Here's Why To Not Let Your State Go Blue

[usmbguest5318]

This claim too has been resoundingly shown to be literally fake news.

• There Is No Evidence of an Illegal Immigrant Crime Wave: Why the “Elusive Crime Wave Data Shows Frightening Toll of Illegal Immigrant Criminals” Is Flawed

Forgot to hyperlink the bulletpoint article. Here's the link: There Is No Evidence of an Illegal Immigrant Crime Wave: Why the “Elusive Crime Wave Data Shows Frightening Toll of Illegal Immigrant Criminals” Is Flawed

 

[usmbguest5318]

Here's Why To Not Let Your State Go Blue

Because "blue" =

That should be reason enough.

Color blindness happens....

 

[protectionist]

Godless? How does Coulter know of the personal religious beliefs and practices, or lack thereof, of the people she writes about? Mario Cuomo was a Roman Catholic. Hillary Clinton is a Methodist. President Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ. This is all well known.

Coulter is a total nutjob. She does no research and then weaves some tale about how people who share certain political beliefs are a "church" or a "religion," a tale as idiotic as that told by the dumbest among us who try to equate being LGBT with a religion, even though there are lots of LGBTs who attend Christian services and some are even clergy, as well as LGBTs being followers of other faiths.

Do people actually believe people like Coulter?

Obama is a MUSLIM and a JIHADIST. You are duped.

You are also making a FOOL out of yourself right here in this thread. Coulter does no research ? Wow. Has any statement in USMB ever been so obviously wrong, and pathetically ridiculous.?

Here's a list of research footnotes in Ann's very well-sourced books >>

Mugged - 724 footnotes.

Godless - 344 footnotes

In Trump we Trust - 223 footnotes

1,291 research footnotes in just those 3 books alone.

 

[protectionist]

Unless a hell of a lot in that regard has changed since 2014, in the U.S., no, they don't for the most part.

​

Surely you will acknowledge that there were far more than 140K crimes committed in 2000. Furthermore:

• 2010/2015 -- The Criminalization of Immigration in the United States
  • Immigrants are less likely than native-born individuals to engage in criminal behavior.
  • In 2010, 10.7% of native-born men aged 18-39 without a high school degree were incarcerated compared to 2.8% of Mexican immigrants and 1.7% of Guatemalan and Salvadoran immigrants.
• 2014 -- ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Report
  • 177,960 --> The quantity of undocumented immigrants deported in 2013 who were convicted criminals
• 2015 -- U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to Sen. Flake
  • "Between FY 2010 and FY 2014, there were 121 unique criminal aliens who had an active case at the time of release and were subsequently charged with homicide-related offenses." That's about nine per year.
• 2013 -- Prisoners in 2013
  • There were 73,665 inmates in state and federal prisons who are not U.S. citizens.
• 2000 -- On Immigration and Crime
  • With few exceptions, immigrants are less crime prone than natives or have no effect on crime rates.
• 2000/2007 -- Why Are Immigrants' Crime Rates So Low?
  • Butcher and Piehl examine the incarceration rates for men aged 18-40 in the 1980, 1990, and 2000 Censuses. In each year immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated than natives with the gap widening each decade. By 2000, immigrants have incarceration rates that are one-fifth those of the native-born.
• 2013 -- Understanding the Impact of Immigration on Crime
  • Spenkuch found that a 10% increase in the share of immigrants increases the property crime rate by 1.2% and that immigrants have no on violent crime rates. He found too that Mexican immigrants account entirely for the effect on property crime rates, committing 3.5 to 5 times as many property crimes as the average native; however, all other immigrants commit less than half as many crimes of any sort as natives.
• Various years -- Multiple researchers found that the population of immigrants is either not correlated or negatively correlated with crime rates.
  • Secure Communities (S-COMM) program [1] analysis -- Miles and Cox used the phased rollout to see how S-COMM affected crime rates per county. If immigrants were disproportionately criminal, then S-COMM would decrease the crime rates. They found that S-COMM “led to no meaningful reduction in the FBI index crime rate” including violent crimes. Treyger et al found that S-COMM did not decrease crime rates nor did it lead to an increase in discriminatory policing that some critics were worried about.
    • Does Immigration Enforcement Reduce Crime? Evidence from “Secure Communities”
    • Immigration Enforcement, Policing, and Crime
  • 2000 -- Exploring the Connection between Immigration and Violent Crime Rates in U.S. Cities, 1980–2000
    • Ousey and Kubrin looked at 159 cities at three dates between 1980 and 2000 and found that crime rates and levels of immigration are not correlated. Their research found that “[v]iolent crime is not a deleterious consequence of increased immigration.”
  • Immigration and the Recent Violent Crime Drop in the United States
    • Using time‐series techniques and annual data for metropolitan areas over the 1994–2004 period, [Stowell et al] assessed the impact of changes in immigration on changes in violent crime rates. Their multivariate analyses showed that violent crime rates tended to decrease as metropolitan areas experienced gains in their concentration of immigrants. This inverse relationship was especially robust for robbery.

