Open Mic Part 6

After the SOTU, which I missed, what is King Obama planning now?

Advertisements

Comments

  1. As usual, bring anything forward you wish 😎

  2. Apparently, the President had ingested some kind of weird drug, because when he stepped to the podium he didn’t look at the teleprompter. He just started talking.

    Obama and the State of the Onion Address

    “…like every other recent President, when I take to this platform I’m expected to tell a certain number of lies dressed up as the truth. And believe me, folks, I had a few whoppers ready to go.

    “But now I feel like doing something else. I’m not going to delve into the many scandals of my administration, because examining them and taking them apart and exposing the lies would keep us here all night and into tomorrow.

    “Instead, I just want to explain my overarching agenda. It’s the same agenda every modern President has fronted for. I’m not really doing anything new. That’s a myth.

    “You see, in order to become President in the first place, I had to sign on to the scheme to debase, throttle, and weaken this country. I have my methods. Every President has his own.

    “Weakening America is part and parcel of Globalism. Ultimately, America will not the lead the way into what has been called the New World Order. International heavy hitters, bankers, and corporations will carry that ball. America will go along, with its population of sleeping masses.

    “So-called Pax Americanus, or imperial American empire, has been shelved, in favor of a much larger operation.

    “My basic job is allowing all this to happen, so we end up with a global management system, in which the individual is enmeshed.

    “With some degree of accuracy, you could say that everything I’ve been doing is a smokescreen to obscure the march of Globalism.

    “We politicians view humans at large as dangerous and badly programmed biological machines. Until new programming can be inserted universally, we keep things in check. We hold the fort.

    “For the next two years, I’ll continue clamping down on rights and freedoms. I’ll support the Surveillance State. I’ll take away guns. I’ll step up psychiatric intervention. I’ll increase debt. I’ll keep unemployment high. I’ll probably launch a few more military interventions. Expect more mass shootings, which are covert actions, with appointed patsies to take the fall.

    “I’ll allow the expanded militarization of local police forces. I’ll intercede, wherever possible, to stop individuals from living off the grid. I’ll try to mangle the spirit of self-sufficiency in whatever form it occurs.

    “I’ll assist mega-corporations. I’ll keep as many doors open for Monsanto as I can.

    “You get my drift. It’s business as usual. In my case, I’ll try to up the ante and intensify the collapse of America.

    “Did someone put something in my cigarette or coffee? I’m telling the truth. It feels strange, very strange.

    “Anyway, here’s to One World under one authority. It’s the only solution to our problems. Trust me, I wouldn’t mislead you. Give up, give in, take the ride. It’s not so bad. Resistance is a fool’s errand. The people who are running things are out to destroy independence. Let them. By the time they’re finished, you’ll see that ‘equality’ isn’t so bad.

    “One final random thought. Agents of the US government killed Martin Luther King. In case you didn’t know that. Good night and good luck.”

    This post originally appeared at http://www.nomorefakenews.com

    Meant as a satire 🙂

  3. I would like to extend my sincere condolences to Judy and her family for the passing of Judy’s mother. God Bless.

    • I’m so sorry Judy-May the Lord be with you and your family at this most difficult time.

    • The 15th marked 10 years since my Mom went. I know what you are feeling and wish you the best. You never stop thinking about them. I’m left with my dad’s comments from 30 years back. “Remember the good, forget the bad.”

      • Judy Sabatini says:

        Thank you Stephen, been thinking about her all day, & I know it’s going to take time. I lost my brother in 1992, & my dad in 1998 & not a day goes by, that I don’t think of them. Now, it’s just me & my sister.

    • Condolences and best wishes to you, Judy.

  4. Judy Sabatini says:

    Thank you so much G & V, I truly appreciate your kind words, at least, she’s no longer suffering anymore. I have to say, she put up one heck of a good fight, but, eventually lost that fight & went peacefully in her sleep, for which I’m grateful for. I’m going to miss her so much. Again, thank you for your kind words.

  5. Just A Citizen says:

    Some early fact checking on the speeches last night.

    http://news.msn.com/us/fact-check-did-obama-get-it-right

  6. Just A Citizen says:

    A little dated but the KEY POINTS remain the same.

    Death to the Class Warfare of the Democratic Party………………….

    http://www.financialsamurai.com/who-are-the-top-1-income-earners/

  7. Just A Citizen says:

    Much good data in this long report. Many of the rhetorical comments don’t match the data and are obviously slanted against wealthy people. Propaganda to be precise.

    Notes: Look at the table showing non financial wealth distribution. Notice that the lower 90% control over 50% of the home equity. Notice how this is blown off in most commentary. In fact, the lower class controls the vast majority of Private Wealth.

    http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

    Death to the Class Warfare meme of the Democrats.

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    Those JOBS which comprise the 1%. Data from 2005.

    Note: You have to scroll the pictures to get the job list.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/18/1-percent-most-common-jobs_n_1017640.html#s417327&title=1_Executives_Managers

    Death to Class Warfare.

  9. Plainly,

    (just don’t tell a gay you won’t bake a cake on your property).

    Gman, I know, as I am sure the rest here at SUFA do, that you’re a decent guy at heart. That being said, I have to say that this statement in your comment was a cheap shot and very much beneath you.

    This was not a knock on gays, but on the hypocracy of the business owners rights to conduct business. If a business owner chooses not to have customers carrying concealed on his/her property, I’m OK with that, it’s his/her property. But if a business owner refuses to conduct business with a gay person, because their actions are religiously offensive, I don’t care about that either. BUT, the courts have said the business owner is violating the rights of gays, but a person wishing to carry concealed will be arrested. Just an example of how the laws and some judge’s have lost their perspective on what rights really are. This also goes with many bars, who have the right to DENY service to anyone they choose (and have signs saying so) because the law say’s so, BUT……….:wink:

    • plainlyspoken says:

      I’ll ask here what I said to BL on the other thread. Is a business owner able to decide to segregate his lunch counter for example? How far do we go with the 14th Amendment?

      • They did it with Smoker’s before the laws changed.

        • plainlyspoken says:

          Yes, they did – through state laws G, not federal legislation or through the courts under a constitutional argument. You still believe in state and local voting – so get together with your neighbors and start a movement to change those laws.

          So, about answering the question?

          • I will answer it…..to segregation, the answer would be no. To refusal to serve whom you wish…the answer would be yes.

            • It is not even a state issue…..it is a private issue…..If I do not like one eyed, one horned flying purple people eaters…….that does not make me a racist. It means I do not like them…that is all. I will say or do nothing, unless I am attacked in some fashion,,,,I simply will ignore them and leave.

              I do not associate with pot smokers or drunks. It does not mean that I am anti anything….it is my choice. No one has the right to force me to accept something I do not like. I have some very good friends that are pot smokers. I like them a lot….they know my feelings on this subject. They know I do not care if they light up but they also know if they do, I will leave. Therein, lies the difference.

  10. Plainly
    The difference with what Reagan did and what is happening now is clear. Our soldiers weren’t being attacked and killed by the organizations that are getting our weapons as they are today. The claim that “moderate muslims” are getting them is hogwash. I guess when an airliner gets shot out of the sky with one of the surface to air missiles we have provided them will people see things for what they are 😉

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Our soldiers wouldn’t be getting attacked if they weren’t their either. Under your thinking then GW Bush is guilty of treason too? Plus, how many of those weapons in the hands of Taliban were originally provided by the USA? We can’t know for sure, but we didn’t send quite a lot there once upon a time.

      I also find your argument weak on Reagan not being treasonous.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        sheesh my sentence structure sucks today. “but we didn’t…” should read “but we did….”

      • I wasn’t defending Reagan, just pointing out differences. He’s dead anyway, no sense dragging his name through the mud. Now, Carter, both Bush’s, Clinton and now this clown in office is a different story. Not to fond of any of them. I’m sure we can find something to nail each one on. 🙂

        • plainlyspoken says:

          I see, if the past President is dead then don’t speak ill of them. Hmm…does that include FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon too?

          BS Gman. BS. Pure avoidance m friend. Answer the question.

          • Did we send weapons to a stated enemy of the U.S. at the time? I don’t believe what Reagan did accomplishes this. But, I’m not too up to date on what happened with that mess, to be honest.

            • plainlyspoken says:

              Which stated enemy, or enemies, are you referring to?

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              Iran- Contra affair. Weapons to Iran, those weapons were used against Iraqis, Iraqi pilot takes revenge against a US asset, USS Stark, plane identified on ships systems as Iraqi, our friends against Iran. Commanders not notified of potential danger from Iraqis due to the double dealing. 27 killed, Phalanx close in defense systems locked down due possible mistake by shooting down trailing newscasters helocopters…..Woops….Commander Court Martialed

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Dale, the actions of one Iraqi pilot acting on his own does not make the country our enemy.

                I might also ask how the billions of collars in credits we supplied to Iraq – when we were friendly with Saddam – were used for weapons purchases that were used against Iran?

                It isn’t as straight forward as you’d like to make it sound.

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    A good example of Evil disguised as a member of the INTELLIGENCIA.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/gallup-poll-finds-democra_b_4683688.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

    • Oh MY, Left Wing Propaganda from HuffPo 😆

    • plainlyspoken says:

      I could argue that the Republicans find the constitutionally authorized powers of Congress (defense, taxes, national security – terrorism & spying on citizens in their eyes) than the Democrats (education,environment, poverty, homelessness, income distribution) too, but I won’t.

      Oh, and by no means try to say I condone terrorism & spying on citizens as a constitutional duty of ANY government. I wrapped in under “national security” and said the Republicans may well see it that way in their thinking.

  12. Plainly,

    I am curious and have a question. Why are you unwilling to come right out and call for a general uprising against the government to overthrow this tyranny you are so against?

    Answer is easy, because the people are not ready yet, or should I say, not screwed enough to rise up. That time will come, when? I don’t know. One or two men does not an overthrow make. 🙂

    • plainlyspoken says:

      So it would have nothing to do with risking charges against you under Title 18 U.S. Code § 2385 – Advocating overthrow of Government?

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385

      I wouldn’t blame you since no one in their right mind would. This is why so many won’t rise with any insurrection – first off the leaders of such movements will be culled from the herd and stuck away in secure federal prisons like the one just down the road from where I am sitting at the moment (Florence, CO).

      So, better to find a different way don’t you think?

      • Like I said, it’s just not time for that kind of thing. All peaceful means available should be exercised, as the situation allows. One day it may come to pass, but who knows when and likely by younger men, LOL 🙂

        • I need surgery anyway, can’t hardly walk much less lead a Revolution. Let’s hope that day never comes.

        • plainlyspoken says:

          But you don’t participate in all peaceful means – you don’t vote at the federal level. So what other peaceful means are open to you then?

          • I don’t feel voting at the Federal level as a means any longer. The game is rigged. Other ideas, peaceful protests like the one coming up in May. Maybe the Constitutional Convention being called for (although I too have my doubts). When people get more fed up, just saying NO, and loudly is interesting. Let them start the violent part 😉

    • Here you go Gman. Time to “Put your money where your mouth is”:

      https://www.facebook.com/OperationAmericanSpring.Target.Washington.DC

  13. plainlyspoken says:

    JAC:

    plainly

    Business owners should have the right and freedom to serve whomever they choose.

    Govt should NOT have the authority to dictate business practices by creating a “licensing” requirement.

    There is no overwhelming Govt Interest in regulating businesses beyond obvious safety issues.

    I am not in disagreement with you. Business owners should have the choice. I was trying to point out to Gman & BL the contradictions.

    To me the 14th Amendment should only be invoked in the operations of the government – not against private business. A good example of this is that I don’t see the 14th Amendment being used in pay inequality between men & women, a private business matter.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      plainly

      I agree. Although I don’t think the 14th is actually used against private people in the sense that Federal marshals or the DOJ sue a person on the basis of violating the 14th.

      What has happened is the passing of “active” laws to prevent discrimination by both Congress and State Legislatures, as well as City/Towns and Counties.

      The 14th prohibits Govt bodies from passing discriminatory laws, that is laws that supersede Federal grants and privileges. However, it did not “prohibit” them from passing laws that FORCED integration among private citizens.

      You accurately point out that this creates a serious contradiction in the laws as well as the moral/ethical arguments used to support freedom, liberty and justice.

