Roger Simon's editorial is worth a separate thread.

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/the-big-...n-charade/

"If you sought to preserve the violent, reactionary and undemocratic regimes of countries like El Salvador and Honduras -- and, to a great extent, Mexico -- into perpetuity, how would you do it?

One way would be by providing a permanent U.S. safety valve for all their poor and downtrodden, the victims.

Just as with Europe and the Middle East, open borders can salve the soul and make us all feel good about ourselves, but they come with a price. And that price is not just for the richer host countries in supplying costly services. It is even greater for the countries of origin whose benighted citizens, the stay behinds, are left to suffer under governments that are incompetent, corrupt and often murderous.

Meanwhile, many of their good people (yes, along with some of the bad) are leaving or have left. It would have been those people, working together, that might have fixed their countries. No chance now....






And nothing is likely to change in any substantive way from current events, because serious discussion of the issue is non-existent. Propaganda rules. It is the political football of all time, brought out when politicians seek to score points or distract from other issues that might embarrass them.

That it has been miraculously discovered -- despite having been going on for decades -- that children are being temporarily incarcerated on the border is a perfect example of that. It's no accident this surfaced at the moment the FBI is under fire for the Clinton email investigation and the possibility the organization sought to sabotage the presidency of Donald Trump.

So "immigration" is once again the stalking horse for everything but itself. It is a dumb show with the poor of Central America used as pawns. People will throw up their hands in horror and some children will likely get to stay longer with their parents -- a good thing, obviously -- but the larger reality will not change one iota....

In the midst of all this, compromise will be abjured with both our political parties wedded to placating their bases....

So what's the solution? I wish I had one. I usually try to be optimistic. It's kind of how I see my job, pushing things forward. But in this case it's hard. I've been watching the charade of immigration being played for too long. With everything for propaganda and almost nothing for reality, I don't see the logjam being broken any time soon."







LOAD MORE
FACEBOOK327 TWITTERTWEET EMAILEMAIL
Sponsored Content
10 Dying Professions That Job Hunters Should Avoid
10 Dying Professions That Job Hunters Should Avoid
Kiplinger
[Photos] Girlfriend Requests A Neck Massage. Then Boyfriend's Gut Tells Him Something Is Wrong With Her
[Photos] Girlfriend Requests A Neck Massage. Then Boyfriend's Gut Tells Him Something Is Wrong With Her
Direct Expose
[Photos] Things Flight Attendants Notice About Passengers in 3 Seconds
[Photos] Things Flight Attendants Notice About Passengers in 3 Seconds
Direct Expose
Born Before 1985? Georgia Will Pay Up To $355/Month Off Your Mortgage
Born Before 1985? Georgia Will Pay Up To $355/Month Off Your Mortgage
Smart Saver Online
'Fire and Fury’ Reveals Donald Trump’s Disturbing Nightly Habits
'Fire and Fury’ Reveals Donald Trump’s Disturbing Nightly Habits
Auto Draft | The Cheat Sheet
5 Classic Mealtime Phrases That Need to Stop
5 Classic Mealtime Phrases That Need to Stop
Strong4Life
Recommended by

(06-20-2018 10:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  In the midst of all this, compromise will be abjured with both our political parties wedded to placating their bases....

By and large a throw away conspiracy article that attempts to minimize people's lives by painting it as politics. However, the quoted part above is the truth.

OK, PJ Media. Not a moderate voice

The problems in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala are extremely exacerbated by the US's policy of taking gang members who frequently don't even speak Spanish and haven't lived there since they were 2 or 3 years old and expelling them at the end of a jail sentence to a country where they have no ability to do anything but terrorize the local population. I'm not saying 'don't deport', but at the end of the day, we have a responsibility to help these governments control the problem with those gang members. We aren't doing it. Shutting off the border to asylum seekers would be counterproductive and would lead to an increase in the chaos, which would create MORE problems for the USA.

The problem in Mexico is also exacerbated by the US, in the form of our 'no question asked gun laws' that help the gangs get weapons and our war on drugs which helps them financially. NAFTA actually did work, and work well in slowing (actually it basically has stopped and long before Trump) Mexican illegal immigration to the USA by making Mexico's economy more functional for the 70 million poor Mexicans. The Mexicans that are here illegally have built a life here after coming here prior to NAFTA's gains or have families already here. NAFTA was working.

The solution would be to assist the Central American countries and to add Central American nations to NAFTA.

Quote:Meanwhile, many of their good people (yes, along with some of the bad) are leaving or have left. It would have been those people, working together, that might have fixed their countries. No chance now....