From the findings of the studies above, both Census-data driven ones and macro-level ones, the notion that immigrants are more crime-prone than natives does not hold water. There are numerous reasons why immigrant criminality is lower than native criminality. One explanation is that immigrants who commit crimes can be deported and thus are punished more for criminal behavior, making them less likely to break the law.


There is, of course, one crime genre whereof illegal immigrants commit almost exclusively are the perpetrators: immigration offenses. Because immigration violations are crimes, to the extent immigration-law-only offenses are included in immigrant crime, doing so materially overstates immigrant crime rates, thereby denuding greatly their legitimacy for asserting that immigrants commit more crime than do non-immigrants.


Note:

1. The Secure Communities program (S-COMM) uses a federal information-sharing partnership between DHS and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that helps to identify in-custody aliens without imposing new or additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. For decades, local jurisdictions have shared the fingerprints of individuals arrested and/or booked into custody with the FBI to see if those individuals have a criminal record and outstanding warrants.
   
   Under S-COMM, the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints to DHS to check against its immigration databases. If these checks reveal that an individual is unlawfully present in the United States or otherwise removable, ICE takes enforcement action -- prioritizing the removal of individuals who present the most significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime, their criminal history, and risk to public safety – as well as those who have violated the nation’s immigration laws.
   
   S-COMM proved beneficial for facilitating deportations, but not useful at reducing crime rates. Note that the remark to which this post is a response is about immigrants' criminality, not the government's success at/rate of deportations.

Here's why to not waste your time clicking/reading liberals' looney and souped up links. Liberals love "studies" (actually con jobs). They refer to ones by liberal sources (university professors, think tanks, media, etc., and then tell us we have to accept them because they're soooo authentic and respectable.

They especially love their "studies" when they're concocted to produce just the notions they want us all to believe. If I had a dollar for every liberals "study" that turned out to be false, I's buy a mansion. Sometimes this common liberal study error characteristic comes from pure deceit (intentional propaganda). In other "studies', it's a result of simply being founded from typical, liberal, wrongheaded, preconceived notions.

Check out this farce (a typical "study") >>

The Stephens-Davidowitz racism study >>

In this farce, published as undeniable in the New York Times, it was contended that some places in the US were more racist than other places. The study contended that because 57% of Denver, CO, voted for Obama in 2008, and only 48% of Wheeling WV did, that Wheeling was the 7th most "racist" city in America, while Denver was the 4th most “enlightened” city.

Problems here are twofold. First, in places like the Times, the only 1 dimension at play was Obama's race. The Stephens-Davidowitz study failed to consider that Obama was the most fabulous, celebrity-backed candidate for president in a long time - something more important to people in Denver than in West Virginia.

Secondly, on Nov. 2, 2008, two days before the election, Obama vowed to bankrupt the coal industry. He threatened to impose huge fines on coal companies for emissions of greenhouse gases. West Virginia's economy is 99% (energy) and 60% (business taxes) dependent on coal. The real way to test Stephens-Davidowitz theory about West Virginians would be to run a non-flashy black candidate who had not pledged to destroy the coal industry, and THEN compare votes.

Here's an alternative to the faulty Stephens-Davidowitz study that the New York Times admired so much >> Ann Coulter did a study on states inclinations to racism, also. In Ann's study, different states were compared by participation in the military - an institution with a high lever of close quarter racial mixing, jaw to jaw, in military barracks (hell for racists).

The least racist states were Montana, Texas, Wyoming, Alabama, Alaska, and Idaho. The most racist ones were Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, and Vermont.

 

[Witchit]

Adam's apple Ann Coulter is a good conservative writer? That's funny.

She is one of the very best in the world. Hands down. She has authored many books, all carefully sourced/footnoted, and her books are a warehouse of knowledge, 95% of which you probably don't have.

I could post a long list of names of people from her books, all of major political significance, and my guess is you'll know of none of them. You talk ignorance, as do most typical information-deprived liberals.

 

[protectionist]

Unless a hell of a lot in that regard has changed since 2014, in the U.S., no, they don't for the most part.

​

Surely you will acknowledge that there were far more than 140K crimes committed in 2000. Furthermore:

• 2010/2015 -- The Criminalization of Immigration in the United States
  • Immigrants are less likely than native-born individuals to engage in criminal behavior.
  • In 2010, 10.7% of native-born men aged 18-39 without a high school degree were incarcerated compared to 2.8% of Mexican immigrants and 1.7% of Guatemalan and Salvadoran immigrants.
• 2014 -- ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Report
  • 177,960 --> The quantity of undocumented immigrants deported in 2013 who were convicted criminals
• 2015 -- U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to Sen. Flake
  • "Between FY 2010 and FY 2014, there were 121 unique criminal aliens who had an active case at the time of release and were subsequently charged with homicide-related offenses." That's about nine per year.
• 2013 -- Prisoners in 2013
  • There were 73,665 inmates in state and federal prisons who are not U.S. citizens.
• 2000 -- On Immigration and Crime
  • With few exceptions, immigrants are less crime prone than natives or have no effect on crime rates.
• 2000/2007 -- Why Are Immigrants' Crime Rates So Low?
  • Butcher and Piehl examine the incarceration rates for men aged 18-40 in the 1980, 1990, and 2000 Censuses. In each year immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated than natives with the gap widening each decade. By 2000, immigrants have incarceration rates that are one-fifth those of the native-born.
• 2013 -- Understanding the Impact of Immigration on Crime
  • Spenkuch found that a 10% increase in the share of immigrants increases the property crime rate by 1.2% and that immigrants have no on violent crime rates. He found too that Mexican immigrants account entirely for the effect on property crime rates, committing 3.5 to 5 times as many property crimes as the average native; however, all other immigrants commit less than half as many crimes of any sort as natives.
• Various years -- Multiple researchers found that the population of immigrants is either not correlated or negatively correlated with crime rates.
  • Secure Communities (S-COMM) program [1] analysis -- Miles and Cox used the phased rollout to see how S-COMM affected crime rates per county. If immigrants were disproportionately criminal, then S-COMM would decrease the crime rates. They found that S-COMM “led to no meaningful reduction in the FBI index crime rate” including violent crimes. Treyger et al found that S-COMM did not decrease crime rates nor did it lead to an increase in discriminatory policing that some critics were worried about.
    • Does Immigration Enforcement Reduce Crime? Evidence from “Secure Communities”
    • Immigration Enforcement, Policing, and Crime
  • 2000 -- Exploring the Connection between Immigration and Violent Crime Rates in U.S. Cities, 1980–2000
    • Ousey and Kubrin looked at 159 cities at three dates between 1980 and 2000 and found that crime rates and levels of immigration are not correlated. Their research found that “[v]iolent crime is not a deleterious consequence of increased immigration.”
  • Immigration and the Recent Violent Crime Drop in the United States
    • Using time‐series techniques and annual data for metropolitan areas over the 1994–2004 period, [Stowell et al] assessed the impact of changes in immigration on changes in violent crime rates. Their multivariate analyses showed that violent crime rates tended to decrease as metropolitan areas experienced gains in their concentration of immigrants. This inverse relationship was especially robust for robbery.

