The only person who can stop Rick Perry is Rick Perry

John Ellis, who among many other things is a Republican political analyst, a blogger and a cousin to former President George W. Bush, nails the state of the GOP presidential race in a Business Insider column:

The Republican “establishment,” such as it is, is quickly coming to the realization that the 2012 GOP presidential nomination is Texas Governor Rick Perry’s to lose.

That establishment would prefer someone more electable, someone more like, say, Mitt Romney. But as Ellis points out, Romney is the guy that most Republican voters will choose only if they have no other viable choice:

“Romney’s problem is four-fold: he’s politically “fungible” (to put it politely), he’s from the wrong region of the country (New England), he’s of the wrong religion (Mormonism) and he’s too closely identified with Wall Street (Bain Capital). The Republican base would prefer to nominate a strong conservative, evangelical Christian from the Sunbelt who, at the least, shares their disdain for Wall Street’s reckless stewardship of the nation’s financial system.”

Know anybody like that?

Ellis predicts that after Labor Day, the GOP establishment will launch “a sustained negative campaign to destroy Perry with the party’s base.” We’ve already seen hints of that from Karl Rove, among others. Absent some major revelation, however, that effort isn’t likely to work. Perry’s persona and background align so closely with the desires of the GOP base that it will be very difficult to drive a wedge between them. If Perry can prove that he can perform on the national stage, the nomination is all but his and there’s nothing Romney can do about it.

And as Ellis points out, Perry will get that opportunity very quickly.

“Once Labor Day has passed, there will be five debates, in quick succession, on the GOP presidential candidates’ calendars. These will be important tests for Perry. If at the end of two or three, it’s clear that he’s every bit the equal of Mitt Romney on matters of policy and politics, then the Perry juggernaut becomes all but unstoppable. Romney’s “I’m the only electable one” argument will vanish and the party’s base will nominate one of their own. If Perry stumbles badly in the debates, Romney’s campaign gets a second wind.”

I agree wholeheartedly. The only person who can snatch the nomination out of Rick Perry’s hands is Rick Perry himself.

– Jay Bookman

1,022 comments Add your comment

Sarah

August 30th, 2011
4:24 pm

This blog should be entitled, “Confederacy of Dumb Arses”…

jm

August 30th, 2011
4:25 pm

I get the impression 75% of the liberals here are over 65. Maybe the retirement age really should be just 65. Cause senility seems to have set in pretty seriously among this crowd.

Misdemeanors aren’t crimes. Democrats haven’t stopped Medicaid reform. The government’s fiscal situation is just fine. Cons are evil. Only in liberal-la-la land do these ideas make any sense.

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:25 pm

Actually, I was wrong about this:

“It is a misdemeanor, it is not a crime, they are not criminals no more than a speeder is.”

Of course a misdemeanor is a crime, but in the case of illegal immigrants, they are breaking a civil law, not a criminal one, so actually it is neither a misdemeanor NOR a felony — and it is not correct to refer to them as “criminals” if their sole offense is being here illegally.

Paul

August 30th, 2011
4:26 pm

jm

“To equate a misdemeanor and a traffic violation is a completely spurious claim.”

You are taking the position some traffic violations are not misdemeanors?

josef

August 30th, 2011
4:26 pm

out of the blue…
And wasn’t McCain a big supporter of the Dream Act…?

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:26 pm

“Addressed to any defending the current practice of not abiding by the current system in place…….”

So, md, who are you addressing this to? I’ve not seen anyone here do that.

jm

August 30th, 2011
4:27 pm

josef 4:24 – I wasn’t suggesting discussing with you was a waste of time in general. I just think its not the best use of time. Nothing personal.

Paul

August 30th, 2011
4:28 pm

jm

Before you answer that, you may want to read Brosephus’s 4:23

as far as “I prefer facts. 99% of traffic violations aren’t misdemeanors or felonies.”

Is that a fact? 99%? Citation?

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:28 pm

josef,

“you don’t have to prove you disagree ”

LOL, I thought the same thing. Proving he disagrees? WTF?

And SHUT UP!! :)

jm

August 30th, 2011
4:28 pm

Paul 4:26 – I’m taking the position most traffic violations aren’t misdemeanors.

