POTUS Bush finally found an alien the US won't tolerate within it's friendly confines -- a  Danish runway model! Possibly drunk, definitely abusive.  Who has LEGALLY resided in NYC for part of each year since 2000.

Too bad she's not loitering around suburban strip malls waiting to be picked up for a day of  unqualified cut-rate wage labor generously provided by marginal but unscrupulous employers.  I'm sure ALL would have been forgiven had she been one of that ilk.

Irony abounds, and in the very SAME edition of the paperIi see a column where Bush is paraphrawed as saying that deporting 12 million illegals won't work.  How does he know?  It's never been tried in a peacetime environment.  And look, 1 down 11,999,999 more to go.

Meanwhile total complcency about the gazillion [yes, it's just a figure of speech] illegals running arounfd our country. Rash talk about amnesty/guest worker programs. Or turning over some US port operations to a company controlled by the gov't of Dubai.

POTUS I don't know what this country would do w/o your brillantly inspired leadership.

I'm eager to find out.

she gets in a fight on an airliner.  What would you prefer they do?  Kiss her ass?  

Or maybe go out and hassle any apparantely swarthy vagrant?

Chances are real good that she has been coming and going using a Danish passport on a visa waiver, which allows 90 day entries, no residence, no work allowed; and chances are she's been working, and if she's here more than twice a year (6 months) it's reasonable to regard her as a residence violator (that's what most of them do).   So there is a fair chance she's been illegal.  If she had been convicted of assaulting an aircrew member, she's probably inadmissible, regardless of how attractive she may be, and that's the way it should be.  I don't see that being anorexic should excuse a person from acting on their bitch impulses.

You're right, deporting 12 million illegals hasn't been tried in a peacetime situation.   We've tried millions (during the Depression, Latin neighborhoods were swept and summarily deported without inquiry as to legal status or ANYTHING) but not tens of millions.

The issue of cost is a legitimate and obvious one.   It's not immediately obvious how hurting your neighbor helps you.  It might, but it's not clear.
The historical problem has been the willingness of the taxpayer to pay for rooting out people without probable cause that would justify a warrant.

The next problem is the wisdom of what we have done in the past.  Are we going to regret sending the Border Patrol into Latin neighborhoods to execute summary sweeps that cannot consider whether a person might be legal?   Do YOU carry an original of your birth certificate?  I don't know anybody that does.  Will we regret reaping that particular whirlwind, a generation of US citizens who recall being deported for the color of their skin?  Because they will come back, this time with their birth certificates.

We realize that it is hard to imagine that a clean European can have a piece of paper and STILL be illegal; or that the life of a wetback could be something less than rosy, but these are possibilities, and in fact, they are common.   The model who was tossed off the plane is just as likely to be misusing a social security card as the wetback.

What is the solution?   The solution is to recognize that these people give us somebody to blame for our problems, and we should be grateful for it.   In her case, perhaps she should be spanked (by me, of course).


The solution is to decide what the hell it is that we want, and what is practical, and stop kvetching, and start doing.

You want amnisty for Millions of illegals - no matter country of origin or purpose for being here.... except of course if they should happen to be from Denmark - also she probably has problems with the language... as she can probably speak English!  

just don't get it, why are you not screaming for this lady's "rights"  

with respect to traveling with a birth certificate?  I do,  and I do with my kiddos as well.   Oh, and passports as well.  go figure....

As far as whirlwind of activity, directed against a "specific ethnic group" I wouldn't know anything about that, just a sec while I ask my Uncle Akira.  Oh, that's correct, a race that actually, even though they look different, assimilated and excelled.

For the record Spock, she was physically violent, deportation?  Seems appropriate, maybe even lenient.  You see, I do apply evenly and equally.  Even to Ann Murry, Gordon Lightfoot, and especially Celine Dion... hee hee!  

Once you get in the habbit of actually doing something - it gets easier - EACH AND EVERY TIME YOU DO IT....

You don't get much of anything, so this should not be any different, I suppose.

Like, did I say "travel" with a birth certificate?  No, I said "carry" a birth certificate.  Are you advocating people should do that?  

So what is it about this "race that...assimilated and excelled"??   We're back to race?  Do you want to bet that I can't find plenty of your Uncle's race-mates who neither excelled nor assimilated, and plenty of any other race who did - as you are living proof, idiocy is not limited to any particular race...

Must be easy for you folks who don't need no steenking facts....

Like for example that I have not really advocated any particular position, only punched holes in yours.  Which is as hard as falling off a log drunk.

So you seem to assume that I disagree with whatever you are thinking (which does not seem to be a whole lot) and that would include whatever amnesty idea you have.

Biz, why doncha just give it up?  Ya don't know what you're talking about, and aren't interested in finding out.   We don't need you wading in and fucking things up even more than they are....

Which has multiple social, economic and legal ramifications.  I may be willing to concede that it might be impractical to round up all illegal aliens.  But it is possible, as there are a finite number of them.

So, just as that position has its practical limitations, so does the position that you seem to support.  And by the way Mr. Sprocket, it does feel a bit uncomfortable when someone else puts words into your mouth, doesn't it.  You have done that with almost every single post I have made.  So, you want that to stop, fine, do so.  

Back to point.  Your position, or at least the position you seem to support, of not rounding up the illegals (and they ARE illegal, plenty of precedent on that) and keeping the border open and unguarded seems to also be impractical.  Why?  Because while we perform body cavity searches on grannie illegals smuggling drugs, or terrorists carrying a dirty bomb can have access.  For the record, I am not talking only of the Mexican border.  Let's face it, if anyone really wanted to get into this country with the materials for a nuclear detonation, they could.   Weapons grade biologics, they could.  

We have a silly, stupid, self-destructive policy with respect to our borders... you speak of uneven enforcement - and yet you support it wrt immigration... go figure.  Who is illogical - if we are not patrolling the border, I submit that we should do away with immigration checking at airports and eliminate the security screening.

Can't have it both ways.  It is you who is illogical - you selectively apply the law.

Gee, Spock, my meds had kicked in and I was in such a light-hearted mood when I noticed this and my heartbeat was under 400 beats per minute for the first time since the week before Xmas and I thought, "gee, a litle irony for the Board.  Spock and Bizarro will probably reply and be at verbal loggerheads, etc...  A few really kindly types might post in reply LOL!"  And you took it all -- or mostly -- the wrong way.

True confession time -- my primary purpose was a cheap laffe.  But I appear to have instead commited a gaffe!

I haven't followed the story all that closely, as it interests me not all that much except as a stick with which to beat POTUS Bush and perhaps score few tarnished rhetorical points.

I'm assuming that the airliner was from a US carrier, hence US jurisdiction [unless there's also an international civil aviation treaty which covers contretemps of this sort].

Assault CAN cover a multitude of sins, and can range from a push to a tire-iron across the kneecaps.  Not exactly sure of the exact nature of the assult.  But I think at least one punch was thrown by Ms. Andersen.

Sports Illustrated, which is owned by Time-Warner/AOL most likely "sponsors" this young lady's forays into the land of the free and the home of the brave, as well PROBABLY  whatever modeling agency manages her -- Elite, Wilhelmia, Ford, etc..  See what I mean about employer sanctions?  Ms. Andersen has lucked out with incredible looks, so she's turned it into one of the few lucrative careers available for that personal quality [apart from providing of course].  She may be an insufferable ass, but she's using the tools she's got. I don't see why you're less sympathetic to her than to some ugly, greasy, sweaty peon caked in loam and topsoil and organic fertilizer from a hard day's work at the gardening job? [BEFORE you freak, it's a joke]. If any civil/criminal wrong has been done, i'm guesing the institutions which employ her are much more culpable than she be.