The solution is to let these people stay in their own countries and largely fix them themselves. If they threaten us, deal with it so they don't. We can't house the world, no matter how bad things may be.
Q: Why don't the individuals on the left open their own homes and pay their own money to house and feed these people? Why aren't there 8 or 9 illegals living at Nancy Pelosi's house? Why doesn't she have compassion to help them? Don't recall any staying with Hiliary or Bill or Chelsea either? DeNeiro? Where are the dozen illegals at your house?


...BTW ILLEGAL "immigrants" are NOT the same as LEGAL immigrants...no matter how much you conflate and try to equate it, it will NEVER be true.

(06-20-2018 10:23 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  OK, PJ Media. Not a moderate voice

The problems in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala are extremely exacerbated by the US's policy of taking gang members who frequently don't even speak Spanish and haven't lived there since they were 2 or 3 years old and expelling them at the end of a jail sentence to a country where they have no ability to do anything but terrorize the local population. I'm not saying 'don't deport', but at the end of the day, we have a responsibility to help these governments control the problem with those gang members. We aren't doing it. Shutting off the border to asylum seekers would be counterproductive and would lead to an increase in the chaos, which would create MORE problems for the USA.

The problem in Mexico is also exacerbated by the US, in the form of our 'no question asked gun laws' that help the gangs get weapons and our war on drugs which helps them financially. NAFTA actually did work, and work well in slowing (actually it basically has stopped and long before Trump) Mexican illegal immigration to the USA by making Mexico's economy more functional for the 70 million poor Mexicans. The Mexicans that are here illegally have built a life here after coming here prior to NAFTA's gains or have families already here. NAFTA was working.

The solution would be to assist the Central American countries and to add Central American nations to NAFTA.

Just remember Obama and Holder did fast and furious.

One solution would be to stop aid to these countries if they persist on sending people here. The money is supposed to be the fix for this, But the money is unaccounted for and probably in corrupt politicians pockets there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(06-20-2018 12:19 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(06-20-2018 10:23 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  OK, PJ Media. Not a moderate voice

The problems in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala are extremely exacerbated by the US's policy of taking gang members who frequently don't even speak Spanish and haven't lived there since they were 2 or 3 years old and expelling them at the end of a jail sentence to a country where they have no ability to do anything but terrorize the local population. I'm not saying 'don't deport', but at the end of the day, we have a responsibility to help these governments control the problem with those gang members. We aren't doing it. Shutting off the border to asylum seekers would be counterproductive and would lead to an increase in the chaos, which would create MORE problems for the USA.

The problem in Mexico is also exacerbated by the US, in the form of our 'no question asked gun laws' that help the gangs get weapons and our war on drugs which helps them financially. NAFTA actually did work, and work well in slowing (actually it basically has stopped and long before Trump) Mexican illegal immigration to the USA by making Mexico's economy more functional for the 70 million poor Mexicans. The Mexicans that are here illegally have built a life here after coming here prior to NAFTA's gains or have families already here. NAFTA was working.

The solution would be to assist the Central American countries and to add Central American nations to NAFTA.

Just remember Obama and Holder did fast and furious.

One solution would be to stop aid to these countries if they persist on sending people here. The money is supposed to be the fix for this, But the money is unaccounted for and probably in corrupt politicians pockets there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agreed with what they were trying to do with Fast and Furious, but they handled it incompetently.

The idea was to catch the gun advocates in the USA that were facilitating arms sales to drug gangs and MS13.

---

There's no 'manly solution' to this problem. You hurt these countries and it will just cause more trouble here. Collapsing the Central American economy will cause MORE immigration and might engender an even nastier civil war in those countries. Or a friggin' leftist takeover. And by leftists, I don't mean Obama (who is actually CONSERVATIVE in a global context), but rather Chavez.

Most people don't want to leave their country in order to be a hidden marginalized minority in another place. They'll stay if its functional. Its not, so they're coming here.

(06-20-2018 10:23 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  OK, PJ Media. Not a moderate voice

Have you ever quoted a moderate source? Is there one?

(06-20-2018 05:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Have you ever quoted a moderate source? Is there one?

I mean, any source left of Fox News seems to be labeled liberal MSM "fake news". Seems like a lot of people on the right would sooner trust Alex Jones than Lester Holt.

(06-20-2018 10:23 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  OK, PJ Media. Not a moderate voice

The problems in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala are extremely exacerbated by the US's policy of taking gang members who frequently don't even speak Spanish and haven't lived there since they were 2 or 3 years old and expelling them at the end of a jail sentence to a country where they have no ability to do anything but terrorize the local population. I'm not saying 'don't deport', but at the end of the day, we have a responsibility to help these governments control the problem with those gang members. We aren't doing it. Shutting off the border to asylum seekers would be counterproductive and would lead to an increase in the chaos, which would create MORE problems for the USA.

