If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mother Jones)   Dallas judge on why he wants to open shelters for unaccompanied child migrants and not just deport them: These are children and we don't turn our backs on them in Texas   (motherjones.com) divider line 59
    More: Obvious, Texas, Murrieta, McAllen, county judge  
•       •       •

619 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Jul 2014 at 11:10 AM (24 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-09 09:05:57 AM  
You might want to check with the rest of Texas on that one, Hoss.  Once the mother poops them out, they're on their own.
 
2014-07-09 09:06:51 AM  
We'll raise them until they are eighteen, then deport them.
 
2014-07-09 09:17:14 AM  
TINO
 
2014-07-09 09:24:46 AM  
It's a big state. There are good and bad people. It's nice to see some of the good.
 
2014-07-09 09:31:22 AM  
I was telling my eight-year-old daughter...She was asking why all the children were being detained on the border, and I was explaining it was for her security and protection. She explained to me, "But daddy, these aren't people, these are children."

Eight year-olds dude - smarter and more compassionate than our state's adult redneck population.
 
2014-07-09 09:56:54 AM  
hey, who else is going to pick the lettuce.
 
2014-07-09 09:58:02 AM  

UberDave: I was telling my eight-year-old daughter...She was asking why all the children were being detained on the border, and I was explaining it was for her security and protection. She explained to me, "But daddy, these aren't people, these are children."

Eight year-olds dude - smarter and more compassionate than our state's adult redneck population.


Kids say the dumbest things.
 
2014-07-09 10:35:09 AM  
Children are people.
 
2014-07-09 10:51:52 AM  
Has this guy been to Texas?
 
2014-07-09 10:56:39 AM  

James!: Children are people.



So why should it be?
 
2014-07-09 11:07:29 AM  

James!: Children are people.


Corporations are children to my friend.
 
2014-07-09 11:12:57 AM  
God Bless Texas.
 
2014-07-09 11:14:00 AM  

mrshowrules: James!: Children are people.

Corporations are children to my friend.


Which friend?
 
2014-07-09 11:14:30 AM  
The people of Texas certainly seem to disagree.
 
2014-07-09 11:15:30 AM  

dookdookdook: You might want to check with the rest of Texas on that one, Hoss.  Once the mother poops them out, they're on their own.


That's what I was thinking... their voting record clearly states Texas cares about fetuses, not children.
 
2014-07-09 11:15:33 AM  
During a House debate on an appropriations bill that year, Laubenberg, a staunch conservative, put forward an amendment that would require expectant mothers to wait three months before they could begin receiving prenatal and perinatal care under the Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, a program that helps cover uninsured children in low-income families.

Laubenberg's amendment drew criticism from Democratic Rep. Rafael Anchia, who said the change would mean that more than 95,000 children, in utero, would be kicked out of the CHIP program. As the two sparred over whether that was true -- Anchia cited CHIP data from hospitals, Laubenberg alleged it was "misinformation" -- Anchia asked if Laubenberg recognized those in-utero babies as people.

"You do know, don't you, that these are U.S. citizens?" Anchia asked.

"But they're not born yet," Laubenberg said.


Texas, where people really don't turn their back on children.
 
2014-07-09 11:16:02 AM  
The texan voters loudly proclaiming their desire to simply kill them at the border would probably disagree.
 
2014-07-09 11:17:24 AM  
What percentage of a person you are, according to the American right:

Blastocyst: 100%
Newborn through Adult: 50%
Woman: 10%
Rich White Male: 100%
Corporation: 1500%
 
2014-07-09 11:18:11 AM  

mrshowrules: James!: Children are people.

Corporations are children to my friend.



Oh right, like corporations are grasping and selfish, consuming resources while making huge messes and refusing to take any responsibility or clean them up without the imminent threat of punishment.
 
2014-07-09 11:18:38 AM  
Immigrant: -25% (Multiply by the above to determine total personhood)
 
2014-07-09 11:20:07 AM  
Obvious?
 
2014-07-09 11:20:37 AM  
The funny thing is, its pretty much the law.
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act 2008 requires that children be handled through Health and Human Services and not simply deported back to their home countries where they can potentially be victims of further trafficking.
 
2014-07-09 11:21:12 AM  
Good luck on this dude's next election.
 
2014-07-09 11:25:00 AM  

mrshowrules: UberDave: I was telling my eight-year-old daughter...She was asking why all the children were being detained on the border, and I was explaining it was for her security and protection. She explained to me, "But daddy, these aren't people, these are children."

Eight year-olds dude - smarter and more compassionate than our state's adult redneck population.