You mention the issue of cost, which in many of your posts is a key concept.  OK, how much personpower was used for how long to keep Ms. Andersen in custody and eventually to "keelhaul" from the land of fruited plains and purpled mountains majesty?  And in all that time, how many illegals, Spock, do you imagine managed to make an undocumented and hence ILLEGAL entry into this country?  And how many of those chaps, I wonder, are far more criminally inclined that the hapless Ms. Andersen is or ever will be?  

Hey, there's plenty of other groups in this country which can and do get scapegoated.  It's not just the illegals. If they weren't here, we would not have to invent them -- we'd do double duty on African Americans or gays or welfare recipients, shameless plutocrats, vulgar nouveau riche like Donald Trump, the ever popular Arab Terrorists, or ... I imagine.

Lastly, I might remind you that not even two months ago Denmark was the toast of the free world for printing insulting editorial cartoons about The Prophet Mohammed, and was being applauded from coast to coast within this country for their plucky and valiant courage in standing up to and defying the manaical Mohamedans and their murderous mullahs issuing felonious fatwas. What short memories WE HAVE to treat so shabily the proud daughter of such a stalwart land!

Have we no shame at last?

And I bet POTUS Bush really does think that this constituted "getting tough" on unwanted immigration.

Time for more meds.  No matter what the dosage warnings say.

PS. Sending the US Border Patrol into urban meighborhods to conduct sweeps?  This is a new one -- I don't even think they have the legal authority to perform THAT task.  But I could be wrong.  But this is the first time i've ever come across this charge.  Are you channeling the most radical members of the Executive Board of La Raza?
Please post link if possible?

finally, abject apologies for an unusually high number of typos, even for me, in the original post.

I think that as a doctor - never mind what kind... I could support prozac for all of us... we takin this way too seriously.  Technically, if we all wanted to read Black's Law Dictionary constantly, review FDA guidelines and search endlessly on US and local Law Code I guess we could all be as smart as Mr. Spock... but let us take stock of the man, the myth, the legend that is Mr. Spock:
1) he claims that he has no opinion, and only provides logical conclusions of the law, scientific fact and social behavior.
2) he claims that he is just and fair in his views
3) he claims that what he provides is the definitive expert opinion.


What I find lacking in his posts are the following:

    1) he has opinion, but chooses to hide behind the guise self-defined logical presentation, some of which is in error
    2) he is far from just and fair, that would be equal application of law, something which clearly he does not support.
    3) Most law and for that matter, legal affairs are not necessarily a “done deal” until they have been defined by the court.  That is, I may be granted a patent, but until I defend it against infringers, there is a certain probability that the patent may be invalid.  Similarly with laws, codes and regulations….

Oh and an aside about "scientific fact."  Our ability to define "scientific fact" changes constantly.  New things are discovered daily.  Example?  Big Bang theory - back in vogue due to a failure of the "steady state" of the universe to be supported by observations... another?  the Cambrian explosion of species that "Evolution" cannot account for.... another?  the famous Miller and others experiments purporting that they could demonstrate the synthesis of biomolecules given the early earth's atmosphere and electrical discharge.... unfortunately, further scientific discovery uncovered the "fact" that the early earth's atmosphere was not as Miller proposed.  Other examples abound.

Rational societies existing within an organized civilization (government) have a need to 1) define their citizenry and 2) define their borders within certain accepted international norms.  Heck, even the preample to the US constitution recognizes this with "We the People of the United States of America."  Simple statement but sets forth that 1) we are a people and 2) we choose to name our geographic position. Without that ability, they cease to be able to govern.  The current Chief occupant of the White House seems to have skipped that part of Civics in High School.  Perhaps on the day that was discussed he was out interviewing for his ANG position?!  Who knows?  But the open to anything policy that he and Mr. Spock support is really ridiculous… course then again much of what this joker supports is really ridiculous, such as: no abortion, no stem cell research, no true health care reform, no fiscal responsibility, no WMD (lol), no peace in Iraq (Ok, so NOW who are we there for, they don’t want us to continue to stay there), and my fave, no listening to outside opinion….  

