September 30, 2009
It's Called Illegal Immigration for a Reason

A story in today's Times details the ongoing saga of illegal immigrant Jorge Chehade and a new bill being put forth by Congressman Jim McDermott to help him stay in the US.

Let me start off by saying that I honestly feel for this kid. He's seems like a good lad: graduated high school with honors, ran his own small business and recently graduated with a degree in business from the UW. By nearly all accounts Chehade is a model citizen and I wish more folks born in the US were like him but whether, in the cosmic sense of the word, it's fair or not, the law is the law and Congressman Jim McDermott can't just go waiving it for one guy, no matter how great he may be. As sad as it may be for Chehade to return to Peru, leaving his family behind (which, by the way, doesn't make sense because I assume, they too, are illegal and should be shipped back with him) it's what he must do.

Throngs of qualified and decent people want to settle here and it would be nice if we could just open our borders, letting in anyone who wanted to enjoy the American Dream. But, because we live in an imperfect world, often times a place I like to call the real world, a place that people like Jim McDermott seem to have left awhile ago, we can't be that magnanimous. There just isn't enough room.

My advice to the young Mr. Chehade would be to follow the law, go back to Peru, and then apply to return legally.

And my advice to our elected officials like Congressman McDermott would be, instead of writing a bill to save one illegal immigrant from deportation, why not focus on the problem at large. Our current immigration system, like much of our government, is a victim of its own bureaucracy. While we need to enforce and perhaps strenghten current laws that are letting illegal immigrants into this country by the thousands, we also need to streamline the system so that good people like Chehade can come here legally and not have to fill out a thousand different forms and wait years before coming here.

Posted by MarkGriswold at September 30, 2009 09:42 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Jim McDermott in addition to being a liberal Dem
is a "shrink": understandably, proper behavior to him is personal choice. His bill is a waste of time because Obama will bestow citizenship on
Chehade along with millions of other "guests".

Posted by: roy matheny on September 30, 2009 10:57 AM
2. Jim McDermott in addition to being a liberal Dem
is a "shrink": understandably, proper behavior to him is personal choice. His bill is a waste of time because Obama will bestow citizenship on
Chehade along with millions of other "guests".

Posted by: roy matheny on September 30, 2009 10:58 AM
3. Not for nothing, but he did not enter the country illegally, and there is no felony or misdemeanor crime that he committed by staying. Overstaying a visa is basically the equivalent of speeding ticket or other infraction.

That's the law.

And there's nothing legally wrong with a law that allows him to continue living here: it would not be excusing him from any serious crime, again, it's just an infraction.

I don't think it should be done this way -- we should have a broader and more comprehensive reform effort instead of doing it piecemeal for individuals -- but it's no different to the law than waiving a speeding ticket, which happens all the time (usually by the cop at the scene, but sometimes in court too).

Let me ask you this: if a pregnant woman, water broken, were being driven by her husband to the hospital and he was speeding, would you have a problem with the government waiving that ticket? It really is the same thing.

The difference between the two is not in the law, but in the perception of the severity of the consequences: deportation is obviously a big deal to the person being deported. But in the eyes of the law, it's just putting you where you belong, and it is NOT a big deal. (Although coming back illegally after deportation IS a big deal.)

If he had ENTERED the country illegally, that would be a different story. That is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail. But overstaying a visa is not a crime any more than going 65 in a 55 is.

Posted by: pudge on September 30, 2009 11:09 AM
4. Yes pudge, but Congress, to the best of my knowledge, has never gotten involved in waiving speeding tickets.

We have immigration law courts for a reason. Just because McDermott doesn't think the immigration law judge made the right decision, and just because McDermott may have the right to put forth a bill saving Chehade from deportation, doesn't mean he should.