Bosch 4:25 – glad you could admit that. I’ve made mistakes on here too. And owned up to them. They’ve generally come up in arguments with Jay….

md

August 30th, 2011
4:29 pm

“This blog should be entitled, “Confederacy of Dumb Arses”…”

Says the newest member of the confederacy…………..

Brosephus

August 30th, 2011
4:29 pm

Misdemeanors aren’t crimes.

If it’s civil law that’s broken and not criminal law, then that is indeed true. There is a difference between civil infractions and criminal infractions. Just breaking any law doesn’t automatically make one a criminal. That’s one of the biggest misconceptions there is about breaking laws.

Logical Dude

August 30th, 2011
4:29 pm

Bosch says: Actually, I was wrong about this:”

(snarky)
What? Someone on this blog admitting they were wrong!?
Why, I’ve never seen that before!
(/snarky)

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
4:30 pm

T. Maddox — “Bosch: 8 U.S.C. § 1325.”

You should read it sometime.

“It’s a crime. Crimes are committed by criminals in the real world.”

Nope. Under the section you cited, it’s *clearly* discussed as a *civil offense* and the penalties thereunto pertaining are civil in nature. Here you go:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/usc_sec_08_00001325—-000-.html

I *do* hope more of y’all will actually bother to *read* applicable law on this topic. If you had actually read the part you cited, you’d have saved yourself the embarrassment of posting something that *disagreed* with the point you’re trying to make.

jm

August 30th, 2011
4:30 pm

Trust me. If you committed a misdemeanor, you committed a crime. Very different than a traffic violation.

Joe The Plumber too.

August 30th, 2011
4:30 pm

wow bosch, I’m impressed with an admission of being wrong about something. Now that you have realized that a misdemeanor is a crime, you are halfway there, but until you can admit to yourself that they are criminals…. you are still wrong.

Logical Dude

August 30th, 2011
4:30 pm

But it is good to see real thought happening, and research and corrections.

It just seems to be rare these days. :)

Adam

August 30th, 2011
4:31 pm

jm: Democrats haven’t stopped Medicaid reform.

Wait a minute, your ORIGINAL statement was that REPUBLICANS haven’t stopped Medicaid reform. Which is it?

And with that, I’m out!

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:31 pm

jm,

But illegal immigrants are not labeled “criminals” for that sole infraction. Well, they are by people like you, but by the definition of the law, they are not.

Paul

August 30th, 2011
4:31 pm

Bosch

It’s fun with nouns time.

Is a misdemeanor a crime? An infraction? Both? Does a crime involve only those things punishable by incarceration? Or can a violation of the criminal code not result in incarceration? Does any violation mean a person is in the category of criminal? Can one commit a crime and not be a criminal?

It’s a merry go round for the bored.

josef

August 30th, 2011
4:32 pm

md

Changing your name to Ignatius are you? :-)

BOSCH

Howdy! And YOU shut up! :-)

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:32 pm

“but until you can admit to yourself that they are criminals…. you are still wrong”

No, Joe, I’m not — the law is on my side.

getalife

August 30th, 2011
4:32 pm

Hard working criminals.

How is that farming jobs thingie working out for ya?

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:33 pm

Paul,

I know, right! I was getting confused a little with the whole misdemeanor/felony/civil/criminal thing.

But the basic point is that illegal immigrants are not criminals.

godless heathen

August 30th, 2011
4:33 pm

And you hate them all the same, huh, blue?

jm

August 30th, 2011
4:34 pm

Bro 4:29 – dude….. um civil charges aren’t brought by the police and are therefore never misdemeanors

seriously…..

civil charges are one citizen suing another. ugh

out of the blue

August 30th, 2011
4:34 pm

“out of the blue…
And wasn’t McCain a big supporter of the Dream Act…?

And…What does that have to do with anything I’ve posted this afternoon?

josef

August 30th, 2011
4:34 pm

SARAH

Are you the Minkoff Minx? :-)

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:34 pm

“But the basic point is that illegal immigrants are not criminals”

Well, they are if they murder someone, but its the murder that makes them a criminal not the whole being in this country illegally part.

Paul

August 30th, 2011
4:34 pm

Brosephus

Appreciate the insight, but you’re dampening a good argument with those darn facts.

It’s almost criminal….

md

August 30th, 2011
4:34 pm

“So, md, who are you addressing this to? I’ve not seen anyone here do that.”

So they should go out and come back in according to the system? Or report to their nearest gov’t office and request to follow the system??

Or is there a problem with the system?

Joe The Plumber too.

August 30th, 2011
4:34 pm

bosch:
Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, “Improper Entry by Alien,” any citizen of any country other than the United States who:

Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or

Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or

Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;
has committed a federal crime.

Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

Sarah

August 30th, 2011
4:35 pm

I prefer undocumented fellow human beings.

Logical Dude

August 30th, 2011
4:35 pm

I have a freind who was stopped for “criminal speeding”.

WTF??
There was only a fine to pay. And it seemed to be just another speeding ticket on the record.

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:36 pm

Uh oh, now jm, the blog geek is going to tell Brosephus, the law enforcement immigration dude that he is wrong. :roll:

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
4:36 pm

Don’t stop there, Joe Plumber!

Continued:

(b) Improper time or place; civil penalties

Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of—

(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or

(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection.

Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.

(c) Marriage fraud

Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than $250,000, or both.

(d) Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud

Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance with title 18, or both.

Your honesty is in question, Joe Plumber.

josef

August 30th, 2011
4:37 pm

out of the blue

“Speaking about amnesty for illegal immigrants. Wasn’t it Saint Ronnie who granted 3 million illegal aliens amnesty?”

My comment/question on McCain and the Dream Act was piggy backing on that…backing up your point…

Brosephus

August 30th, 2011
4:37 pm

jm: Bro 4:29 – dude….. um civil charges aren’t brought by the police and are therefore never misdemeanors

Dude, I turn people back from entering this country based on civil charges. I speak of these things because I have first hand knowledge, not because of something I’ve read on the internet. ;)

Dusty

August 30th, 2011
4:37 pm

whoooeee!

We have people here who value our country so much that they don’t care who gets across the border and sticks around. If they are not citizens, seems they are OK if they work hard and stay out of trouble. Why bother with LAWS! Hey, just like speeding tickets, not crossing street in lanes, etc. etc.

My son-in-law spent seven years doing the right things for citizenship. He came to be a citizen and he worked hard to get it legally. He is now a fully legal American citizen. He did not want any connections with criminality.

And Adam thinks nobody wants to come here! Then why are they sneaking in here day and night? Getting college scholarships and forgetting to go home? Why have we found so many illegal immigrants we don’t even have enough money to send them home?

I suggest we have a swap system. Americans who don’t give a snap about this country should swap with an eager immigrant who is anxious to live here. Everything wrong with the USA? SWAP! There’s your ticket.

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:37 pm

Joe,

Did you google that from WikiAnswers? :roll:

pogo

August 30th, 2011
4:38 pm

Seems all of those young “change” loving liberals from 2008 now have had a nasty tasting dose of Obama’s “change” and they don’t like it all. With their 100k degrees from the very best of schools they still cannot find a job. I had to listen to a table full of them Friday night. These kids are not happy. I wouldn’t be either if I were in their place.

Aquagirl

August 30th, 2011
4:38 pm

but until you can admit to yourself that they are criminals…. you are still wrong.

Because who cares what the law says? Joe has pronounced them criminals, they’re criminals. Anyhow, most of them talk funny and aren’t white, that’s proof enough.

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
4:40 pm

Bosch — “Did you google that from WikiAnswers?”

He probably pulled it from the link I posted a short time ago, but he left off the latter two-thirds.

And the piece he posted even SAYS “civil fines.” I swear, some of the people don’t even read the stuff they post before they put it up.

Tommy Maddox

August 30th, 2011
4:40 pm

Keep reading Joe:

§ 1325. Improper entry by alien

(a) :Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts. Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both…

Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.”

jm

August 30th, 2011
4:40 pm

Speaking of being wrong. I retract my statement about civil law only being two people (or entities) suing one another.

Nevertheless, civil law is very different than criminal law. And to the substance of the issue: being an illegal immigrant is a criminal violation, not a civil one.

To the extent you might be confused Bosch, it is that recent state level illegal immigrant laws have said someone has to be violating some other law before their immigration status can be checked. However, they are still already in violation of federal law and committing a crime that they could be arrested for (should the feds elect to enforce).

out of the blue

August 30th, 2011
4:40 pm

josef

August 30th, 2011
4:37 pm

Cool! Sorry I didn’t make the connection.