      To RATIONALIZE these laws we must accept the premise that racial integration or the prohibition of discrimination of “any kind” is a “Compelling Govt Interest”. Which in turn requires that we accept the premise that ANY RIGHT can be taken if the Govt can show that it has “A compelling interest”.

      Which in turn begs the question: WHO decides this?

      Answer: NINE WIZARDS IN BLACK ROBES.

      The Wizards have in my lifetime REMOVED the authority to make such a determination from the PEOPLE’s duly elected Representatives, and in some cased from the PEOPLE themselves.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        Yes the black-robed wizards have worked diligently to do so. That we can completely agree upon. The “compelling government interest” argument is – for the most part – a sham to excuse government intrusion into non-government areas. The 14th Amendment, while not used against individuals forms some part of the foundation for constant government intrusion.

  14. Just A Citizen says:

    An example of FAULTY arguments made against Libertarians.

    You need to take the time to read many of the comments. They do a pretty good job of explaining why the author is wrong.

    Note: In the past two months there has been an INCREASING effort by the Establishment on BOTH sides (progressive vs. conservative) to denigrate and demean Libertarianism.

    This fellow’s conclusions are funny in light of the Progressive view that is similar but for differing reasons.

    So one must ask……….WHY are the two extremes SUDDENLY so focused on Libertarianism??

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/01/libertarianism_and_the_public_good.html

    • ……….WHY are the two extremes SUDDENLY so focused on Libertarianism??

      Because it’s a threat to the Elite Ruling Class that relies on Big Government to control the masses. The attack on the Tea Party is for the same reasons. The few Tea Party folks who were allowed to get elected will be demonized continuously. The Two Party establishment don’t like threats to their monopoly over elections either.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        gman

        You make the argument against yourself.

        Your claim is true. But in order for there to be a perceived threat there has to actually be a threat.

        Which in turn means that the concept and political action tied to it is becoming effective.

        Which in turn means that VOTING is in fact making a difference. Or at least it is viewed by the power structure as having REAL POTENTIAL for making a difference.

        The Tea Party is the most astute group of renegades in my life time. The quickly realized that marching in the streets is primarily for show. That REAL change comes from Political ACTION.

        • You make the argument against yourself. Not exactly. I’ve said often that a few mouthpieces are “ALLOWED” to get elected to serve the illusion. There was likely some underestimating how these voices would act. The Two Party establishment won’t make many more mistakes like that again. As we get closer to the next election, let’s see how many “Tea Partiers/Libertarians” that are new to the game get elected. I will say this, there will NEVER be enough of them to change anything in DC, corruption rules and it will continue to rule into the future.

          It’s important to maintain my energy at the local level. I do fear that the State level elections are heading the way of the federal elections, but at least there is a better chance to change things at the State level than at the federal. I will likely vote locally, I won’t legitimize the bums in DC by voting for 3 members out of 535 and one President that is the least of two evils, chosen by the establishment. You my friend, can waste all the time you want in the Great North West. Any chance on getting any Tea Partiers elected in your neck of the woods? In my old hometown, a Democrat stronghold, that would be a fantasy to think one could get elected there (Youngstown, Ohio). Now, I live in Tea Party country, so to speak.

          I did post during the Holiday’s that I sent a letter to my Congressman, if you recall. I’ve not received a reply as of yet. Don’t expect one either. 🙂

          • Hmmmmmm. Mike Duggan(D), white, defeated Benny Napolean(D), black, former county sheriff in the Detroit mayoral election, Nov ’13. Now the natives are feisty at another of their own, the mayor pro tem who was recently busted with alcohol and pot in his vehicle.

            Change can and does happen.

            • One Democrat to another democrat is not change, other than who is filling the suit. I really don’t want the US to have to get to what Detroit has become to get a change done. DO YOU?

            • Remember, pot is good, the president says so. Expect to see more and more of it along with increases in social program spending, food stamps and Section 8. That coupled with even more stupid reality shows and debacles like the Grammys will bring us right in line with the rulers of ancient Rome. We will have our bread and circuses and “they” will provide just enough, just barely enough to prevent the plebs from realizing how screwed they are and revolting. You can learn such neat things from history.

              “Ave imperator, nos morturi te salutamus”.

            • Anita,
              I’ll bet you wish some of us liberals would return to SUFA so Gman could focus his attacks on us again – and leave you alone!! 🙂

              • He is getting stubborn in his old age. I think he even scared Charlie off! Then there’s Buck, who JAC and the Colonel have just about converted, so he’s no fun. Matt, I don’t know, he’s been grouchy too. Cmon out and play so I have someone different to bitch at. 😉

              • Converted!? Are you smoking something Anita?? How in the world did you reach that conclusion! 🙂

              • figured that would draw you out.

                It’s a work in progress, ok? Last tally I saw was 4/4. I know it’s hard letting go, but you’re getting there. 🙂

              • Perhaps they just aren’t as conservative as you thought….

  15. Just A Citizen says:

    Buck

    Re: “Watch it JAC — you’re in danger of having a Bill Maher moment…”

    May be a surprise to you but I AGREED with his “moment” of clarity then and I still do.

    The “Conservative” media’s reaction to it was much like the “Progressive” media’s reaction to the Republicans today. Both are Bull Dookey.

  16. I am telling ya…..put me in coach………the first thing I would do is issue an executive order that requires Buck to wear cowboy boots, hat, and use the term ya’ll. The second thing that I would do is free DPM from the dungeons of Mathius’ basement. The Third thing that I would do….is put Charlie on a Mexican food diet and get rid of “eye” talian food.

    Instead of a chicken in every pot paid for….it would be a gun in every hand and go hunting.

    How’s that for starters?

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Basis in United States Constitution for Presidential Executive Orders;

      Although there is no constitutional provision nor statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of “executive power” given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most executive orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President’s sworn duties,[2] the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.[3]

      An executive order of the President must find support in the Constitution, either in a clause granting the President specific power, or by a delegation of power by Congress to the President. 343 U.S. 579, 585. Antieau, Modern Constitutional Law,§13:24 (1969)

      With the exception of US Grant the use of Executive orders really took off with Grover Cleveland whom I believe was the first of the “Progressive” presidents. Obama has actually used it very sparingly, comparatively, but they have been biggies like on immigration, gun control, healthcare.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        EO’s that further his agenda as opposed to emergencies or clarifications enabling the, administrative agencies to function better. The last part is a contradiction in term.

      • “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed

        So the King signs an EO that does the opposite (stop enforcing a law, immigration) then it’s fairly safe to say he is acting illegally?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          No!

          • So an EO can nullify current law during the term of the President? I’m curious here. If it’s legal to NOT enforce a law, how far can that go?

            • Just A Citizen says:

              AS far as Congress allows it to go.

              My answer is predicated on the reality that no all laws are explicit.

              In most cases the law itself is subject to POTUS approval via a Secretary of some agency.

              So when an EO overturns or refines a Federal Regulation it is not necessarily “illegal”.

              However, it could be subject to litigation on the grounds of violating the Administrative Procedures.

              Namely, EO’s have to have some basis relative to the issue addressed.

              Unless of course the left wing court decides it doesn’t matter in this case.

              See my discussion about Clinton vs. Bush on the Roadless Rules.

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                By just saying the EO is illegal isn’t enough. Congress can challenge the EO, the EO can be taken court as seen during Truman’s administration. If Congress just lets it ride quietly then they do endorse the EO by the fact they delegated the administration of the law to the president and his agencies. And the EO’s become law themselves. Congress has to be specific, like Obama changing the small business portion of the ACA. Changed the law as written, but they let it ride, probably to make political hay as a run up to the mid-term elections.
                So far the political strategists for the Republicans have shown themselves to be extremely incompetent. AS, many folks have said in their posts, there is no difference between the core Dems and the core Repubs. The only difference is the timing, with the Repubs generally following a 5 year lag. They, eat their young, so to speak, their independant minded thinkers. So far only a handful have spoken out against the abuses of privacy by the government and those are being systematically marginalized by the party. The Arizona GOP has censured McCain as being to much like a Democrat and will not campaign for him and give support. He was with 4 other senators involved in the Savings and Loans collapse in the 80’s. He was cleared of substantial interference with the investigations but was cited for exercising “poor” judgement by the senate ethics committee. I also would think after all the years he spent as a prisoner of war in North Viet Nam, he would be very sparing and cautious of wasting our soldiers lives. Except he is the first to say “Bomb Them” “Invade Now”

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                There also is another way to fight the government. There are laws that should be challenged and “voided for vagueness” Laws are to be written that a reasonable person can understand the content and the ramifications of non-complience. The ACA comes to mind. Congress passed it and it was signed into law and nobody ever read it and they are still making it up as they go.

            • plainlyspoken says:

              Laws are not enforced all the time G. The feds just use their discretion and decide it isn’t worth the expenditure to do the enforcement, unless or until they find it is worth it for some reason.

              Prosecutors at all levels of government pick and choose cases that will move forward within the criminal justice system.

              • Plainly, quite true. But this also leads to selective enforcement (discrimination on many avenues). One of my main issues with the Feds and their control tactics, let the States manage their issues, it would and could be done much better. As I have said, WE don’t need the feds, they need US 😉

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                Then why not get rid of all the laws that require selective enforcement. To not prosecute because they don’t have the time or energy or media attention seems to be arbitrary and even more so when it is totally within the hands of ONE person, the prosecutor.
                “The federal system has an unprecedented number of laws that have been enacted making actions that were heretofore only state offenses federal criminal actions”.
                “The federal prosecution of drug offenses is probably the single most prominent example of federal intrusion into an area previously left to the states”
                The author also “provides insight into how the Patriot Act became a protective covering for non-national security actions”
                “The book has chapters pertaining to prosecutorial misconduct, with common Brady violations only the tip of the iceberg. Much of the blame is on United States Supreme Court rulings that gave absolute immunity to prosecutors:
                “The Supreme Court established a broad rule of absolute immunity from civil liability for prosecutors in Imbler v. Pachtman . . . This rule immunizes prosecutors from liability for acts ‘intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process”
                In most instances the Court has stated that misconduct was usually “harmless error.” The quotes are from an Angela Davis book.
                The roadside shootings in Michigan resulted in a charge and conviction of terrorism, nobody was injured. The Duke Lacross team, the prosecutor withheld exonerating evidence from the defense when they were required to share. It actually took an intern of the defense team to catch the oversight. The high powered lawyers never remembered the evidence the State analyzed while they collected their millions in fees.. The issue could have been resolved in < 6 months instead of 1.5 years. At lease Nifong was disbarred but only spent 24 hours behind bars. Yet in his needless prosecution cost Durham, and Duke University millions of dollars. Charges prosecutor misconduct are very rare. Local case here in town, a quick stop robbery, the perp was charged under the Patriot act of committing the crime with a weapon of mass destruction, a 12 gauge.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Dale, there are NO laws that aren’t open to being selectively enforced. There never will be. Prosecutors at all government levels have the ability to carry forward with a prosecution of any alleged violations of the law. It has always been that way and always will be.

                Short of Congress, the courts are the only ones who can nullify a law. States can ignore enforcing laws if they want, but that doesn’t remove the law from the books.

                Now you might say then that the courts system – both civil and criminal – need to be reformed. I agree it does, badly. Yet, to enact that reform will take the action of those same state legislatures and/or Congress. Those very elected officials who screwed it up (along with the courts) in the first place. And, lets face facts, attorneys have a vested interest in having a complicated, twisted, and serious flawed/broken system.

                Gman – The states aren’t much better. The system is just as screwed up at the state levels in their justice systems too.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Local case here in town, a quick stop robbery, the perp was charged under the Patriot act of committing the crime with a weapon of mass destruction, a 12 gauge.

                G – Dale provides an example of state authority being just as messed up. I presume that the prosecutor in question was a county DA, not a US Attorney. If so then it is a case of overcharging to gain the harshest penalty possible. The Patriot Act, like so many other laws, is being misused in a straight-forward case of armed robbery.

                State level prosecutors should not be able to charge under federal laws anymore than US Attorney’s should charge and try state law cases. They want a Patriot Act violation then let the US Attorney have the case (which I am willing to bet the US Attorney would decline to prosecute in this case).

    • I don’t think I’d look very good in a cowboy hat…plus I’d stick out like a sore thumb around these parts.

    • Mathius™ says:

      The second thing that I would do is free DPM from the dungeons of Mathius’ basement.