As far as comparing overstaying one's visa to speeding, it would be more accurate to say that, after the cop pulled the speeder over he decided not to give him a ticket and then continued to let him speed. As long as Chehade is in this country he is breaking the law and is, therefore, illegal. Is he a bad person? Should he go to jail for a year let alone a week? No. He should simply stop breaking the law, go back to Peru, which, last time I checked, wasn't hacking peoples heads off or anything, and then go through the appropriate channels to return.

Posted by: MarkGriswold on September 30, 2009 11:20 AM
5. Better Idea:

Send McDemott to Peru and let the kid stay, or even better pay Peru to take nut case Jim.

Posted by: Oxymoron on September 30, 2009 11:41 AM
6. Mark: Congress, to the best of my knowledge, has never gotten involved in waiving speeding tickets.

But those aren't federal. ;-)

Again, though, I am not saying McDermott is right. In fact, I said he was wrong. This is the wrong way to do what he wants done. I agree with you that we should not make such laws.

And yes, the analogy is imperfect, but the point is that he is not guilty of a serious violation, and as such -- in the eyes of the law -- there's not much to get worked up over here, to me.

I am not saying you're wrong, I am just saying what Chehade is guilty of is not a big deal to the law, and therefore not to me.

Posted by: pudge on September 30, 2009 11:44 AM
7. So pudge, if cops started letting everyone speed and commit other "minor" infractions you wouldn't think that was a big deal? If it's such a small deal maybe we shouldn't even have the law at all. We'll just do away with visitor's visas and start letting anyone in who qualifies for a visitor's visa (i.e., not a terrorist,etc.). And that last point isn't meant to be sarcastic. Not that I necessarily support it but it's a discussion I'd be willing to have.

Posted by: MarkGriswold on September 30, 2009 11:56 AM
8. Congress already makes exceptions regarding the tax code, so why not our immigration code? Have to keep the lawyers employed.

Posted by: FurryOldGuyJeans on September 30, 2009 11:58 AM
9. Staying here illegally may be "just an infraction"; however, what crimes were committed in the process of violating immigration law?

Tax evasion? He ran a business - did he pay taxes?

Identity theft? Whose birth certificate, driver's license, etc. has he been using?

How did he attend school without these things, if he didn't use someone else's?

Did he register for Selective Service?

Perjury? Throughout the years, signing that the information was true...

Posted by: Douglas Aldrich on September 30, 2009 12:13 PM
10. Jim McDermott is yet another politician who is more interested in protecting illegals than supporting our rule of law and the legal citizens he is suppsed to represent. Who the hell is he anyway to think he has the power to change a judge's ruling? We need to vote out these pompous, power tripping politicians who stand up for illegal lawbreakers. Overstaying a visa or entering illegally is basically the same offsense and is against the law. Period. I'm sick of people like Mr. Chehade who they they shouldn't have to abide by our laws. He does not deserve the priviledge of staying in this country. We need to quit feeling sorry for law breakers. If our government would just seriously enforce immigration laws, we wouldn't have to deal with this crap.

Posted by: Dee on September 30, 2009 12:42 PM
11. Did he vote?

Posted by: daveo on September 30, 2009 12:56 PM
12. hmm,
Isn't this a kid that came in with his parents when he was 12 or 14? His parents are apparently laying low in the area so they too won't be deported.

Too bad laws aren't flexible enough to let justice be flexible. The laws are set so bureaucrats can hide behind the inflexibility and not have to worry about true justice.

In this case a minor is brought in illegally to this country. Said minor grows up with parents and is a model citizen.

What if the kid was 1 month old when brought to the US?

What if the kid was constantly in trouble but had been here since being 1 month old?


J

Posted by: JP on September 30, 2009 01:22 PM
13. He had no choice but to move here when he was a kid. He probably identifies with America a lot more than Peru. I don't agree with making a law just for him, but honestly it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to help a good person out. And then we need to reform immigration laws.

#9 Douglas Aldrich, don't you think it's the least bit irresponsible to simply make up or guess accusations? I think it is.