Sarah

August 30th, 2011
4:41 pm

Free Daryl Hannah!

Brosephus

August 30th, 2011
4:41 pm

Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;
has committed a federal crime.

If they’re apprehended at the border, they are processed on Grounds if Inadmissibility under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended. If they are apprehended from within the border, then it becomes a 237 charge on Grounds of Deportability. Only if there’s another criminal act involved, will they be tried, convicted, and sentenced using 8USC charges. In that instance, they are placed in Removal Proceedings and go before an Immigration Judge.

If every EWI (Entered Without Inspection) were processed under 8USC, there would be no jail space for our everyday citizen criminals.

jm

August 30th, 2011
4:42 pm

Bro
“I turn people back from entering this country based on civil charges.”

Just because you turn someone back doesn’t mean the charge was brought by the police.

The police can bring civil charges. However, only the police can bring criminal charges. In contrast, in civil law, someone can sue someone else over a civil “violation” (allegation). That’s the distinction.

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
4:42 pm

Pay closer attention, Mr. Maddox. You just posted this, but you missed this part:

“CIVIL PENALTIES UNDER THIS SUBSECTION are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.”

You cited CIVIL law, not CRIMINAL law. It provides for CIVIL penalties, not CRIMINAL ones. It leaves the door open for criminal penalties, but DOES NOT IMPOSE THEM BECAUSE IT IS CIVIL LAW.

Geez.

jt

August 30th, 2011
4:42 pm

Brocephus may ignore a person sneaking in via swimming the Rio Grande but…………………………………………what happens if a person tries to avoid the TSA pervs in an airport security line?
.
If caught sneaking by a TSA grope fest…………..what would Brocephus do?

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
4:44 pm

You posted this, Mr. Maddox (emphasis mine). Maybe you should have read it first.

“CIVIL PENALTIES UNDER THIS SUBSECTION are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.”

Civil penalties and civil law. NOT criminal.

md

August 30th, 2011
4:44 pm

“I prefer undocumented fellow human beings.”

Are the ones waiting in line patiently not also “fellow human beings”? Why do we coddle the ones that jumped the lines?

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:44 pm

jm,

“To the extent you might be confused Bosch”

I’m not confused. I know that people here in this country who are not documented are not, by definition of the law, considered criminals, if that is their only offense.

Dusty

August 30th, 2011
4:45 pm

OUt of the blue

ONCE AGAIN, Neil Bush is not running in any election. No matter how hard you try to exploit his personal life, he is NOT running for office.

Tommy Maddox

August 30th, 2011
4:45 pm

“…for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both…”

That means jail.

jm

August 30th, 2011
4:45 pm

out. the immigration debate is so over-hashed.

Sarah

August 30th, 2011
4:46 pm

Deport Xenophobia!

Paul

August 30th, 2011
4:46 pm

JAY

I’m beggin’ ya’… fresh sheets…. pleeeeeeeeease……..

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:47 pm

“Why do we coddle the ones that jumped the lines?”

And again, md, who on this board today has supported doing that? If, you are suggesting that I’m doing that, or your earlier questions that I support doing away with the system, then nothing could be further from the truth, and have no freaking idea why you would make such a leap, but I hope you stretched first so as to not harm your hamstring.

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
4:47 pm

Tommy Maddox — “That means jail.”

That means civil detention. You clearly don’t know what you’re talking about.

Undocumented immigrants *can* be civilly detained, but most aren’t.

md

August 30th, 2011
4:48 pm

“If they’re apprehended at the border, they are processed on Grounds if Inadmissibility under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended. If they are apprehended from within the border, then it becomes a 237 charge on Grounds of Deportability”

So the key to beating the system is getting past the first line of defense?

Comforting to know…………

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:49 pm

“the immigration debate is so over-hashed”

It might help if you knew what you were talking about when trying to debate.

Joe The Plumber too.

August 30th, 2011
4:49 pm

bosch, nope just typed in the US Code.
joemama: I read as far as I needed to, I guess like all double talk garbage written into laws, it can be read both ways. As far as my honesty being called into question, that is not a problem in my life, but then unlike so many of my brothers still on the democratic plantation believing government will take care of them, I chose a life of hard work, happy marriage, great educated children, loyal customers and financial security so my honesty is in tact to all those who matter to me. Perhaps a look in the mirror wouldn’t hurt you sometime.

