheif has spent his time tweeting and lying. Yet you guys are still making excuses for him!
So I suppose you guys will cover for him once again as his policies fail us. It’s alright guys keep telling us the big lie- It’s the immigrants it’s the immigrants, while he continues to lead us into a third world gilded age.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 19, 2018 1:00 PM
Comment #435883

Hey, I have an idea why not get Trump Charity Foundation to pay for the wall? Oh, wait that was a fraud, not a real charity, wasn’t it. Who is surprised by that? We all knew Trump had no decency but to look the other way while he scams, once again, the American people! We now see his supporters have no decency.

Well then perhaps Trump supporters can appeal to the President of Mexico for some money. Or to the rich backers of the Trump Repubs and let them privatize the wall. According to conservatives, the privateers can do everything better anyway.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 19, 2018 3:25 PM
Comment #435884

I’ve got an even better idea! Mr. “Taking away your guns” Trump can collect all them bumpstocks he banned, melt them down and make the wall out of old bumpstocks. Then perhaps he could beg the President of Mexico for some labor to install the bumpstock wall.

Obama didn’t ban bumpstocks Trump did….who woulda thought? Where is the outrage from our “civil war over the 2nd amendment” conservatives? That’s right sheeple…..lay down for Trump.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 19, 2018 3:40 PM
Comment #435885

Roy the American people pay taxes that fund the military. Why on earth should we be forced into paying for a wall on the southern border when national security would be much better served by rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure? If privatization of the infrastructure is deemed acceptable by conservatives/populist why not the same approach for the wall?


You don’t really believe D.’s misleading stats, do you? They are all part of the big lie. Imagine counting all those crimes and killings by those running drugs for the cartels in with people running from the cartels to this country. Imagine a wall that would keep the cartels and their drug operations out of the country!

Posted by: j2t2 at December 19, 2018 3:57 PM
Comment #435886
j2t2 wrote: … It’s the immigrants, it’s the immigrants, …

j2t2 wants to discuss the “BIG LIES”.
Yet, the true villains are NOT non-criminal illegal immigrants looking for work.
Some of the true villains, are j2t2, many Democrats, and others on the left that despicably perpetuate the BIG LIE about the cost and crime due to massive illegal immigrantion. They despicably try to disguise their desire for votes as compassion.

The BIG LIE, perpetuated by j2t2, and similar despicable ilk, is the lies about the true cost (up to $296 Billion per year in net losses) and level of rampant crime due to illegal immigration, which includes:

    GAO Report GAO-11-187 contains the following information (summarized below):
    • (01) 25,064 homicides (NOTE: 25,064 homicides / 7 years = 3,580 homicides per year for 5 states for a study group of 249,000 (of a total of 354,950 illegal immigrants in U.S. jails and prisons in year 2010; extrapolating, that is 3,580 / (249,000/364,950) = 5,247 homicides per year for 5 states);
    • (02) 69,929 s*x offense convictions;
    • (03) 94,492 weapons violation convictions;
    • (04) 213,047 assaults convictions;
    • (05) 504,043 drug crime convictions;
    • (06) 43% of terrorism-related convictions were by illegal immigrants;
    • (07) $1.63 Billion per year (as of 2009) for cost of incarceration of illegal immigrants (for all states; $1.1 Billion was for California alone).
    • (08) compare 3,580 homicides per year (9.8 homicides per day) by illegal immigrants (in only 5 states by only a portion (i.e. 249,000 illegal immigrants; 68% of the total of 364,950 incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails in 2010) to ALL 17,250 homicides in the U.S. in year 2016; 3,580/17/250 is 21% of the total number of homicides in the U.S. in 2016. And that does not include all homicides by illegal immigrants;
      Sources: www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-187 , www.gao.gov/assets/320/316959.pdf;
    • (09) As of year 2017, 32% of all persons in federal prison are illegal immigrants (Source: cis.org/Huennekens/32-Federal-Inmates-Are-Aliens ).
    • (10) And, the monetary costs are estimated to be $296 Billion per year, which does not include all of the costs of the crimes by convicted illegal immigrants listed above.

GM sucks. GM is laying off 14,000 workers. GM should never receive any more tax-payer funded bail-outs or subsidies. GM should have never received bail-outs in the first place. While GM may be leaving, far more corporations and money have returned to the U.S. since 2016 (Source: www.tcpalm.com/story/money/business/2018/06/28/manufacturers-bringing-most-jobs-back-to-america/36438051/).