Oh that’s correct, I forgot, GOD speaks to him…. Well him and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.   My question to these gents (actually, same question the Pharaoh posed to Moses), “whose god is god?”  but then again, I guess Mr. Spock will undoubtedly have a (non-opinion) expert dissertation on that as well – as I am sure he is well versed in all things theological…. Lol

Don’t cha just luv it when we hobbiests, oops, oh that is correct,  Mr  Spock does not hobby (or have sex, except for every 7 years as described by Leonard Nimoy)!  Evidently it is against some arcane Vulcan code… kinda like he probably can’t drink anything with caffeine in it, and believes that there are golden tablets somewhere out there in the New England forests with his name inscribed on them….lol!  


What would the human condition be, were it not for discourse on the human condition.  But then again, he is Vulcan.


Again, fear of Mexicans, no, not if here legally and I am sure that with Mr. Spock's intellect and ability to argue convincingly that he could work to change the immigration laws and codes to provide me with what I wish - and make it easy on the migrant worker... as I have simple humble needs... you know, the ability to know who is coming into the country and with what are the coming.

-- Modified on 4/27/2006 5:59:21 AM

-- Modified on 4/27/2006 6:00:01 AM

(1)   There are plenty of posters, both of us included, who regularyly push the edge of irony so close that it's hard to tell what's tongue in cheek, and not...and there are also (more elsewhere, but even here) plenty of mindless morons who simply vent without thinking.  So sometimes we kick into the knee-jerk mode of assuming a person is serious, and to be taken at face value.

And while we believe that Dubya and his Veep are so far different in degrees of stupidity and venality as to probably be a different kind, we also try to separate the people from the policy, and not advocate their impeachment for acts that we would have done the same.

(2)  Our POV w/r/t immigration is pretty much the same as anything else, that responsibility should primarily be individual, and that a person should not be criminally sanctioned for something that s/he cannot personally avoid, or even civil sanctions against a person for issues unconnected with them personally; so that eg Mohammed is not responsible for the policies of Saddam, nor Jose for the policies of the PRI.

(3) To continue terminal earnestness, and for the benefit of those who may really be confused, I'd rather deal with an uglyass pocho who does his job, than a bitchy Danish model (have you EVER dated a Dane?  I have NEVER known a Danish woman I thought was on an even keel.)  and there are all sorts of rules about slapping at the flight attendants, even if you miss.  

(4) As to La Raza, etc, there are many unexplored corners of US history that go overlooked.  Just as the LAPD tried to turn back Okies at the CA border during the Great Depression, the Border Patrol did in fact conduct widespread sweeps through Latin neighborhoods in LA, summarily rounding up families and deporting them.    Even today, practically speaking, the MO is to offer a ride back to Mexico in lieu of proceedings, and sometimes it's more or less pushy; but in any case, there are sometimes cases of people self-deporting because they don't in fact know that they are legal.  

I can offer no solutions for the fact that the law is so complex that govt agents are often mistaken about it.   My suggestion would be that Americans calm down and spend their energy dealing with it,  focusing on what is best for them, ie, keeping to good neighbors and ditching the bad.  Personally, we have been fortunate in knowing more good pochos than bad; but then, that also applies to the gabachos, too.   So who can know?

it is fundamentally an economic issue in the end; we should prioritize to keep costs reasonable, while getting rid of the worst 1st, and legalizing the best, and probably dealing with the others as they become an issue (see economics above) - a key question is, have things really changed that we suddenly want to deport them all, or are we just venting?  Will we pay the bill when it comes?

Prosecutorial discretion is necessary as an enforcement tool, if for no other reason than to keep criminals from avoiding set patterns.   However, there can be a fine line between that and selective prosecution that is fundamentally unfair.

We don't have to catch the last one to be effective.   That it's hard enough to get through that some die en route is an indication that enforcement is pretty tough, at least now.
Personally, I suspect more people get through ports of entry with false documents, or misrepresentations, or in trunks, as walk across a border not at a port of entry - and holding the papers often makes people think they are legal, even when the papers were in fact used or procured fraudulently.

that you could use some Prozac?   We agree.