      You and what army?

      • plainlyspoken says:

        Where is your humanity? Where is your mercy? Oh the shame of your dictatorial oppression of poor, poor DPM.

      • My army of Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders. You can be bought.

        • plainlyspoken says:

          No Colonel, don’t do that. If his wife catches him accepting that bribe she’ll release DPM and lock Mathius in the basement. Oh the inhumanity…………..lol

          • Unlikely. She’d probably wind up hacking up my body and scattering the bits across all 50 states.

            And, no, there’s no “if” involved in whether she catches me. The woman is psychic* – she’d know. She knows.. everything..

            * It is also possible that she has installed a GPS tracking device on me and has my office/home/car outfitted with cameras and has hired an outsourced company to monitor the feed and alert her if she needs to know anything. I’m not entirely sure how to explain it otherwise.

  17. HMMM! Lots of chatter going around this week about economics. Here’s a sample:

    I work as a stock broker for Piper Jaffray located in Los Angeles. What happened yesterday left me absolutely stunned in disbelief. I manage the portfolios for more than half of our richest clients and my boss called me into his office and told me to cash them all out immediately. My obvious thought was that there was going to be a crash but it was strange that he was so adamant about cashing them out. He clearly knew something so I asked him what was up.
    http://silveristhenew.com/2014/01/26/insider-spills-the-beans-on-impending-financial-market-collapse/

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Bear market analyists predict a general collapse later this spring. They just can’t put their fingers on any specific triggering event. I believe it will be a series of events. Like the Fed slowing the printing of money, consumer spending was a disaster this past holiday season, China depending upon outside consumption, as the ACA continues to kick in and people really feel the real impact, consumption of bick ticket items will fall off, planes orders fell arms etc, The stock market is trading at levels that are hugely more inflated than the worth of the companies being traded. A huge amount of the money being used in the market is borrowed and increasing every month. The investment banks and high rollers have access 1st to the Fed money at zero or negative interest rates. The government can’s seem to stop adding program after program with money that doesn’t exist and can’t fix things that need repairs due to the lack of funds. Watch out for your private retirement acounts. The government may force those funds be converted to US treasury bonds, like done in Poland the other year.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        With the Fed tapering QE the government has to find people to purchase bonds that fund the out of control debt. Where else but changing the law governing 401K and retirement plans and force purchase of treasury bonds. As I said previously, Poland forced 1/2 of private retirement funds to be polish government bonds to pay for their debt.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          All they have to do is RAISE the interest rate on Treasuries and they will get all the money they need.

          Which is why Turkey is raising their interest rates. The Fed’s announcement that it is easing on easing is causing the first ripple to makes it’s way around the world.

          The dollar is worthless,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,unless you are comparing it to the other worthless currencies.

          • Who’s gonna want to buy it? What are they gonna buy it with, since their fiat is worthless? Where do you get your economic info, HuffPo?

            • Just A Citizen says:

              The same people buying it now, only even more so.

              The Value of our currency is relative to the Value of other currencies.

              We raise interest rates and other nations, investors will buy OUR bonds. The US is still viewed as a “safe haven”. Backing off on quantitative easing strengthens that view. You may not like that or think it foolish but that is how it is, today.

              Where do you get your economic information…………..INFOWARS??

              • Says who, You? I asked first, where do you get your economic info? Or is HuffPo just correct, BWAHAHAHA.

                I start with Weiss Research and add others who have specific expertise in the different markets. Having just one source is stupid at best and will you one poor at worst. Infowars don’t offer economic advice, although their overseas news can be handy when dealing with oil prices sometimes, just not very often. Dale is correct, the 401’s are in the line of sight for the Feds to force into Govt bonds, it’s already begun with some retired Govt workers. If you had any decent sources, you’d know this 😉

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Published this past OCT. Nothing has changed except the Feds announcement it is starting to pare back on QE.

              http://www.foxbusiness.com/investing/2013/10/17/dont-buy-hype-us-remains-worlds-safe-haven-despite-dc-antics/

  18. Plainly, Another reason why leading a violent revolution is such a bad idea. Too many people with their heads so far up their asses they deserve what government gives them.
    http://conservativevideos.com/2014/01/people-react-obamas-state-union-speech-happened/

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Yes, they do and unfortunately will happily live their lives not understanding anything.

  19. I found an interesting article about Fox News, that also fits SUFA to a “T”.

    I made a few “edits” to help you out!

    Enjoy – and keep up the good work!

    Rather than waste time bemoaning Fox’s SUFA’s bogus journalism, liberals should encourage it. The more that Fox News SUFA viewers are duped into believing that the misinformation they are fed by Ailes Gman * 😉 is fair and balanced, the more easily they can be ambushed by reality as they were on Election Night 2012. We are all fond of quoting the Daniel Patrick Moynihan dictum that “everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” But we should start considering the possibility that it now works to the Democrats’ advantage that Fox News SUFA does manufacture its own facts. Much as it lulled its audience in 2012 into believing that Romney’s “47 percent” tape was just a passing storm, so it is now peddling similar assurances about Chris Christie’s travails.

    * or maybe Gman’s new little friend – just what SUFA needed – someone who agrees with Gman and fuels his paranoid fantasies!! 😉

  20. plainlyspoken says:
    • Just A Citizen says:

      Another LOUSY idea. Just more layers upon layers.

      Furthermore, I am completely baffled on HOW the President has the authority to create such accounts.

      He must be assuming it is an IRA and there will just be different “regulations” governing such and IRA.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        I ask myself how long before the government would raid these, leaving behind an IOU a la Social Security?

  21. Hurricane – A big ass wind, accompanied by rain and sometimes tornado type circulation, that comes in from the ocean ( that big expanse of water some live by ) and it tears the hell out of homes, business’, beaches, etc. Sometimes winds can get to over 250 MPH.

    Tornado – Another big ass wind that is very tightly packed twister, ( that means it turns…violently ) and can pack winds over 300 MPH. It runs in a mostly erratic fashion and will destroy everything it touches and will even drop big trucks on you from several miles away.

    Ice Storm – Frozen water that is usually associated with a front. It will accumulate and down power lines, break tree limbs that will fall on you, block bridges and roadways, make things very slick and will crash cars and even bring airplanes down.

    Snow storm – That really pretty fluffy white stuff that will accumulate and block bridges, roadways, collapse roofs, break tree limbs, and make everything very difficult to move around in. Some times it is associated with high winds ( blizzards and white outs ).

    Thunder Storms – Usually associated with cold weather fronts that collide with warm moist air and cause violent straight line winds ( sometimes in excess of 100 mph, tornado type winds, drop lots of water and causes immediate flooding, flash flooding, rock slides, and all types pf other calamities.

    Arctic Air (Polar) – Extremely cold air that blows down from the Arctic ( northern regions of our hemisphere ) and is usually accompanied by extreme temperatures that will freeze anything that it touches, causes wind chill that will cause frost bite, frozen extremities, freeze number two diesel fuel while the engine is running, cause vapor locks in normally aspirated aircraft ( non fuel injected ) while in flight and is known to kill animals and humans exposed to it in short and/or long periods of time.

    Heat wave – A common phenomenon where air temperatures and heat indexes can exceed 115 degrees ( in the shade ), heat marble benches to temperatures that will cause severe burns, over heat even the most expensive cars, heat all metal surfaces to cooking temperatures, boil water on concrete, and cause birds not to fly, the deer to seek refuge anywhere they can, and drive fish to the deepest parts of lakes and streams. Even jets and other aircraft cannot sometimes get enough speed and lift to get off runways and heat has even grounded space shuttles from lifting off….because there is no lift even in thrusting situations.

    ===========================================

    Satellites – Pretty fancy gadgetry that floats around in space and takes pictures of our atmosphere and weather patterns. There is pretty fancy GPS systems on these pretty fancy gadgets that pin points same.

    Meteorologists – Men and women trained to read these images, interpolate patterns, and forecast the differing types of weather phenomena.

    Television/radios – Communication devices that spread the word of impending dangers and weather alerts.

    =============================================

    Brains – That gelatinous mass of tissue that is supposed to reside the head of all living human beings capable of thought producing ( rational or otherwise ).

    Dumb asses – Those who wish to file law suits against the weather service and local meteorologists because they did not receive, in their feeble minds, enough weather warning to STAY OUT OF THE FRIGGIN’ WEATHER !!! This is happening in three states so far…Georgia, Minnesota, and Florida.

    Double Dumb Asses – The lawyers who would take such a suit.

    Triple Dumb Asses – The judges who would allow such a suit to be heard.

    ==============================================

    Common sense – When a meteorologist or weather service forecasts such events that are forming……pay attention. Forewarned is forearmed, as they say. The weather has its own mind. It will go and do what it wants to do. The only thing that a weather service can do is relay what is CURRENTLY happening, what might happen IF AND ONLY IF the conditions continue, and what could be the result if certain factors combine. If they tell you a hurricane is coming….get out of the way. IF you live in the southern regions where cold fronts and warm fronts collide…you already KNOW what to expect. The same for the northern regions in the winter…you already know what can happen. Sometimes, the weather will fall apart and sometimes it will be worse than predicted but the patterns are always there. VERY VERY rarely will the weather spawn something deadly without at least 24 to 48 hours warning….ample time to get away or take cover.

    If you choose to get on the road and an ice storm paralyzes traffic and closes down schools and roadways…that is the way of the world. Live with it. IT WAS YOUR CHOICE to roll the dice.

    As a private pilot, I make choices every time I fly. We get the best weather forecast that we can. We take courses in reading cloud formations, winds aloft, weather patterns, and imagery interpretation. We decide when to fly……or not fly. If I fly into a known weather pattern, I am responsible…..not the meteorologist or the weather service….they are a tool….not the final say so.

    Sorry all…..my dander got up this morning when I saw an interview of a lady in Minnesota and read of several lawsuits already being filed because of the meteorologists. It boggles the mind.

    • There ought to be a set of regulations for hurricanes, ..like that they can only occur in certain months, or impose a wind speed limit, maybe that they break up 50 miles from shore.. If a hurricane does not comply, simply fine the state where said hurricane makes landfall.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Along this line of thinking……

      “Seismologists Convicted of Manslaughter for Failing to Predict Earthquake”

      Seven people — six Italian seismologists and a government official — were found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to seven years in prison on Monday for failing to warn people of a 6.3 magnitude earthquake that killed more than 300 people.

      L’Aquila is “a jewel of medieval beauty set in the middle of one of the most seismically dangerous zones in Italy” and “surrounded by the massive peaks of the restless Apennine mountain range.” The city has been destroyed twice before by earthquakes, in 1461 and 1703.

      Comments on the recent storm that swept across the south. The one thing you can count on is ICE during the winter. All the weather reports were calling for sleet and freezing rain and then switching to snow after about 12 hours. In New Bern, there was a prediction of 8-12 inches of snow after the sleet. If you looked at the dopplar radar maps I would not have disagreed except because they were showing a very heavy moisture laden weather pattern. My weather station at home was predicting almost NO precipitation if any. Also the old nose (not scientific) failed to pick up the usual smell associated with a heavy snow. We had the sleet 1″ but zero snow. After the NO snow the meteorologists said the weather had was dry, an opposite analysis of 24 hours before. Years ago in Raleigh they had a very similar storm coming up from the south, same pattern. The meteorologists predicted very little snow if any. I stuck my head out of doors and thought to myself we’re going to get dumped on. Where I lived we had just shy of 3 feet of snow. The old farmers almanac predicted this was going to be a bitch of a winter. So far, right on and they did not rely on fancy models and radar.

      A couple from England sailed around the world 3 times without hitting any major storm. They 1) were not in a hurry and 2) they hung around an area before heading out on their next legs of the voyage. They talked to the local waterman and aquire years of “experience on the weather” from those sources.

      But today, we are all “victims” and somebody has to be at fault for anything that might go wrong or not as you expect.

  22. Gman……you have to watch world markets and currencies very close. The dollar is not going to be replaced by the yuan, as some are predicting……it is still the most sought after currency. The world knows that we are in a conundrum right now with this progressive movement. it will die an economic death….nut in the meantime, policies can be manipulated for short term gain.

    Even Clinton caught on to this and I am the first to say….go back to Clintonomics…same tax rates….and SAME SPENDING. Put the changes that he made in the welfare system and medicaid system back in place, take out the housing market fiasco that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac started and kill the Carter year housing debacle….and we would be riding high. Like international politics, we do not learn from history. We repeat it.