Jefferson

August 30th, 2011
4:50 pm

Anyone who spends a 100k for an education deserves to owe 100K.

Dusty

August 30th, 2011
4:50 pm

OH now I get it. Any illegal person coming to AMerica is to be given a big hug, a box of kleenex and directions to all government aid offices. Anyone calling them criminals will be placed in chains and sent to break rocks. We gotta have law & order ya know!

Tommy Maddox

August 30th, 2011
4:51 pm

Well, the Code says “imprisoned”. Think what you may, but it’s rotten as written.

Take it up with West – they publish the Code.

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
4:51 pm

Bosch — “It might help if you knew what you were talking about when trying to debate.”

It’s a question of what they believe and want, not what they know.

They *believe* that undocumented immigration is a crime, possibly even a felony. They *want* it to be one. They’re sure it *ought* to be one.

But it isn’t, and they have a hard time with that notion. It can be pretty disillusioning to them when they realize what I’m trying to get across to Mr. Maddox here.

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:52 pm

Joe,

All that stuff if just super duper, congrats. But your still wrong about the immigration thing.

“OH now I get it. Any illegal person coming to AMerica is to be given a big hug, a box of kleenex and directions to all government aid offices. Anyone calling them criminals will be placed in chains and sent to break rocks. We gotta have law & order ya know!”

Apparently you don’t Dusty, but when you lose an argument and start in with the sarcastic hyperbole, it’s not very flattering.

Why would you assume anyone is advocating doing the things you mentioned?

Brosephus

August 30th, 2011
4:52 pm

Just because you turn someone back doesn’t mean the charge was brought by the police.

What do you consider Customs and Border Protection Officers then?? Chopped Liver??

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22667000/Law-Course-for-CBP-Officers-13th-Edition-2004-excerpts

5.110 With A Federal Warrant The authority for Customs officers to arrest for federal offenses with or without a warrant is contained in 19 U.S.C. § 1589a. 19 U.S.C. § 1589a(2) grants Customs officers the authority to execute any federal arrest warrant for any federal crime. It contains no authority to arrest under a state felony or misdemeanor warrant.
5.120 Without A Federal Warrant Customs officers are authorized by 19 U.S.C. § 1589a(3) to make arrests without warrants for any federal offense committed in the officer’s presence or any federal felony committed outside of the officer’s presence. In all cases, of course, the officer must have reasonable grounds to believe, i.e., probable cause, that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing a crime.

I meet all the legal definitions of being a police officer. I am sworn to uphold the laws just as police officers are. Because of my position, I have some exceptions of the laws that regular officers do not have, in relation to 4th Amendment searches. I AM a police officer, and I bring charges on those who violate immigration law.

Sarah

August 30th, 2011
4:53 pm

Who Would Jesus Deport?

md

August 30th, 2011
4:53 pm

“Deport Xenophobia!”

You might have a point if any here were anti-immigration……….I haven’t seen any evidence of that.

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
4:54 pm

Mr. Maddox — “Well, the Code says “imprisoned”. Think what you may, but it’s rotten as written.”

Agreed. But nowhere in there does it specify that someone convicted under that section ’shall be guilty of a misdemeanor’ or ’shall be guilty of a felony’ or anything remotely like that. Check the Georgia Code and look up burglary or arson or something like that — it will *specify* when when you’re convicted of that offense, you’re “guilty of” whatever level of criminal offense applies.

It doesn’t say anything like that here, and that’s because it’s not a crime. It’s a civil offense, and it DOES specify civil penalties — you even posted that part.

“Take it up with West – they publish the Code.”

I’m taking it up with you, because you posted it here and you’re misrepresenting it.

out of the blue

August 30th, 2011
4:55 pm

Oh thanks for informing me of that Dusty.

But, if you had bothered, you would have noticed that I was responding to a poster who brought Bush; The meathead up.

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:55 pm

“You might have a point if any here were anti-immigration……….I haven’t seen any evidence of that.”

How rich of you md, to lecture, while guilty of the same offense.

Brosephus

August 30th, 2011
4:55 pm

If caught sneaking by a TSA grope fest…………..what would Brocephus do?