Posted by: John Jensen on September 30, 2009 01:33 PM
14. #13 Mr Jensen,

I don't think it irresponsible to ask questions if they are logical.

It is highly probable that more serious crimes have been committed in the course of his staying here. Some by his parents, and some by him.

Please consider that the young man could not go to ANY school without documentation of some sort, some of which he would have personally provided after the age of 18.

Of course, that is not counting the procurement of a driver's license, etc. and what that involved.

Posted by: Douglas Aldrich on September 30, 2009 01:44 PM
15. Well intentioned public servants always want to bend the rules for certain individuals BUT really all it does is create anarchy.

If you want to live in a state where the rule of law means nothing... then you are on the right path. Just pick and choose if and when immigration laws can be enforced. You'll have a state like California that has 2.7 million law breaking illegal immigrants expecting every social program available. Putting millions of anchor babies into the welfare system annually.

Crime from gangs will require an expensive task force to contend with the massive gang problems that come with the illegal immigrant presence.

You better get additional schools and prisons built too. Hire a bunch more interpreters, judges and attorneys.... you'll need a lot more than you currently have. Prepare to have your state budget to mushroom like Hiroshima. But the American families that need assistance won't be served anymore.

Also, these folks don't vote or pay taxes so you may have a citizen outcry from your constituents. Tell Mr. McDermott to find a new job because the folks that vote and pay taxes will never vote for him again. But he'll have the support of LA RAZA and the ACLU to keep him warm.

Of course, you could just deport him and his family and be done with it.

Posted by: MadMommy on September 30, 2009 01:46 PM
16. Seems like a good hard worker, etc. and heck---I AM half peruvian with a father that came from Peru LEGALLY---but this is not the problem of our government. His PARENTS did this to him. THEY put him in this hard spot. Not the government; not you, not I. Sorry but he should go back (with his family) and apply to get in the legal way---just like my peruvian dad did. It works out best that way for everyone.

Posted by: Michele on September 30, 2009 06:15 PM
17. The main foundation stone in this whole illegal immigration problem is our own State Department. It use to be a far shorter time factor, going through the legal process to make proper entry and become an American Citizen. But, over the many years, the State Department, like all Government Entities, grew in size, expanded its make work empire of Red Tape, causing unnecessary clumsiness and delays in the processing of immigrants who wish to enter this Country legally. It now, can take upwards of 10 to 15 years. Ridiculous! No wonder we have such trouble of immigrants working every angle and Yes, feeling the need to break the so-called law because, of over restrictive, time consuming delays caused by our State Department in order to achieve a better life for themselves. I say let the Kid stay, he has more than proved himself worthy. The law is to serve to the benefit of Mankind/Americans and not against.

Posted by: Daniel on September 30, 2009 07:33 PM
18. SPON--SOR--SHIP--a long-overdue concept;

read my lips---you want illegals here, YOU pay for them--ALL costs--like a dependent--med, food, house, etc; AND--put them up in YOUR houses; YOU are liable for ALL their actions;

when people take PERSONAL responsibility for illegal immigrants they want to sponsor & personally vouch for, then o.k.--i'll listen

immigrant legal groups and ethnic groups all love helping people--especially when U.S. Joe Taxpayer foots the bill for meds, translation services, etc

have their own interest groups foot the bill at no cost to us and THEN i'll listen...

until then, it's all B.S. feel-good P.C. shyt;

Posted by: jimmie howya-doin on September 30, 2009 08:22 PM
19. @ 16 Michele- I agree 100%. We have a thing in this country called the rule of law. If you're not in this country with a 'legal status', then you need to return to your country of citizenship and return when done with respect to and in compliance of and accordance with our sovereign nations immigration laws. I have plenty of people I know personally that are restricted from bringing loved ones here from abroad and I'd hate to see people, well intentioned or not, skip in line only to create the current stagnant legal immigration into this country from those who've chosen to "do the right thing" with respect to this countries sovereignty.

While it may not be Mr. Chehede's fault he has overstayed his 'legal status', but rather his parents, it IS HIS repsonsibility to rectify this by going through the system and jumping through the hoops like every other person seeking to be here has had to jump through.

Posted by: Rick D. on September 30, 2009 08:50 PM
20. Rick D...Your agreeing with Michele a 100% is founded on Michele's father being able to become an American citizen years ago when the time factor to do so was much shorter. Now, the time factor is crippling to a young immigrant who wants to start out a new life. Fifteen years stacked on top of a young man makes him middle aged or older before, he can become an American citizen. It is difficult to start a career when you're middle age or older. This Nation needs young healthy Legal Immigrants. Legal Immigrants who are young, vital and productive are a great benefit to this Nation's economy. The State Department is blocking such immigrants from entering the U.S. by having a wait period of a ridiculous amount of 10 to 15 years to be able to become Legal Citizens. The State Department is our Greatest Enemy to our immigration issue.

Posted by: Daniel on September 30, 2009 09:43 PM
21. Now, the time factor is crippling to a young immigrant who wants to start out a new life.

Yes, Daniel. And the reason for that crippling wait is because of unfettered illegal immigration into this country in the last 30+ years. The illegal immigrant/ gate crashers are causing those willing to stand in line and respect our sovereignty to wait for longer periods of time and jump through a myriad of red tape prior to approval for entry.

It is that same illegal immigrant that is hindering the entry of the legitimate and legal immigrant access to this country, and I think that is wrong.

Posted by: Rick D. on September 30, 2009 10:04 PM
22. Ah yes, another wonderful case study in why an impractical and immoral approach to our immigration policy just isn’t working.

“Yeah, yeah, yeah. Ya got a good story but our government says ya don’t qualify.”

One of those few times the Right Wing wackos are willing to “gubmint” authority: When it protects their god given rights to enjoy the benefits of their accidental birth within the borders of the USA.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on September 30, 2009 10:35 PM
23. Where was all the outrage when Joe Wilson introduced a bill to get an illegal immigrant to stay in the country? Oh right, you guys were too busy worshiping the ground he walks on.

Posted by: Tyler on September 30, 2009 11:10 PM
24. Hi guys,
We are a group of practicing physicians who have a blog devoted to educating people about Health Care Reform from an insider's point of view. There are many posts including one on HR 3200 and illegal immigrants (http://www.takebackmedicine.org/?p=1217) and tonight one about that DBag Alan Grayson (http://www.takebackmedicine.org/?p=1530)
Please feel free to read, use as desired and forward to others that you think would enjoy this information. If you visit, leave a comment, say hello and share a thought.
Yours,
BNK MD

Posted by: Brian K on September 30, 2009 11:46 PM
25. Hi guys,
We are a group of practicing physicians who have a blog devoted to educating people about Health Care Reform from an insider's point of view. There are many posts including one on HR 3200 and illegal immigrants (http://www.takebackmedicine.org/?p=1217) and tonight one about that DBag Alan Grayson (http://www.takebackmedicine.org/?p=1530)
Please feel free to read, use as desired and forward to others that you think would enjoy this information. If you visit, leave a comment, say hello and share a thought.
Yours,
BNK MD

Posted by: Brian K on September 30, 2009 11:46 PM
26. Our Government, past & present, Republican & Democrat, have allowed the invasion of 20 to 30 million criminals and uneducated peons which is the largest invasion of any Nation, at any time, by any means & in direct violation of Article IV, Section IV of our Constitution.

This refusal to abide by our Constitution or enforce our Immigration Laws should be classified as Treason of the most foul kind, & as grounds for impeachment & trials for Treason!