The problem in Mexico is also exacerbated by the US, in the form of our 'no question asked gun laws' that help the gangs get weapons and our war on drugs which helps them financially. NAFTA actually did work, and work well in slowing (actually it basically has stopped and long before Trump) Mexican illegal immigration to the USA by making Mexico's economy more functional for the 70 million poor Mexicans. The Mexicans that are here illegally have built a life here after coming here prior to NAFTA's gains or have families already here. NAFTA was working.

The solution would be to assist the Central American countries and to add Central American nations to NAFTA.

The number of illegal immigrants was 3 million when Reagan did his immigration reform. It quickly ballooned to 12 million after NAFTA.

Not that NAFTA was responsible, but it most certainly did not curtail the problem as you claim.

(06-20-2018 06:02 PM)Gakusei Wrote:  

(06-20-2018 05:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Have you ever quoted a moderate source? Is there one?

I mean, any source left of Fox News seems to be labeled liberal MSM "fake news". Seems like a lot of people on the right would sooner trust Alex Jones than Lester Holt.

Alex Jones didn't brag to the Trump campaign about how he "got" Hillary when he was supposed to be an impartial moderator. Lester Holt has zero credibility.

Exactly my point.

(06-20-2018 06:02 PM)Gakusei Wrote:  

(06-20-2018 05:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Have you ever quoted a moderate source? Is there one?

I mean, any source left of Fox News seems to be labeled liberal MSM "fake news". Seems like a lot of people on the right would sooner trust Alex Jones than Lester Holt.

Fox News actually is the most moderate "news."

Now there is a difference between Fox News and Fox infotainment shows (ie Tucker Carlson, Hannity, etc.). There is little difference between ABC/NBC/CBS News and their infotainment.

(06-20-2018 07:13 PM)Gakusei Wrote:  Exactly my point.

Nobody should trust Lester Holt. Or Dan Rather, among others.

(06-20-2018 07:14 PM)bullet Wrote:  Fox News actually is the most moderate "news."

Now there is a difference between Fox News and Fox infotainment shows (ie Tucker Carlson, Hannity, etc.). There is little difference between ABC/NBC/CBS News and their infotainment.

It actually is not. The most moderate news is AP or Reuters. Slightly to the right of that would be Wall Street Journal. A bit to the right of that is something like The Hill. Getting your news from Fox News is the equivalent to someone on the left getting their news from Huffington Post or Mother Jones.

(06-20-2018 07:18 PM)Gakusei Wrote:  

(06-20-2018 07:14 PM)bullet Wrote:  Fox News actually is the most moderate "news."

Now there is a difference between Fox News and Fox infotainment shows (ie Tucker Carlson, Hannity, etc.). There is little difference between ABC/NBC/CBS News and their infotainment.

It actually is not. The most moderate news is AP or Reuters. Slightly to the right of that would be Wall Street Journal. A bit to the right of that is something like The Hill. Getting your news from Fox News is the equivalent to someone on the left getting their news from Huffington Post or Mother Jones.

AP has moved extremely far to the left over the last 3-4 years. They no longer separate news from editorials.

You don't understand the difference between Britt Hume and Tucker Carlson.
And even Tucker is not as extreme as Huff Post or Mother Jones. Huff Post, Mother Jones and Alex Jones are siblings.

Lester Dolt is a total fraud, should be at MSNBC.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(06-20-2018 06:02 PM)Gakusei Wrote:  

(06-20-2018 05:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Have you ever quoted a moderate source? Is there one?

I mean, any source left of Fox News seems to be labeled liberal MSM "fake news". Seems like a lot of people on the right would sooner trust Alex Jones than Lester Holt.

Alex Jones has had a better record of accuracy than Lester Holt over the last 2 year. Granted, Trump is probably getting him reliable sources while Lester is getting set up with fake news leaks, but I don't believe a damn thing from any of them.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(06-20-2018 07:18 PM)Gakusei Wrote:  

(06-20-2018 07:14 PM)bullet Wrote:  Fox News actually is the most moderate "news."

Now there is a difference between Fox News and Fox infotainment shows (ie Tucker Carlson, Hannity, etc.). There is little difference between ABC/NBC/CBS News and their infotainment.

It actually is not. The most moderate news is AP or Reuters. Slightly to the right of that would be Wall Street Journal. A bit to the right of that is something like The Hill. Getting your news from Fox News is the equivalent to someone on the left getting their news from Huffington Post or Mother Jones.

AP and Reuters have been putting out a lot of fake news. Their agenda is hurt Trump.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk