Jeb Bush has a principled stand on immigration. Several, in fact.
Last summer, Jeb Bush was in favor of offering illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. As he told Charlie Rose:
“You have to deal with this issue. You can’t ignore it, and so either a path to citizenship, which I would support — and that does put me probably out of the mainstream of most conservatives — or a path to legalization, a path to residency of some kind.”
In his new book, “Immigration Wars: Forging an American Solution”, Bush comes out in stalwart opposition to citizenship.
“It is absolutely vital to the integrity of our immigration system that actions have consequences — in this case, that those who violated the law can remain but cannot obtain the cherished fruits of citizenship. To do otherwise would signal once again that people who circumvent the system can still obtain the full benefits of American citizenship.”
Today on “Morning Joe”, Bush was back to his initial position. Kind of … He repeatedly stressed that the book was written last year, as if something had happened recently to alter what in the book seems to be a strong, principle-based opposition to a path to citizenship. He also argued that a path to legalization would not create a magnet for future illegal immigration, while a path to citizenship somehow would.
“If you don’t have a difference between a path to citizenship or a path to legalization, you’re going to create a magnet going forward for more illegal immigration. So going forward — we wrote this last year — going forward, if there is a difference, if you can craft that in law where you can have a path to citizenship where there isn’t an incentive for people to come illegally, I’m for it. I don’t have a problem with that.”
A couple of points:
1.) The Bush flip-flop-flip has angered veterans of Mitt Romney’s campaign, which last year felt stranded on unpopular ground with the candidate’s “self-deportation” approach.
“Where the hell was this Jeb Bush during the campaign?” one advisor told the Miami Herald. “He spent all this time criticizing Romney and it turns out he has basically the same position. So he wants people to go back to their country and apply for citizenship? Well, that’s self deportation. We got creamed for talking about that. And now Jeb is saying the same thing.”
2.) The distinction that Bush attempts to draw between legalization and citizenship in fact has little real consequence. Those who have immigrated here illegally were drawn by jobs, the chance to escape Third World living conditions or greater opportunity for their children. Getting U.S. citizenship was way, way down on their list. A nice possibility, maybe, but hardly a deciding factor.
The notion that a path to legalization would be a less powerful magnet than a path to citizenship makes no sense, and Bush is smart enough to know it. But when you’re caught tacking to the right when the political winds are blowing left, and when you have ambitions of becoming the third consecutive Republican president named Bush, you have to scramble a bit.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
2,197 comments Add your comment
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
8:55 am
Thanks Normal
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
8:58 am
Just LITTLE bit of a diversion but……….
Why would Holder SAY that? I mean how stupid can you be? At a time when the President is trying to force the Republicans to do something why in the HELL would a senior admin say something so controversial to change the subject.
I’ll bet Pres. Obama is wanting to drone strike HOLDER lol.
Welcome to the Occupation
March 7th, 2013
8:59 am
Doggone: “Our government agents “take out” people all the time without “due process”…what does it MATTER what weapons platform they use to do that?”
I agree to a point, but there is an irresolvable conflict in a democracy between the state’s prerogative to summarily execute and the inherent brutality and corrupting nature of the action. It requires a delicate dance of secrecy and disavowal, as President Ford learned when he was in office and spilled the beans, kicking off the contentious debate we’re still engaging in in its modern form. Since 9/11 and now the crisis of capitalism this has become even more of a crisis.
Under Nazi dictatorship, of course, there is no conflict here. Death is just an administrative matter. But under a form of government that attempts to embody any sense of virtue, there has to be at least some pretense to secrecy and official denial, which in turn then flies in the face of the principles of democracy the regime is founded on. Hence you have in some sense an irresolvable tension.
Cosby
March 7th, 2013
8:59 am
Gee Jay…when are you going to have at least one blog on Dems and their stupidity..we could start by wondering when The King is going to send a Drone to the AJC!!