But GM is not the BIG LIE.
The BIG LIE is that j2t2, the mainstream media, some Democrats, and similar ilk are trying to hide thousands of people being killed per year by illegal immigrants in the U.S. Why?

Bumpstocks are only good for spraying a lot of bullets in the general direction, and do not help to shoot accurately, so I don’t care about bump stocks. Also, a bump stock is not necessary to fire quickly.

Also, j2t2, “open-borders” phx8, and others on the left have lied for years by saying illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than U.S. citizens. That is part of their >BIG LIE.

GAO-Report-11-187 proves that illegal immigrants committed (on average) at least 21% of all homicides in the U.S. (i.e. 3,580 / 17,250; 3,580 homicides per year between 2003 to 2009 and the total of ALL 17,250 homicides in the U.S. in 2016), which is a far higher homicide rate than that of U.S. citizens (i.e. some of 12 million illegal immigrants, 3.66% of the total U.S. population (328 Million) committed (on average) at least 3,580 homicides per year (and that was based on only in 5 states, and only on a portion (68%) of all illegal immigrants in U.S. jails an prisons).

Democrats don’t want to spend $5 Billion toward the wall, but conveniently ignore the costs and crime due to illegal immigration.
This is the BIL LIE that needs to be revealed to all citizens of the U.S.A.
And that revelation will also reveal why Democrats have been lying about it for decades … for the votes.

QUESTION: Why do Democrats say they want secure borders, but Democrats do not want to fund physical and electronic barriers?
ANSWER: Because many Democrats want the votes, Democrats are pandering for votes, and that is despicable.
Democrats despicably pit U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes, by 30+ years of Democrats pandering to illegal immigrants, for votes (via more representation in the House, via more U.S. House representatives, via apportionment of representatives (and electoral votes), based on population, based on the decennial CENSUS, which does not verify U.S. citizenship. And still, the Democrats are also fighting against that Citizenship checkbox on the CENSUS form.

The true villains are:
(1) many Democrats and many others on the left are the most despicable villains, for (despicably) pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes, by pandering for 30+ years to illegal immigrants, for votes (via more representation in the House, via more U.S. House representatives, via apportionment of representatives (and electoral votes), based on population, based on the decennial CENSUS, which does not verify U.S. citizenship. Democrats are also fighting against a check-box on the CENSUS, despite the check-box being totally inadequate to prove citizenship. Democrats disguise their desire for power (for THEIR party) as compassion for illegal immigrants, while despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes. People are catching on to this despicable practice.
(2) the greedy employers, who refuse to use eVerify and/or similar services;
(3) the incompetent government that fails to enforce existing laws, and created other laws that allow many abuses;
(4) many Democrats, who lie about the costs and the crime by illegal immigrants, and persistently perpetuate the lie that illegal immgrants commit fewer crimes than U.S. citizens, despite the numbers in the GAO-11-187 report, and Democrats perpetuate the lie that illegal immigrants provide a net benefit, despite the costs up to $296+ Billion per year in net losses (source: www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/21/mass-immigration-costs-govt-296-billion-year-natio/).
(5) many Democrats lie about the level of crime commited by illegal immigrants, and perpetuate the lie that illegal immigrants commit less crime than U.S. citizens. That is false, since at least 3,580 people are murdered every year by illegal immigrants in only 5 states by only a portion (i.e. some of 249,000 which is only 68% of the total of 364,950 incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails in 2010) of all illegal immigrants incarcerated in U.S. jails and prisons (source: www.gao.gov/assets/320/316959.pdf).

Despite all of that hypocrisy and questioning, do not be surprised when j2t2 writes again, while questioning others’ decency, that j2t2 is proud of j2t2’s rhetoric:

    j2t2 wrote: “have you no decency?
  • j2t2 wrote: “I am proud of each and every one of my comments you have listed here.”
  • j2t2 wrote: In fact right now I’m rather proud that you have spent the time going through the archives hunting for my words of wisdom.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 19, 2018 4:09 PM
Comment #435887
j2t2 wrote: You don’t really believe D.’s misleading stats, do you? They are all part of the big lie. Imagine counting all those crimes and killings …
j2t2, these are not my statistics; that report is from the Government Accounting Office Report-GAO-11-187.