Nothing. Simple answers for simple questions. My jurisdiction is at the border. TSA does not screen prior to people entering the US, therefore, I would not be present to witness such an event. IF I were along the Rio Grande and saw your swimmer, I’d apprehend him and process his paperwork to return back from where he came.

Joe The Plumber too.

August 30th, 2011
4:55 pm

aquanet, seriously…. they are not white, are you that dumbed down. A stance different than you bedwetters doesn’t make those who take it white. I’ve been called a lot of things in my life but thats a new one, I prefer mocha.

md

August 30th, 2011
4:56 pm

Soco……….but why have you when we don’t seem to care once they get past you??

What is the difference?

Brosephus

August 30th, 2011
4:57 pm

So the key to beating the system is getting past the first line of defense?

Nope. There’s multiple layers of enforcement that have different authorities and procedures for addressing immigration issues. I only speak from my jurisdiction and authority because that’s what I’m trained to operate in.

Tommy Maddox

August 30th, 2011
4:57 pm

Oh – if you want Georgia law, a misdemeanor is a crime punishable by up to one year and jail and up to $1,000 in fines. Anything above that [more than a year in jail] = a felony.

Paul

August 30th, 2011
4:57 pm

Sarah

“Who Would Jesus Deport?”

not many would want to consider

“Who Would Deport Jesus?”

Aquagirl

August 30th, 2011
4:57 pm

Joe @ 4:49, congrats on winning the Avoidance Gymnastics title. You want a cookie to go with that?

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
4:59 pm

Tommy,

Simple question, do you understand the difference between civil and criminal law?

Being here illegally or undocumented or whatever, is breaking a civil law, not a criminal one — so therefore you are not a criminal for doing that lone infraction.

Do you or do you not understand that simple premise? Yes or no.

Joe The Plumber too.

August 30th, 2011
5:00 pm

no thanks, wife has me on a diet, middle age spread you know. Speaking of which, time to shut this office down and head to the house. Braves baseball, oh yeah!!!!!

md

August 30th, 2011
5:00 pm

“How rich of you md, to lecture, while guilty of the same offense.”

A bit of a difference Bosch…..there are some here defending those not following the system…….how can one defend those and still believe in the system??

Or does the system need to be changed??

If yes…..to what?

josef

August 30th, 2011
5:00 pm

PAUL

Want a new thread…?

I’ll give it a shot…

Hell yes! Close the borders and deport anybody not three generations born here…here being defined as the Mason-Dixon-Ohio River-36 30 to the north, Rio Grande to the south…

All those illegal immigrants keep coming in, take jobs from the natives, won’t learn the local language or local culture, try to make us live like them, send their money back home…

:-)

Brosephus

August 30th, 2011
5:01 pm

Soco……….but why have you when we don’t seem to care once they get past you??

What is the difference?

The difference is that if my position were adequately staffed and disbursed accordingly, there would be less enforcement needed beyond the border, but the problem of illegal immigraton would not go away. As long as we have an open society that wishes to have open access to cross the border, we will have illegal immigration issues. All one has to do is enter legally and never leave. That’s one of the major tasks I face at work on a daily basis. I have to be able to determine who’s here for the vacation and allow them to travel on while, at the same time, being able to determine who’s coming here to never leave, turning them around at the border.

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
5:01 pm

“there are some here defending those not following the system”

Where md?

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
5:02 pm

Mr. Plumber — “joemama: I read as far as I needed to, I guess like all double talk garbage written into laws, it can be read both ways.”

No. See my post at 4:54 for a clearer explanation of what you should be looking for and what you don’t see,

“As far as my honesty being called into question, that is not a problem in my life, but then unlike so many of my brothers still on the democratic plantation believing government will take care of them, I chose a life of hard work, happy marriage, great educated children, loyal customers and financial security so my honesty is in tact to all those who matter to me. Perhaps a look in the mirror wouldn’t hurt you sometime.”

If you knew anything about me, you wouldn’t be telling me to look in the mirror. I’m a disabled Army vet, raised in the deep South and I voted GOP & Libertarian for the first 20-odd years of my voting life. I left the GOP fold for a number of reasons, but one of them is because a lot of the conservative faithful don’t hold truth and honesty in very high regard.

There was a time when Republicans, when they were confronted with facts that disagreed with their position, would back up, regroup, adjust their position and message, and then move forward again. That doesn’t happen any more.