Normal, Plain and Simple
March 7th, 2013
8:59 am
Mary,
As far as our Government killing its own citizens, if a citizen takes up arms against us, they lose due process no matter where they are.
Period. The end.
p
Marty Huggins'
March 7th, 2013
9:01 am
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
8:52 am
Having played ball there for a few years I am inclined to buy into they will hate us no matter what, for some.
But there are many others who are “on the fence” or don’t have a true conviction one way or another.
There are some there looking for someone, anyone to blame for their suffering in life no reason to give them is as the focus of their hatred.
I understand it is an inevitability but innocent lives taken never sits well with me.
Regardless if they feel my enemy or I have the moral high ground.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:01 am
Dems and their stupidity..we could start by wondering when The King is going to send a Drone to the AJC!!
Talk about funny. This guy thick he thinks we have a king and calls DEMS stupid? Who’s the real dummy?
Wow.
Marty Huggins'
March 7th, 2013
9:03 am
Normal, Plain and Simple
March 7th, 2013
8:59 am
What if the arms they have taken up turn out to be like the WMDs we went to war for?
We just chalk it up as another oh well whoops?
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:04 am
Marty: No one likes the taking of innocent lives, especially those of us who have been the sharp end of the spear. The reality that “it happens” doesn’t make it any more palatable.
But in the end one has to justify whether or not it is worth saving the lives of “us” or “them.” It’s a crappy choice to have to make.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_Yayz5o-l0
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
9:04 am
Fred, not following you. I think Holder’s statement is an accurate assessment of the law. As Paul pointed out earlier, drones are just a weapon like a gun or grenade. Their use in this country has always been subject to review and DOJ has articulated standards (including national security, imminent danger and no other reasonable options) for use.
Thomas
March 7th, 2013
9:05 am
It is vastly different when a person on the other side of the world uses a tv screen and a joystick to wipe out folks. Soon to come will be articles of the “ease of war” due the video game element. No different than the “FU” from a weakling on a blog that would never have the gumption to say such things live.
Marty Huggins'
March 7th, 2013
9:05 am
Normal, Plain and Simple
March 7th, 2013
8:59 am
Why do they have to be droned if appropriate intel has been squired and the subject is here in America and we can obtain their location to drone why could we not obtain the location and take them into custody?
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
9:07 am
“but there is an irresolvable conflict in a democracy between the state’s prerogative to summarily execute and the inherent brutality and corrupting nature of the action”
And that was MY point. It’s not an inherent conflict that is SPECIFIC to drones. It applies to ALL weapons platforms, and that includes a man with a gun.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:08 am
Keep: I’m not arguing the legality, I’m arguing the WISDOM of bringing up such a controversial subject at a time when the President is trying to focus the national conversation on the budget “crisis.”
LOL Why didn’t Holder just come out and say he was going to legalize gay marriage nation wide? Or that he was going to FORCE all pregnant women to get an abortion. I mean if you are going to cause a major crap storm let’s not half ass it ……..
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
9:14 am
Fred, I think he was responding to a question at a Congressional hearing. Unfortunately, I think some forget that the Federal govt is not a single person and that the work of the DOJ and other departments goes on daily despite the media’s seeming focus on a single issue.
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
9:16 am
“Gee Jay…when are you going to have at least one blog on Dems and their stupidity”
blogspot.com is ready when you are
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
9:18 am
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has launched a nationwide campaign to assess police militarization in the United States. Starting Wednesday, ACLU affiliates in 23 states are sending open records requests to hundreds of state and local police agencies requesting information about their SWAT teams, such as how often and for what reasons they’re deployed, what types of weapons they use, how often citizens are injured during SWAT raids, and how they’re funded. More affiliates may join the effort in the coming weeks.
Additionally, the affiliates will ask for information about drones, GPS tracking devices, how much military equipment the police agencies have obtained through programs run through the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, and how often and for what purpose state National Guards are participating in enforcement of drug laws.