I thought I had.

What you should find lacking is a complete issue of your brain mass.  But then, how could you know?

No, I don't think you're on the right track here.  I admire your effort to be free of facts, but I think your concept is fundamentally fucked.

Sad to say, I have never dated a Danish woman.

But I have eaten Danish...

For breakfast.  [Yes, it's godawful and I have used it previously several months ago].

BTW -- testable hypotheses?  Danish women might be erratic because of the popular folkloric thing about the prevalence of suicide within the Scandanavian cultural/linguistic groups [you know, the cold weather, long winters, not enough sunlight, having to read Soren Kiekkergaard and Ibsen and Strindberg, Lutheranism is the state religion, etc...  But I'm not absulutely sure that Denamrk is technically a Scandanavian country].

Bizzaro, you and Spock are the best duelists working the Board currently.  Makes me miss the good old daze  when I would post something inflamatory and critical about Israel's role in the Near East and DoctorGonzo would weigh in with alacrity and anger. And an occasional harsh word! But then he got smart, if not burnt out, and just ingnored me.  And now he's cruising the country on that monster cycle.  Hmmm, think he knows something we don't?

This is so simple that i don't know how it fell to me to think of it -- itself a prety damning comment -- but Spock's interest in aliens is purely selfish and self-interested.  He's a Vulcan, you see, and that means he's from a different planet, which maked him an ... ALIEN.

I think Spock has created a persona on this Board, and his postings, and the manner in which he organizes and presents his thoughts as well as his critical analyses of others' contributions, is intended to serve the image of the character he has crafted  on the Board.  even though you guys disagree fundamentally, it's not [I don't think] personal.  You both provide a great foil for the other.

That being said, I love it when you guyz get into it.

He does make one essential and timeless point -- every policy alternative re illegal immigration has both costs and benefits.  When we do X, we can't do Y.  And, as imprecisely as as can, we HAVE TO attempt to take into consideration the costs of alternative policies.  Costs to the many individuals concerned, costs to the economy and polity and society in the aggregate, costs in our relations with other countries, and lots of other heavy-duty, torpor-inducing questions of the sort.
None of which, truth be told, can be answer with great confidence.

What you don't like is a clearer, more concise presentation of concepts....

I'll bet you are a tiny minded person who knows lots of facts but cannot get the big picture.

I'll provide a list of a few things I said...
Bush does not support
 1) abortion,
 2) stem cell research,
 3) true health care reform,
 4) fiscal responsibility,

and he found no WMD and
we have no peace in Iraq

Which of those is false?  help me here.

-- Modified on 4/27/2006 8:25:41 PM

so it is up to you to prove allegations of fact.  

Tiny minded people are the ones who do not share your psychic visions, eh?   Whose perceptions can be confirmed?  Who simply do not realize the joy of hallucination?

You need to help yourself 1st, by disciplining your mind.  You can start with a neurological enema - shove a live 120V connection in each ear, and see if you aren't more sane after a few minutes.

I responded by asking you to state which statement was false... and gave specific statements.  OK?  did he find WMD?  Does he support embryonic ST research?  can't prove a negative?  GW has publically stated that he does not support embryonic ST research... etc.  What I am talking about is public policy statements!  Matter of record...

wrt your suggestion... was the intent to kill or do harm to me? counselor?  If so, I need to know that....

As was seen during the last "Boycott" and in the "boycott" of Air Traffic Controllers- they were fired... and guess what, things went on....

More important though than the cost of action, the cost of inaction.... project 50 yr into the future with the current inaction.... will be have a citizenry who understand the law, let alone respect it?

-- Modified on 4/29/2006 7:07:07 PM

as you can verify through wikipedia.

that the ultimate tool of boycotters is to do without, here, to return to their native countries?

Are you afraid that you cannot in fact do without them?  Or simply angry that they make this suggestion?

My primary concern is that putting policy in the hands of such a volatile and poorly informed group such as yourselves would lead to disaster - if not in this issue, then in others more important...

don't keep reminding us.