Not only have they allowed the invasion, they force American tax payers to pay Billions on Billions of dollars to provide Welfare, Prison cells, Educate the invaders numerous children, and free medical care, at the same time the invading horde break numerous laws and massive document fraud, & are destroying our schools, hospitals, communities, culture and standard of living while Robbing, Raping, Killing & Assaulting American Citizens WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Posted by: steve on October 1, 2009 04:17 AM
27. Our Government, past & present, Republican & Democrat, have allowed the invasion of 20 to 30 million criminals and uneducated peons which is the largest invasion of any Nation, at any time, by any means & in direct violation of Article IV, Section IV of our Constitution.

This refusal to abide by our Constitution or enforce our Immigration Laws should be classified as Treason of the most foul kind, & as grounds for impeachment & trials for Treason!

Not only have they allowed the invasion, they force American tax payers to pay Billions on Billions of dollars to provide Welfare, Prison cells, Educate the invaders numerous children, and free medical care, at the same time the invading horde break numerous laws and massive document fraud, & are destroying our schools, hospitals, communities, culture and standard of living while Robbing, Raping, Killing & Assaulting American Citizens WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Posted by: steve on October 1, 2009 04:20 AM
28. @21 Get Real, Rick D...You got to look at the whole picture of what is happening with the immigration fiasco. If it wasn't for the Criminal Incompetence of the State Department in delaying legal entry into the U.S. by many years, you as an immigrant would have second thoughts as to the righteousness of the Rules laid upon you. As with any laws that are excessive and abusive, the respect for and complying to the law is reduced. This condition will deteriorate to where the law becomes unenforceable. That is the chain of events that has led to this blanket ignoring of the law not, the other way around as you have described. The State Department is the beginning of the problem and by fixing the State Department you can begin to bring this problem under control.

Posted by: Daniel on October 1, 2009 08:26 AM
29. As with any laws that are excessive and abusive, the respect for and complying to the law is reduced.

So now our immigration laws (and presumably those of other nations in the world) are "excessive and abusive"? What an ignorant comment to make. Immigration laws are in place to regulate population to coincide with a limited number of resources in the country.i.e. Jobs, housing, education resources, food sources, etc. You are simply naive if you think we can sustain unfettered immigration into this country.

Also, If these laws are so excessive and abusive, why would all of those people standing in line continue to wait in line? There must be some reward worth receiving in this cold hearted nation, right? And since when is it wrong to have all immigrants having to abide by the same set of rules? Why, in your eyes, does a Guatemalan here illegally for 1 year deserve a recognized status that someone that has been waiting in line for 8 years going through the legal channels from the phillipines does not?

You're not consistent, Daniel.

Posted by: Rick D. on October 1, 2009 08:54 AM
30. No, Rick we are discussing the Immigration problem solely in the U.S. So, lets keep our discussion on target and not spread it to the emigration laws of other Nations. My comment that laws that are excessive and abusive, the respect for and complying to the law is reduced, is Not, an ignorant comment to make. It is a well establish fact that has been proved many times throughout history. Nor, did I state that we can sustain unfettered immigration into this country. Your Lying to say that I have so stated. Yes, there are some who will still try and abide by the abusive law that requires, without legitimate cause, to wait many years but, that doesn't make the abusive law correct. I have never said it was wrong for having all immigrants abide by the same rules. Again, you are Lying. What I'm saying is, the State Department needs to clean up its act and by doing so, will go a long ways to begin to solve the problem.

Strange...I thought you were a Conservative but, your thinking patterns are that of a confused Liberal. Perhaps, I was wrong.

Posted by: Daniel on October 1, 2009 09:37 AM
31. My comment that laws that are excessive and abusive, the respect for and complying to the law is reduced, is Not, an ignorant comment to make.

Sure it is as you have no proof to back up your assertion that it is excessive or abusive. No foreign national has a "Right" to be here. We currently have 12-20 million illegals that essentially crashed the gates rather than do it through legal channels. You still have yet to explain why that Guatemalan that made it here is any more deserving of recognition and rewards when he jumped in line in front of the Philipino. What you're experiencing is cognitive dissonance, which is why you can't answer that and remain consistent in your argument.