ATL Tiger
March 7th, 2013
9:19 am
A little unsettling that our President hasn’t come out and made a statement that he is 100% unequivocally against killing American citizens on American without due process.
The longer he waits, the more damage it does to him and the Democrats.
Normal, Plain and Simple
March 7th, 2013
9:20 am
Mary,
You said, “Why do they have to be droned if appropriate intel has been squired and the subject is here in America and we can obtain their location to drone why could we not obtain the location and take them into custody?”
Why are you wanting to put our soldiers or police men’s live in danger? What if the area where the bad guy is, is so inaccessible that it would be extremely dangerous to assault it?
I know you don’t want to see anyone killed, but that’s just not real life.
Welcome to the Occupation
March 7th, 2013
9:21 am
Normal: “As far as our Government killing its own citizens, if a citizen takes up arms against us, they lose due process no matter where they are.
Period. The end”
Actually what you’ve said here is that the government has unlimited power vis-a-vis citizens on the grounds of the inviolability of its own security, which is a statement that is strikingly inconsistent with our political principles.
I assume you agree that the government should not have absolute power, and since there is no more fundamental power than the government’s having the power of life and death over its citizens, which is the power to decide re the life and death citizens, isn’t that a little inconsistent to endorse that kind of abuse of power?
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:22 am
Uh huh Tiger. Right. And as soon as he does we’ll have every talk radio host and FOX screaming: President thinks he’s above the DOJ………. he thinks he’s the King and doesn’t need to follow the law…….. just damn.
Normal, Plain and Simple
March 7th, 2013
9:23 am
ATL Tiger
March 7th, 2013
9:19 am
Horse feathers!
Re-read my posts about it.
Normal, Plain and Simple
March 7th, 2013
9:25 am
Common,
Sling it anyway you want to. All I’m saying is that the federal Government has a responsibility to protect its citizens. If taking out terrorists does that, then so be it.
Jackie
March 7th, 2013
9:28 am
Wonder when Gov. Deal is going to remove and replace school board members from other school districts in the state?
ATL Tiger
March 7th, 2013
9:28 am
Normal,
“My view is if an American Citizen takes up arms against his country, he forfiets that citizenship and is, in fact, an enemy of the State. Kill him anyway you can.”
So you not only disagree with the 5th amendment, but also the 2nd I see. If an American citizen is in possession of a firearm does that qualify as ‘taking up arms against his country?’ Let me copy what the 2nd Amendment says.
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
Doesn’t that contridict your stance?
ATL Tiger
March 7th, 2013
9:31 am
“Uh huh Tiger. Right. And as soon as he does we’ll have every talk radio host and FOX screaming: President thinks he’s above the DOJ………. he thinks he’s the King and doesn’t need to follow the law…….. just damn”
An do tell, what law is he not following by not authorizing deadly force on American citizens on American soil without due process? How is that above the DOJ? If the DOJ is authorizing that kind of authority then they are committing unconstitutional procedures.
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
9:34 am
Let me put a little spin on the argument.
What if drones intended for domestic use could only mount *non-lethal* weaponry, such as incapacitating chemical agents?
How would that alter your stand on domestic drone use (no matter what your current position is on it)?
django
March 7th, 2013
9:35 am
Jay did you read the book. If you would have you would have known that if you kept reading you would have seen his position is exactly the same now as it was then. I guess instead of actually reading the book you take the word of the far left websites you frequent as fact……
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
9:38 am
“How would that alter your stand on domestic drone use (no matter what your current position is on it)?”
For me, it wouldn’t alter it at all.
pete
March 7th, 2013
9:38 am
This sequester idea that Obama is using is an attempt to trick low information voters, kind of like all you Bookman fanboys and fangirls. The plan of Obama is to hurt as many people as possible in order to prove their point of turning America into a nanny state.
Bookmanites…hope you enjoy the ride down.