    I do not like Obama and his policies at all…..I think he is a pariah and I think that he does not have the interest of the United States at heart at all. However, you do not see the changes that got us here in the first place taking place. He is doing exactly the same thing as Bush did only worse.

    The rich are not stupid……we are making more money and paying less tax under Obama than we ever did under Bush, Clinton, or Reagan. Obama’s policies favor the rich……big time. Just as the Carter years did. Obamacare will make the insurance companies rich and cause the middle and poor class to be even more poor. The results are already out there. Companies that wish to make more money to the bottom line will simply eliminate their insurance costs and pass it on to the government….why not? It is a bottom line issue. We were forced, at one time, to compete with each other for employees…..that is no longer the case. Want to raise the minimum wage…do it. Companies do not care…we simply eliminate the employee and move them to part time. Want to raise taxes on the companies….do it. We do not care for right now it is a tax deduction. Want to eliminate the tax deductions? Even the most LIBERAL AND PROGRESSIVE democrat will not do this…..it will end their career. Want to raise social security and medicare taxes….ok…do it. This increases our bottom line. This is what the libs do not understand. Don’t you think for a minute, that if it were feasible for the dems to eliminate tax deductions, that they would have done it already? Anytime, they eliminate a tax deduction, it does not hurt the company…it hurts the employees.

    The dollar is strong as it pertains to the world…..and can be manipulated by the Fed. raise interests rates and there will be a tremendous influx of cash. HOWEVER…..it is a house of cards. One day, all this debt will hit. Spending is the problem. You can tax all the people today 100 percent…take everything….and it will not pay the debt and debt…….will be the downfall.

    You need to watch China, if you are afraid of the yuan. Their cost of living and inflation rate is enormous and shows no sign of being controlled…it is estimated that the inflation rate in China is over 30 % and climbing. That will destroy their currency. There is no one else even close to us in the amounts that are required. All their investing in gold will not help them….it is not stemming their inflation at all.

    Want to watch somebody……watch Germany. They are pretty smart. Without Germany, the Euro collapses and everybody knows this.

    Watch the small players very closely….Cuba, Argentina. Brazil……they are beginning to move to capitalistic economic issues….they are beginning to see what is good and what is bad. Cuba, for example, just moved to opening up their health care to private companies. Argentina, despite its despots, is allowing the black market to flourish and it is getting big…..Brazil has eliminated, in total, its income tax on private companies. Why? They understand the strength of this and it will encourage investment from outside. It is record breaking.

    The Fed controls interest rates…..think about this.

  23. Just A Citizen says:

    Major Change Up.

    Saw “Saving Mr. Banks” this past weekend. Outstanding movie.

    Emma Thompson was fabulous and the Academy Awards folks should be ashamed of themselves for not nominating her for Best Actress.

    Which furthers my view the Academy is completely out of touch with Real Art anymore, let alone the consumer audience.

    By the way, at the key point in the film there was not a dry eye in the theater that I could see. Including mine. Not often a movie or performance by an actor can touch an audience like that.

    • VH….the article is partially true. First, the Mexican populace can own a weapon. They can own a shotgun. They cannot own handguns or rifles. Also, you can hire private security. We applied for, and received, permission to hire private security for our ranch. The weapons can never leave the ranch, meaning that you cannot carry them in town. There are no restrictions on the private security and private security can be anyone you want, including American citizens. No training required.

      Now, to the home grown militias that are popping up. There are some very nasty areas down there that the Federal police cannot protect. The cartels move freely around fully armed and prey on citizens at will. If you remember the movie, The Magnificent Seven where bandidos raided towns at will to extract payment for protection. The same thing is occurring today with the Cartels. They take what they want, confiscate houses and cars, rape women and children…all without fear of retribution. Some are even going after tourists in places like Puerto Vallarta. So, in the absence of Federal protection, some are forming militias and gun runners are supplying weapons and ammunition.

      The Mexican government cannot, or perhaps will not, stop these militias. However, the militia’s are not wanting to go through or register with the Federales. The reason is that the Federales cannot be trusted at all and everybody knows this. It is going to be interesting. But even in Mexico, where government cannot supply something or is too intrusive, militias do form. The Mexican government tried to stop something similar in the state of Chiapas….they sent government troops in there to disarm the populace…..the government troops were sent packing with hundreds of casualties. It will be interesting.

  24. Dateline: Austin, Texas

    A lady driving across the Colorado River in Austin noticed a young man about to jump off the bridge in an apparent suicide. The lady pulls up and yells to the young man, don’t do it. Think about your parents!!! The young man replied, ” My parents are dead. I am going to jump.” The lady, undeterred, yells back,” think about your wife and children “, to which the man responded, ” I am not married and have no children.”

    The lady still undeterred, ” Well, remember your heritage and remember the Alamo !”

    The young man replied, ” What is the Alamo?”

    The lady simply said, as she stepped on the gas, ” You’re right. Go ahead and jump, you yankee, liberal democrat.”

  25. Mathius™ says:

    Call me lazy, but I know you lunatics will have this information on tap for me..

    QUANTITATIVELY, Obama has signed fewer Executive Orders (per year or per day) than any president other than Harrison (who died a month after his election) in the last 100 years or so. Bush II comes in a close second, and St. Reagan is still in the low-end, but behind Slick Willie Clinton.

    So, I guess, the agitation is with the QUALITATIVE aspect (content) of his orders versus what previous Presidents have done with them. That is, if he’s such a dictator, but he’s issuing fewer edicts, then the logic would follow that the edicts he does issue are substantively worse than his predecessors. That’s the only way I can make sense of this. Can someone please shed some light here?

    What EO’s, specifically, has he issued that were so out of line with Presidential precedent?

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Mathius…..20 presidents up until Grover Cleveland signed a fraction of of the number of EO’s. Most of those were in the single and double digits. There was one exception, U.S.Grant, Grover Cleveland, would be what I would call the 1st of the “Progressive” presidents and from then on it has been “katie bar” the door. Bush 1 signed less than Obama in recent history. What has to be analyzed is the intent and content of the EO.
      There is NO explicit constitutional right for the president to use EO’s. However, they have been interpreted to be used to give greater clarity to an existing law written by Congress so it can be administered better.
      I was just glancing through The last two Presidents EO’s. A great many are revoking their predecesors EO’s. Some may be also just an actual extension of an existing EO due to a time limitation on the original EO..
      At all times they can be challenged by Congress and the courts. If not, then the implication is the EO did not violate any intent of law or the Constitution.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        I just read through all the titles of the EO’s that President Obama has signed during his presidency.
        I will challenge anyone to find the Executive Orders in the National Archieves that have modify the ACA via the EO process. Same with the gun control EO’s allegedly signed last year. Same with the Immigration law changes he’s made. Sure as heck does not appear to be by the EO process which is challengable by congress and the courts.
        http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/obama.html

  26. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/30/nyc-school-cuts-popular-gifted-program-over-lack-d/

    Seems to me -that by doing this they are hurting all the students.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      It will be another group of students that will be diagnosed with ADS and need medications after getting total bored by being mainstreamed into dumbed down classes.

      Had the opposite happen when I was in High School. Cost cutting measures in LA County Schools and the boards kept the classes that were specialized to the super achieving students and were preparing for college preparatory science. They dropped the general requirement science courses. Needless to say, the GPA for the students who were taking the courses now formed a U not a bell curve. The chemistry course in HS was equivalent to 3rd year chemistry at Cal Poly at San Luis Obispo. Which is no slouch of a university.

  27. OK, so we now have a Republican immigration proposal which is sort of like what I have been saying for years and what Gingrich brought to the floor last year! Come out of the shadows, get vetted, get a green card. No citizenship or path to citizenship ever!

    By accident or on purpose, in this election year this could be the smartest move the Republicans have done in a long time.

    Not that you have heard it yet (or are likely too) but they have backed the democrats against a wall. The dems cannot support this, they cannot vote for it or if they do, Obama cannot sign it. It gives them nothing and takes away a key issue! If played properly and if conservatives don’t buy the media hype that as all over the news yesterday, it is the perfect offense. and damn near the perfect solution.

    A prediction if you will, the media will be all over this, they know that what I just laid out is true. They will initially try to confuse what has been offered as amnesty and a path to citizenship. It is not, it does not give the illegals the right to bring their entire families here but it does give them the right to go home, stay awhile, visit Mom, Dad, cousin Guillermo, aunt Flora and then legally return to the US. Families will no longer be “separated”. What we need to do is start burning up the phone lines to the talk shows, start writing letters to the editors and push this “humane” and sane bill.

    PS, the fence is a must!

    • plainlyspoken says:

      I wonder how quickly this whole issue would be settled if the migrant workers (legal & illegal) skipped a year of working the fields, leaving all that produce to rot in the fields?

      You can bet there would be plenty of work out there for those looking.

      • Sorry, not on point.

        • A quick take on the old Gingrich plan from two years back.

          http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/29/gingrich-immigration-plan-a-real-workable-solution/

        • plainlyspoken says:

          Sure it is, it points to the idiocy of the fact that this issue still isn’t settled. Why? Because of divisiveness both sides bring to the table in this. Why should the Repugs get a pat on the back for bringing forth their “plan” now? Why didn’t they get off their collective asses 2 years ago? Oh, wait – they were whining and demanding their wall first, wouldn’t agree to a damn thing before the precious – AND USELESS – wall was built to keep those horrible people south of the border.

          But, now they bring it out – and only as a political tactic to corner the opposition so that the Repugs can hopefully grab more seats in Congress. They could care less about the issue, just the seats they can get to take power in the Senate and maintain it in the House. Right after that it will be back to demanding their precious wall.

          • Plainly….quit thinking logical…..The Republicans just borrowed a play from the Democrats play book. This whole administration has been rife with delays and specifics to correspond with election cycles.

            • plainlyspoken says:

              lol….sorry Colonel, I forgot that logical thinking was outdated in our society now. 😉

              • Quit hatin already would ya? It’s a solution that kills two birds with one stone. Who cares when they roll it out? It’s not news that they play politics 24/7. Or would you prefer they keep playing politics and we stay in a rut?

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Anita, I am certain that they (meaning both sides) will continue playing politics – it’s in their blood. lol.

              • Yes sir….we were taught to use logic and common sense….that is no longer the norm.

          • This plan has been around for years. I have run it past immigrants, legal and otherwise for a decade at least. You can yell, scream, holler as much as you want to. Castigate Bohner, beat him to death for all I care. Here is a plan that works! Here is a plan that solves a problem, does not encourage more illegal immigration, helps out the country, gets rid of the truly undesirably who have criminal records at home or here.

            Your position is great, it is like G-man not voting. Do nothing but bitch and moan that nobody did anything and then of course nothing gets done which of course, allows you to bitch and moan some more. The Dems and their allies in the media will oppose this . They will do anything to prevent it from happening. It is our job to counter them. It is our job to call up the so called conservative talk shows and get them to listen and not be knee jerk. Knee jerk is not only a liberal disease you know.

            The only people who could oppose this are the open border folks who somehow believe that this country is capable of ingesting half the world’s population and those who believe that we have the will and guts to deport the 12 million. Read the attached article I posted, then argue against it.

            And, what the hell is wrong with a fence. Works for Israel.

            • plainlyspoken says:

              Why read the article? Your initial post was all about the political maneuvering bringing this plan out now would give the Repugs – not about the issue itself. For you, that’s all this was about – the politics, not the issue itself.

              I will bitch and moan all I please, whether or not you like it. BTW – I am one of those who believe in an open border – no need for a useless wall that is nothing more than a money pit so some can “feel” safer in the country. Not a drop of humanity in many of you “secure the border” idiots.

              • Well then, that’s fine, you are an open borders guy. That is really doing marvelous things for the western and southwestern states now as well as places like NYC. A citizen of the world no doubt who feels that the US can somehow not become Calcutta.

              • Let’s start with this:

                http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/thomasmann397654.html

                Now, putting that aside for a moment, I am not going to allow you to denigrate me by claiming what I want is political. Unlike the vast majority of folks out there, I have spent the past twenty-five years working predominantly with immigrants from South and Central America as well as the Caribbean. Most have been legal but some not. By and large, these are fine folks and I want for them what my Grandparents were looking for. I know people who can’t go home and there is only one reason for that no matter how many drivers licenses or Social Security cards they show me. I want them out of the shadows.