It is a well establish fact that has been proved many times throughout history.

Where? When? citation?

Again, you are Lying. What I'm saying is, the State Department needs to clean up its act and by doing so, will go a long ways to begin to solve the problem.

Once again, and still, WRONG! The state department has nothing to do with 12-20 million squatters that have broken our sovereign immigration laws and entered this country illegally.

Strange...I thought you were a Conservative but, your thinking patterns are that of a confused Liberal.

Wow, you're projection isn't making your argument any more coherent, but rather just the exact opposite. When did you, as a "conservative", stop believing in the rule of law, Daniel?

Posted by: Rick D. on October 1, 2009 09:52 AM
32. Rick,

I don't think Daniel is advocating that some people have more right to break immigration laws than others or that we don't need immigration reform. He's simply saying that part of the solution, as I mentioned in the main post, is cutting out a lot of the red tape that currently exists.

He is correct in stating that as laws become more excessive and abusive more people will break them. Proof?
Prohibition for one. When alcohol was illegal not only did we have a rise in crime related to the prohibition (Al Capone, et al) but we also had thousands and thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens who were breaking the law by going to speakeasies. The upper class folks were probably the biggest "criminals", regularly having parties where the champagne flowed free.
And then there's taxes. One of the reasons that tax revenue goes down when taxes go up is that more people cheat on their taxes.

So, we do need to better enforce current immigration laws, strengthen the border, do away with "sanctuary cities", send people we catch packing instead of throwing them in jail, fining companies that hire illegals, etc. But we also need to make it easier for those good people who do want to come here legally to do so. Once upon a time I was a secretary in an immigration law office and let me tell ya, the amount of ridiculous paperwork, money and time that was spent to get someone into this country, someone that we were clearly going to let in, was out of control.

Posted by: MarkGriswold on October 1, 2009 10:13 AM
33. Yes, Rick...The law becomes excessive when, the wait, caused by the State Department, of many years makes it overburdening to comply with the law. Yes, excessive laws that are difficult to abide by have been proved failures throughout history. You want a example? How about the Prohibition Era?

The State Department has a lot to do with illegal immigration. By generating a ridiculous and debilitating waits encourages the breaking of the law ergo, the temptation to simply ignore the law and hence the millions of illegals.

I do believe in The Rule of Law but, only if the Law is reasonable, Just and well applied. Only a Slave minded Fool would believe in and blindly follow a Law that is Unjust and poorly applied. Does anything I have written make any sense to you? Naah...You're a Liberal!

Posted by: Daniel on October 1, 2009 10:42 AM
34. Mark: I don't think Daniel is advocating that some people have more right to break immigration laws than others...

Sure he is. He believes that Mr.Chehede should receive special status because he's already here, while someone else that is abiding by the U.S. immigration laws is outside looking in. I do agree completely with your third paragraph, though. The first rule in first aid is to stop the bleeding and I say that rule should be applied to immigration to this country. I would favor a moratorium on immigration and until we figure our how the ones here are dealt with and the process improved, all immigration ceases. I see california as the model of what happens when you accomodate illegal aliens. They've placed a huge burden on that state from social services, education and health care. I say we as a nation learn from CA and learn from their mistake.

Posted by: Rick D. on October 1, 2009 11:17 AM
35. The law becomes excessive when, the wait, caused by the State Department, of many years makes it overburdening to comply with the law.

As I stated before,Daniel. Foreign nationals don't have a 'right' to emigrate to this nation. Have you ever thought that the state department is merely restricting access from those standing in line to compensate for the 12-20 million that crashed the gates? Is there some magic number that you've arrived at as to how many we let in?

I do believe in The Rule of Law but, only if the Law is reasonable, Just and well applied.