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
9:39 am
“Jay did you read the book.”
No point addressing replies to Jay. He said he’s taking the rest of the week off. He’s not here.
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
9:41 am
In a written response to the intelligence panel, Brennan, too, said the administration has “no intention” of killing Americans with drones in the United States.
That was also the plan in Iraq, Afghanistan and to an extent, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. I simply don’t understand what motivated this legal “finding” in the first place.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 7th, 2013
9:43 am
Cops: Perp Had Loaded Revolver In Her Vagina
MARCH 6–An Oklahoma woman arrested Monday on drug charges had a loaded handgun hidden in her vagina, according to police.
The weapon was discovered during a search of Christie Dawn Harris, 28, by a female officer with the Ada Police Department. According to a police report, the cop spotted the handle of the five-shot revolver “sticking out from” inside Harris, who is seen at right.
“You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead ….”
– Thomas “Christie Dawn Harris” Jefferson
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
9:43 am
Doggone — “No point addressing replies to Jay. He said he’s taking the rest of the week off. He’s not here.”
Honey badger don’t care.
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
9:43 am
While completely predictable, it remains mind-boggling that liberals defend BO for this “finding”. I guess if any previous GOP suggested the same, all hell would break loose as well..
A sheepish lot indeed.
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
9:44 am
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 7th, 2013
9:43 am
Awesome…that’s quite a thorough search…
BADA BING (imagine an umlaut above the i, I'm trying to class this place up a little)
March 7th, 2013
9:45 am
Better get those drones handy. There are more domestic anti gov’t groups than ever before, thanks to our new administration. Texas has the most KKK groups. But can you believe that liberal California has the most anti Gov’t groups in the US? Necessity is a motha.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:46 am
An do tell, what law is he not following by not authorizing deadly force on American citizens on American soil without due process? How is that above the DOJ? If the DOJ is authorizing that kind of authority then they are committing unconstitutional procedures.
See Keep Up the Good Fight’s post up above. HE’S the lawyer. When it comes to lawyer stuff I defer to him and his judgment (and DDR’s now that I know she’s a lawyer too lol). Just as I defer to Brocephus on Border Patrol stuff and JM on how to be a dumb ass. I defer to the experts in the field.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:48 am
Honey badger don’t care.
You asked for it……..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg
pete
March 7th, 2013
9:49 am
DDR is a lawyer!?!? Damn…I thought lawyers were bright and intelligent people. Well, there goes that theory.
Brosephus™
March 7th, 2013
9:50 am
Late to the party, but I’ll chime in a bit…
Has a war been declared upon us citizens?
No.
“Overseas Contigency Operation”
Notice the use of the word Overseas, not domestic or homeland.
Also notice the lack of the word war?
Well, when you declare war, you usually declare it against another sovereign nation, right? If we were to officially declare war against AQ and it’s affiliates, what country do we declare war against?
That’s likely one of the reasons why it’s an operation as opposed to an officially declared war. I doubt any of us will ever know the true meaning behind the name, but that seems likely. Also, if you notice, most of the drone business has been done by the CIA, hence an operation as opposed to a war. Brennan has been in discussion with folding the CIA Drone program into the Pentagon as well to free up the CIA for their true mission, which is spying and espionage.
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
9:52 am
“Well, when you declare war, you usually declare it against another sovereign nation, right”
Not usually. Always.
Ben The Independent
March 7th, 2013
9:52 am
At lease Mr Jeb Bush has taken a definitive position which as you report has changed over time. I would welcome a definitive position from Mr Obama. I seem to recall Mr Obama has changed his positions in the past on various issues.
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
9:52 am
Randomly, I’m still puzzled why BO would not take deal where he was responsible for which specific areas to slow growth in spending. Baffling really. He seems to want maximum pain in order to avoid responsibility.
The idea of releasing illegal criminals certainly can’t be true? Are there no other ways to find budget objectives?
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:53 am
Bada Bing? Do you have a site for that info? I would have thought Montana or Wisconsin…….. maybe Idaho.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
9:53 am
Bro, but..but..but..Bush said “War on Terror”.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:54 am
DDR is a lawyer!?!? Damn…I thought lawyers were bright and intelligent people. Well, there goes that theory.
If you have ever “thought” you haven’t shown evidence of it here.
TaxPayer
March 7th, 2013
9:56 am
What is the difference between a suicide bomber/terrorist and a drone? One is the enemy.
pete
March 7th, 2013
9:56 am
Stevie Ray,
“He seems to want maximum pain in order to avoid responsibility.”
This is EXACTLY what he is doing! This has been his plan for 5 years now.
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
9:57 am
Pete — “Damn…I thought lawyers were bright and intelligent people.”
Some of them are, others are dumb as a post. When my mother became disabled and asked me to take over her affairs, I had to deal with her attorney in another state to iron out all the paperwork so I could restructure her finances, sell off some assets and put most of her liquid assets in a trust so my dirtbag brother couldn’t get his hands on it if something happened to me.
I swear, dealing with that man was like dealing with the lawyer equivalent of Barney Fife. A lot of his advice seemed to hinge on what would require the least amount of effort from him. Even getting a simple durable Power of Attorney (and a stack of notarized copies) out of him took nigh onto three weeks.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:57 am
Hey Keep? Here’s a new racket for you:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gun-owners-lawyering-even-shots-fired-191305639.html
I’ll give ya $50 a year. That’s easy money as I don’t have a pistol lol.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
9:58 am
<i.What is the difference between a suicide bomber/terrorist and a drone?
A drone is re-usable.
Welcome to the Occupation
March 7th, 2013
9:59 am
Stevie Ray: “While completely predictable, it remains mind-boggling that liberals defend BO for this “finding”. I guess if any previous GOP suggested the same, all hell would break loose as well..
A sheepish lot indeed.”
It’s true. In fact, watching MSNBC last night was a sad spectacle. Mostly the Obama cheering squad that makes up the prime time there mostly tried to ignore the filibuster, but when they did address it betrayed a tendency to dismiss it.
On the sheepishness of liberals, it shows how liberals are in many ways just conservatives who are just a little more out of touch with their own snobbery. There was a recent study that showed how liberals showed a tendency to support the very same actions they were previously disposed to reject, when pursued by a right wing leader, merely by being told that a supposedly ‘liberal’ leader like Obama was carrying them out instead.
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
10:00 am
Doggone — “Not usually. Always.”
I seem to recall that the war against the Barbary Pirates was not officially against a state, but my memory is fuzzy on the point.
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
10:03 am
“I seem to recall that the war against the Barbary Pirates was not officially against a state, but my memory is fuzzy on the point.”
Did Congres declare war?
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
10:05 am
Welcome to the Occupation
March 7th, 2013
9:59 am
Can’t disagree but the term liberal and conservative are definitely interchangeable…Far right and far left will follow shephered…even if stepping in sh*t along the way.
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
10:07 am
Doggone — “Did Congres declare war?”
I’m not certain, but I do know that the Barbary Wars were the proximate reason Congress authorized a permanent and standing Navy — to protect commerce on the high seas.
I also know that the Barbary Wars involved the ’shores of Tripoli’ that jarheads like to sing about, but I’m poorly informed otherwise about those particular conflicts.
pete
March 7th, 2013
10:08 am
Obama is inflicting as much pain as possible on purpose. It may take some time, but folks will figure this out eventually. Some of us are ahead of the curve, the rest will come around. Those that don’t will continue to spin their tires in the mud.
It’s sunny and warming up. Time to go out and hit some golf balls around.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
10:08 am
Fred, prepaid legal plans are generally a waste of money and a joke. But hey, I’ll be glad to take the money! I’m a capitalist!
Or does that make me a socialist if I spread your money around?