                At the same time, I have been up to my armpits in the Cocaine wars and I want those people GONE.

                The solution offered yesterday is the most workable solution out there. It is the essence of compromise. Unless of course you define compromise as getting 100% of what you want (The Stalinist view of compromise).

                So, you can get up off your ass, support something that despite being “political”, can work, can gain majority support, is humane or not do a damned thing.

                Frankly, Plainly, I am sick and tired of the left calling me anti-immigrant when I am not. To quote a very good line from a great Robert Mitchum/Deborah Kerr flick, “If you know me and don’t like me that’s just fine. If you don’t know me and don’t like me, well, that’s just plain stupid.”

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Stephen, you’re not even close. There are other avenues to deal with people coming to the US other than discriminatory immigration policies, the wasting of billions of dollars by the feds on one border line (the southern) to save the country, etc.

                An open border doesn’t mean what you are purporting it means. It was fine up to 1904 when the forerunner of the Border Patrol was brought into existence (oh and they were patrolling to stop Chinese immigrants from entering the US apparently).

                http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/border_patrol/border_patrol_ohs/history.xml

                And what problems are those? The standard “they’re sucking from the system” arguments constantly spewed out? Let them come and work legally, pay taxes, and then maybe there would be any more of a problem than with US citizens who abuse the welfare system. But, no – get them out of here, save us from the ugly, sick and criminal illegals, when the only “crime” they committed was crossing an imaginary line on a map.

              • There you go calling or at least implying I am anti-immigrant. I call Bullshit on that! That my friend is Politics. Politics of the worst kind.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                And I spent years working around them as well, and turning those who were illegals over to the Border Patrol just as I was required to do. Plus I have spoken of options before when there have been debates here on immigration – trying to find even a consensus here on a path to get them out of the shadows – to no avail I might add. Several just whined that the border had to be secured first, didn’t want to budge an inch until that requirement was met.

                I have spoken with veteran Border Patrol agent on a secure wall along the border. The most common reaction I got from them was laughter. They know damn well it won’t work and is a waste of time & money. Money they felt could better be spent putting more agents on the ground, or improving monitoring and enforcement of laws regulating the employment of immigrants in the US.

                Plus, your secure border won’t remove the cocaine cartels from the US, especially when the majority of the groups running the coke in the country are now homegrown, US born, gangs. What you going to do, deport them back to their home US State? All the cartels supplying the coke, pot, meth, etc., to the US will find other ways of getting their product into the country. As long as the addicts demand the stuff, they will find ways.

                Lastly, I’ve been off my ass for years on getting something Positive done about immigration. I was willing 2 years ago to buy the plan Gingrich tried to get Repugs behind (and failed). Anything that moved in the right direction was good. I accused you of being with it for the politics of it – for what it does for the Repugs (are you a card carrying Repug?) and it was reasonable based on your initial post. So, sit your ass down and rethink your approach to how you speak of the issue.

                Plus, I am far from being a liberal. If you don’t like being tagged as something by those who don’t know you, then practice what the hell you preach.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                There you go calling or at least implying I am anti-immigrant. I call Bullshit on that! That my friend is Politics. Politics of the worst kind.

                What I am SAYING, not implying, is you’re showing concern for the political position it gives the Repugs, not the issue. Reread your initial comment and apply some critical thinking skills to the view it gives of you!

                That my friend is logic. Try using it.

              • What is so wrong with supporting BOTH stances?

              • So, let us all get together on something that can work. Most of my Manhattan dealings with drug sellers were not native born. Most were from Santo Domingo to be exact. I’m sure that things are different in other parts of the country but the smuggling that goes on, human and drugs must be stopped. laugh if you want at a fence. They built the interstate highway system. they built the panama Canal, they went to the moon. They fought and won WW 2 starting from scratch. Can’t build a fence? Horsehockey!

                Someday when I figure out exactly how, I’m going to check and see if my own grandparents ever bothered getting naturalized. They were mostly interested in freedom and opportunity. Whether they learned enough English or thought they could qualify is questionable.

                Give em green cards, deport the bad ones and do something about the border.

                I’m a Goldwater Conservative and vote that way. Mostly libertarian but not suicidally so.

            • Stephen…..the West Bank fence is barely 400 miles long…….just the Texas border is 1400 miles long……and not in flat country.

  28. As usual, no one in Washington is asking those of us who patrol and advise and work the border what will work. We DO NOT NEED A PHYSICAL FENCE…..Texas has proven that. We have effectively stopped the border crossings in Texas. Most of the crossings are going to Arizona and California. We have set up and control an area NOT IN THE US CONTIGUOUS ZONE. That is useless and the Feds are stopping no one and they use bean bags and rubber bullets….you know…non lethal ammunition which stops NO ONE. So, Texas has set up a control zone at 13 KM. We have also set up roving check points on all highways and State roads throughout the state. One day we are there and the next day we are somewhere else.

    The 13 Km zone is very unique. No one…not even American citizens..escape being stopped at the 13 KM zone. All cars, trucks, bicycles, vans, and trains are inspected with scanners, mirrors and dogs and each individual in every vehicle is observed and the driver or operator of each vehicle is asked to “vouch” or those with them. If you lie and are caught at it, there is no fine or ticket. Your car or vehicle is immediately impounded and the operator of the vehicle goes directly to jail……….oh……and we profile. There is no need for a fence. We created one with check points. All ranch land within the 3 KM zone of the Contiguous border ( US defense zone ) is patrolled by drones and infra red. Ranchers and their employees have been outfitted with night vision devices and radios tuned directly to the response teams. The response teams are Texas Army National Guard supported with Blackhawks, that report directly to the Governor and not to the POTUS nor ANY OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY. We work autonomously. We do not shoot bean bags nor rubber bullets,,,,,we shoot the real thing. All of this is financed…………………………….by Texas. No Federal Money is accepted nor wanted. We have changed the training program of the National Guard to be that of border patrol outside the US Defense Zone…that allows us to patrol and train 24/7. We put gun boats on the border lakes and rivers. There has not been ONE SINGLE ROBBERY OR KIDNAPPING on the lakes and rivers since we did this. NOT ONE. No longer do fishermen have to worry and no longer do rafters on the rivers in the Big Bend National Park get sniped.

    Outside the contiguous zone, between the 3Km and the 13 KM are roving Department of Public Safety patrols and Texas Rangers (not the baseball team). Outside the 13 KM zone are patrols of Texas DOT ( Department of Transportation ) units that stop and check the manifests of all commercial vehicles on random basis. If you are caught smuggling, transporting, or hiding illegal immigrants, drugs , or guns….all carry the same penalty. Your vehicle will be impounded and you will go to jail. Period. Illegals are transported back to the control zone and turned loose.

    One thing about setting up the 13 KM zone is that we keep 90% of the illegal crossings bottled up on he border where the cities must account for them. Once the cities started becoming inundated and having to support the influx…they got tougher and sent them back across the border.

    We changed our state laws to reflect the hiring of illegal immigrants. If you are caught with them in your service…..you will lose your franchise. Period. No appeal.

    There are a myriad of other remedies that we have enacted….but you get the picture. NO FENCE IS NECESSARY. Enforce the laws on the books and do it vigorously.

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Colonel, while I don’t agree with all Texas is doing – I will say at least it is the State taking action on it’s own. Let the states handle the issues in their state, where people stand a better opportunity of influencing the state government via elections or involvement in the issues. The feds will bungle it as they have always bungled it – and ignore what people want.

      • Fair enough…..but, out of curiosity….where is your disagreement?

        • Have to run and errand or two….but am very interested in your response….or anybody’s for that matter, as long as it is constructive.

        • Oh this should be fun. Colonel, I believe he just called you an inhumane idiot up above. Come join us on the Group W Bench. 🙂

          • plainlyspoken says:

            I believe you are incorrect. I do not include the Colonel in that remark. So, he can stay right where he is, no need to sit on the bench.

            • But he’s for secure boarders..have a seat Colonel.

              I don’t mean that to sound as smart alecky as it sounds

              • plainlyspoken says:

                His idea of a secure border and your idea of a secure border are not the same thing by a long shot.

              • Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed today? Secure boarders is secure borders. I can get on board with lots of options, starting with enforce the current laws.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Anita, you – as I recall – were one of those “we can discuss it after you build the wall and secure the border” people. No reform of any kind until then for those already here until that condition was met. Hasn’t been met yet, won’t be anytime soon, so why continue to wait to reform other problems too?

              • I was the shock and awe type…do all of the above, now!

        • plainlyspoken says:

          Based only on what your wrote (meaning that further information on an aspect could change how I see things).

          The 13 Km zone is very unique. No one…not even American citizens..escape being stopped at the 13 KM zone. All cars, trucks, bicycles, vans, and trains are inspected with scanners, mirrors and dogs

          I see potential for 4th Amendment violations. Dogs, what kind of trained dogs? Scanning, with what for what? It seems guilty until proven innocent for all.

          Stopping commercial vehicles for inspections has long been the standard, so I have no real problem there so far as it stands. If the people of the state want to live under drone surveillance that is their choice, so none of my business.

          I actually like the idea that you punish the smugglers and send the illegals back. I see no reason to condemn or punish someone for just crossing an imaginary border – clogs up jails and prisons unnecessarily.

          Outside the contiguous zone, between the 3Km and the 13 KM are roving Department of Public Safety patrols and Texas Rangers

          I am assuming (and I know how dangerous that can be) that these patrols are stopping only on ‘reasonable suspicion’ or probable cause? If not, well I might have a problem with that.

          Profiling concerns me – but that is a completely different debate at this point.

          • Actually, there is no 4th Amendment violation, according to both the State Attorney General and even The US Attorney General. Everyone has to go through these check points…..Mirrors are used underneath cars and trucks to spot false bottoms…. scanners, much like airport scanners but for vehicles spot welds and repairs or changes that are not common, dogs sniff the outside only and tires for drugs, explosive residues, etc. Personnel are not required to get out of vehicles at all nor are they searched. If a dog alerts, or a scanner spots something, or the mirrors show something unusual, then you are told to drive to another lane were a more thorough search is conducted. Now, these check points are only on the inbound lanes….if you are driving to the border, there are no checkpoints….but coming back….you better be clean….and, I might add, we like this type of security. While it may be inconvenient, those of us that go through this on a regular basis understand it. The only ones complaining are the guilty ones.

            I think you misunderstood drone surveillance or I was not clear enough…the drones are only used in the 3 KM ( Contiguous zone…border area ) at altitudes between 1500 and 3000 ft….higher requires FAA regulations. Very useful at night using infrared and very useful at finding underwater bridges built by the Cartels at night.

            As to the smugglers ( human traffickers ) we show little or no mercy. The problem down here is that the traffickers will use illegals as “mules” ( drug carriers ) and then they shoot them once on the US side. We show little mercy to the “coyote’s and/or human traffickers. As to the imaginary border..unfortunately, there is no one world. The borders are real.

            As to the DPS and local police…..there must be a reasonable reason to stop vehicles. Reasonable is defined as suspicious….for example. A pickup truck driving on a deserted farm to market road with 8 Mexicans in the bed is highly suspicious. It is highly suspicious even with 8 Anglos or 8 anything in the bed.

            Profiling…..I know people do not like this as it assumes guilt……but it does work and it works well. Example…..if you are an American citizen and you drive across the border into Mexico in a van and you come back across the border..you will be profiled. Why? Because over 50 % of the vans ( yes, it is that high) carry drugs. So you will be automatically profiled because the statistics say so. Wear a back pack and walk across..you will be profiled. IF you are Hispanic, you will be profiled. Not all Hispanics are illegal and we understand that but over 90% of the illegals are Hispanic. you may not like it but that is the way of the world. If they were just looking for work, that is one thing….but the stats and history shows that drugs are routinely smuggled across the borders, as are weapons….and as are underage women sold into prostitution. We prefer to inconvenience the 75% that are legal instead of “overlook” the 25% that are not. It is the overlooked 25 % that create the problems.

            However, thank you for your answer and thank you for remaining civil.

