Joe Arpaio Blathers Stupidly About Child Refugees, while Dennis Gilman Educates in Mini-Documentary

Thumbnail image for FeatheredBastard_RESIZE_VF.jpg

What does an aged blowhard like Sheriff Joe Arpaio know about the humanitarian crisis involving thousands of children from Central America crossing the border into the United States?

Not a damn thing. Arpaio proved this categorically on the conservative site Newsmax TV in a recent interview with washed-up former Republican congressman J.D. Hayworth, where the "shurf" spouted a bunch of mishegas.

picresized_1403324394_arpaiohayworth.JPG
Breitbart.com
Arpaio on Newsmax: Full of the brown stuff as usual...

"First of all, the executive order, if you recall, on the DREAM Act?" grumbles Joe. "They get a pass. Well, who do you think is coming into the country? All the people who qualify for the DREAM Act. I don't know if anybody realizes that."

First up, Joe, the DREAM Act is just a proposal, one that has yet to pass both Houses of the U.S. Congress.


Gilman outdoes himself, and the rest of the local news media, with this mini-doc on some of the folks crossing the border

What Arpaio's talking about is DACA, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, created by the Obama administration in 2012.

As the name implies, the program defers deportation proceedings against immigrant kids who meet certain requirements, requirements that happen to exclude children who have been crossing the border in the current crisis.

For instance, a DACA-applicant must, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, "have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time," and have been "physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making [a] request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS."



Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
142 comments
dennis20
dennis20 topcommenter

 Leslie Velez, senior protection officer at the U.N. High Commission for Refugees is interviewed in this article and answers many questions I did not in the video.  These kids are fleeing for their lives and they aren't just showing up in the USA. Mexico has reported around 23,000 seeking refuge status there.  They are even showing up in Canada.  


http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/why-90-000-children-flooding-our-border-is-not-an-immigration-story-20140616



fratdawgg23
fratdawgg23

"Blathering stupidly" is Arpaio's preferred method of blathering.

lesterbet
lesterbet

The U.S. government has been supporting for centuries the corrupt families that have been running the countries in Latin America. The money that the U.S. sends to those countries to help the poor goes into the bank accounts of the oligarchs. Poverty, corruption and discrimination are widespread throughout the region. Americans should expect another 10 million kids crossing the border. The news are hot today. http://ow.ly/ylQuz

john043012
john043012 topcommenter

The only agencies responsible for this crises are headed by Obama appointees. These people being dumped off at bus stations is a prime example of a failed presidency . Our border agents now have been reduced too taking care of the very people they where supposed to keep out. Obama has decided the only way our so called allies south of the border will help with this tragedy is to give those corrupt governments more of our money while we continue to absorb their oppressed people all the while we have 11-30 (who knows) illegal immigrants the congressional democrats want to give amnesty to. Can someone please explain how in the world this new crop of illegals gaining entry are going to help our society now?

fankromank555
fankromank555

Some times man you jsut have to wonder who comes up with that stufff


www.WentAnon.tk

Jukes
Jukes

"Blathers" is way too nice a word. It's something you might say about Kim Kardashian talking about her new husband's so-called genius, not the ignorant ravings of someone who is paid to know what they're talking about and people's lives depend on it. 

Criticalthinkin
Criticalthinkin

Why are people who are scheduled for court in Florida being shipped to Arizona from Texas?

Why is this scenario totally reliant on volunteer assistance in order for people to receive humane treatment?

Why isn't Mexico harbouring these refugees?

What is it exactly which allows these people to qualify as refugees?

Answer these questions rather than becoming a cheerleader for an obvious failed handling of this situation, then real journalism will be achieved.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@lesterbet ... the U$A has a moral and ethical obligation to take those Refugees from the last half-century of FAILED U$ Foreign Policy in Central America.


Criticalthinkin
Criticalthinkin

@ConcernedCitizenAZ the content of this article does not support your conclusion that Arizona citizens lack empathy for children and families. It's Arizona citizens who are meeting these bus loads of mostly children and providing them with care and assistance for FREE. How does service for another individual equate to bigotry and racism?

You appear to be stuck on stupid. It's your federal government who is failing these people by dumping them off while requiring them to travel thousands of miles away in a very short period of time with no means to successfully do so. They aren't setting the table for a successful conclusion to this problem. There is an obvious agenda to not provide asylum to these huddled masses.

MaskedMagician1967
MaskedMagician1967 topcommenter

John, I agree that Obama is a failure of a president. He certainly has earned a bottom tier ranking from me.

However, Arpaio is doing absolutely nothing to help resolve the immigration issue. His "raids" are costly to the taxpayers, they don't penalize the employer, the people actually creating the issue, and the "raids" are rife with potential abuses against legalized and US citizens of Hispanic descent or origin.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 literally releases employers from liability because they aren't required to authenticate the documents presented, and if the documents presented are false, employers aren't held responsible for denying work. This is the actual problem.