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 7th, 2013
10:08 am
Far right and far left will follow shephered[sic]…
George Will fanboy says, “What?”
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
10:10 am
TaxPayer
March 7th, 2013
9:56 am
In the case of the latter, enemy of whom exactly? Innocent “collateral damage”? I’m not sure how big a deal this is in reality but the fodder provided that can be argued somewhat successfully to fly in the face of the spirit of DEM tenets, was really dumb. At a time when popularity is slipping, realities of the cost of PelosiCare are beginning to be validated, the confusing issue of slowing spending fractionally, and then this…It would appear BO is intent on following the self destructive path formerly and currently the domain of the GOP…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
10:11 am
Obama is inflicting as much pain as possible on purpose.
You mean like voter ID laws aimed at certain voters? Or changes in the elector college? Or perhaps you mean those vaginal probe laws?
Brosephus™
March 7th, 2013
10:11 am
Way off topic, but the droning is begging to get unbearable…
National Champions ain’t the only thing coming out of Alabama…
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/03/dora_man_catches_record_stripe.html
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
10:12 am
“I’m not certain”
According to Wikipedia…they did not.
getalife
March 7th, 2013
10:13 am
The wsj said rand was dead wrong on the issue on drones so basically rand is an idiot.
But we knew that already.
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
March 7th, 2013
10:15 am
Well, I’m for using drones against Terrists. Even in a country like Wisconsin. I guess we could work out some way to give American Terrists due process. Like them holding still while we hold a hearing in front of a judge and maybe a trial.
Anyhow, seems to me we need to treat the Terrists the way they treated us on 9/11. No warning. Just let old Ahmed walk around thinking he’s safe and then all of a sudden, “Boom! Happy Birthday, Ahmed.” No offense to Thelma Doom about that “Boom!”
Have a good Thursday everybody.
appleseed
March 7th, 2013
10:16 am
China may be a little more able to fight a war than some think.Especially a war on or near their borders.I do not think they would have any problems with crossing over to Formosa.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
10:22 am
Damn. My joke didn’t even get a chuckle. There goes my dream of writing for Letterman…….. oh wait, no chuckles? Letterman? I’ve got the job hands down………
KAM: Check out this corner kick (if you can):
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/soccer-dirty-tackle/greatest-corner-kick-ridiculously-waterlogged-area-field-see-230212186–sow.html
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
10:22 am
getalife — “The wsj said rand was dead wrong on the issue on drones so basically rand is an idiot.”
FWIW, I don’t think Senator Paul was wrong on the drone issue. I think he’s a loon and a nitwit, but (choose the aphorism that appeals to you):
1) even a stopped clock is right twice a day
2) even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while
There are legal bars to using military resources for domestic law enforcement purposes (Posse Comitatus), and there are very few *narrowly defined* exceptions. From what I can tell, unless a suspected terrorist is known to be in possession of nuclear munitions or nuclear materials (e.g. a dirty bomb), then the exceptions don’t apply.
I’m sure that the Obama Administration is going to try to find some way around it (possibly transferring ownership of drones to some state governments and training some of their people how to use them), but at this point, I think the President is running up against some definite Constitutional limits on the use of his power.
I certainly hope he will prove to be more honorable in how he chooses to address those obstacles than his predecessor was.
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
10:24 am
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
10:11 am
Those are a problem as well but telling folks we need to release dangerous illegals, let children starve and make us more vulnerable to terror strikes are somewhat different.
I draw the civil rights and voting rights problems as a real serious issue but suggest the impact on outcomes of recent elections would be no different. Clearly needs fixing but both parties use re-districting and the like with equal vigor..
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
10:25 am
Doggone — “According to Wikipedia…they did not.”
It seems that you’re right. Apparently the pirates declared war on us, but we never returned the favor.
