culebra: I'll admit that concession isn't a hard choice this year with an incumbent in the White House and a fractured GOP. I think Thune might have made a decent candidate for the GOP with serious backing, but he's pretty green still, and probably eyeing one of the upcoming elections.

I see your point about trying to beat an incumbent, but even assuming an open seat I don't see anyone that could appeal to enough mainstream voters...not with the Primary Gauntlet of Crazy any GOP nominee has to go through. To make it through, any candidate has to make themself completely toxic in a General Election just on their own merits, regardless of who they are running against.

Stupid is as stupid does

9beers: Get what done? We know it's not securing the border and depleting illegals, so what is it?

You're wrong.
We've increased security by added boots on the ground and border surveillance.

Statistics:
400,000 people were deported in 2011
392,862 people were deported in 2010
390,000 people were deported in 2009
(FYI - fewer than 120,000 people were deported in 2001)

There have been more deportations by ICE and Border Patrol under President Obama then there were by President Bush's and Clinton's administrations combined.

what_now: He leaves office January 20th, 2017. That's one month short of 5 years.

I'm sorry you aren't good at counting, subby.

He said another 5 years coming, as in he doesn't have the time yet. He didn't say I have 5 years left. English, how does it work? Right now he has 11 months left, and if he wins he has another 4 coming.

Mrtraveler01: soy_bomb: Jesterling: 9beers: Get what done? We know it's not securing the border and depleting illegals, so what is it?
Deplete them of what? Also, stop talking.
Obama administration reports record number of deportations (new window)

Oh that debunked claim again?

Did you really link to Judicial Watch?

Might as well link it to Free Republic. They're both as credible.

God, it never gets any funnier watching liberals practice intentional ignorance. Can you refute the numbers? Or is it only untrue because it goes against your politics?

MyRandomName: what_now: He leaves office January 20th, 2017. That's one month short of 5 years.

I'm sorry you aren't good at counting, subby.

He said another 5 years coming, as in he doesn't have the time yet. He didn't say I have 5 years left. English, how does it work? Right now he has 11 months left, and if he wins he has another 4 coming.

So just to be clear, he didn't rig the upcoming election ahead of time? That's a relief. That means we won't hear cries of ACORN in 2013...

HellRaisingHoosier: 9beers: Get what done? We know it's not securing the border and depleting illegals, so what is it?

You're wrong.
We've increased security by added boots on the ground and border surveillance.

Statistics:
400,000 people were deported in 2011
392,862 people were deported in 2010
390,000 people were deported in 2009
(FYI - fewer than 120,000 people were deported in 2001)

There have been more deportations by ICE and Border Patrol under President Obama then there were by President Bush's and Clinton's administrations combined.

Yeah, but what's the count on how many weapons we've supplied them with vs. how many of our "boots on the ground" have been murdered by said weapons?

soy_bomb: Oh that debunked claim again?

Claim in thread: Most total deportations.

Additional claim in article that wasn't mentioned in thread: 55% of the deportations included those who had committed felonies or misdemeanors.

Debunking: Total number of deportations not in dispute but not enough of them were criminals. Evidence for this is a chart that says "Most Serious ICE Charge" which, at best, supports the claim that these people being mentioned in the 55% number may not have been picked up for new charges while saying nothing about prior convictions that didn't lead to deportation under the pre-Obama admin way of doing things. In other words, an illegal immigrant with a DUI from 2000 who got picked up by ICE now wouldn't have a new ICE charge but would still be someone who would qualify as one with a criminal record for the 55% claim.

So, soy_bomb, you managed to "debunk" a claim that wasn't claimed by citing materials that don't even address the claim you were trying to debunk and which don't even sufficiently debunk the claim they were addressing.

It takes a special kind of derping to lose in a fight with your own strawman.

jvl: Corvus: jvl: So why not start with a proposal now? Or back when both houses of Congress were Democratic? Even GW Bush managed to actually make a proposal despite a lack of popularity for the idea. It's almost as if he was not really serious about this issue.

Because congress is busy with important matters like telling women they are slutty whores who should shut up and keep their legs together.

The Republicans have had exactly one house of Congress for 13 months now, so naturally you blame them for everything that happened in the last 37 months?

How about this: if he's really serious. Propose SOMETHING. Get both Republicans and Democrats on record with an actual vote. Or, if not serious, he can keep on trolling the hispanic voters.

Only thirteen months?

You seem to be unaware of the filibuster, which the GOP has been using very frequently over the past 37 months. They have a cloture-proof 'majority' in the Senate almost the entire time President Obama has been in office and they have not been the least bit shy in exploiting this.