Kids say the dumbest things.


This isn't one of those times.
 
2014-07-09 11:25:15 AM  
What a Dallas judge may look like:

simpsonleblog.s.i.pic.centerblog.net
 
2014-07-09 11:29:14 AM  

DeaH: It's a big state. There are good and bad people. It's nice to see some of the good.


Encouraging more of them to come so they can die in the desert on their way here is your definition of "good"?
 
2014-07-09 11:31:14 AM  
I am guessing this is a significant dilemma for many Texans (not all, some are hardcore racists and brown children as not seen as human) but the calls to send them back are in direct conflict with the law Bush signed to treat them humanely.
 
2014-07-09 11:31:23 AM  

Cataholic: Encouraging more of them to come so they can die in the desert on their way here is your definition of "good"?


If we're so damned concerned about these kids, why don't we just run a taxi service through Mexico?  They're going to come here anyway, right?
 
2014-07-09 11:32:11 AM  

monoski: I am guessing this is a significant dilemma for many Texans (not all, some are hardcore racists and brown children as not seen as human) but the calls to send them back are in direct conflict with the law Bush signed to treat them humanely.


Easy mode. Blame the law on Obama.
 
2014-07-09 11:33:23 AM  

Uncle Eazy: mrshowrules: James!: Children are people.

Corporations are children to my friend.

Which friend?


spelling is not my friend
 
2014-07-09 11:33:25 AM  
Legalize drugs and let them all in.

Win win.
 
2014-07-09 11:34:33 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: mrshowrules: UberDave: I was telling my eight-year-old daughter...She was asking why all the children were being detained on the border, and I was explaining it was for her security and protection. She explained to me, "But daddy, these aren't people, these are children."

Eight year-olds dude - smarter and more compassionate than our state's adult redneck population.

Kids say the dumbest things.

This isn't one of those times.


Children on children violence is very common.  If a child should fear anyone, it should be other children.

/not really
 
2014-07-09 11:35:00 AM  

Cataholic: DeaH: It's a big state. There are good and bad people. It's nice to see some of the good.

Encouraging more of them to come so they can die in the desert on their way here is your definition of "good"?


Good point. We should remove all incentives for people to immigrate to America without obtaining visas or other permits to come and work here. I say we start with immediately revoking the corporate charter and seizing all assets of businesses that are convicted of hiring someone without permission to work in the country.
 
2014-07-09 11:37:22 AM  
If so many Mexicans and Guatemalans want to come here, we can always just annex the countries and send the US military in to clear out the drug gangs, right?

We can just finish the Mexican American War.
 
2014-07-09 11:37:52 AM  

SilentStrider: James!: Children are people.


So why should it be?


I don't understand what makes a man hate another child, help me understand.
 
2014-07-09 11:39:01 AM  

Cataholic: DeaH: It's a big state. There are good and bad people. It's nice to see some of the good.

Encouraging more of them to come so they can die in the desert on their way here is your definition of "good"?


All the encouragement they need is "It's better than here".

Obviously we should crash the economy so that America is just as shiatty as where they're coming from.

Republicans are already on that.
 
2014-07-09 11:39:03 AM  

Cataholic: DeaH: It's a big state. There are good and bad people. It's nice to see some of the good.

Encouraging more of them to come so they can die in the desert on their way here is your definition of "good"?


A good number are fleeing to Nicaragua instead, we could send some there.

Trying to discourage them because of the danger of the journey, requires that the journey be more dangerous than staying put. I read where some nuns were advising teens that rape was very likely on the way, and getting met with "eh, I'm getting raped by gangbangers already".
 
2014-07-09 11:39:33 AM  

monoski: I am guessing this is a significant dilemma for many Texans (not all, some are hardcore racists and brown children as not seen as human) but the calls to send them back are in direct conflict with the law Bush signed to treat them humanely.


Why do so many people (erroneously?) think Texans are racist towards Hispanics? It's almost as if most Farkers are unaware that Texas is a Hispanic state and has been since before it was a country, or that it's hard to find a native Texan who doesn't have a Hispanic family member.

qorkfiend: Easy mode. Blame the law on Obama.


Obama was a senator at the time wasn't he? Did he vote for or against the law, or was he absent from the Senate because he was out campaigning?
 
2014-07-09 11:39:47 AM  
The haters are just falling back on a proud American tradition when it comes to the proper way to deal with undesirables:

Damn any man who sympathizes with Indians! ... I have come to kill Indians, and believe it is right and honorable to use any means under God's heaven to kill Indians. ... Kill and scalp all, big and little; nits make lice. - Col. John Milton Chivington
 
2014-07-09 11:47:26 AM  

BojanglesPaladin: qorkfiend: Easy mode. Blame the law on Obama.