YouLibs
March 7th, 2013
10:25 am
Cosby @ 8:59:
“Gee Jay…when are you going to have at least one blog on Dems…”
http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/
You’re welcome…
TaxPayer
March 7th, 2013
10:25 am
“Drones don’t kill, people kill.” – The NRDA (National Rifle and Drone Association)
JamVet
March 7th, 2013
10:26 am
Rand Paul is opposed to abortion and supports a Human Life Amendment and a Life at Conception Act. He also opposes abortion in cases of rape and incest, but supports use of the morning-after pill. He takes a states’ rights position, favoring the overturn of Roe v. Wade and allowing states to decide on the legality of abortions without federal involvement.
getalife is correct – he’s nuttier than a fruitcake…
BADA BING (imagine an umlaut above the i, I'm trying to class this place up a little)
March 7th, 2013
10:28 am
Fred…….I read that a few days ago on CNN online.Try to google or bing. There were thousands of groups according to the DOJ.
getalife
March 7th, 2013
10:28 am
Joe,
The Senate debated it, found it legal and will confirm Brennen.
I think it is a good thing the tea party finally joined the left that already fought for American freedom and lost.
Better late than never.
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
10:28 am
“There are legal bars to using military resources for domestic law enforcement purposes (Posse Comitatus), ”
There are…but drones are not restricted to the military
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
10:30 am
China may be a little more able to fight a war than some think.Especially a war on or near their borders.I do not think they would have any problems with crossing over to Formosa.
Which shows how little you know. I don’t care what you THINK. I will stick with the FACT that they lack the landing craft and standing Navy to get past submarines much less the carrier groups we have in the area.
They have an Army of 100 million men and enough gas to operate for two weeks. How does their oil get to them? The sea. Who controls the sea? We do.
Now you see the difference between someone who CAN think for themselves and research, and someone like you who gets all their “info” from the fearmongers.
It’s better to let folks think you are a fool that to open your mouth and erase all doubt.
Educate yourself.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
10:32 am
telling folks we need to release dangerous illegals
Stevie, more of your buffoonery? Low risk detainees have been released and, to my knowledge, the President has not claimed that “dangerous” detainees will be released. But please proceed to PROVE your claim that the President is telling people that and its not just your (and other conned) knee jerk reaction.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 7th, 2013
10:33 am
Fred
The league shoulda rescheduled that match.
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
10:34 am
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 7th, 2013
10:08 am
OK you got me….I do dig his columns..fun reading. I’ve also come to really appreciate Thomas Sowell, and Glenn Greenwald on human and civil rights…I have come to appreciate Rachel Maddow her smirks notwithstanding…this a result of suggestions at this site..
Classic Greenwald
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/26/supreme-court-eavesdropping-law-doj-argument
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
10:35 am
Thanks Bada. I found it. Reading it now.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/us/splc-extremist-groups-report/index.html
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
10:38 am
Doggone — “There are…but drones are not restricted to the military”
Who else in the US is using them?
getalife
March 7th, 2013
10:42 am
I was more concerned on holder’s comments that some banks are too big to prosecute which means we have two justice systems.
One for the billionaires where they walk and one for the rest of American where they get locked up.
No accountability for billionaires is here to stay.
That will not end well.
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
10:42 am
“Who else in the US is using them?”
The CIA for one…but it doesn’t matter if no one is right now, they aren’t RESTRICTED to the military,
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
10:44 am
“I was more concerned on holder’s comments that some banks are too big to prosecute which means we have two justice systems.”
yeah, I heard a play on the “too big to fail” bit yesterday: “too big to jail”
Welcome to the Occupation
March 7th, 2013
10:46 am
Hugo Chavez, a life well lived.
Well done, sir.
getalife
March 7th, 2013
10:47 am
“yeah, I heard a play on the “too big to fail” bit yesterday: “too big to jail”
He said it before and thought he should not have the job if he can’t do his job.