Mrtraveler01: Did you really link to Judicial Watch?

Might as well link it to Free Republic. They're both as credible.

Yes and the evil, right wing, New York university that did the study Judicial Watch refers.

/I guess academia has a right wing bias now
/now you have been debunkified

What? no hopes of impeachment in the last year?

weezbo: So, soy_bomb, you managed to "debunk" a claim that wasn't claimed by citing materials that don't even address the claim you were trying to debunk and which don't even sufficiently debunk the claim they were addressing.

Even non-criminal deportations went down in 2011. Sorry, still debunked.

"I will let all you amigos stay if you vote for me in this election"

Shrugging Atlas: culebra: I'll admit that concession isn't a hard choice this year with an incumbent in the White House and a fractured GOP. I think Thune might have made a decent candidate for the GOP with serious backing, but he's pretty green still, and probably eyeing one of the upcoming elections.

I see your point about trying to beat an incumbent, but even assuming an open seat I don't see anyone that could appeal to enough mainstream voters...not with the Primary Gauntlet of Crazy any GOP nominee has to go through. To make it through, any candidate has to make themself completely toxic in a General Election just on their own merits, regardless of who they are running against.

No doubt. The GOP still could have made the worse decision and promoted someone they actually thought could win (and I agree they wouldn't anyway), but to their credit they've allowed their dross to take center stage. The question I have is what the GOP could hope to gain by actually trying to win this time out? I guess I don't understand why it is necessary to name who they might have gone with in such a scenario.

Just because they made the wiser decision doesn't mean there was a winning move for them. I get the sense they are regrouping for 2016, but like you I can't imagine who among them will be a successful candidate. They're pretty much farked into the forseeable future.

why look to repugs to beat the dumbos?
there are other choices, use them!
ever notice nothing ever changes when the r takes over from d or vice versa?
they are all the same, got to get rid of the whole bunch...

winterwhile: does Chris Mathews have pee running down his leg?

So what will you do when the President is reelected?

I'm just curious... if it helps you sleep at night, lets just call it a hypothetical question... What would you do IF.

I'm very eager for your response.

ib_thinkin: So, it's entirely outside of the realm of possibility that Judicial Watch referenced a study in order to misrepresent it with the air of credibility lent by it? Really?
You know, those Milgram Experiments - I'd say it's a pretty good case for the fact that most of the KGB was pretty decent people; obviously, there wasn't anything wrong, then.

I linked to the study as well in that post. You can read it yourself instead of whining about Judicial Watch and believing there is a massive conspiracy at the level of a Russian intelligence agency which Syracuse is complicit.

soy_bomb: weezbo: So, soy_bomb, you managed to "debunk" a claim that wasn't claimed by citing materials that don't even address the claim you were trying to debunk and which don't even sufficiently debunk the claim they were addressing.

Even non-criminal deportations went down in 2011. Sorry, still debunked.

Even if that is true, which you've given no evidence of, since your own source agreed with the same total numbers claimed in the article you were "debunking," it STILL doesn't even address the fact that there are more deportations under Obama than under prior presidents.

Raharu: I'm very eager for your response.

Um, why?

ib_thinkin: There was no whining, just a criticism of your stated defense. "It's okay if this source is totally unreliable because this totally unreliable source mentions a totally reliable source." Be less insecure.

I linked directly to the original, reliable source in the post. You chose to focus on Judicial Watch.

King Something: Only thirteen months?

You seem to be unaware of the filibuster, which the GOP has been using very frequently over the past 37 months. They have a cloture-proof 'majority' in the Senate almost the entire time President Obama has been in office and they have not been the least bit shy in exploiting this.

Does Obama plan on having both houses plus a two-thirds majority in the Senate in the next five years?

And again, even Filibusters leave voting records. And nothing prevents the House from voting. So farking PROPOSE SOMETHING instead of vague-handwavy I'm-on-yourside bullfark and get stuff on record.

jvl: King Something: Only thirteen months?

You seem to be unaware of the filibuster, which the GOP has been using very frequently over the past 37 months. They have a cloture-proof 'majority' in the Senate almost the entire time President Obama has been in office and they have not been the least bit shy in exploiting this.

Does Obama plan on having both houses plus a two-thirds majority in the Senate in the next five years?

And again, even Filibusters leave voting records. And nothing prevents the House from voting. So farking PROPOSE SOMETHING instead of vague-handwavy I'm-on-yourside bullfark and get stuff on record.

You mean like the DREAM act which keeps getting filibustered? There are already proposals out there that aren't going anywhere, Obama's would just be one more of them.