It is a cold, hard FACT that undocumented immigration is a civil offense, not a criminal one. And when someone on your side argues over an incontrovertible fact like that, you just solidify my opinion that I did the right thing in leaving the party.

You don’t know what I think or what I believe, and frankly, I think you’d be happier just making stuff up about me anyway. It’s hard for conservatives to think that one of their own voluntarily left, and it’s a lot easier to make up reasons for it and call names than it is to ask questions, find out and then perhaps try to persuade the guy to come back.

If you have questions about how the immigration thing works, I think there are several people here who would be glad to lay it out for you. However, if you’re just going to go off and spout stuff without knowing or understanding what you’re posting, then I don’t think we’ll have a very productive discussion.

Tommy Maddox

August 30th, 2011
5:03 pm

Sure do Bosch. That’s why that operative word “imprisoned” is contained in the US Code, not “civil detention”. It really is a simple premise.

Oh and Joe, that Georgia law defining misdemeanors and felonies can be found at O.C.G.A. 16-1-3.

md

August 30th, 2011
5:04 pm

“Who Would Deport Jesus?”

With a large percentage coming from Latin America, I’d hazard there have been a few………..

Tommy Maddox

August 30th, 2011
5:05 pm

Bosch

August 30th, 2011
5:05 pm

Tommy,

One simple premise that you apparently do not understand. You are getting hung up on the word “imprisonment” and again, that does not a crimnal make.

Dusty

August 30th, 2011
5:06 pm

Bosch,

So you blog for flattery and only pass pleasantries?

Too bad you forgot the day you messed up so badly you want to forget it entirely, even though it is still in the archives. Then all the accusations about lying!! Talk about squirming!!

Say anything you like about my posts. Your credibility with me is long gone. I will continue to post my opinion, not yours.

Joe Mama

August 30th, 2011
5:07 pm

Mr. Maddox — “Oh and Joe, that Georgia law defining misdemeanors and felonies can be found at O.C.G.A. 16-1-3.”

I know that. Go look at some of the specific offenses and penalties. You will see language like this:

‘when convicted of this offense, the accused shal be guilty of a Class B felony’ or some such. It *specifies* in the applicable Code section what the offense is.

The Section of USC 8 we’re talking about doesn’t say anything about a misdemeanor or felony, but it DOES directly address CIVIL penalties. That’s because it deals with a CIVIL offense. It leaves to door open to other laws to be passed that *would* impose criminal penalties, but that portion of USC 8 does NOT speak to that at all.

josef

August 30th, 2011
5:07 pm

md

I don’t care who you are, thass funny! :-)

JohnnyReb

August 30th, 2011
5:08 pm

I see Daryl Hannah has been arrested at the White House while leading a group of tree huggers protesting the Keystone pipeline. No chance they would throw away the key…nah, just wishful thinking.

Tommy Maddox

August 30th, 2011
5:08 pm

I think you might want to run that notion in the Code rather than Wiki. Have fun. Love the law; live the law…

md

August 30th, 2011
5:09 pm

“All one has to do is enter legally and never leave. That’s one of the major tasks I face at work on a daily basis. I have to be able to determine who’s here for the vacation and allow them to travel on while, at the same time, being able to determine who’s coming here to never leave, turning them around at the border.”

Again, why worry about it if the feds don’t seem too concerned once they get in or decide to over-stay? I sense 2 totally differing concepts…………

Unless the game is to try to stop them, but not really caring if we do…………

Filter

August 30th, 2011
5:09 pm

jm,

You might need to check your facts.

You’ve gone on and on about traffic violations not being misdemeanors and you’re dead wrong about that. Read the first line of OCGA 40-6-1 and you’ll see what I mean. The statue provides for exceptions but specifically states that it is a misdemeanor to violate any statute in Chapter 6 unless the specific statute in question states otherwise. .

Also, your statement that only the police can bring criminal charges is also wrong. Anyone can apply for a civilian warrant even if the police have declined to take the charges against someone. The warrant is subject to a show cause hearing but the warrant, as long as it is signed by a magistrate court judge (which in come places doesn’t even have to be an attorney) the warrant is valid grounds for arrest.

If you’re going to purport to be an expert on something, at least do your homework,