I guess it is a new form of discrimination against the majority of Americans
Joe Hussein Mama
March 7th, 2013
10:48 am
Doggone — “The CIA for one…but it doesn’t matter if no one is right now, they aren’t RESTRICTED to the military,”
I should have been more specific in my question. I should have said ‘who else is using *armed* ones?’
I can see the utility of something like an autonomous surveillance UAV for locating missing hikers/campers/boaters. I can see such a UAV being equipped to drop a GPS locator or radio once the missing persons have been found.
I can also see the utility of UAVs with long loiter times surveilling places where drug activity is known to take place.
The problem I’ve got is using *armed* UAVs to take out individuals without due process.
Besides, I could see the government allowing me to purchase surveillance UAVs (I can see where farmers and ranchers could use them), but not an *armed* one. Something tells me I’m not going to be able to get my hands on a UAV with a live and launchable Hellfire or HARM missile mounted on it.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
10:48 am
9 out of 10 golden retrievers have indicated they are replacing their guns with drones.
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
10:48 am
Keep Up the Good Fight!
March 7th, 2013
10:32 am
Hmmm “baffoonery”…that’s a new one. I can’t disagree with your point but why then is he rushing out to make a big deal out of this. You are correct, the released detainees are low risk as detainees, but are they released into the general population without means to make a living? Is that a risk? After all they are criminals for being here illegally. Napolitano still trying to figure out who made decision to release these folks..
It would seem to cost less to simply return them to country of origin…
Common Sense is Uncommon
March 7th, 2013
10:49 am
Why is it Democrat Administrations think it is okay for them to murder United States citizens? The Clinton Administration authorized the use of fully automatic “assault rifles” using high capacity rounds to murder inocent civilians at Ruby Ridge and then added authorization to use armored tanks as well at the Waco massacre. In the later case dozens of of our fellow citizens, including women and children were killed by our government.
Barack Obama ‘has authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans on US soil’
President Barack Obama has the authority to use an unmanned drone strike to kill US citizens on American soil, his attorney general has said.
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
10:50 am
“The problem I’ve got is using *armed* UAVs to take out individuals without due process.”
And why is that any different from using a sniper to do the same thing? Or an armored vehicle. Or an airplane or helicoptor?
TaxPayer
March 7th, 2013
10:52 am
The rise and fall of “patriotism” is so… predictable.
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
10:53 am
After all they are criminals for being here illegally.
Ever have oral sex? You are a criminal. If you haven’? THAT is criminal.
Ever sped, run a stop sign. Gone slow in the left lane, passed on the right? You are a criminal.
That whole illegal aliens are STILL criminals is so FOXBOT.
Doggone/GA
March 7th, 2013
10:55 am
“After all they are criminals for being here illegally.”
No, they are not. Illegal entry into the US is not a criminal violation.
Stevie Ray
March 7th, 2013
10:55 am
Holder on the extortion big banks wield to prevent criminal prosecution….banks need to be broken up…absolutely no value to us of this group of bohemoths….Break the damn things up….no down side…nothing but upside for us…Too bad our priorities are meaningless..
Fred ™
March 7th, 2013
10:55 am
Common Sense is Uncommon: And you certainly exhibit HOW uncommon with your post @ 10:49.
getalife
March 7th, 2013
10:56 am
Our President is giving them memos on the use of drones so they set up some rules.
The Senate agrees and the issue is over.
I do not remember rand standing up with the left during w’s stolen freedom but he said he did.
Brosephus™
March 7th, 2013
10:56 am
Those are a problem as well but telling folks we need to release dangerous illegals
Dangerous illegals are locked up in prison and deported when released. Why do you think Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador have such a bad gang problem now? We exported our problem to their countries. The illegals being paroled, which is the correct term, are those who are low risk and will show up for their immigration hearings as required.
—————
“There are…but drones are not restricted to the military”
Who else in the US is using them?
JHM
CIA’s got armed drones. DHS has unarmed drones. Those are the two that I can think of off the top of my head.