  29. What’s that guy’s name from the Blue Collar Comedy Tour that will give you an example of someone really dumb and then finishes with a line, “and that there is all you need to know” (or something….don’t have time to youtube it”. Well anyway, here’s one of those moments:

    http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/01/31/jon-stewart-laughs-pelosis-face-after-she-admits-she-doesnt-know-why-obamacare-site

    • Oh my Lord, what did this woman just say-it doesn’t matter-just fix it-the executive is the revolving door-I just kept thinking huh-Good Grief!

      can’t think of the guys name but if I’ve got the right guy in mind-the line is–Here’s your sign!

  30. Haven’t had time to watch the video but this might be interesting. Found Ayers answer about stealing the land-the usual crap-so what if the land was stolen-that really isn’t the point of the question-which I read as how do we grow economically now-today.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/01/30/2016-filmmaker-dinesh-dsouza-vs-ex-domestic-terrorist-bill-ayers-in-contentious-debate-watch-the-highlights/

    • plainlyspoken says:

      VH,

      Haven’t watched the video either and I agree, the “steal the land” stuff is good for nothing more than a discussion of the past. We can’t change it now and roll the clock back to redo that period in our history.

    • Every now and then, you hear something that makes some kind of sense. Yesterday there was an exchange on The Limbaugh show about “stealing the land”. Never thought about it before, but the land in all South America, Central America, The Caribbean, Florida, The South west was stolen by Spaniards. The culture was destroyed by them and the native languages suppressed. The great Midwest and Canada were stolen by the French. The Dutch tried to do a number in the east but were supplanted by the English. In the scheme of things, “Americans” came quite late to the party.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        Does that make what the “Americans” did ok, because they were late getting to the party?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          What Americans did was OK because that is what the LAW of HUMANS said was OK.

          • plainlyspoken says:

            Points taken JAC. Would it be better if I asked, does it make it right?

            • Just A Citizen says:

              plainly

              It WAS equally right, for the times. Although there was considerable “Contradiction” in the American actions of the mid to late 1800’s and the values those same people held in the 1700’s.

              Let me just get to the point. Occupying the land was not the crime or the wrong. Not given the rules of humanity at that time.

              The “Indian” vs White conflict was a clash of Aboriginal/Native and Society/Law based cultures. Had the Europeans of the time traveled back in time they would have had the same clash with their tribal ancestors as they did with the Indians of North America.

              So in my view, the real BAD was in the concerted acts of betrayal and murder of innocents. It was in how we handled the Indians once we decided to just occupy the land regardless of treaty. These types of atrocities occurred in the 1800’s, long after the WHITE MAN was established on this continent. I am speaking of Americans here, not the total White Invasion of the western hemisphere.

              Much of the THEFT people like Ayers want to harp on, it is about the taking of “Mexican” territory. But they ignore the fact that Mexico was a Spanish creation. “Mexicans” did not own the SW USA anymore than anyone else owned it at the time. They “claimed it” and their “ownership” were grants from the King/Queen of Spain.

              In other words, we took from Mexico what Mexico took from the natives that lived in the region.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                And I am not in disagreement with anything you’ve said here. I especially agree with your fourth paragraph. Those are the true “crimes” of the issue.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        The CONCEPT of THEFT of land DID NOT EXIST among the human race at the time of these supposed crimes.

        Go back farther. The Comanche stole the land from the indigenous tribes of what is now Texas, Oklahoma.

        The Crow and Blackfeet occupied lands previously held by the Shoshone people.

        Those damn Asians invaded the continent and stole it from who knows who.

  31. Just A Citizen says:

    Open Borders = Recipe for destroying a Nation.

    Claims that open borders should be OK because we had open borders a hundred years ago FAILS to recognize the changes in population and occupation of territory that have occurred over the time.

    No Country can survive a massive immigration of people that do not share the language or cultural values of that Country.

    I suggest you google Governor Lamb’s speech on the topic of how to destroy the USA. It was given many years ago.

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Because I believe in open borders does not mean I believe in no controls over immigrants to the US. Open borders – to me – means that anyone, without fear, can walk up to a border crossing point and “check in” to the US. I even – oh so long ago here on SUFA – offered some options on how to “check in”, less restrictive than we make it now. I also am not saying crossing that border will automatically make you a citizen, or that an immigrant has no responsibilities to meet certain conditions while in the US – or face being shown the door.

      I am against this idea that we “close” tight the borders – which will never be successful.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        plainly

        In the world we live in today, just “checking in” will have the same disastrous effect.

        I understand your view, and would agree to it WHEN our neighbors become more aligned with our economic status and culture.

        While those “checking in” would not be citizens, their children born here would be. And they would ALL be availed of the WELFARE benefits we offer.

        • plainlyspoken says:

          JAC,

          And would we be better at spending more of our resources on working with our neighbors to become more aligned with our economic status and culture than spending it on a wall, cameras, etc., to “secure” the border?

          The issue of citizenship by birth could be dealt with by an amendment change. Then those children, once they become an adult, could follow whatever reasonable path to citizenship that could be designed for children born here of foreign parents.

          Plus, just checking in doesn’t mean some would still be excluded from entering. Those, for example, who are convicted felons under US law could be excluded. But having a simpler entry system would cut down on the numbers needing to be chased as criminals because they crossed the border I would think.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Plainly

            Re: Spending priorities. NO!

            We have been spending on such for decades. The Cost of NAFTA is all about this very thing.

            So I say No, it is not money better spent. We need to spend OUR money on US. In this case beef up the border security.

            I will not matter what our immigration laws are because if there is not a secure border they will be broken. Unless of course our laws simply let anyone in the door.

            Part of the need for increased security at the border is also to reduce congestion at the border.

            I would like an answer to the most perplexing viewpoint of the “open border” folks.

            There are ZERO “open border” countries. Our neighbors BOTH have stricter policies regarding who can and cannot visit and how long they can stay.

            So WHY is it that the USA, which exists in THIS world of National identities is supposed to be the one nation that Does NOT enforce such rules? Why should our borders be porous and nobody else??

            Furthermore, I am always confused by those who espouse “libertarian” views on open borders but seem to never question WHY it is that the Fabian Socialists and Marxists espouse the very same thing.

            If this were so good for the USA and our FREEDOM then why would those that work against these values ALSO support open borders???

            • plainlyspoken says:

              JAC – define clearly what you mean by secure border? Is it the fence, with cameras and sensors ect. Will that stop the “invasion” of people across it? I don’t think so. It’s 1400 miles long. Do we want a Berlin Wall/Iron Curtain across the border between the US and Mexico? What about the same for the US/Canadian border?

              There are other, in my opinion, more productive ways to “secure the border” than this nonsense. There aren’t enough agents to be everywhere that the border is being violated. I suppose we could militarize the border and have US troops patrol every mile of it (which would be better than them fighting in Afghanistan I suppose)?

              Enforce the rules, no problem there. But criminalizing a person for walking across the border? Naw. Scoop em up and send em home, enforce laws that will keep them from gaining from society, but the parts of the border that have been “secured” still leak.

              Just quit wasting money on ineffective solutions and find more effective solution to utilize. How hard is that?

              Since you don’t want to spend money to bring the neighbors into better alignment with our economics and culture, then HOW do you suggest this be accomplished? Should we just continue to be a “shining star” that people are drawn to and are willing to go to extremes to be here and partake?

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Oh, and my “HOW” wasn’t yelling JAC. I just wanted it to stand out from all the rest of what I wrote. 🙂

              • Just A Citizen says:

                plainly

                Securing the border means that ONLY those people who WE want to cross it are the ones who cross it.

                I am not a “physical fence” proponent. Actually, patrolling the border with troops would be LESS COSTLY than the fence costs quoted so far. Although that cost is outrageous.

                I’ll bet the cost of the existing fence has been inflated by Govt policies and administration.

                I would beef up security, as in people and infrastructure, and the primary crossings. To reduce congestion and increase “captures”.

                The NORTHERN BORDER does have a fence. It is an electronic fence and there are “border patrol” agents patrolling all the time. RCMP’s on the other side. This includes the “remote” areas.

                It is THEIR decision to make if they want to join us in our economy and/or culture. Why should we spend a single dollar on their problems? Not any different than sticking our nose in the Afghan’s business.

                I have no problem with simply kicking violators out without filing criminal charges. Although our neighbors will throw you in jail. Again raising the question, why not us?

  32. plainlyspoken says:

    First Stephen, I will apologize – because I wasn’t being civil. Maybe Anita is right and I got up on the wrong side of the bed. I can only say that the political slant you gave to your post angered me and I let that anger influence my behavior in my responses. No excuse, it was wrong. Not, on to what you wrote:

    So, let us all get together on something that can work. Most of my Manhattan dealings with drug sellers were not native born. Most were from Santo Domingo to be exact. I’m sure that things are different in other parts of the country but the smuggling that goes on, human and drugs must be stopped.

    I agree, stop the drug smuggling as much as we can. We can’t expect to ever stop all of it, but dents can be made. Our drug enforcement, at least at the federal level, needs to focus on those involved in smuggling the drugs in – which is not always the case. We had prisoner in our jails awaiting transport to federal lockup who had been busted by the feds (primarily DEA) who were not much more than low level dealers and distributors, while the major smugglers were still out on the streets getting their “product” into the country. I will say that most of the dealers and low level distributors I dealt with were American citizens, of all races, so there are differences based on what area of the country we may be looking at.

    laugh if you want at a fence. They built the interstate highway system. they built the panama Canal, they went to the moon. They fought and won WW 2 starting from scratch. Can’t build a fence? Horsehockey!

    Yes, we certainly can build a fence, that is possible over time. But will it be cost effective?

    In 2009, the Congressional Search Service reported that the Department of Homeland Security had spent roughly up to $21 million per mile to build a primary fence near San Diego. The cost had ballooned as the fence extended into hills and gullies along the line.

    The same year, Customs and Border Protection estimated costs of building an additional 3.5 miles of fence near San Diego at $16 million per mile. Even this lower figure would yield a rough projection of $22.4 billion for a single fence across the 1,400 miles remaining today. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/20/us/politics/border-fence-raises-cost-questions.html?_r=0)

    The above was from a 2011 article. How much has that cost gone up. It only takes money and we can define “fence” (the physical kind) in different ways. But, will it be worth the effort or, like Texas is doing (per the Colonel), are there more effective “fences”?

    Someday when I figure out exactly how, I’m going to check and see if my own grandparents ever bothered getting naturalized. They were mostly interested in freedom and opportunity. Whether they learned enough English or thought they could qualify is questionable.

    I have an account with ancestry.com, if you’d really like to know before 1 May 2014 (when it expires), I would be happy to supply you my email address and do some research for you.

    Give em green cards, deport the bad ones and do something about the border.

    We can find a meeting of desires here with this one statement than we can over the politics of the immigration issue. I know both sides of the aisle are equally obstructive to solving this issue, and many others. I don’t just blame the Repugs.

    I’m a Goldwater Conservative and vote that way. Mostly libertarian but not suicidally so.

    I am a fair amount of libertarian, but – as you said – not suicidally so. I know there is no one-size, single, solution to a problem in a society, yet I feel so many think there is that they lose sight of trying to compromise/cooperative in any meaningful ways. Logic and compassion needs more of a place in our thinking for finding solution to some problems – such as immigration.

    Again, my apologies for my poor attitude in responding to your posts. I know better than that.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Well played Sir.

    • Apology not necessary but accepted. I’m running around today too and don’t have lot of time. Waiting for grandchild # 4 to show up due date is NOW. Like to follow up more later on these issues. Listening to Rush before, either he does not “get it” or he just wants to keep the pot stirred. The media would do well to go to Gingrich on this one since he thought it out first.

      Regarding the fence. the entire Northeast is covered with miles and miles of concrete “noise” barriers which I am sure do not cost a fraction of the “fences” The “cost” of the fence is wildly exaggerated so as to make any one proposing it look like a bloody moron. As I said to the Colonel, there are fences and there are fences. I cannot believe that we are incapable of devising a satellite based monitoring system forthe rough terrain or using drones with sensors over those areas. The military (Army) has been playing around for a while with high altitude blimp like aircraft to monitor the battlefield. Then, it becomes a ,matter of getting the border patrol there to pick them up.

      Somewhere along the line the folks who sneak in seem to be getting “rights”. Ideally we should revert to sending them back across the border but that does not seem to be happening the way it did. If the Canadian border becomes identified as a problem, then seal it too. So far, with the exception of this Justin Bieber turkey, it seems to be ok.