It should be noted that the Senate passed an immigration bill authorizing some $50B in border security spending. House Speaker John Boehner has NEVER brought the bill up for debate. If the Republicans have a potential solution, let's hear it.

john043012
john043012 topcommenter

One other thing I do not think the majority of these people want to harm any of us., they want a safe environment in which to live , work and support themselves. The problem is they are not welcome here and for the most part they aren't scientists or engineers our government says we so desperately need they are laborer's that are going to be targeting blue collar jobs that many of our minorities rely on and If history is our guide they will also work for 50% less. I cannot see any positives in this can you

danzigsdaddy
danzigsdaddy topcommenter

@fankromank555 good reference

sometimes i wonder if they are just winging it or if they actually paid someone to come up with it and just run blindly with it once its typed up and handed to them (if they paid, boy should they have held out for a more qualified PR man)

grongusbertrude
grongusbertrude

@Criticalthinkin 

1. Money

2. Money

3. A lot of these children are getting through Mexico undetected. There is a shit ton of private, obviously illegal "for-profit" entities that are bringing in the cash to transport these kids. 

4. A refugee is basically someone who is terrified to live in their country, so they seek refuge. For these kids, the gang violence is so heavy and sick that they live in constant fear and danger of being kidnapped, murdered, forced into prostitution.. the list goes on. Many of their parents are involved in the crime or have been killed.


and @nobigmystery is 100% right.

nobigmystery
nobigmystery

@Criticalthinkin well, there's your problem. you came to the new times web site expecting journalism. this is where they simply preach hate of the sheriff and republicans to the libtard choir and the same half dozen commenters nod their heads vigorously in agreement.

john043012
john043012 topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay Its people like you who just cant help themselves can yah ? Moral and ethical obligation, wow. that's right blame America first our citizens haven't done squat to better the world you and your kind have a better idea on how to accomplish that right? just open our border's and that will solve all the problems. Hell we now have our border agents welcoming them in changing diaper's Obama has authorized flying them all over the country what more can we do donkey maybe get them set up with 40 acres and a mule, might be wise to add a additional tax to our w2"s setting aside money to support all their needs that would be a just moral and ethical obligation that everyone should applaud our families should take a back seat lets just elevate those people into comfortable living arrangements .

dennis20
dennis20 topcommenter

@Criticalthinkin Here is an article you may find informative. 

It is an interview with Leslie Velez, senior protection officer at the U.N. High Commission for Refugees. 

It also answers questions that my video did not.  I was surprised to see that these kids are fleeing everywhere-not just to the U.S.  The UN reports they are showing up as far as Canada. Mexico has over 23,000.    

john043012
john043012 topcommenter

@MaskedMagician1967 Im sure you read the senate bill or at least some of it . the 50 billion towards border security does not come into play until of all the other legislation is in progress it gave the government 6 yrs to START the process of securing the border. The congressional republicans want the border secured fist including the 50 billion expense before there is any conversation towards what to do with the 11-30 (who knows) illegal immigrants. The Obama administration cannot be trusted on anything pertaining to national security or pretty much anything else

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@MaskedMagician1967


You REALLY want a "potential solution"?


1.  Stop all free entitlement programs for other than legal citizens.  Charge for all services.  Medical, schooling, food stamps, welfare, SSI, legal. If the immigrant cant pay, bill the country of origin.  If they refuse to pay, stop or reduce the foreign country welfare to that nation.


2.  Establish a very liberal guest worker program.


3.  Stop 90% of citizen entitlements so our citizens WILL work instead of living off of the government (no, I am not talking about earned entitlements).


4.  Teach OUR kids (who are not heading to college) a trade beginning in the 9th grade (coupled with the three Rs).       


fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@john043012


John,  given the fact that truth, rational thought and practical ideas are not welcome here, I would guess you have made few friends with the NewTimes' regular loons.  

grongusbertrude
grongusbertrude

@john043012 @DonkeyHotay 7 year olds are getting publicly dismembered. They aren't coming here to take your shitty job and better their credit. They are fleeing from the most dangerous parts of the world..

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@fishingblues ... spoken like the callous self-centered lowlife pig-ignorant kkkonservative fuck-knuckle that you are.


MaskedMagician1967
MaskedMagician1967 topcommenter

Fishing,

I agree with you on medical (hospitals are businesses too). Schooling is protected by Plyler v Doe, food stamps and welfare are taxpayer-subsidized, as is SSI. Legal help is protected by Miranda v. Arizona.

Another New Deal program? Obama tried that and it sunk faster than the Lusitania.