So you believe in the rule of law as long as Daniel thinks that law is valid, correct? And since when do we let foreign nationals determine which immigration laws are valid, Daniel? Is there some huge outcry from Americans that we need more immmigration to this country that I haven't heard about? I'm fairly certain the polls are not on your side on this issue.

Does anything I have written make any sense to you? Naah...You're a Liberal!

Nothing you've written makes any sense because it is largely inconsistent with logic. And calling me a liberal doesn't make you sound any more coherent.

Posted by: Rick D. on October 1, 2009 11:35 AM
36. No, Rick D...I'm NOT advocating that some people have more of a right to break immigration laws than, others. What I'm advocating, is the right for Mr. Chehede to have his case, which involves a particular set of circumstances beyond his control, be reviewed by the courts. After all, it is part of the justice system is it not? That being said, in my opinion with the facts that are known to me, I would show mercy and let him become an American citizen without further ado.

Posted by: Daniel on October 1, 2009 11:39 AM
37. [Daniel's] NOT advocating that some people have more of a right to break immigration laws than, others.

However...

[He] would show mercy and let him become an American citizen without further ado.

The departure from logic is astounding.

Posted by: Rick D. on October 1, 2009 11:48 AM
38. Remember Rick...Nothing that I have written will make any sense not because, it is largely inconsistent with logic, for it IS consistent with logic and Truth. It is you the Liberal, that is inconsistent with logic and Truth, so well demonstrated in your commentary that it is you that is unable to grasp the logic and Truth being offered. Get it? Naah...You're a Liberal!

Posted by: Daniel on October 1, 2009 11:55 AM
39. Rick, @40 I see you are selecting things out of context and then, attacking as a stand alone statement. What a blatant dishonest tactic in order to promote your False conclusion. Typical Liberal deception to distort the Truth. Keep it up. You are displaying to all what a Liberal is all about...A disingenuous, lying...LOSER!

Posted by: Daniel on October 1, 2009 12:07 PM
40. I see you are selecting things out of context and then, attacking as a stand alone statement. What a blatant dishonest tactic in order to promote your False conclusion.

translation: "you caught me in an obvious logic deficit and now, in order to save face, must now call my own words written back to me "out of context" as they contradicted one another. Then I must launch into a "you're a liberal" mode so as to lend the death blow to any further rational discussion of the topic at hand"
- See Al Gore/Global warming-

Posted by: Rick D. on October 1, 2009 02:39 PM
41. How this Rick? Short and sweet...Fact: You're Full of Crap! No Surprise. You're a Liberal!

Posted by: Daniel on October 1, 2009 04:22 PM
42. "your confidence in your own sanity is naively overblown"~ pudge to Daniel

I'll second that...

Posted by: Rick D on October 1, 2009 05:31 PM
43. Lets see...You have to hold on to pudge's shirttail in order to give your position some credibility in our exchanges? That is definitely a sign of weakness on your part. Pudge himself has lost a lot of credibility in his exchanges with me when, trying to hold his position. Rather than, to continue to give factual rhetoric to support his argument, he was reduced to simply replying with negative condescending remarks. Plus, on another post, he would delete my comment entirely. Yes, pudge is very fair and even handed. Yeah...poor pudge cannot begin to equate that Liberals as a class of people, can be any stripe of Socialists and that includes Nazis. That mental barrier that he is not strong enough to cross is probably because, he has close relatives that are Liberal. Perhaps, as close as his Mother.

Posted by: Daniel on October 1, 2009 10:17 PM
44. ...[he] cannot begin to equate that Liberals as a class of people, can be any stripe of Socialists and that includes Nazis.

Next stop, western state hospital....

Posted by: Rick D on October 1, 2009 10:57 PM
45. Well, you have some time ago, more than demonstrated that you have reached the same level of cognitive destitute in your lack of ability to refute intelligently as pudge did. What a Laugh!

Posted by: Daniel on October 2, 2009 08:46 AM
46. You guys both sound like liberals.

Posted by: John Jensen on October 2, 2009 05:50 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?