Catsaregreen: I HATE Obama with a passion, but have conceded the fact that he's gonna win again in November. Apparently the Republicans are too stupid to find a suitable candidate.

You may need to reassess the situation as: Republicanism is too stupid in general.

Conservatism vs. Republicanism

Conservatism is not the complete and utter lack of change on social or economic issues. It is the slow, steady, introduction of modest change, then the validation of that change prior to further action. It can be easily addressed by thinking of the standard model for running almost any sort of governance framework, eg: Plan - > Do -> Check -> Act.

Conservatism is essentially a methodology that can be applied regardless of ideology (and it usually is by people who are just plain logical).It is a way of doing something, not what must be done, eg the "How" not the "What" or "Why".

Republicanism is an ideology espoused by people that advocates introducing radical changes to government with minimal controls or governance. Indeed, the motto of Republicanism is, "The government that governs least governs best". They have no established process or methodology for managing change, as they are really not interested in managing anything (except maybe who you put your pee pee into, but that's just a weird outlier when looking at the whole)

Conservatism actually used to mean something respectable. It meant that you were cautious and stable. Now it means you're a reactionary nutbag that listens to bad advice to buy gold coins and commemorative plates while you sit around fantasizing about how valuable they'll be when the rapture finally happens.

finaboy: HellRaisingHoosier: 9beers: Get what done? We know it's not securing the border and depleting illegals, so what is it?

You're wrong.
We've increased security by added boots on the ground and border surveillance.

Statistics:
400,000 people were deported in 2011
392,862 people were deported in 2010
390,000 people were deported in 2009
(FYI - fewer than 120,000 people were deported in 2001)

There have been more deportations by ICE and Border Patrol under President Obama then there were by President Bush's and Clinton's administrations combined.

Yeah, but what's the count on how many weapons we've supplied them with vs. how many of our "boots on the ground" have been murdered by said weapons?


The United States is the top weapons supplier of the entire world. So I don't know how many weapons we've sent down to Mexico.

How many ICE agents and Board Patrol have been killed the last few years?

HellRaisingHoosier: finaboy: HellRaisingHoosier: 9beers: Get what done? We know it's not securing the border and depleting illegals, so what is it?

You're wrong.
We've increased security by added boots on the ground and border surveillance.

Statistics:
400,000 people were deported in 2011
392,862 people were deported in 2010
390,000 people were deported in 2009
(FYI - fewer than 120,000 people were deported in 2001)

There have been more deportations by ICE and Border Patrol under President Obama then there were by President Bush's and Clinton's administrations combined.

Yeah, but what's the count on how many weapons we've supplied them with vs. how many of our "boots on the ground" have been murdered by said weapons?


The United States is the top weapons supplier of the entire world. So I don't know how many weapons we've sent down to Mexico.

How many ICE agents and Board Patrol have been killed the last few years?

Are you talking about the ones whose records have been sealed or just all of them in general?

finaboy: HellRaisingHoosier: finaboy: HellRaisingHoosier: 9beers: Get what done? We know it's not securing the border and depleting illegals, so what is it?

You're wrong.
We've increased security by added boots on the ground and border surveillance.

Statistics:
400,000 people were deported in 2011
392,862 people were deported in 2010
390,000 people were deported in 2009
(FYI - fewer than 120,000 people were deported in 2001)

There have been more deportations by ICE and Border Patrol under President Obama then there were by President Bush's and Clinton's administrations combined.

Yeah, but what's the count on how many weapons we've supplied them with vs. how many of our "boots on the ground" have been murdered by said weapons?


The United States is the top weapons supplier of the entire world. So I don't know how many weapons we've sent down to Mexico.

How many ICE agents and Board Patrol have been killed the last few years?

Are you talking about the ones whose records have been sealed or just all of them in general?

Herpity Derp!

finaboy:
Yeah, but what's the count on how many weapons we've supplied them with vs. how many of our "boots on the ground" have been murdered by said weapons?

AJ: Anyone else find it tiresome that the word "said" is overused as an indicative pronoun? Using "those" in the example above would be so much more fluent.



jvl:
The Republicans have had exactly one house of Congress for 13 months now, so naturally you blame them for everything that happened in the last 37 months?

AJ: If they were clever Republican Congressman would stop dodging blame and start trying to take credit for anything that has happened in the past 37 months. But they're not.

George W. Bush won after what some democrats believe is the best administration since FDR. Obama will lose against dead candidates.

Nice! Both a idiotic rebuttal to deportation numbers and a Fast and Furious derp. Is it Freeper Friday already?!

Rug Doctor: Obama can troll with the best of them. I admire him for not doing it more, because if I had the power to make millions of Republicans go insane with rage just by talking, I don't think I could resist.

I was exposed to Fox News this afternoon (it was on the TV at the gym) and Mygyn Kylly and her guests spent a good ten minutes squawking over how PRESUMPTUOUS! Obama was to claim he had five more years. And, inevitably, predicting that this arrogance and general uppitiness would turn off voters.

Chimperror2: George W. Bush won after what some democrats believe is the best administration since FDR. Obama will lose against dead candidates.

All you need to do now is level a trumped up charge on obama, get him impeached, and put up the son of a former Republican President to win on name recognition.

I would recommend using Obama's birth certificate and Reagan''s son.

dave2198: Chimperror2: George W. Bush won after what some democrats believe is the best administration since FDR. Obama will lose against dead candidates.

All you need to do now is level a trumped up charge on obama, get him impeached, and put up the son of a former Republican President to win on name recognition.

I would recommend using Obama's birth certificate and Reagan''s son.

No, all republicans need is a dead cat. McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Gore, Obama are testaments to that.

finaboy: HellRaisingHoosier: finaboy: HellRaisingHoosier: 9beers: Get what done? We know it's not securing the border and depleting illegals, so what is it?

You're wrong.
We've increased security by added boots on the ground and border surveillance.

Statistics:
400,000 people were deported in 2011
392,862 people were deported in 2010
390,000 people were deported in 2009
(FYI - fewer than 120,000 people were deported in 2001)

There have been more deportations by ICE and Border Patrol under President Obama then there were by President Bush's and Clinton's administrations combined.

Yeah, but what's the count on how many weapons we've supplied them with vs. how many of our "boots on the ground" have been murdered by said weapons?


The United States is the top weapons supplier of the entire world. So I don't know how many weapons we've sent down to Mexico.

How many ICE agents and Board Patrol have been killed the last few years?

Are you talking about the ones whose records have been sealed or just all of them in general?


Does it matter? The U.S. is still sending literally ton of weapons out every day to every corner of the Earth. Either way these people are going to get their hands on our guns. Guns are not the issue, and they never will be (or at least as far as immigration is concerned).

We need a solid defense and strategy to combat illegal immigration and the manipulators of migrants, as well as a realistic and "porous" immigration policy.

Five years sounds about right.

Probably be one of those minimum security federal country club prisons, though.

soy_bomb: ib_thinkin: There was no whining, just a criticism of your stated defense. "It's okay if this source is totally unreliable because this totally unreliable source mentions a totally reliable source." Be less insecure.

I linked directly to the original, reliable source in the post. You chose to focus on Judicial Watch.

If you would've just linked to the original source instead of just Judicial Watch. You might've had more credibility.

I'm fine with the second source but as others have said, it doesn't refute anything that Obama initially claimed.

Here Comes Everybody: I was exposed to Fox News this afternoon (it was on the TV at the gym) and Mygyn Kylly and her guests spent a good ten minutes squawking over how PRESUMPTUOUS! Obama was to claim he had five more years. And, inevitably, predicting that this arrogance and general uppitiness would turn off voters.

MEANWHILE, Republican presidential candidates, without even having won their party's nomination, regularly say things like "When I am president". Of course, when they do it, it's because they want to sound confident and strong because that appeals to voters.

No subby left behind?

soy_bomb: Jesterling: 9beers: Get what done? We know it's not securing the border and depleting illegals, so what is it?
Deplete them of what? Also, stop talking.
Obama administration reports record number of deportations (new window)

Oh that debunked claim again?

Neither of your links says he isn't deporting more illegals, the first one even says "record number of deportations" they are addressing the percentage of that record number of deported aliens that have engaged in other criminal activity. It stands to reason that simply deporting more illegals, simply because they are here illegally, would see the percentage of illegals that are guilty of other crimes being deported drop.

Mrtraveler01: If you would've just linked to the original source instead of just Judicial Watch. You might've had more credibility.

He linked to both in the first thing he said on this topic to pretend he had multiple sources for the info. What he had was a JW article commenting on (and linking back to) the study abstract whatever thing so that he could get the data interpreted through two filters and he still didn't understand what it was. Or hoped no one else would.

Cubicle Jockey: Mrtraveler01: Did you really link to Judicial Watch?

He linked to two places, neither of which debunked what he claimed to.
Both of them discussed that the criminal percentage of those deported has gone down.
Neither of them addressed the raw number of deportations.

You said it better. Hat's off.