      I am glad we are focusing attention on the issue because it is a serious one. My experiences with illegals is that they are constantly taken advantage of. they are paid below minimum, extorted and constantly threatened with exposure. From the American worker’s point of view, native born as well as immigrant, their wages and hopes for a future will be dashed as long as this underground economy is allowed to flourish.

      In my town we have a rule that you must bag your leaves in the fall for pick-up. Within ten feet of the curb, you can rake them into the street for sanitation. For the past several years my block has been deluged with contractors, employing illegals I am sure, who will put all the leaves from 200 foot deep property in the street. The cops are “too busy”. When I ask the workers who seem to come from just bout every country, they tell me that they are not paid enough, are given time deadlines and their boss is not being paid enough by the homeowners to cart the leaves away and pay a tipping fee. This is just one personal grudge I have but is symptomatic of what happens in almost every other labor intense business around. Honest employers cannot get the jobs and workers are going to stay at the bottom forever.

      • Oh, I just might take you up on that Ancestry thing or do it myself since I want to track my wife’s family. I suspect they are “potato famine” immigrants to NY. Would love to see if my kids have Civil War relatives in their bloodline. On my side forget it.

        • plainlyspoken says:

          No problem, just let me know. I have about run my family tree back as far as I can go with paying for their international search package. Be glad to some work, and by the way – once I start the tree I would be able to make it available to you to see as well from your computer.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        SK

        I suggest you do some deep thinking about the possibility that YOU do not get it.

        Maybe after being screwed on these types of “compromises” in the past has caused some to be firmer in their positions. Which of course is a very logical and rational position.

        For example, once the green card is in place what is stopping the next Dem controlled congress and whitehouse from using procedures to turn them into citizens? It could be easier using “procedural tricks” than if there had not been a “comprehensive bill passed”.

        Once such legislation is offered it then becomes “hostage” to the process which is controlled by the Dems in the Senate. Remember how the ACA was passed?

        I think you are overly optimistic about how this would put the Dem’s in a corner. The proper response should be to DIRECTLY address in public WHAT the values of a PROPER IMMIGRATION policy should entail.

        Do not introduce legislation until the American Public has had a chance to digest the principles.

        • Answer: not a damned thing but then, if they control congress and the Presidency again, they can pretty much damn well do anything they want anyway. Obamacare anyone?

          Get out in front on this one and push hard. I think it is a great idea and an even better way (sorry this is political) to call their bluff. They claim it is not political but humanitarian as does my church. Well, if that’s the case, then let them support it.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        I am glad we are focusing attention on the issue because it is a serious one. My experiences with illegals is that they are constantly taken advantage of. they are paid below minimum, extorted and constantly threatened with exposure. From the American worker’s point of view, native born as well as immigrant, their wages and hopes for a future will be dashed as long as this underground economy is allowed to flourish.

        I very much agree. My ex-father-in-law (now deceased) made part of his earnings off of migrant worker camps he owned. I can guarantee you he exploited them all without mercy. Some of those places weren’t fit to let your dog live in.

        I have always felt that the employers need to be hunted down and prosecuted unmercifully. Fine them into unprofitable earnings, shut them down if they are major abusers, whatever it takes (including locking them up). Make the environment for the employers hiring of undocumented workers toxic enough and it may deter a lot of them from exploiting the illegal workers. Same goes for the labor camp owners too. Plus, get Americans to accept that those fruits and vegetables will cost us more at the store.

        Many say illegals that get legalized shouldn’t ever get to be citizens. I say why not? It something that could take a lot longer than those who entered legally, but if they’re legal and productive why would we not let them? But, that’s a whole different debate. First, lets get them out of the shadows.

        • See, nobody wants to do this. You are familiar with the instant background check on firearms purchases, right? Then, just how difficult would it be to allow employers to call, use their tax ID as identification as gun dealers use their FFL and find out status. Voila! in five minutes or less, you have an answer. Democrats want the votes and republicans and democrats want cheap lawn service.

        • That sir is the penalty for breaking the law. No citizenship. As I have said many times, if the reason they come is for a better life, give them a better life. If the inhumane thing besides the obvious rip offs is the breaking up of families, allow them to return home with their green cards. It is a fair compromise and I do stress compromise.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            SK

            And what do you have to offer the thousands upon thousands who can’t get in because they don’t have the benefit of living south of our border??

            • Sometimes JAC, I think it boils down to life isn’t always fair-there are consequences for not fixing these problems for so many years and sometimes the innocent have to pay for our sins. I figure we’ll end up doing another amnesty without fixing the underlying problems and in a few more years we’ll be doing another one. This political fight is just too profitable to actually solve the problems.

  33. plainlyspoken says:

    OK Colonel, now for your response.

    Actually, there is no 4th Amendment violation, according to both the State Attorney General and even The US Attorney General. Everyone has to go through these check points…..Mirrors are used underneath cars and trucks to spot false bottoms…. scanners, much like airport scanners but for vehicles spot welds and repairs or changes that are not common, dogs sniff the outside only and tires for drugs, explosive residues, etc. Personnel are not required to get out of vehicles at all nor are they searched. If a dog alerts, or a scanner spots something, or the mirrors show something unusual, then you are told to drive to another lane were a more thorough search is conducted. Now, these check points are only on the inbound lanes….if you are driving to the border, there are no checkpoints….but coming back….you better be clean….and, I might add, we like this type of security. While it may be inconvenient, those of us that go through this on a regular basis understand it. The only ones complaining are the guilty ones.

    Well, can’t really see a problem here then. As long as enforcement actions are based on a probable cause, I see no issue with the ways that probable cause is being found. As long as there are no exceptions, then no one is being targeted unfairly/unlawfully.

    I think you misunderstood drone surveillance or I was not clear enough…the drones are only used in the 3 KM ( Contiguous zone…border area ) at altitudes between 1500 and 3000 ft….higher requires FAA regulations. Very useful at night using infrared and very useful at finding underwater bridges built by the Cartels at night.

    Does this zone include border cities/towns? If so, are these drones used over them ? Again, not that I have a problem with it if that is the case. That is up to the people of the State of Texas to argue over through the state legislature.

    As to the smugglers ( human traffickers ) we show little or no mercy. The problem down here is that the traffickers will use illegals as “mules” ( drug carriers ) and then they shoot them once on the US side. We show little mercy to the “coyote’s and/or human traffickers.

    And there should be no mercy to human traffickers. Punish them to the full extent of the law, especially since human trafficking covers more than just what the drug smugglers are doing. I am more concerned with the immigrant – even the mules – who are being dealt with. Yeah, they may be carrying a hundred pounds of pot on their back as a part of the price they pay to get brought over, but is it worthwhile to fill jails/prisons with these mules for – potentially – decades? Not in my view it isn’t.

    As to the imaginary border..unfortunately, there is no one world. The borders are real.

    They are real when they can’t be changed, which they could really anytime two countries want to cut a deal and redraw the lines. The border is just a line of the area under the control of a nation. You have shown how this “border” is inconsequential to what Texas is doing to control things there.

    As to the DPS and local police…..there must be a reasonable reason to stop vehicles. Reasonable is defined as suspicious….for example. A pickup truck driving on a deserted farm to market road with 8 Mexicans in the bed is highly suspicious. It is highly suspicious even with 8 Anglos or 8 anything in the bed.

    Why doesn’t Texas outlaw people riding in the bed of trucks? The the stop falls under a violation and surpasses reasonable suspicion? Not saying Texas should, just a random thought. With reasonable suspicion (and as my trainers always taught us – that means you can articulate the “why” in being suspicious) then I have no problems here at all. Stopping for no reason smacks too much of a police state behavior that denies any freedoms to the people governed.

    Profiling…..I know people do not like this as it assumes guilt……but it does work and it works well. Example…..if you are an American citizen and you drive across the border into Mexico in a van and you come back across the border..you will be profiled. Why? Because over 50 % of the vans ( yes, it is that high) carry drugs. So you will be automatically profiled because the statistics say so. Wear a back pack and walk across..you will be profiled. IF you are Hispanic, you will be profiled. Not all Hispanics are illegal and we understand that but over 90% of the illegals are Hispanic. you may not like it but that is the way of the world. If they were just looking for work, that is one thing….but the stats and history shows that drugs are routinely smuggled across the borders, as are weapons….and as are underage women sold into prostitution. We prefer to inconvenience the 75% that are legal instead of “overlook” the 25% that are not. It is the overlooked 25 % that create the problems.

    I have a problem with just race-based profiling, or culture-based profiling (think Muslims). I know profiling in some ways is effective to the outcome, better it be on things like driving a van, carrying a backpack etc. That removes my concerns for the most part. Though, any profiling activities need to be monitored so they aren’t abused by those on the front lines using them.

    However, thank you for your answer and thank you for remaining civil.

    Thank you for your polite way of pointing out I have not been very nice today. I needed that.

  34. plainlyspoken says:

    Ladies & Gentlemen of SUFA,

    I have behaved poorly today in my exchanges with Stephen, and likely to Anita as well. I have no excuse for my lack of civil and respectful behavior. I know better and was certainly taught better by my mother.

    I truly try to be respectful of all opinions and beliefs, whether I agree with them or not. I believe in civilized discussion and debate, which I failed to exercise today.

    So, I hope all of you will accept my apologies for it. You should have had to read my responses and observed my incivility.

    plainlyspoken

    • plainlyspoken says:

      *sigh* I need a better editor – I am a poor one.

      I meant “should not have” in the last sentence.

  35. http://www.lifenews.com/2014/01/30/researchers-find-human-conscience-part-of-brain-differentiating-right-and-wrong/

    Wonder if this will satisfy Matt’s need to know why humans should have more value to other humans than animals? Although, I would hurt a human if they were trying to hurt my pet.

    • plainlyspoken says:

      The best thing a human should have if they are trying to hurt one of my pets is medical insurance, they may need it.

      So, we’re born with a conscience? Hmm….Which would possibly mean it is how we are trained in early life influences our right/wrong or whether we use it at all? Interesting thoughts.

  36. plainlyspoken says:

    Down here JAC.

    The NORTHERN BORDER does have a fence. It is an electronic fence and there are “border patrol” agents patrolling all the time. RCMP’s on the other side. This includes the “remote” areas.

    Maybe in some areas, but not across the whole border. I remember watching an episode of Drugs, Inc., where dope runners spoke of walking across the border from Canada with the drugs. They stated, and showed on the show, the border was nothing more than a cleared zone of 100 yards or so (as I recall only – could be wrong on the width) in width for miles upon miles along the border. No fences, no detection devices, etc. No idea how often it is patrolled, either on the ground or in the air.

    It is THEIR decision to make if they want to join us in our economy and/or culture. Why should we spend a single dollar on their problems? Not any different than sticking our nose in the Afghan’s business.

    OK, so no incentives offered to help them “see the light” so to speak.

    I have no problem with simply kicking violators out without filing criminal charges. Although our neighbors will throw you in jail. Again raising the question, why not us?

    So what JAC. Should we do it just because they do it? So, we take the high road and ignore what they do. If we shouldn’t influence other countries, then we shouldn’t let them influence us, right?

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Or maybe it was less than 100 yards. I really don’t remember other than it just being a cleared zone through the wilderness.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      plainly

      I do not know what is there today, but if the equipment is still in place I can tell you that for sure there is an electronic fence.

      It consists of “listening” devices to detect people crossing. This alerts officials to go to choke points.

      Recently a bunch of drug runners were caught in the backcountry, disguised as outfitters.

      It is not as porous as some make it out to be. And if you go through the checkpoints and have a DUI YOU MAY NOT ENTER. If you have a gun registered, you will be subject to additional questioning and delayed. If you do not have Birth Certificate or passport and drivers license/other ID you WILL NOT ENTER.

      The point of us vs them is that there are REAL reasons they constrain migration across their borders. Those REASONS don’t vanish at our border.

      And why should we not reciprocate with our neighbors??

      • plainlyspoken says:

        And why should we not reciprocate with our neighbors??

        If you are speaking to jailing – just because they do is no reason we should or have to. It’s what would be better for our society, not theirs. They aren’t the ones footing the costs of locking someone up here for illegal border crossing. Waste of money to lock them up for just that. Further, work in the jails and prisons for a while as an officer and get a first hand feel of the populations in them. You will find it ridiculous to lock them up adding to the pressures within that mini-society.

  37. Plainly….I do have an issue with closing the border. The Republicans have believed the Dems twice now on immigration reform….give them what they wanted and then the border. I do not have to go to the well a third time to know that it is dry. I would only consider immigration if the border is closed first….then deal with what we have.

    • plainlyspoken says:

      I understand your feelings. That is where the politics of the issue come into play. As I have maintained throughout both sides have been obstructionists on the issue.

      The federal system is so damn broken I don’t see it getting fixed anytime before I’m dust (or my wife, kid, and grandkids at this rate).

  38. I agree there……but one main reason that I favor closing the border has to do with health issues. We deal daily with diseases that we have eradicated in the United States. Third
    world countries that do not immunize are a real threat. What is wrong with going back to an Ellis Island sort of thing. Want to come to the US….fine. But, get in line and get a clean bill of health. Be examined, like we used to do.

    The US has all but eradicated polio, for example. We have cases of polio coming across the border unchecked. The same with measles, dpt, TB, chicken pox, One case of plague and numerous cases of meningitus. You cannot use the argument that they are in the minority… IF so, ask yourself, how many does it take to start an epidemic. This year alone, beginning this past January, there have been recorded in three counties alone, a respiratory virus that simply does not exist here……400+ cases. If you know someone on the border…ask them. You will not see it reported in the msm.

    Even Mexico, with their free healthcare, simply does not immunize all of its citizens….it immunizes the elite class but the poor class ( the majority ) are not immunized. What is worse, none of the indigent Indian population in Mexico is immunized. Not a singe one of them. A great number of immigrants are not Mexican…they are coming from Central and South America…..I understand looking for a life and work….but we also have a moral and ethical obligation to our own citizens to protect them. Closing the border will help greatly with just in the health issue alone.

    • plainlyspoken says:

      I won’t disagree that there are people crossing our border in infectious states for certain diseases the US has all but eradicated. However, a part of the reason those illnesses gain a foothold in our population is because of the lack of vaccinations in the US. People who make the choice not to vaccinate their kids (or themselves) for whatever reason. Some say the vaccines are dangerous and lead to other problems, like the measles vaccine supposed link to autism. That was a crock of baloney, but people buy it still and exercise their right to not vaccinate. I just looked at the vaccination rates for 2012 of children 19-35 months (issued by the CDC).

      3+DTaP 4+DTaP 3+Polio 1+MMR
      94.3±0.7 82.5±1.2 92.8±0.7 90.8±0.8

      Those are the national percentages for these 3 diseases. For those who don’t know them: DTaP is the diphtheria, Tetanus & Pertussis (Whooping Cough) vaccine; Polio id obvious, and MMRI is the Measles, Mumps & Rubella vaccine.

      Now for DTaP children should get 5 doses of DTaP vaccine, one dose at each of the following ages: 2 months, 4 months, 6 months, 15 to 18 months, 4 to 6 years. (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a682198.html).

      MMR: Children should receive 2 doses of MMR vaccine. Infants should be vaccinated with the first dose as close to the first birthday as possible. The second dose is routinely recommended for ages 4–6. (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/mumps/outbreak/faqs-outbreak.htm).

      Polio: Children whose vaccinations have been delayed should be vaccinated as soon as possible. The minimum interval from dose 1 to dose 2 and from dose 2 to dose 3 is 4 weeks. The minimum interval from dose 2 to dose 3 and prior to the final dose in the series is 6 months. (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/polio/vac-faqs.htm).

      So, looking at the numbers the vaccination rates, while good, are leaving segments of our society open to contracting these diseases. That’s our fault. Personally if parents don’t want to vaccinate their kids then the risk their children run of contracting the disease is on their head. Don’t our citizens have a moral and ethical obligation to protect other citizens from these diseases when they choose to forgo vaccinations? Again, we are back to there is not one simple answer.

      Plus I have no problem stopping anyone not a legal resident or citizen from entering the country if they have these diseases – yet you can’t tell if they do and are in an infectious state all the time. When found – deny entry or send them to a hospital isolation ward for treatment as a public health risk (and do the same for citizens and legal residents who have traveled abroad and are found to be infectious on their return).

      There are valid reasons to check those entering the US, this I don’t deny. But lets be reasonable too. Many just don’t want them here period and want any excuse used to deny them entry – so secure those borders. We are becoming prisoners in our own country it seems with all this “national security” we need so very badly (yes, sarcasm there). I guess we can start getting an idea of how those behind the Iron Curtain felt.

      (Wonder if I’ve gotten myself onto the watch lists over the past few years I have been speaking my mind? My wife actually worries that I have. lol)

      • plainlyspoken says:

        oops – forgot the data link to the percentage rates. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/stats-surv/imz-coverage.htm (the Children Only link on that page).

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        I remember that once I started going to school, we all lined up in the gym and getting all the vaccinations available at the time. We also used to get annual TB checks in LA until heading off to college. You also were quarentined if you got a communicable disease. Now I’m sure very little of that still happens.

  39. Here you go Matt-read this and then let me know whether or not you believe Obama isn’t out of control-after reading this it obviously isn’t just EO’s that he’s using to make major changes without going through the legislation.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/obamas-power-play-102904.html

  40. Just A Citizen says:

    Mathius

    There has been little discussion on your question of Obama’s Executive Orders.

    You are correct in that the devil is in the nature and not the number. However, it is not JUST in Executive Orders. I think they have gone beyond prior administrations in directing changes of law WITHOUT using EO’s.

    One example is the “directives” or other policy direction methods. Where the desired policy is implemented by Forcing a Secretary to act a certain way. For example, the use of “prosecutorial discretion” to stop deportation of Illegal Alien students.

    The following article claiming to be factual is not completely honest. They used this method to create the appearance of “discretionary” power due to “budget shortfalls”. Yet those budget shortfalls did not exist until he wanted the Dream Act provision activated….PRIOR TO THE ELECTION.

    http://www.factcheck.org/2011/07/did-obama-enact-dream-act/

    I believe this Administration is overreaching its Constitutional Authority. I also believe the Republicans are hypocrites because Bush II did the same thing. He learned the skill from Clinton and Gore and so on and so on.

    If you get a chance you should look up Obama’s EO’s and then read some of the more substantive ones. They read like LAW, not just direction. Several of them CREATE costs for agencies and contain statements that the order is subject to funding being available.

    Well, if that is the case then the EO is creating LAW that creates a NEED FOR OBLIGATIONS that are NOT within the law. This is very real evidence of EO’s outside the legal bounds. In my opinion.

    Now I want to add one more thing. I believe that Mr. Obama is more bluster on this stuff than substance. This is one of his tactics and he has used it well against many of the knee jerk maroons on the Right. It serves two purposes.

    1. It pumps up the radicals on his side. They love this and wish he were KING. The love KINGS.

    2. It sets up the R’s as fools, further solidifying the left’s view of the right. When the actual EO is not as bad as Mr. O implicated, the R’s look silly.

    I would also like to add some factual historical perspective to the EO and Executive Power debate.. Pelosi and Reed referred to Bush II quite often as “King George”.

    The Republican leadership and operatives referred to Clinton as “King William” many times in the 90’s.

    That I think speaks volumes to the entire controversy. It is part political rhetoric and a BIG part the CONTINUED EXPANSION of Presidential Power.

    Mr. Obama is very different in that he openly flaunts it in everyone’s face. Further supporting the view of his ARROGANCE. Which makes me wonder just what he would do if he did not have ACTUAL legal scholars in the White House keeping his EO’s in line.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      I tried getting something going on the EO’s the other evening. Yes Obama has used EO’s very sparingly, and when you read them they seem innocent. In the National Archives there are just 167 listed in 5 years. He is using a different tool bypassing the EO process and heading directly to the regulatory process. All in all the president DOES NOT have a free hand to do whatever he wants. Congress has got to stay on top of what transpires in the regulatory agencies and challenge the rules they set up. Just because they delegate to the executive branch, doesn’t mean they can turn their back on the process. Except they have. Obama is using Executive Actions not Executive Orders. Which have all the marks of an order by the mob boss. Very hard to trace back. An EO is a hard document, listed and saved in the archives.

  41. Just saw on the news that HHS and the Insurance companies just jumped into bed together…openly. With Obama care failing and young people not signing up and refusing to do so and the poor not able to handle the deductibles…..consortiums are springing up all over the place. Private investment opening hospitals and doctors offices not associated with any Obamacare function, medicare, nor medicaid. These same consortiums are offering low cost health programs to college students, through college administration, at prices significantly lower than any of the programs available under Obamacare. Since they are private investment companies they are under no obligation to Medicare, Medicaid. In addition, they are not regulated as insurance companies since they are investment companies and can go across state lines. Hospitals love it because they are cash customers. Doctors love it because there is no paperwork debacle.

    Now, the insurance companies are crying foul because they claim that private consortiums undermine the exchange procedure and that without people being forced into the system, the insurance companies cannot make it.

    There is a line in the movie Jurassic Park…where the scientist said…” Life finds a way “. Well, capitalist found a way. Offering the same benefit at lower costs without involving state lines and regulations. HHS and the insurance companies are now wanting legislation to stop this.

    Note to Mathius: IF and that is IF there is no legislation on this, an EO issued to eliminate private competition would be, in my estimation, a breach of the authority of the EO and outside the scope of Presidential power. What say you, sir?

    ***** Did I mention that my army of Cowboy cheerleaders would be topless?

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Just look at the medical flights flying from the UK to India or Singapore. The people get 1st class health care when they need it. And at a very reasonable price. You will see that really pick up here also. I have an old friend that told me the other month that she would rather go back to Italy for her heathcare than receive it here. That is going some.

      The NRA during Roosevelt’s 1st term was ruled unconstitutional. The NRA was specifically designed to eliminate the small competion. It was written almost in it entirety by the big businesses of the time. Just like the ACA and the Dodd Frank banking bill.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        True Dale, there was a portion of the NRA that was ruled unconstitutional in 1935. Many of those provisions then showed up in the Wagner Act in 1935 (more commonly known as the National Labor Relations Act). Also note that the NRA was up for renewal under its charter in 1935 as well, two years after it was created. With the courts ruling the NRA lived on as a cheerleader for the fair practices beliefs the act once compelled on the nation.

  42. Just A Citizen says:

    There are good reasons for Govt ownership and operation of public utilities, like WATER.

    But there is also a VERY BIG DOWNSIDE. And here it is, in living color.

    http://news.msn.com/us/amid-drought-california-agency-wont-allot-water

  43. Just A Citizen says:

    O boy, I can hear those leftwing heads exploding.

  44. Just A Citizen says:
    • plainlyspoken says:

      Just finished reading this article. And, it’s about to come up as a story on Fox & Friends Saturday.

      I wonder how all those duped supporters of the TSA & the “security” the government was allegedly providing feel now knowing they were a part of a nation sham? Nothing more than free propaganda for a government out of control?

      Even less useful than that danged wall y’all want. 😉

  45. Going to start a new thread to speed things up, feel free to brings things forward.

  46. Saturday Morning thoughts…

    There have a numerous studies conducted, in various animal species as well as humans, to demonstrate the existence and function of what is known as a “Collective Unconscious”.

    It explains things like why/how flocks of birds or insects fly in perfect synchronicity. …or termites building perfectly aligned tunnels although they are separated by a steel wall and every other conceivable normal outside physical influence.

    It explains things like monkeys on island chains, although separated by water, will show trends of the same learned behavior. …as if it is catching on a subconscious level. Studies with humans on opposite sides of the planet demonstrate the same phenomena.

    There are numerous studies all suggesting/proving there is something there, some sort of communication taking place.

    This causes me to wonder…

    If we are all connected in such a way as to coordinate on a subconscious level, how is it effecting the development and progression of humanity?

    What happens when everyone decides to live in peace truth and righteousness for the greater stability, health and future of our species?

    Look at all the aspects of the way our society is structured. Note the systems in place within various governments and cultures that work in favor of dominance, fear, hate, greed, lust, etc, …basically all the things that exploit the bad side of human nature.

    How do we get around them? How do we correct them? What happens when we do?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      “There are numerous studies all suggesting/proving there is something there, some sort of communication taking place.”

      No, what they prove is that humans have certain SHARED behaviors and that is due to our BRAIN being the same.

      This conclusion is a good example of BAD Conclusion attached to good science via anecdotal connections.

%d bloggers like this: