Eric Holder's style of "justice" isn't justice.
- Brenda Durhamposted 11 years ago
0Unbelievable that America keeps allowing that man to be the leader of our Justice system.
If it's not Fast and Furious, it's going soft on terrorists, and now we find out that his wife is a part of perpetuating abortion, in particular a corrupt abortionist. Well, they're all corrupt, since abortion is murder. But this just seals the deal. I can't figure out why anyone would trust Holder to mete out any form of justice since he's got his hands in killing babies.
I hear he made sure that the surviving Boston bomber got mirandaized, knowing he killed and maimed so many people. And all along has no guts to stand against killing the unborn either.
http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_tru … onist.htmlIf he ensured the bomber was mirandized, then good for him, that was the right thing to do.
But yeah, our justice department is a joke. Our justice department is hiding behind the POTUS, hiding from justice. It's pathetic.Agreed.
And I keep wondering who the POTUS is hiding behind.
I guess I'm still having a hard time believing that Obama alone has so much sway over people that they've let him get by with his carp, especially for a second term. Does he really have that many Left-wing connections on his own? Or was he groomed and fitted specifically by a very powerful group of people?...................I disagree, he should not have been mirandized, he should have been held as an enemy combatant, or POW if one wants to call it that..
The Constitution is very clear. EVERY citizen has the right to due process. Don't you think we should honor constitutional rights?
He requested and received political asylum to remain in the country.TO make a request, one must be of legal age to represent themselves and we all know that is the age of 18. This boy is only 19. So under rules for citizenship, he has to wait 4 years from getting asylum before being eligible to apply for US citizenship. SO how did he get it? Does he really have it?
Also, if he did obtain citizen as part of the conspiracy for his crime, his citizenship can be revoked.
In the past, Americans have been held as enemy combatants, the last one was Jose Padilla. . . .
Naturalization
Generally, a legal permanent resident can apply to naturalize, or become a U.S. citizen, five years after obtaining a “green card.” When asylees get their “green card” it is backdated one year, meaning that they can apply to naturalize four years after obtaining residence. Once a foreign national becomes a U.S. citizen, as long as there was no fraud in the naturalization application, he or she cannot be deported.
http://immigrationequality.org/issues/a … on-asylum/
To get back on topic.
If he hadn't been mirandicized any conviction could have been thrown out of court. So, some seem to want an American citizen to be thrown in jail without any sort of trial. Seems many conservatives have been screaming about attacks on American citizens.
This guy will never get out of prison... But I do believe he is eligible for the death penalty because it's under federal jurisdiction other wise Massachusetts does not have the death penalty.
American View... he had been in the US since he was 8...Good post, UW. As an American citizen the youngest bomber deserves the same rights as any other citizen. I was in favor of reading him his rights immediately. Strangely, he's acquired a bit of a Dream Team of defensive lawyers - so he might beat the death penalty - but I agree that he'll spend the rest of his life in prison.
" I was in favor of reading him his rights immediately. "
Me, too. And giving him life in prison.
That is what happens when you put in an American hating Leftist.
Spoken by a "leftist" hating American of the Tea Party persuasion.
That made no sense.
Patriots do not hate America. People on the Left that favor Godless Socialism and Communism do.
Every time I see members of the Left, they are always on the wrong side of the argument. Leftists are nothing more than traitors.
When you put a Commie into public office, the results can be catastrophic.Thanks for this, I can ignore you now
I bet you would have loved the 50s.I do. Better than the absent-minded and Commies we have running amok now. At least men and women got married and sick perverted things were not cherished with open arms.
I am still waiting for the 1 million dollar comment too.You mean like Segregation/racism, McCarthyism, xenophobia, misogyny, and unregulated corporatism?
You said segregation and racism <personal attack removed>. By the way, I am Black, you <personal attack removed>.
Every nation has xenophobia. Misogny is not bad because men by nature are suppose to lead and rule. Unregulated corporatism, where did you get that.
Like I said, back then was better because <personal attack removed> like YOU were ignored. Families were better, patritots were not ashamed.
You need to get lost.
- JaxsonRaineposted 11 years ago0
If I tried to explain why, IMO, things are the way they are, I would be called a racist.
I understand.
But I myself have no qualms about saying he's treated with kid gloves because he's black! However, I wonder if that's not just the tip of the iceberg; in other words, I think there's someone or some group that's got a radical liberal agenda, and maybe Obama was chosen to be the spokesperson for that, being liberal himself, and adding to that the fact that his race would only add to the power that he's perceived as having.It's the people, not some hidden group.
It's inevitable, when a populace becomes more wealthy, they will become more entitled. They take for granted things that their ancestors fought for, and consider them 'rights'. We have developed a very, very wealthy country.
We have reached a point where the entitlement one one side, and apathy on the other, have overloaded and tipped the balance, to where action is going to be impossible unless a lot of people wake up. Obama won the last election not because of his support, but because of the lack of support for Romney... both conservatives and independents just didn't turn out in the numbers that would have been expected based off the same enthusiasm of 2010. Being involved is tiring, and people are tired. They are struggling with their bills, and they are tired.You could be right.
I know it's tiring to even keep up with politics these days! Much less be active in politics. People should be able to go about their daily life and focus on that and trust their elected Officials to run the Country, States, Towns, etc. correctly. But it ain't happening.Wow, so many dog whistles going off here, I'll be a little disappointed if you don't get hounded.
The "immortal" race is trying to implement their own form of government. These corporate people have pretty much succeeded.
They have fooled the human race in to funding the whole thing.
Welcome to the corporate fascist reality!I bet you're joking partly?
But it brings up a question.
What do you mean by the "immortal"?
I know I've heard Bill Clinton talk about the possibility of people living longer. I think he and others have reverted to the pagan idea of a fountain of youth or something............selfishly clinging to the hope of prolonging life for themselves while killing the unborn.
Funny; I just watched a movie where man has become "immortal" but with a catch------there is no more money; it's time that's money; and they have a "clock" imbedded in their forearm that needs refilled with "time"; people in the "rich" zones have hundreds or thousands of years, while the poor zones are full of people who have to find work or a friend who'll share time in order to replenish their clocks; if they don't, and time runs out, they simply "time out", keel over, die.........Corporations, these are entities that are immortal, the legal fictions. They hold the same rights as every other person. They never die.
I expect this to turn out like so many other "terrorist" situations in this country. It'll consist of a slap on the wrist, someone saying "bad boy" and the citizens of this country will support this misguided kid the rest of his life with our government saying "well, we sure showed him!" We've become so broadminded our brains may fall out -- if they haven't already. I can't imagine this guy didn't know what his "rights" were to begin with -- if he'd attempted this in Russia he'd be dead. I view this as our government trying to cross all the "t's" and dot all the "i's" -- we must be "legally and politically correct" and the safety of this nation be damned.
Abortion isn't killing babies; it's killing shapeless parasites that lack brains with only a nonfunctional red dot to call a heart.
It's not until the third month that the brain forms and other functions kick in, and wouldn'cha know it, that's the cut-off date for abortions.Yeah, wouldn't ya know it--------the liberals have succeeded in perpetuating the coverup and legalization of countless murders for over 40 years. Who cares that it's helpless little babies that can't fight back?!
definition of parasite:
"
an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment"
Babies are not "another species".
doesn't look so "shapeless" to me.
That image is not true--at 3 months, the human zygote hasn't even assumed its animal form yet, let alone tiny human form. It's at the 5 month-ish period that the human zygote resembles a cat zygote, and after that, we shed our tail and grow our thumbs and start working on a brain and a skeleton.
Before the legal cut-off date, zygotes don't look like much of anything.Who cares what it looks like at any age?
You used to look like that once.
Everyone did.
Do you think you were once just a "zygote" and then later developed into a human being?
Nope. No matter how inhuman you talk, and how inhumane your view of fetuses is, you were a human being even when you looked like "not much of anything"....So?
Is the Pope Catholic?
Yep.
You're not a human being until you're born. Before that, you're a fetus, and before that you're a zygote, and before that you're a couple of cells, and before that you're just a sperm cell.Really? Not a human being until you're born? Then why are people being convicted of killing unborn babies when they either killed or injured the mother?
You see, you're not a human being until you're born only if your mother doesn't want you.I think he probably means the legal definition of "person." It is interesting that charges can be brought against someone who injures a fetus intentionally - if it is against the mother's wishes. But, if the mother desires it - no charges are forthcoming.
That said - I am mostly (not all) pro-choice. I think it is the soul or essence of the human spirit, embodied in flesh that makes a person - a person. Just my belief - but I don't think that happens until birth or soon before or after.
I'm not a religious person, but if I were - I would think that if God wanted an entity on this earth - he or she would be here. I would think that God's will would supersede human will. Can it be murder if the soul of an aborted fetus enters another fetus and is then born?
I noticed something else interesting. Miscarriages. When a woman miscarries early in her term, the fetus often gets flushed. That sounds gross, but I can't help but think that if those who think the fetus is already a person - REALLY believed that, they'd fish the little lump out of the potty and have a formal burial. They don't. They flush.
This post isn't mean to upset anyone - it's just some things I've pondered over the years.I've actually heard of people who did have funerals for their babies that were miscarried. Maybe not pulled out of the toilet like you said, and maybe (I can't remember...) not even having the remains in a casket, etc., but a memorial service in memory and honor of the life of the child no matter how brief.
I'm sure there are a few - but I think it's the exception - not the rule.
You live in deep denial my friend.
here, a source not about abortion at all, just development. That picture is indeed true and accurate.
http://www.babycenter.com/fetal-develop … ek-by-weekBald eagles don't look like eagles in the embryonic stage. If you destroy a bald eagle egg, you'll likely go to prison and pay a hefty fine. If you destroy a human in its embryonic state, it's your right. Go figure. Bald eagles receive more protection than people?
http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.htmlSo, by that logic, I can kill my little boy who is 7 years old, and it's okay. Logic?
Funny. I wasn't aware human beings were an endangered species that aren't in a state of hilarious overpopulation.
So, if people were endangered, we wouldn't be able to have abortions? Interesting. I've never heard that argument before. I think I get it now. Some geneticists believe that the worldwide population of red headed people is rapidly diminishing. Consequently, red heads are not allowed to have abortions. Got it.
Well thank the Leftist animal freaks for that one. They hate people but LOVE animals.
Yeah, they often want gun control but not illegal alien control. Illegal aliens kill 6-12 Americans each day, but you won't find many liberals screaming for some kind of change to protect the victims. It's selective compassion. They tell conservatives that we have no compassion for the poor, and then they advocate abortion rights, leaving few rights for the unborn. It's selective compassion, political compassion.
"selective compassion", "political compassion".......
very well put.
I hadn't thought of defining it quite like that, but you're sooooo right! And it adds to the discussion about compassion (or lack thereof) in JThomp's thread too.Hello again, EA.
The claim about immigrants killing 6-12 Americans each day was spread by Fox News and debunked years ago as false and meaningless. It is intellectually and rationally bankrupt with absolutely no relation to any real facts.
Journalist Mac Johnson contrived the numbers you quoted in a 2005 article in which he wrote that he was unable to find statistics on “illegal alien murders.” After admitting "the murder rate among illegal aliens in America is unknown,” he constructed a series of bizarre assumptions to reach the utterly false conclusion you recklessly misrepresented as a fact in your post.
The truth is “that statistic is derived from completely baseless assumptions about immigrants' crime rates. Actual studies have found that immigrants in general are less likely to be incarcerated and that there is no evidence that undocumented immigrants commit a disproportionate amount of crime.” {1}
The Center for Immigration Studies published in its November 2009 report, “Given the limitations of the data available, it is simply not possible to draw a clear conclusion about immigrants and crime.”
In the end, EA, your views about “selective compassion” seem to be built on a false premise. But, thank you for contributing.
{1} http://mediamatters.org/research/2010/0 … ate/164326If you go back in the forum, you'll find that I didn't quote Fox News. I had two other sources. I provided data while some made bold claims that illegal immigration leads to a net savings of life, regardless of how many Americans are killed. That unsubstantiated claim had absolutely no data.
Wikipedia:
Fiscal year 2011 saw 396,906 deportations, the largest number in the history of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; of those, 216,698 had been convicted of crimes, including:
44,653 convicted of "drug-related crimes"
35,927 convicted of driving under the influence
5,848 convicted of sexual offenses
1,119 convicted of homicide
1,119/365 days = 3 a day that were actually caught and deported - Others were not caught or deported. Additional deaths result from drug-related crimes and driving under the influence. I said 6-12 Americans are killed each day. 3 are homicides, and the rest might just come from other crimes committed by illegal aliens. That's not Fox News, and it's statistically accurate.
I'm guessing that the fact that the statistic might be as low as 3 dead Americans each day doesn't make their families feel any better. It's time for illegal alien control.Good evening, EA.
Perhaps you misunderstood my post. When speaking specifically about your false claim that “illegal aliens kill 6-12 Americans each day,” I did not say you mentioned Fox News! I said the misinformation you quoted in your post as a fact was actually spread by Fox News and later debunked as false and meaningless. I also included links you did not use, apparently, so you could verify my sources.
In your reply to me, however, you do not admit your “6-12” numbers are false but rather clearly state, “I had two other sources” [other than Fox News] but you failed to reveal those two sources. Do you care to provide us with links to your two sources for the 6-12 numbers? Otherwise, your readers must conclude you made a false claim that you have not acknowledged was wrong.
I thank you for adding new data from Wikipedia. Here again, it would also be helpful if you post a link to the sections covering this data so we all can see the origin of these numbers too. I am particularly interested in learning if the 1,119 homicides (3 a day according to your math) were Americans. In your words, “I said 6-12 Americans are killed each day. 3 are homicides, and the rest might just come from other crimes committed by illegal aliens.” Did you say “might just come from other crimes committed by illegal aliens?” You triggered this dialog when you said explicitly, “Illegal aliens kill 6-12 Americans each day.” It appears you are not sure exactly what your statistics are saying nor are you retracting any of your claims. Should we suspect your stats are bogus? I would just like to see where they came from.
Please understand that I am not questioning your honestly and integrity. I have already established some of your claims are false. However, there are good reasons to question the origin of the numbers you believe are factual, in particular your 6-12 numbers. Revealing reliable sources will certainly convince me too.
I hope you had a great weekend, EA. Enjoy tomorrow.With all due respect, you have not made your case. I have provided multiple sources which clearly support my claims. You have provided analysis of my data with no data of your own.
How many times must I provide the same links? Read the sources. Agree with them, or disagree with them. If you have a problem with the data, provide a counter source. What is your claim?
This whole argument is moot, as it is unnecessary. We've gone from discussing a serious problem to debating exactly how much crime there is; I have yet to hear anybody dispute the fact that many illegal aliens are killing a substantial number of Americans, raping them, kidnapping them, providing drugs to them, and stealing from them. Is there some magical number at which we must do something about illegal aliens? If so, I'd really like to know what that number, red line, is. Is it 3, 4, 20 each day? Let's hear your statistics. How many Americans die because of illegal aliens? Is your number an acceptable statistic to you? Are you willing to lose this number of lives? Are you saying that American lives are expendable in order to provide greater opportunity to illegal aliens? What exactly are you saying other than my numbers are wrong or that I have failed to provide adequate citation of them?
Homicides are not the only deaths attributed to illegal aliens. My Wikipedia source does not necessarily conflict with my sources that have stated that 6-12 Americans are killed by illegal aliens each day. DUI, drugs, and other crimes also result in American fatalities.
Here is the Wikipedia source, along with two new sources that are specific to my state, Arizona:
http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2011/1 … al-aliens/
http://www.fairus.org/issue/immigration … fact-sheet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_im … ted_States
I'll have to go back through this forum to find the original sources I cited.
Best wishes.You are an Arizona nativist fan of Joe Arpaio who is willing to believe just about anything negative about immigrants. Just curious, where did your ancestors come from?
I actually see it happen. I see what it does to our schools, our children, and our communities. I don't need to be told what it does. I provide data, because people in these forums will not accept personal experiences as fact; anybody could fabricate events. They need data. I could talk to you about my personal experiences with illegal aliens stealing my truck to run drugs or being in the jury for murder cases involving illegal aliens. I could talk to you about what is happening in our schools because of illegal aliens. I could give many personal accounts, but people understandably want data. I don't need to be told how to think by Arpaio. I've never even voted for the man, so please don't presume to know me.
I do not believe only negative things I hear about immigrants. In fact, I recently wrote a letter on behalf of a family member who was trying to enter our country legally, a person who married into my family. After many years of legal difficulties, I'm happy to say that she is now in our country and working on citizenship. By the way, another family member is married to a woman from Mexico, and she was a GREAT addition to our family. She, too, went through the proper process to enter America. I am for legal immigration.
You imply that I am against immigration by asking about my family lineage. AGAIN, I am not opposed to legal immigration. I am opposed to illegal immigration. It is not unreasonable to want to know who is entering our country and for what purpose. Too many Americans are suffering and dying because of our government’s disinterest controlling the entry of illegal aliens."It is not unreasonable to want to know who is entering our country and for what purpose. "
Fine. We can agree on that. And we can agree that immigrants who are convicted of criminal violations should be dealt with appropriately under the law. The more important issue is what do you think should be done with/for the 12 million undocumented immigrants already in the country and their children who were born here and are therefore American citizens?
Here's a more positive view of immigrants, citizens and undocumented, who have become a majority in Port Chester, New York.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/busin … on.html?hpChildren born here should not be penalized. Those families, pending a background check, should be allowed to live here with a green card. People should apply for citizenship and go through the proper process to become a citizen.
I believe that there should be no blanket amnesty. People should apply for citizenship and go through the proper process to become a citizen. Green cards should be issued to people who have clean background checks, as needed.I disagree. Being born an American is a treasure. If that treasure is stolen by the parent and inherited by the child it is not the country's fault but it is the country's responsibility to protect the value of a legally acquired treasure. If the parent had been a criminal and piled up a vast hoard of stolen money, we would readily seize that ill gotten gain regardless of the effect on the children. To permit illegals the privilege of p passing on the benefits of citizenship to their heirs is to denigrate the strife and sacrifice of those who pursue citizenship legally.
The entire anchor baby idea is rooted in a flawed understanding of citizenship and the 14th Amendment. No child of an illegal immigrant is entitled to the same right secured to the children of former slaves by the 14th Amendment. It is time to expunge that egregious misrepresentation, now.I agree with most of what you say. Note that I do not advocate blanket citizenship for these children, only a green card, pending a background check, for their parents. Becoming a citizen is a process that does not begin with illegally entering our country.
I would go so far as to say that entering the country illegally or being born here of those here illegally puts you all the way behind every single individual working their way through the, ridiculously complex and expensive, legal route to citizenship.
Yes, what does it tell all those people who are coming to our country legally? Instead of going through the process of becoming a citizen, just go through Mexico and into America. Eventually, you'll receive amnesty for breaking the law. It's not right.
My understanding is that nobody's proposing a "blanket amnesty" but rather a fairly onerous path to citizenship for those who qualify.
That's not my understanding, and it's not what illegal aliens think is happening. We're being bombarded by illegal aliens entering the country right now, because they are anticipating blanket amnesty.
Well that is incorrect, the bi-partisan plan is to provide a rout to citizenship but it is not an easy route, must demonstrate no criminal record, be subject to health checks, pay taxes on income earned inthe US etc. etc.
No, you are wrong. The proposal does provide for amnesty and does not even, at this time, require a back taxes. Yes, illegal aliens are flooding through our borders, because they feel they will receive amnesty and citizenship. How stringent is this process? They have to have a background check? Wow. That's tough. Do they need to go through any of the process that other immigrants go through . . .doesn't sound like it. This "stringent" process is amnesty.
Gang Of 8 Amnesty Talk Spurs Huge Influx Of Illegal Border Crossings
http://lonelyconservative.com/2013/05/g … ve%2FbdZb+(The+Lonely+Conservative)
"Instead, before an illegal alien may apply for 'registered provisional immigrant' (RPI) status – the first and most important step in the AMNESTY process – the alien would only be required to settle up with the IRS for all “Federal income taxes assessed.” (Sec. 2101)
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/04/ … nesty-too/Exactly people have to settle up with the IRS before they can become PROVISIONAL immigrants at that point they have to pass all manner of criminal, health checks etc. and if they fail the PROVISIONAL status can be revoked. So as I said it is certainly not a blanket amnesty. Thanks for providing the data on it.
It's not enough. It will result in millions of people becoming citizens, the same people who entered our country illegally in the first place. In case anybody forgot, they broke the law entering our country in the first place! It is a blanket amnesty with minor, minor penalties. I wouldn't even call it a slap on the wrist. Get serious!!!!!
Yeah crossing the border is a crime, and so is jaywalking, in both cases obviously neither is considered to be very serious by most people (given that the vast majority of Americans support the Amnesty) so putting that aside it is obviously not a blanket amnesty and yes it provides an opportunity to get citizenship meaning that those illegals will be paying more taxes as well as the reparations from the beginning of citizenship entry.
What does it take to make people realize that allowing anybody in our country is dangerous? You compare the illegal entry of immigrants to jaywalking. Jaywalkers don't kill, rape, kidnap, and provide drugs at the same rate illegal aliens do, do they? See if you can find that statistic.
Massive influx of illegals?
Not what Faux News says.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/06/ne … migration/You're not looking very hard for this then. There are many sources that clearly show that there is a flood of illegal aliens. I provided a source in a post today. We see it and feel it in Arizona.
I love how people watch then news to find out what is happening in border states. Then, they report their statistics to people who live in a border state. I actually live in Arizona. I live it. My totaled truck is in my yard. It was stolen for drug running to and from Mexico. This is common. I know two other people who had their trucks stolen for the same purpose. I've been in more than one jury where we had to listen to cases where illegal aliens killed somebody from Arizona, either willingly, through a DUI, or through a drug deal that went wrong. I don't need Fox News to tell me there is no illegal alien problem in Arizona. I would encourage people in Southern California, Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona to speak up, so we can hear what they say. Many of us are tired of being told that we must suffer so some people can come to America illegally. The loudest advocates of this policy often do not live in a border state and cite their sources as gospel. We live this nightmare. Trust me, the media is not reporting how bad this is. I don't know why. I don't care why. I just want to feel safe. I want my children to be safe. I want schools to be able to teach and not have to spend so much time dealing with gangs from Mexico. It's not asking too much to say that the government should keep American citizens safe from people who are in our country without our permission.
Here's one of many sources, substantiated by CBS:
http://lonelyconservative.com/2013/05/g … ve%2FbdZb+That is just to Texas in the source, also remember than tons of illegals left when the recession hit and are now returning as the economy recovers.
The border is so porous that people can come and go. That's the problem. They're coming here for amnesty. I can provide sources that quote some illegal aliens. . . perhaps a video?
I don't doubt that is happening in New York. New York's illegal immigration situation is very different from ours in the South.
Your source actually agrees with my stance. “We need more legal immigration,” said Diana Furchtgott-Roth, an economist at the conservative Manhattan Institute. “Additional human capital results in more growth.”However, does adding to the Proletariat aid the economy?
“Additional human capital results in more growth.”
When did I say that? I believe you have attributed the quote to the wrong person. I believe that legal immigration results in more growth. Is that what you are saying?
Good evening again, EA.
Please forgive me for being a person who goes to great lengths to insure my statements are factual and supportable. Also forgive me if I expect the same diligence from contributors in the forums.
Let us not shift the focus of our little dialog. You claimed “Illegal aliens kill 6-12 Americans each day.” My claim is that your claim is a gross misrepresentation and, dispite your insisting otherwise, you did not provide any links to any sources in any of your posts prior to the one today.
Although you are reluctant to admit your impression and your facts about homicides created by illegal aliens are unsupportable, I did dispute your claims that many undocumented foreigners “are killing a substantial number of Americans.” You still have not provided a verifiable source for your outrageous “Illegal aliens kill 6-12 Americans each day.”
In http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/112043? … ost2391628 (2 days ago) you said “Illegal aliens kill 6-12 Americans each day” but no links.
In http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/112043? … ost2391083 again no links
In http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/112043? … ost2392304 a flip-flop “the statistic might be as low as 3 dead Americans each day” but no links.
However, I sincerely appreciate your finally including three links in your last post:
http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2011/1 … al-aliens/
An article by John Hill, Stand With Arizona that says absolutely NOTHING about 6-12 Americans killed each day. Instead, this staunch opponent of immigration claims “More than 50,000 Americans have been killed by illegal aliens since 9/11” but no links. I guess he thinks Americans are so gullible they will just believe his claims with wanting to examine his source! Please tell me, EA, do you believe his claim without seeing a source?
http://www.fairus.org/issue/immigration … fact-sheet links to a page titled
Immigration in Arizona: Fact Sheet (2012). It says nothing about “Illegal aliens kill 6-12 Americans each day.”
How do you say that when you have not produced ANY sources that “have stated that 6-12 Americans are killed by illegal aliens each day.” I am reading nothing but smoke and mirrors in your claims. This Wikipedia article mentions nothing about 6-12 Americans being killed by illegal aliens each day. It does say 1,119 undocumented foreigners with homicide convictions were deported in 2011. It does not claim, as you did more then once, 1,119 homicides were committed in 2011. It does not even claim, as you do, 1,119 Americans were killed by those deported. {1}
While I hate to be picky, EA, lets you and I continue to focus on the truth and leave exaggerations and distortions to everyone else. Have a great night.
{1} http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_im … ted_StatesYep, you are right. I did not provide those sources in this forum. It was in the gun control forum. Sorry, I forgot that we had the same discussion there. I have provided many sources there. Good catch.
I provided CBS, The Department of Homeland Security, and The Department of Arizona Corrections as sources in the gun control forum. If these are not good sources for that, nothing is:
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/108960?page=54
Here are some additional sources that I am providing today:
ILLEGAL ALIENS MURDER 12 AMERICANS DAILY
http://www.wnd.com/2006/11/39031/
Illegal Aliens Murder 12 Americans Daily
http://theshitpiler.blogspot.com/2012/1 … daily.html
http://www.fairus.org/issue/immigration … fact-sheet
Again, how many people have to die for this to become a serious issue that needs a solution? Illegal aliens commit a lot of crime. We can discuss how much it is until we're blue in the face. We need to do something to protect Americans, whether or not the number is 3, 6, or 12 Americans being killed each day. Proving that it's 3 or even 1 a day won't make the victims' families feel any better. It's time to protect people from the violence and drug proliferation perpetrated by so many illegal aliens.
Again, I live in Arizona. I can provide sources all day, but that really means nothing to me. I don't need some newspaper or Internet site to tell me there is a problem. I can see it in here Arizona, and I can tell you that a lot of the crime is not being reported by the media. It's much worse than you might think after reading what is being reported. There is a reason Arizona keeps passing laws and electing people that make Arizonans look like cooks. I'd think Arizonans were cooks too, if I had only half the facts. I'm telling you right now that the media, including but not limited to Fox News, has not done a good job reporting how bad the illegal immigration is in Arizona, and presumably other border states. We have a serious problem that is largely being ignored. We’re paying that price here in Arizona
Best wishes.
EA,
I did not find the Wikipedia entry but I did locate a news article in the Metro West Daily News that refers to an ICE press release containing the following information:
“In fiscal 2011, ICE said it removed 396,906 people nationwide, the largest number in its history. Of those, 55 percent were convicted of felonies or misdemeanors, an 89 percent increase in criminal removals since fiscal 2008.
The fiscal 2011 arrestees, the government said, included 1,119 illegal immigrants convicted of homicide, 5,848 convicted of sexual offenses, 44,653 convicted of drug-related crimes and 35,927 convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs”
However, your conclusions are wrong. “1,119/365 days = 3 a day that were actually caught and deported -…I said 6-12 Americans are killed each day. 3 are homicides, and the rest might just come from other crimes committed by illegal aliens…it's statistically accurate.”
Sorry, but your statements are statistically inaccurate on at least three counts. The reported 1,119 illegal immigrants convicted of homicide were apprehended during 2011. The ICE press release DOES NOT say their crimes were committed in 2011, does not indicate the number of years these deportees have been at large, nor how many of their victims were Americans. You can not assume 1,119/365=3 homicides a day in order to justify your erroneous 6-12 a day claim. Even after your false interpretation of the deportation numbers, the source of your original 6-12 Americans killed each day remains virtually nonexistent.
{1} http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/news/ … -day-blitz
Thanks, Quill. Nothing like the facts! The political forum is infested with misinformation.
I guess CBS, Homeland Security, The Arizona Department of Security, and Wikipedia don't work as credible sources for you? What would? Hupi.com?
This makes more sense to me:
Fox & Friends displayed an on-screen graphic promoting a ridiculous Family Security Matters estimate that "2,158 killed by illegals every year." But that statistic is derived from completely baseless assumptions about immigrants' crime rates. Actual studies have found that immigrants in general are less likely to be incarcerated and that there is no evidence that undocumented immigrants commit a disproportionate amount of crime.
Fox chyron cites absurd estimate that "2,158 killed by illegals every year"
Fox pushes ridiculous immigrant crime estimate. Fox & Friends hosted Ed Kowalski, a board member from the group 9/11 Families for a Secure America, to discuss, among other things, the controversial new Arizona immigration law. During the segment, co-host Gretchen Carlson said, "According to you, politicians seem to be more concerned about the illegals' rights than the rights of the Americans, some of whom end up dead." Kowalski responded: "That's correct, that's correct. As best as we can estimate, 2,200 Americans a year are murdered by criminal illegal aliens. That number is staggering." Several times throughout the segment, the following on-screen text aired:
Human Events writer bizarrely assumed that immigrants are committing crimes at the same rate that people purportedly commit crimes in their home countries. The immigrant murder rate cited by Fox News is based on a 2005 Human Events article by Mac Johnson. In the article, Johnson said he attempted to locate statistics on "illegal alien murders" but was told "that no one kept track" of those numbers. Johnson then "arrived at my own approximation of the number," which he called "crude." After admitting that "the murder rate among illegal aliens in America is unknown," Johnson assumed that the rate at which "illegal aliens" murder would remain consistent with murder rates from the immigrant's home country. From his 2005 Human Events article:
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert … s-immigran
Snopes on crimes by illegal aliens:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/taxes.aspI find it interesting that the liberal is quoting Fox, and the conservative is quoting CBS.
Again, check out Wikipedia. You'll find that there were over 1,100 homicides committed by illegal aliens in 2011. It's a fact. How many Americans have to die to make this a serious issue?900,000+ gun homicides, and gun control is still an issue folks like you don't want to touch, soooo...a lot more?
"900,000" ???????????????????????????
"folks like you"
Gun control doesn't address the issue, criminals. Illegal alien control reduces the number of criminals in our country. Again, I am not opposed to legal immigration. I just believe that we need to know who is in our country and for what purpose. That's really not unreasonable.I am for good gun control measures, like placing another hand on the grip and squeeze, don't jerk, the trigger.
Just say SQUEEZE, eh?
Is your real name James Gilkerson, perchance?
The guy who fired off 37 rounds from his AK-47 against officers who had stopped him
for a routine traffic stop?That would be a neat trick considering ol James is on a slab somewhere. You really think that was a routine traffic stop? Cops don't live under the illusion that anything is ever routine, you can clearly hear the gunman saying "Kill me" that's what is known as suicide by cop.
No, but I could have been one of those firing back. After all, hatred of the police is usually a lefty thing - just ask Obama buddies Billy Ayres and Bernadine Dorn or quiz any number of university faculty members whose sympathies lie with those who have or would murder the police. After all, isn't Mumia Abu Jamal a cause celeb among lefties. Didn't Columbia University (Obama's alma mater - he hasn't spouted off about that one and God knows he comments on absolutely everything else, ie, the Maria Carey/Nikki Minaj "feud.") hire Kathy Boudin, a convicted cop killer. In a civilized society she would have been executed rather than elevated - but hey this is the liberal academic elite. You know, the ones who helped radicalize the Tzarnaev brothers.
To be precise, zygote is the term used to refer to the cell as a result of the fusion of two haploid nuclei during fertilization until the first cleavage. When the zygote starts to divide and multiply, it is called an embryo.
http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Zygote
Abortion: One Way to Decimate the Human Population
Staring Liberals, Democrats, Communists, Socialists, Prostitutes
Target Audience: Inner City, children (3-9 yrs)
Obamacare: How to Successfully Kill of the Elderly Through Trickery and Lies
Staring: Obama, the Democrats and the fiends of the unrighteous Left
Most of us are not stupid enough to believe that picture is real.
No most of you are just in denial.
How about this one?
Does that look shapeless to you? Or is that fake as well?
Oh comes from here:
http://www.webmd.com/baby/ss/slideshow- … evelopment
Just so you know, it was in response to this statement:
"Abortion isn't killing babies; it's killing shapeless parasites that lack brains with only a nonfunctional red dot to call a heart."
Which I've proven inaccurate, to put it in nice terms.
I will be so glad when the Commies are ALL out of office. Holder is a typical Left Wing anti American commie.
Marquis, I am a liberal but not a Communist. I believe in freedom of choice but am personally against abortion. I simply do not feel that I have the right to decide what others do with their bodies. I am a man but do not think that woman are the weaker species or that men are somehow genetically superior to them. I am a gun owner who is in favor of gun control. I find the idea of people being anti-abortion but pro capital punishment to be sadly amusing. They are not against killing humans, they simply want to be able to decide at which age they should do it. I am appalled by what the bombers did at Boston but just as appalled by those who do not want to mirandize the bomber. People in this country are entitled to protection under the law no matter how egregious their crime. The concentration camp at Quantanamo should be bulldozed and the inmates there should be given a fair trial or released. We are not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia to lock people away and deny them due process. Obama was fairly elected unlike his predecessor and as such is entitled to make his own mistakes. He has yet to involve us in two concurrent wars that do nothing but cost American lives, money and world standing. I find everything you say to be offensive, poorly thought out and to be knee jerk drivel but I recognize your right to say it. And before you have the nerve to question my patriotism I am an Army veteran. Are you?
I find it amusing that you would use abortion in an analogy with the death penalty. One is an innocent life and one has in most cases taken an innocent life but somehow you have made them equal. What is even more strange is that some on death row have taken a life before it ever left the womb.
Not surprising that you missed the point lie defective. Killing is killing. Since I am sure you probably have the 10 commandments tattooed on your chest, I am sure you know that one says, thou shalt not kill.
I would engage in the same style of debate but I will show you the respect that I show everyone. Sir, you never made a point other than showing a complete bias. By the way your service to our country is appreciated but that alone does not make one a patriot!
My apologies for being harsh. I anticipated rancor before it was expressed. I am not meaning to make a judgment as to the innate morality or lack of morality of the individuals being killed. I was simply stating that under the Judeo-Christian ethic that most of us espouse killing of any sort is wrong.
As always, thanks for the information, Ralph.
When I'm in Southern California, I'm around legal and undocumented immigrants. It's about 1 out of every 10 people. I do not see crime as acceptable conduct, according to their norms. Work is all I hear them ask for--never spare change.
There are some people, however, working with the drug cartels, who do murder people, mostly others in the drug business. Yet in Central L.A. there was a Mexican Mafia organization taking protection money from the street vendors. But what major city has not had to deal with that?And there is the crime - holding a w-2, hourly, legal job requires verifiable identification. If one has a job from which taxes are with held but are here illegally they are violating a few laws. Identity falsification, identity theft, illegal residency are all crimes. Violent and drug related crimes are not the only crimes. What are the statistics regarding drunk driving, hit and run accidents, auto accident fatalities committed by illegals? Though the punishment is not imprisonment but deportation, overstaying a visa or sneaking across the border are still violations of the law.
The following are statistics derived from various sources - news reports, local law enforcement, FBI, DHS and Border Patrol numbers.
83% of warrants for murder in Phoenix are for illegal aliens.
86% of warrants for murder in Albuquerque are for illegal aliens.
75% of those on the most wanted list in Los Angeles , Phoenix and Albuquerque are illegal aliens.
24.9% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals.
40.1% of all inmates in Arizona detention centers are Mexican nationals.
48.2% of all inmates in New Mexico detention centers are Mexican nationals.
29% (630,000) convicted illegal alien felons fill our State and Federal prisons at a cost of $1.6 billion annually.
53% plus of all investigated burglaries reported in California, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona and Texas are perpetrated by illegal aliens.
50% plus of all gang members in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.
71% plus of all apprehended cars stolen in 2005 in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and California were stolen by Illegal aliens or "transport coyotes".
47% of cited/stopped drivers in California have no license, no insurance and no registration for the vehicle. Of that 47%, 92% are illegal aliens.
63% of cited/stopped drivers in Arizona have no license, no insurance and no registration for the vehicle. Of that 63%, 97% are illegal aliens
66% of cited/stopped drivers in New Mexico have no license, no insurance and no registration for the vehicle. Of that 66%, 98% are illegal aliens.
Given the tiny numbers of actual illegals compared to the total population, illegals are very hard working in order to account for these FBI stats.+1
Thank you. I am all for legal immigration. I am tired of illegal immigration. I live in Arizona, and we are paying a BIG price for our current disinterest in border security. How many people have to die before our country starts protecting us from illegal aliens?I love immigrants. One of the best women I know is from Romania. My family has been in this country for 100 years. Immigrants have a place in America. Cheating, sneaking, lying, line jumping illegals have no place in America. It is racist to excuse Hispanic illegal immigration at the expense of legal Asian and African immigration. There are thousands of people from all around the world trying to get here legally. They should just save their money, fly into Mexico, sneak across the border, steal someone's identity and get a job illegally. It works for Hispanics why shouldn't it work for Afghans, Indians, Chinese, Laotians, Vietnamese, Filipinos, Indonesians, Nigerians, Maldivians, Zimbabweans,Kenyans, Bulgarians, Ukrainians, Poles, Slovaks, Fijians, Tongans, etc.... , except they don't have a whole political party trying to pander for the votes of their "fellows in language."
Dear retief2000,
Sadly, I am unable to connect one of your statistical claims to news reports, local law enforcement, FBI, DHS and Border Patrol numbers.
I did, however, find hundreds of identical versions cut and pasted on the internet. Just like your own version, none includes a link to any source.
Oddly, there are many, although not yours, prefaced by the impotent introduction “2006 (First Quarter) INS/FBI Statistical Report on Undocumented Immigrants.” These a clearly phoney since the INS ceased to exist in March 2003 when most of its functions were transferred from the Department of Justice to three new entities within the Department of Homeland Security.
I am hopful you can provide a link to news reports, local law enforcement, FBI, DHS and Border Patrol numbers that confirm the accuracy of your particular set of claims. No one else on the internet seems to able to do so.
Kentucky redneck morons buy guns for kindergartners:
"The next day Kristian, 5, shot and killed his 2-year-old sister with a gun marketed for children as “My First Rifle” in what the authorities said was an accident. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/us/ke … p&_r=0"redneck morons" I'm sorry...isn't that a derogatory remark and racist as well? Let's check on that shall we?
Redneck is a derogatory slang term used in reference to poor, uneducated white farmers (definition from Wikipedia)
Perhaps you should read the entire story and not just the "shocking headline" the media puts out there huh?
How almost all the adults had these same rifles at age 5 (omg! they didn't shoot anyone and made it to adulthood! shocking!)
How the majority of the 5 yr olds there have this same rifle (omg! they are all still alive and haven't shot anyone!)
And that the issue was not the rifle but the fact that the parents left it unlocked, accessible and loaded. The other parents in the small town who agreed to be interviewed said they keep it unloaded and locked up and the child never has access unless they are with them.Ah I see. So because they are from a small town in Kentucky they are "redneck morons" and "uneducated".
I do wonder why you choose that particular story to try to advocate gun control and not the following:
http://www.webpronews.com/6-month-old-s … ng-2013-03
Or is it because that doesn't promote your agenda?
Because, you know, it is the home of some of the strictest gun regulations in the country.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/us/st … l&_r=0I assume they are redneck morons and uneducated because they bought a FIVE YEAR OLD a gun. The fact that everyone else in the town has as well just means there are a bunch of other redneck morons in the area.
Jesus, I supervise my daughter when she has scissors. A bloody gun for a five year old? That takes a special kind of idiot. I would LOVE to see both of those parents charged with murder.Hey I would never buy a five year old a gun on a personal level. However, hunting is a way of life in that particular area. This is not a "new fad" that is going through the area. It is something that has been going on for generations. I'd bet you the gun deaths there per capita are far less than any city, yet, I'd bet you the gun ownership per capita is higher. Why? Because they don't treat guns like they are some evil possessed thing. They are taught from a very young age to treat them with respect. These parents did not do so and did not act responsibly. They said they didn't know the gun was loaded. Not good enough.
However, I'm certain there are plenty of things that these people could say about city people and call them morons. Who are you to pass judgement on an entire town and a way of life?Didn't the article say that in that town alone another 6 year old boy killed another kid... and that still another kid was shot at a picnic? Both recently?
I am surrounded by redneck morons. I know them quite well. They shouldn't own a Swiss Army Knife, let alone a gun. In general if a requirement for a sixth grade education and an IQ of over 80 was required for gun ownership, they have to chase the deer down with a sharpened stick.
And they'd likely lose a finger sharpening the stick... But hell, they'd still have 3 left to hold their beer.No that wasn't in that town. Not even in that state. It's very bigoted of you and Ralph to use a term such as "redneck" to describe someone, and decide they are uneducated (people you do not even know). It is just more of the left double standard. They are allowed to make derogatory and racist statements about any group of people with whom they disagree but throw the term "racist" around about anyone who disagrees with the President's policies.
Which was all I was bringing to light. Thank you for your assistance.Redneck isn't a race. It's a choice.
Your comments say a lot about you as well. You want to stand up for people who let their kids shoot each other because it's their way of life, have at it.
And I'm a moderate, but good try.Or a semi-literate conservative. I've heard they are actually learning to read now.
The term redneck is a slang derogatory term used to describe UNEDUCATED, POOR, WHITE farmers. Seems like a racist term to me.
If you and Ralph were truly concerned about children dying at the hands of guns, you would cite all the children dying from gang related shootings. But you don't because it's only alright to demean "redneck morons" and because it does not support your argument.
Nice how you and Ralph both chose to ignore that part too.
On a personal level, I think these particular parents were responsible, not because they bought their 5 year old a rifle, but because they did not make sure it was unloaded and locked when they were not supervising them. I wouldn't purchase a rifle for my 5 year old but I can read the article objectively enough not to condemn people just because of the traditions they've followed for generations.
You and Ralph have put forth the opinion that because YOU don't agree with it, it is alright to demean them and call them morons. Not only that, you go one step even further and decide it is a FACT because it is your opinion.
You can call yourself a moderate all you like, you and Ralph are still riding the same High Horse.Actually we factually know enough about child psychology to know a five year old does not have the mental maturity to use a gun or understand it's danger.
Yes Josak, because every 5 yr old child is exactly the same everywhere.
They can't comprehend the danger of a stove either, but there are plenty of parents teaching them to cook. How do you think they learn about the dangers of things? In a bubble?
Besides, I'm not even advocating purchasing rifles for 5 yr old's as I've already stated.
I shot my first deer when I was 7. I wore camo more than pink. I sat in tree stands and had deer piss spread all over me when the wind was blowing the wrong way. I was hanging up deer on the front porch and cutting their stomachs open so their guts would fall out before I was through with elementary school... and we would kick the crap off of the porch for the coon dogs to eat.
I'm not making judgments on things I don't understand. I'm making judgments on a world that I grew up in.
Like I said, redneck moron is a choice. I CHOSE not to be one.
I didn't comment on gang bangers because I have no idea about their lifestyle. Redneck? Yep, I know that one. Do you?I did not say understand, I said that you were passing judgement on people you do not even know. So, every rural area is just like the one you grew up in and every person in every rural area is just like anyone you knew. Really?
Pretty much. I lived in Kentucky, they look and act exactly the same. Same with Tennessee too.
You got a rebel flag and a gun rack in your truck, you got camo in the middle of spring, you got country music and/or classic rock.
What you HAVEN'T got there are people who read for fun. You don't have people who want to grow up to be engineers or doctors.
If you can find me a pickup truck with a dead deer in the bed that has any form of book beside a field and stream, a bible or a porn magazine, I'll eat a camo hat.
Education is seen as something the state makes you do. Coal mining is seen as good paying work, and guns are seen as perfectly normal gifts to give small children.
That's what a redneck is hon. You can say that's racist... which proves you don't quite understand what it means. But rednecks are simply a group of people who choose to have the same ignorant ideas and uneducated lives. If you choose not to be one, all you got to do is walk away.
So yes, if you are purposely leading a life like that, then don't cry when someone tells you about what you are obviously doing.@Melissa
Yeah, not even close.
1. Not all rural areas are in the South, so yeah, aren't always any rebel flags involved.
2. I happen to live in one (a transplant, wasn't raised here) , have been here 12 years. I happen to know the kids go hunting at aged 7 (sometimes younger). Yet, in that 12 years not once has there been an accidental shooting involving a child. A child was never the shooter nor were they the victim.
3. Gun ownership here is around 80%. In the last 12 years, there has been 4 murders. 1 in 2001 and 3 in 2010. Not all 4 used guns.
4. 80% have graduated high school which is higher than the average for the entire country.
5. 25% have a Bachelor's Degree or higher.
6. 40% have an Associates Degree.
Total population: 2,839. (yep, very rural)
Oh and I forgot one other thing: the majority of the people I know (and, you know, small town and all that, know most of them) happen to adore reading.Well, if your area isn't in the south, then why are you discussing how I don't know anything about it? Unless they moved Kentucky while I was sleeping, you haven't a clue yourself.
So you're just basically making crap up to defend people you have no idea about and accusing me of not knowing what I am talking about when I have actually lived in the area in question.
So essentially you are saying is the area you live in, which apparently is nowhere near Kentucky, isn't like Kentucky.
Good show. How could you ever lose a debate with such brilliant logic?I'm not gonna get into the debate about actual statistics about gun accidents in Kentucky or any other State right now, because I haven't researched those stats. But what I will tell you is that I know of someone who was raised in Indiana and was given a gun at about age 5; he almost shot his foot off with it. AND I will remind you that the article in question above, as SassySue had to tell you again, referred also to gun accidents in OTHER states besides Kentucky involving little kids.
Didn't you read the article, or did you just zero in on the opportunity to point out the sometimes-foolishness of people in Kentucky as opposed to the foolishness of people in general? I think that's the issue here----bias. Whether you lived there or not, whether you were raised there or not. Because you shouldn't try to attach the label of "moron" to ANY particular State's people. We are all just people, in general. Some people may behave in a moronic way, yes, but that's people; just like some people are vulgar and uncaring and wicked-minded/acting and/or whatever, no matter where they grew up or how they were taught.
I will also tell you that I was born and raised in Kentucky; lived there for 20 years. I'm still a Kentuckian at heart in many ways. But even I myself cannot and should not lump all Kentuckians into any particular category.
In the area I lived in, I never once saw a coal mine, even though I lived in the country/hills.
Kids had aspirations to become lots of things, not just coal miners, even though there's nothing wrong with simply wanting to have a steady job and no career ambitions. Sometimes ambition is highly overrated anyway, and I'll tell you there's not one thing wrong with being a farmer for life, or a health care worker, or a trucker, or a hair stylist, or a preacher, or a lawyer, or a restaurant owner, or a waitress/waiter, or a teacher, doctor, counselor, printer, musician, singer, florist, writer, artist, factory worker, politician............need I go on?? There were and still are people from all walks of life in Kentucky, just like any other State.
Point is, people are just people, no matter what State they live in.
And I for one (out of thousands I'm sure) did indeed read for pleasure not just because the State "made me"! I loved school studies. I made really good grades and was as well-educated as kids in any other State. I lacked ambition to have a career, though, and that was my personal choice; my heart was nearer to being a wife and mother, and there's nothing wrong with that either. Just because I didn't have ambition doesn't mean everyone was like me. Kentucky has many wonderful people and many influential people. I recall a former recent State Senator, even, Vernie McGaha, from the "hills" of Kentucky, and I mention him because he's also an unapologetic Baptist and Bible-believer; a Church deacon, a musician; yep, one of those products of the "Bible Belt" who dared to become a representative of the people! Amen, and bah to those who scoff.