Read it, and you might (however unlikely) learn something.
j2t2, many Democrats, and similar ilk will (most likely) never admit that costs are huge and crime is rampant due to illegal immigration.

Again, walls alone are not sufficient, but that has been explained repeatedly to j2t2, but j2t2 only seems able to focus on similar worthless arguments and talking points, that are all too easy to discredit.

The point is, people like j2t2, many Democrats, and similar ilk do not really want secure borders, because they want for votes (via more representation in the House, via more U.S. House representatives, via apportionment of representatives (and electoral votes), based on population, based on the decennial CENSUS, which does not verify U.S. citizenship. Democrats are also fighting against a check-box on the CENSUS, despite the check-box being totally inadequate to prove citizenship. Democrats disguise their desire for power (for THEIR party) as compassion for illegal immigrants, while despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 19, 2018 4:22 PM
Comment #435888

j2t2, please feel free anytime to show us exactly what is misleading in the 71 GAO Report-11-187.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 19, 2018 4:25 PM
Comment #435889

j2t2, did you know my belt loop is a bumpstock? I can do the exact same thing a bumbstock does by hooking my rifle’s trigger into my belt loop and applying forward pressure. Do you propose banning belt loops?

How much money would Mexico lose out on if illegal aliens were not allowed into the country? Just a quick search points out that illegal aliens from Mexico sent 120 billion dollars back to Mexico in 2013. Could it be possible Trump is saying that stopping that money from leaving the country would save enough money to pay for the wall? Trump only wants 5 billion. 120 billion would pay for the wall about 20 times!

I think you should imagine a wall that would keep the cartels and their drug operations out of the country, j2t2. You seem to be avoiding that image entirely. Since Obama weaponized these cartels they should be treated as an opposing army or criminal entities at least. I think the southern border should be militarized until the problem of border security is solved.

Your opposition to a secure border is preposterous. Prisons have walls. Communities have walls. Are you against them also? Your opposition is disingenuous at best. I believe the left has ulterior motives and stating their true intentions would destroy the Democratic party.

It is to the detriment of the Democratic party that they can no longer state a legitimate issue. They have to cloak it in lies and subterfuge to get themselves to believe it. It’s a sad tactic. An tactic the American people can see through. It’s the only level of transparency the Democratic party can generate.


Posted by: Weary Willie at December 19, 2018 4:30 PM
Comment #435890

J2,
Most bump stocks are plastic.
Most gun owners don’t own or even want one.
Obama didn’t try to ban them because he probably had no idea that they even existed.
People aren’t all up in arms over this because:
1 - A plastic bump stock is not an actual firearm.
2 - Bump stocks are a novelty accessory that can be easily copied. There are also tons of different items that can be used to achieve the same action.

Like all other anti 2nd Amendment legislation, this ‘ban’ is totally unenforceable and will accomplish nothing but probably cost Trump and Republicans at the polls. There are a lot of people ticked off at this nonsense.

Posted by: kctim at December 19, 2018 4:37 PM
Comment #435891

Pelosi, playing to the camera, said, “We’re here to have a conversation in a prayerful way, so I don’t think we should have a debate in front of the press.”

Schumer said they should “debate in private,”

Not a lot of transparency in those two statements, j2t2. Where is your opposition to this mindset? Why don’t you criticize this attitude?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 19, 2018 4:40 PM
Comment #435892
Weary Willie wrote: Your [j2t2’s] opposition to a secure border is preposterous. Prisons have walls. Communities have walls. Are you against them also? Your opposition is disingenuous at best. I believe the left has ulterior motives and stating their true intentions would destroy the Democratic party. It is to the detriment of the Democratic party that they can no longer state a legitimate issue. They have to cloak it in lies and subterfuge to get themselves to believe it. It’s a sad tactic. A tactic the American people can see through.
Very, very well written, Weary Willie.
  • (1)Some Democrats have been duped into believing there are net cost benefits and less crime by illegal immigrants.
  • (2)But there are Democrats that know exactly what the true ulterior motive is: VOTES via more representation in the House, via more U.S. House representatives, via apportionment of representatives (and electoral votes), based on population, based on the decennial CENSUS, which does not verify U.S. citizenship. Democrats are also fighting against a check-box on the CENSUS, despite the check-box being totally inadequate to prove citizenship. Democrats disguise their desire for power (for THEIR party) as compassion for illegal immigrants, while despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes.