The people want to work. College is really expensive, and having a degree really isn't getting people much more money than those who don't have a degree.

I agree with you about learning a trade beginning in high school.

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@MaskedMagician1967


I should have added:


Repeal or amend the 14th Amendment.


Slavery is over and therefore, there is no need for an "anchor baby" provision.

john043012
john043012 topcommenter

@TheyCallMeMrTibbs Its seems you are another one who cannot comprehend the difference between legal and illegal. Wasting time.

TheyCallMeMrTibbs
TheyCallMeMrTibbs

@fishingblues @john043012

"practical ideas are not welcome here"


All I see in these comments by you and John is the normal pantywaist bitching. "Practical ideas" are always welcome. "Deport 'em all" is not one of them.

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@MaskedMagician1967


Everything is "taxpayer subsidized", that is the problem.   We cannot finance and support the world (much as we try).  If we alleviated the financial burden to the American taxpayer, I believe the majority of US citizens would be very tolerant on a liberal border solution.  


(Note:  I do not believe for one minute the bogus claims that illegal immigration is a net plus to the American economy.)

MaskedMagician1967
MaskedMagician1967 topcommenter

Fishing, the 14th Amendment does more than provide citizenship.

There's due process, the national debt, etc.

Repealing it would void every American born after its adoption. Including your own.

And the only reason why we even have this problem is because Wong Kim Ark, a man of Chinese descent, sued, claiming he was born here and not subject to the Chinese Emperor.

A Republican stacked US Supreme Court ruled in Wong's favor. (There had been only 2 Democratic Presidents since the Civil War.)

The current US Supreme Court has refused to review the decision, Congress can't do anything about it, and amending the Constitution requires 2/3 majority in both Houses of Congress and 3/4 of the States to agree, or calling a Constitutional Convention, something that hasn't happened since 1787.

john043012
john043012 topcommenter

@MaskedMagician1967 You don't have to repeal the 14th amendment a simple statute attached to it denying birthright citizenship to children of illegal immigrants. If one of the parents is a legal citizen then it becomes a citizen

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@MaskedMagician1967


Difficult problems generally require difficult solutions.  Nowhere did I say it would be easy.


My obvious point is that the "anchor baby" provision is outdated, no longer needed and, in fact,  is causing  additional problems that we don't need. 

Flyer9753
Flyer9753 topcommenter

@john043012 @fishingblues This country would not be here, if not for illegal immigrants.


You really think the original immigrants from europe settled here within the law and were legal?? 


They were illegal immigrants that turned into illegal invaders.


Welcome to the factual truth of history that you cannot get away from so get down off your all mighty high horse, you don't belong there or deserve to be there.

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay 


Typical brain dead donkey comment.



"Good think (sic) the Sgt. keep (sic) a throw-away piece..." May 15, 2014



Remember, the one you deleted in shame and embarrassment.



----or--- how about this ignorant gem..........



 "Sucks to not have a tax-free private connection, don't (sic) it loser?"   posted on 06/01/14


LOL = Lascivious Old Lecher


Damn stinky, you just don't have a chance.  You better stick with fucking with the rubes.  



DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@john043012 "You don't have to repeal the 14th amendment a simple statute attached to it ..."


Typical pig-ignorant teatard.


You can't VOID CONSTITUTIONAL Amendments via "simple statutes" you daft brain-dead dipshit.



MaskedMagician1967
MaskedMagician1967 topcommenter

The only reason that the so-called "anchor baby" provision was included in the 14th Amendment was to void Dred Scott v Sanford, the 1857 US Supreme Court decision holding American slaves of African descent couldn't be citizens Fishing.

That's what the majority of people wanted in 1868, and Southern States had no choice but to accept it in order to regain seats in Congress.

This issue goes back to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the first real attempt at equal protection.

There is a law that banned people of Chinese descent known as the Chinese Exclusion Act. It took effect in 1882 and repealed in 1943.

FDR authorized housing Japanese-Americans in internment camps during WWII. We ended up paying victims and families $20K for each person housed.

Andrew Jackson forced Native Americans to walk the Trail of Tears...

Seems like America tried to be biased against virtually everyone (Native Americans, African-Americans, Asian-Americans, etc.)

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@fishingblues ... so "comfortable" that you're terrified that immigrants will cost you so much $$ your pathetic standard of living will decrease even further.



fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay 


... and yet I just posted proof of YOUR illiteracy.  How do you account for that stinky?  Projection? 

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay 


Unlike the worthless, blood-sucking, fucking liberal mentality, I'm not concerned with myself.  Unlike the parasitic liberal perspective (you), I am worried about the financial welfare of my country.


You just can't grasp the concept can you stinky?

Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...