And indeed, if ya wanna compare notes on who could be labeled "moronic", don't leave out the current "representative" of the whole U.S.A. in the White House-------Barack Obama. And where is he from?-----ahem...I don't mean originally...ha!........Illinois supposedly. Good ol' Chicago that's known for it's gun violence and gang violence.
Definition of "redneck"--------
1
sometimes disparaging : a white member of the Southern rural laboring class.
And from my dictionary----
"(from the characteristic sun-burned neck acquired in the fields by farm laborers)
a poor, white, rural Southerner, often, specif., one regarded as ignorant, bigoted, violent, etc., often a derogatory term
Hmm.
My father was a "redneck", and I'm very proud of him for being a redneck, as in the definition of him being a farm laborer. Just because SOME other people REGARDED him in derogatory terms is simply a testament to THEIR bigotry and ignorance, not to his, because he was not any of those things attached to the end of that definition. He wasn't well-educated because he had to leave school at a young age and help his family in the fields, but he wasn't ignorant; and he was one of the wisest people there are anywhere. He and Mom were the people who taught me and my brothers that people are the same no matter what their skin color or their job description or their financial status etc. That's how almost everyone I was ever around felt. So I'm sure that Kentucky isn't any more biased or racist than any other place. And whoever tries to label Kentuckians with those labels are themselves acting ignorant and biased and hateful.
Now, I don't mind redneck jokes at all, as long as they're in good humor and not done in cruel attack-mode. But what I DO mind is the attachment of "MORON" that rude foolish people want to stick on it. Or people who are behaving rudely and foolishly--------like RALPH. And you too, if that was your intent. Matter of fact, I hate it when anyone calls anyone else a moron, period. I even stop myself when I start to call Obama that. He may be behaving "moronic", but I won't call him a moron. Well, maybe a couple times.....under my breath.......and then I've had to repent of it. lol.
Matter of fact, I think the things he does aren't moronic really; they're intentionally biased and wicked.
As far as the gun debate, I agree with you AND with SassySue that a small child shouldn't have a gun, as I inferred above.
But as far as late teens or young- adult-age people who show that they can be responsible for them, then that's fine. My brothers learned how to drive tractors and other farm equipment, to fish and hunt and all that by the time they were late teens if I remember correctly. I don't remember this incident myself, I guess because I was so young, but my parents and brothers told me how my oldest brother saved my life by shooting a rattlesnake not too far from me that was coiled up ready to strike. My brother was about 16 and I was still a little girl. I suppose it could've been a different scenario if my brother had been a lousy shot; the snake could've killed me, or he could've shot me instead by accident! But we lived in the country where we knew we needed protection from snakes and wild animals etc., and my Dad taught my brothers correctly and safely.
My brothers were taught correctly. Some people aren't. So while I'm for the right to have firearms, at the same time there needs to be very strict responsibility for who has access to firearms and at what age they can even begin to have access to guns. It's very foolish of a parent to keep guns around small children and anyone else who isn't capable of handling the firearm properly.
Well, long post here, but when people keep mouthing crap like "Kentucky morons", I'm gonna speak up and tell 'em they're behaving like jerks and need to stop trying to stick such blanket labels on people. This Kentucky girl here ain't no better than anyone else, but I sure ain't no worse, and I may have forgotten some of my raising, but I still have the guts to tell anyone off when they're running down my family and/or a whole State-full of people.
Thank you Brenda.
Indeed, that was my point.
The over generalization and characterization of an entire populace.Then when that is pointed out, the defending of that bigoted opinion.
I don't think Melissa's intent was to be rude or mean though. We've had discussions before. She's a pretty good egg.
BTW Melissa, redneck, while it may have at one time, no longer refers solely to those in the South. It is indeed a racist term and a derogatory one.
an uneducated white farm laborer, especially from the South.
2.
a bigot or reactionary, especially from the rural working class.
adjective
3.
Also, red-necked. narrow, prejudiced, or reactionary: a redneck attitude. Synonyms: biased, narrow-minded, intolerant. Antonyms: fair-minded, open-minded, broad-minded, tolerant, unbiased, impartial.
So, Ralph,
read my post above this one.
Or not.
But in any case, you're behaving like a real jerk when you intentionally re-write the title to that story, especially since I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt as to your ability to realize that ALL people in ANY State may be ignorant about one thing or another; it's not just Kentucky that could be the subject of insult if people want to insult someone. I'm also giving you the benefit of the doubt about your ability to understand what you read, and if you read the article you'd know that what I've said is true.
Personally, I don't care what you or anyone thinks. I don't care who you call a redneck if you're meaning it as a poor white hard-working Southerner, because that's nothing to be ashamed of. I don't mind being called a redneck; I'm proud to be one. And I don't mind being called a Kentuckian; I'm proud to have been born there. But it truly tees me off when someone puts the words "Kentucky redneck morons" together just so they can cut down Kentuckians. You should watch how you phrase things, unless of course you think New Jersey and other States actually ARE Kentucky........in which case, you need to find a map somewhere and try to cipher that out for yerself. I would help ya, but oh my...where oh where would I find a map on the internet.......?
Further reason to ignore him 
Related Discussions
- 60
Gun Control: Should We Lose The Right To Bear Arms?
by Alem Belton 9 years ago
Okay so another guy dresses up like The Joker and kills people. I will resist the urge to state how bizarre and coincidental that is and stick to the question.The media is intent on showing Americans all the LEGAL gun killings they can while not informing us about the countless lives that are...
- 68
FBI Subpoenaed Over Analysis Reportedly Targeting Catholic Church's
by Sharlee 12 months ago
Once again Our FBI and DOJ appear to have been weaponized. This time this corrupted bunch is targeting Catholic Americans."WASHINGTON (CBS19 NEWS) -- FBI Director Christopher Wray has been subpoenaed as part of a probe into a leaked field analysis involving a group of traditionalist Catholic...
- 54
Is there any common ground on the abortion issue?
by Paul Swendson 13 years ago
Is it possible for pro-life and pro-choice people to find any common ground? Too often, the argument becomes fixated on the morality and legality of abortion, which are both worthwhile topics. But in the end, I think that almost all Americans would like to reduce the number of abortions. So why...
- 12
America-Another Wonderful Day for Killing
by SpanStar 10 years ago
Teen chills Australian baseball player because they were bored.How long, how many deaths is it going to take before America pulls its head up out of the sand?What morals, ethics are being taught to anyone to where we are not consistently seeing insane murders and acts of atrocities?Sitting on our...
- 86
Abortion Nazi Selection Process Social Engineering?
by theirishobserver. 12 years ago
In 2010 almost 8,000 Irish Females travelled to England to have their unborn babies terminated. Some of these females were as young as 11 years old; the majority of terminations were convenience terminations, Doctors being told that the women simply did not want another child or that they were...
- 70
Abortion is a moral, religious and health issue. Why is it in the middle of the
by SEXYLADYDEE 10 years ago
Abortion is a moral, religious and health issue. Why is it in the middle of the political arena?What happened to the separation of state and church? Why is this issue being used as a smokescreen blinding those who can make a difference in our economy. Jobs, food on the table and keeping our...