Today, and for the past 30+ years, that is the true “BIG LIE” by the Democrat party (pandering for votes, disguised as compassion for illegal immigrants, while ignoring the massive costs and rampant crime by illegal immigrants, and hoping no one else catches on to the “BIG LIE”).

In the past:

  • Slavery (Democrats did that: source: www.britannica.com/topic/Democratic-Party ),
  • the KKK violence (Democrats did that; source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan),
  • Segregation (Democrats did that; source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats ),
  • Jim Crow laws (Democrats did that; source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws)
  • and many other historic abuses heaped on Americans in the U.S. by the Democrat Party and its supporters, the political party responsible for all of that racism is now the one constantly shouting:
      “You’re a Racist !, Bigot !, Fascist !, Nazi !
    … and (despicably) pitting different racial groups against each other (i.e. especially, when it comes to despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes).
For many Democrats, it is par for the course.
Since the founding of the Democrat Party, it has always tried to generate racial strife.

And today, many Democrats and others on the left (despicably) refuse to secure our borders (for a tiny fraction of the net losses (i.e. $296 Billion per year) due to illegal immigration, which does not include the massive cost of rampant crime by illegal immigrants (far more crime than those committed by U.S. citizens), because they want the votes, and that is truly despicable.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 19, 2018 4:48 PM
Comment #435893
Some of the true villains, are j2t2, many Democrats, and others on the left that despicably perpetuate the BIG LIE about the cost and crime due to massive illegal immigrantion. They despicably try to disguise their desire for votes as compassion.

Ahhh D. phase II of the Big Lie, zeig heil D., Goebbels would be proud. I guess I should be flattered you have decided to usurp the term I use for your constantly repeated propaganda but I find it to be very authoritarian. Creepy in a touchy-feely grandpa kind of way. Constant repetition is the big lie D. It encompasses all the little lies that you repeat constantly.

Wondering why you aren’t as original in your words as you think you are with your bloated stats? You may be up for both the yearly Goebbels award and the newly minted Trump award for the most myths misinformation half truths and outright lies by a commenter here on WB.

Villification of your political opponents how f**king fascist is that. Of course, I am not surprised. Using assumptions that you have made up without facts….where is the decency in that?

First, they came for the minorities, now they come for us. Really D. have you no decency? Tell you what D. why not actually respond to what was said? Why not take out the drug wars stats from your misleading babble and actually inform us for a change?

Posted by: j2t2 at December 19, 2018 5:02 PM
Comment #435894

Will a Democrat or Socialist on WB please give us the reason the Democrats changed their minds about a border wall. I can provide endless quotes from many leading Democrats who demanded a wall only a few years ago.

What happened?

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 19, 2018 5:03 PM
Comment #435895

Show of hands please. Agree or disagree?

“We cannot continue to allow people to enter the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. The American people are a welcoming and generous people, but those who enter our country’s borders illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of the law. We need to secure our borders, and support additional personnel, infrastructure, and technology on the border and at our ports of entry.

For the millions living here illegally but otherwise playing by the rules, we must require them to come out of the shadows and get right with the law. We support a system that requires undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, pay taxes, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens.”

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/2008-democratic-party-platform

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 19, 2018 5:29 PM
Comment #435896

Who can answer this question?

What year did Dems Remove All References to ‘God’ in their Party Platform? Can some Democrat tell us why?

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 19, 2018 5:49 PM
Comment #435901

Nietzsche used the phrase “Gott ist tot” in a figurative sense, to express the idea that the Enlightenment had “killed” the possibility of belief in God or any gods having ever existed. The phrase first appeared in Nietzsche’s 1882 collection The Gay Science.

Richard Rothe, in his 1837 theological text Die Anfänge der christlichen Kirche und ihrer Verfassung, appears to be one of the first philosophers to associate the idea of a death of God with the sociological theory of secularization.

Secularization refers to the historical process in which religion loses social and cultural significance. As a result of secularization the role of religion in modern societies becomes restricted. In secularized societies faith lacks cultural authority, and religious organizations have little social power.

Secularization has many levels of meaning, both as a theory and a historical process. Social theorists such as Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Max Weber, and Émile Durkheim, postulated that the modernization of society would include a decline in levels of religiosity.