Obama was a senator at the time wasn't he? Did he vote for or against the law, or was he absent from the Senate because he was out campaigning?


The bill was introduced to Congress in December of 2008. I suppose Obama could have been campaigning over a month after he won the election, but that would be pretty goddamn stupid of him.

Also, the bill was passed by voice vote in both chambers.
 
2014-07-09 11:54:05 AM  

Cataholic: DeaH: It's a big state. There are good and bad people. It's nice to see some of the good.

Encouraging more of them to come so they can die in the desert on their way here is your definition of "good"?


Yes, word will get to the displaced women and children that someone is taking in the people who are already there. I wonder what data plan they're on?
 
2014-07-09 11:55:56 AM  

Serious Black: I suppose Obama could have been campaigning over a month after he won the election, but that would be pretty goddamn stupid of him.


Well that's my question, really. At what point does he STOP being a Senator, and was he still on deck to vote on this bill? (He had been notably absent for many Senate votes during the campaign).

His replacement was not sworn in until January 12th, 2009, (By Blogovich appointment you may recall) but according to Wiki, he stopped being Senator on November 16, 2008, so he would not have been voting on the Late December bill. It seems there was just a three week gap where Illinois was short a senator.
 
2014-07-09 12:06:33 PM  
Don't worry, he-man "Conservative" militias will come down and take care of the problem with their "man-card" AR-15 builds.
 
2014-07-09 12:10:25 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Serious Black: I suppose Obama could have been campaigning over a month after he won the election, but that would be pretty goddamn stupid of him.

Well that's my question, really. At what point does he STOP being a Senator, and was he still on deck to vote on this bill? (He had been notably absent for many Senate votes during the campaign).

His replacement was not sworn in until January 12th, 2009, (By Blogovich appointment you may recall) but according to Wiki, he stopped being Senator on November 16, 2008, so he would not have been voting on the Late December bill. It seems there was just a three week gap where Illinois was short a senator.


Yeah, that's what I'm seeing too. That's nowhere near the worst gap I've seen though; Delaware went almost four full years without one Senator and almost two full years without both (between 1899 and 1903) because their legislature couldn't decide on who to elect to the Senate.
 
2014-07-09 12:18:49 PM  

CPennypacker: What percentage of a person you are, according to the American right:

Blastocyst: 100%
Newborn through Adult: 50%
Woman: 10%
Rich White Male: 100%
Corporation: 1500%


African Americans: 60%
 
2014-07-09 12:21:31 PM  

Serious Black: BojanglesPaladin: qorkfiend: Easy mode. Blame the law on Obama.

Obama was a senator at the time wasn't he? Did he vote for or against the law, or was he absent from the Senate because he was out campaigning?

The bill was introduced to Congress in December of 2008. I suppose Obama could have been campaigning over a month after he won the election, but that would be pretty goddamn stupid of him.

Also, the bill was passed by voice vote in both chambers.


It passed by voice vote in both chambers because it was a no-brainer. The fact that a non-Mexican national had to have traveled close to 1300 miles just to get to the border means that for an unaccompanied minor the trip is fraught with danger; expecting them to make the trip back on their own is essentially signing a death warrant or leaving them in the hands of those who would likely abuse them if they seek help to return (hell, the "best case" scenario is they would likely reattempt crossing the border repeatedly because getting turned away a dozen times is preferable to attempting to return home). We're not accepting them into the United States, but holding them until they can be deported to their country of origin.

The problem is that a rumor got around Central America that either the DREAM Act or the Justice Department's policy of prioritizing criminal offenders for deportation meant that America now had an open door policy when it comes to minors (which neither would do), so the program needed to address quintuple the number of unaccompanied minors as anticipated. The fact that critics who say that this proves Obama is weak on the border show they have zero idea of the details of the situation: we're running into severe logistical problems due to catching too many people at the border who cannot be simply turned away but must be extradited.
 
2014-07-09 12:42:06 PM  
~ "These are children and we turn our guns on them in Texas"
 
2014-07-09 12:44:40 PM  
On the contrary, that's exactly what Texas does. It's a state just stuffed with fat assholes.
 
2014-07-09 12:49:50 PM  
HAHAHAHHA yes you do, that's why you live in Texas.
 
2014-07-09 12:56:50 PM  
GOP on abortion: Think of the children!
GOP on everything else: fark your children.
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report