In the 1960s there was a shift toward secularization in Western Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand. This transformation was intertwined with major social factors: economic prosperity, youth rebelling against the rules and conventions of society, women’s liberation, radical theology, and radical politics.

The cover of the April 8, 1966 edition of Time and the accompanying article concerned a movement in American theology that arose in the 1960s known as the “death of God”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_is_dead
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularization

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 19, 2018 10:00 PM
Comment #435922
Yet, the true villains are NOT non-criminal illegal immigrants looking for work.

Wow, I am impressed D., I wonder if the rest of our conservative friends here on WB would agree. I wonder why you count all these people in with the cartels and gangs that are the real problem. I would venture a guess that were your stats correct we would find, whether legal or illegal, the violent crime rate is lower for them than the violent crime rate for the general population.

Do you propose banning belt loops?

The real question Weary is will Trump propose banning belt loops. Just as the real question is why aren’t you up in arms along with Gunowners of America and others over Trumps assault on the 2nd amendment?

Most gun owners don’t own or even want one.

Yet Business was good for those that made them.


Obama didn’t try to ban them because he probably had no idea that they even existed.

Wrong again Weary. This might cause you to have to let go of a myth or two Weary so be careful here.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 20, 2018 2:19 PM
Comment #435924

J2, I agree with d.a.n. it’s not the non criminal illegals that are the villians. But they are still ILLEGAL and are committing a crime being here ILLEGALLY as is anyone hiring them.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at December 20, 2018 3:21 PM
Comment #435925

J2,
I’m the one who posted that most gun owners don’t own or want one, and Obama probably didn’t even know about them.

The numbers at your link show exactly what I was talking about: it is a novelty item. Out of over a hundred million people who own firearms, they only sold roughly 35,000 bump stocks. Most gun owners don’t own or even want one.

Your second link talks about the Obama administration and that it was the ATF who decided it could not regulate bump stocks. Not Obama himself.

As far as your myth statement, that’s pretty silly. (1) The vast majority of Americans never heard of them before Vegas, so why would you think an anti-gunner like Obama would know what they were? (2) IF Obama did know what they were, why wouldn’t he have at least try to ban them? After all, he did issue “a slew of executive orders promoting stricter gun control.”

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/04/fact-sheet-new-executive-actions-reduce-gun-violence-and-make-our

Posted by: kctim at December 20, 2018 4:55 PM
Comment #435929

Trump probably banned the bumpstocks simply to placate people like you, j2t2. It is not a weapon and has nothing to do with the second amendment.

I wouldn’t use an assault weapon on automatic fire even if I could own one. It’s more of an ammunition waster. It’s like an auto advance on a film camera. Click Click Click and you have three photos that are the same. That’s even more efficient than an automatic assault weapon like the M16 because the camera doesn’t jump like the M16 does.

I don’t think Trump would ban belt loops. According to you and your faux doctors in the media, Trump is in dire need of belt loops. I was only using them as an example of the futility of the gesture. However, if it finally makes you happy, j2t2, then he’s accomplished an enormous feat!

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 20, 2018 10:25 PM
Comment #435964
The numbers at your link show exactly what I was talking about: it is a novelty item. Out of over a hundred million people who own firearms, they only sold roughly 35,000 bump stocks. Most gun owners don’t own or even want one.


Kctim are you counting each and every handgun, shotgun and other weapons that wouldn’t use a bump stock in your figure? If I’m not mistaken that 35k figure was for their first year. Not to mention they aren’t the only manufacturer of bump stocks. Anyway, whatever excuses you guys need to protect Trump I guess. Just think if it were the Obama administration banning bump stocks.

As far as your myth statement, that’s pretty silly. (1) The vast majority of Americans never heard of them before Vegas, so why would you think an anti-gunner like Obama would know what they were? (2) IF Obama did know what they were, why wouldn’t he have at least try to ban them? After all, he did issue “a slew of executive orders promoting stricter gun control.”

This assumption number 1 why would you think that? The Vegas mass killings may have caused the NRA to try to blame Obama for not regulating them and to give their approval to ban them, but to say they were some secret is absurd. I knew about them, practiced with one once and I generally don’t have more than average knowledge of guns.
Obama knew about them, his administration didn’t believe it would pass Constitutional muster to ban them. That is why the NRA tried to tell the American people the Obama administration approved the sale of bump stocks after Vegas.

Trump probably banned the bumpstocks simply to placate people like you, j2t2. It is not a weapon and has nothing to do with the second amendment.


Weary please, Trump doesn’t placate “people like me”. So let me ask you this Weary, banning ammunition or any specific part of an assault rifle wouldn’t “have anything to do with the 2nd amendment? Maybe Trump ought to start banning slings, butt stocks, triggers, magazines, barrels, firing pins, and other parts as they don’t have anything to do with the 2nd amendment.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 21, 2018 1:08 PM
Comment #435966

A bump stock isn’t a weapon. It’s an addition to a weapon. A sling is an addition to a weapon. It’s also just a rope, a piece of braided canvas, a strap of plastic, etc. It is not a weapon and anyone trying to ban slings would look foolish. A butt stock is not an essential part of a rifle. Some rifles come without butt stocks and some have removable butt stocks. It is not a weapon unless someone uses it to batter someone else. Again, someone would look foolish trying to ban butt stocks. Triggers can be replaced with rubber bands and firing pins can be replaced with paperclips. Radio antennas can be used as a barrel, but someone would look foolish trying to ban rubber bands, paperclips, and radio antennas, wouldn’t they? However, I wouldn’t put it past the left to try.

I worked with a guy who was familiar with ammunition sizes and he recognized the inside diameter of the products we were manufacturing (bearings) would accommodate the most popular ammunition on the market. He recognized that the bearings could be used as a barrel. Would anyone oppose banning those bearings? I think any reasonable person would, but not on 2nd amendment grounds. They would oppose the banning of bearings because it’s a stupid and futile proposal. They would oppose the person proposing the ban for being stupid before they would even consider the idea of banning the bearings.

I also know Trump cannot placate people like you, j2t2. The left would watch this country burn to the ground before they agreed with President Trump. In fact, they are already trying to do just that. The left has already been exposed as obstructionists with the sudden turn around of the economy. The left and the Federal Reserve are sabotaging the economy as we speak. They can never be seen as agreeing with Trump. Agreeing with Trump would destroy the Democratic party, because their obstructionism is the only thing they’ve got to focus on.

What the left should do now is to claim a victory with Trump’s bump stock ban. They should spin it like Trump caved in on the 2nd amendment. Then they should twist the knife in his back by insisting they ban slings, butt stocks, triggers, magazines, barrels, firing pins, and other parts, because alone, by themselves, they are not covered by the 2nd amendment.

Go ahead, j2t2. Make my day.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2018 3:58 PM
Comment #435976

J2,

“are you counting each and every handgun, shotgun and other weapons that wouldn’t use a bump stock in your figure?”

My statement was “most gun owners don’t own or even want one.” There are a 100+ million gun owners in the US.
Now, even if you wish to deflect to the 5+ million ARs that these bump stocks are primarily designed for, 35k units sold is still in novelty territory AND it gives you the reason there isn’t the huge uproar you are talking about: 100+ million gun owners is vastly greater than the number of AR owners who own the 35k units.
They are an add-on novelty item, J2. The majority of people don’t get upset when something like that is gone. Those who want them already have them and they aren’t going to lose them. It has nothing to do with ‘protecting’ Trump.

Obama banning them would have still only riled up the few people who are now. Especially if it was after an incident like Vegas.

“This assumption number 1 why would you think that?”

There are many reasons.
After Vegas, the news was full of ‘experts’ explaining bump stocks and reporters asking what they were, what they did, and how hard was it to get one.
There are videos of gun owners saying they didn’t know they existed and that they shouldn’t be legal.
Almost every gun owner I know was asking me what one was. The few others were asking me if I wanted one or where they could get one.
No because they were some ‘secret’ but because they serve no use for the vast majority of gun owners, J2.

If it makes you feel good to think that your great Obama knew everything about everything, and defend him against all things, go ahead and do that. I however will give Obama the benefit of doubt and believe that he was letting the ATF keep track of things like bump stocks.

You have a Merry Christmas J2.

Posted by: kctim at December 21, 2018 5:54 PM
Comment #436048

Many rifles can be rapid-fired without a bump-stock, nor any device of any kind, because the recoil powers the rapid-fire process.
For example.
Simply insert your trigger-finger in the trigger, and do not wrap your hand (nor thumb) around the grip.
It is not too good for shooting accurately; only faster.
It can be dangerous for a high volume of discharges, causing the barrel to get too hot.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 22, 2018 2:36 PM
Post a comment