From the findings of the studies above, both Census-data driven ones and macro-level ones, the notion that immigrants are more crime-prone than natives does not hold water. There are numerous reasons why immigrant criminality is lower than native criminality. One explanation is that immigrants who commit crimes can be deported and thus are punished more for criminal behavior, making them less likely to break the law.


There is, of course, one crime genre whereof illegal immigrants commit almost exclusively are the perpetrators: immigration offenses. Because immigration violations are crimes, to the extent immigration-law-only offenses are included in immigrant crime, doing so materially overstates immigrant crime rates, thereby denuding greatly their legitimacy for asserting that immigrants commit more crime than do non-immigrants.


Note:

1. The Secure Communities program (S-COMM) uses a federal information-sharing partnership between DHS and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that helps to identify in-custody aliens without imposing new or additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. For decades, local jurisdictions have shared the fingerprints of individuals arrested and/or booked into custody with the FBI to see if those individuals have a criminal record and outstanding warrants.
   
   Under S-COMM, the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints to DHS to check against its immigration databases. If these checks reveal that an individual is unlawfully present in the United States or otherwise removable, ICE takes enforcement action -- prioritizing the removal of individuals who present the most significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime, their criminal history, and risk to public safety – as well as those who have violated the nation’s immigration laws.
   
   S-COMM proved beneficial for facilitating deportations, but not useful at reducing crime rates. Note that the remark to which this post is a response is about immigrants' criminality, not the government's success at/rate of deportations.

Here's why to not waste your time clicking/reading liberals' looney and souped up links. Liberals love "studies" (actually con jobs). They refer to ones by liberal sources (university professors, think tanks, media, etc., and then tell us we have to accept them because they're soooo authentic and respectable.

They especially love their "studies" when they're concocted to produce just the notions they want us all to believe. If I had a dollar for every liberals "study" that turned out to be false, I'd buy a mansion. Sometimes this common liberal study error characteristic comes from pure deceit (intentional propaganda). In other "studies", it's a result of simply being founded from typical, liberal, wrongheaded, preconceived notions.

Check out this farce (a typical "study") >>

The Stephens-Davidowitz racism study >> (exposed in the book, Mugged, by Ann Coulter, pg. 240-241).

In this farce, published as undeniable in the New York Times, it was contended that some places in the US were more racist than other places. The study contended that because 57% of Denver, CO, voted for Obama in 2008, and only 48% of Wheeling WV did, that Wheeling was the 7th most "racist" city in America, while Denver was the 4th most “enlightened” city.

Problems here are twofold. First, in places like the Times, the only 1 dimension at play was Obama's race. The Stephens-Davidowitz study failed to consider that Obama was the most fabulous, celebrity-backed candidate for president in a long time - something more important to people in Denver than in West Virginia.

Secondly, on Nov. 2, 2008, two days before the election, Obama vowed to bankrupt the coal industry. He threatened to impose huge fines on coal companies for emissions of greenhouse gases. West Virginia's economy is 99% (energy) and 60% (business taxes) dependent on coal. The real way to test Stephens-Davidowitz theory about West Virginians would be to run a non-flashy black candidate who had not pledged to destroy the coal industry, and THEN compare votes.

Here's an alternative to the faulty Stephens-Davidowitz study that the New York Times admired so much >> Ann Coulter did a study on states inclinations to racism, also. In Ann's study, different states were compared by participation in the military - an institution with a high lever of close quarter racial mixing, jaw to jaw, in military barracks (hell for racists).

The least racist states were Montana, Texas, Wyoming, Alabama, Alaska, and Idaho. The most racist ones were Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, and Vermont.

 

[protectionist]

Al Franken does whaaaat ? (other than make a fool out of himself)

 

[Witchit]

View attachment 183618

Al Franken does whaaaat ? (other than make a fool out of himself)

Know how I know you didn't bother watching the video? Because it just ended for me.

And you say libs are in bubbles? It is to laugh.

 

[protectionist]

Know how I know you didn't bother watching the video? Because it just ended for me.

And you say libs are in bubbles? It is to laugh.

Your answer is in Post # 66. LOL.

It's also in Ann's books - did you "bother" to read them ? (and learn a lot - I did)

 

[Witchit]

Know how I know you didn't bother watching the video? Because it just ended for me.

And you say libs are in bubbles? It is to laugh.

Your answer is in Post # 66. LOL.

It's also in Ann's books - did you "bother" to read them ? (and learn a lot - I did)

Christ no. She's the most hateful hag on the planet. And if you're comfortable with all the ugliness she spouts, wrapped in a faux intelligent wrapper, then that doesn't say much about you as a man.

 

[protectionist]

Christ no. She's the most hateful hag on the planet. And if you're comfortable with all the ugliness she spouts, wrapped in a faux intelligent wrapper, then that doesn't say much about you as a man.

It doesn't say much about you as a PERSON, when you judge something without looking at it. You haven't read Ann's books, yet you're willing to post abusive comments about her. That's really dumb.

You just plain don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Lysistrata]

Godless? How does Coulter know of the personal religious beliefs and practices, or lack thereof, of the people she writes about? Mario Cuomo was a Roman Catholic. Hillary Clinton is a Methodist. President Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ. This is all well known.

Coulter is a total nutjob. She does no research and then weaves some tale about how people who share certain political beliefs are a "church" or a "religion," a tale as idiotic as that told by the dumbest among us who try to equate being LGBT with a religion, even though there are lots of LGBTs who attend Christian services and some are even clergy, as well as LGBTs being followers of other faiths.

Do people actually believe people like Coulter?

Obama is a MUSLIM and a JIHADIST. You are duped.

Youare also making a FOOL out of yourself right here in theis thread. Coulter does no research ? Wow. Has any statement in USMB ever been so obviously wrong and pathetially ridiculous.?

Here's a list of research footnotes in very well-sourced Ann's books >>

Mugged - 724 footnotes.

Godless - 344 footnotes

In Trump we Trust - 223 footnotes

1,291 research footnotes in just those 3 books alone.

You are the one who is duped if you think that Obama is a Muslim. This has been a baseless lie continuously pushed by the right-wing and you continue to take the bait, hook, line, and sinker. I remember when the ignorant among us made a big deal over the fact that he took off his shoes to enter the Blue Mosque in Istanbul. So did I when I entered the same mosque. One takes off ones shoes to enter a mosque or a Buddhist temple. This is well known, except among yahoos with keyboards and no brains nor education.

If coulter can't get even the most basic facts right, why should anyone believe her. We know that she is a paid shill for the right-wing woman-hating crowd, as well, while she claims to be a woman. More reason not to trust her or have any respect for her.

 

[protectionist]

Ass sheriff Arpaio. Look that one up. A convicted criminal pardoned by Cadet Bone Spurs for no reason other than political bullshit.

Arpaio for Attorney General

 

[protectionist]

You are the one who is duped if you think that Obama is a Muslim. This has been a baseless lie continuously pushed by the right-wing and you continue to take the bait, hook, line, and sinker. I remember when the ignorant among us made a big deal over the fact that he took off his shoes to enter the Blue Mosque in Istanbul. So did I when I entered the same mosque. One takes off ones shoes to enter a mosque or a Buddhist temple. This is well known, except among yahoos with keyboards and no brains nor education.

If coulter can't get even the most basic facts right, why should anyone believe her. We know that she is a paid shill for the right-wing woman-hating crowd, as well, while she claims to be a woman. More reason not to trust her or have any respect for her.

Obama has proven his Islamism and Jihadism repeatedly >> Fort Hood, Chattanooga, al Baghdai (ISIS) collusion, pulling the troops out of Iraq, paving the way for ISIS to move in, allowing ISIS to travel on open desert roads without airstrikes against them, giving White House jobs to Muslim Brotherhooders, etc etc etc

 

[protectionist]

If coulter can't get even the most basic facts right, why should anyone believe her. We know that she is a paid shill for the right-wing woman-hating crowd, as well, while she claims to be a woman. More reason not to trust her or have any respect for her.

How do you know about Ann Coulter getting facts right, when you haven't read her books ?.......and you don't even know what your talking about.

 

[protectionist]

Stephens-Davidowitz "study" - Pheeeeew!! (high-pitched whistle, eyes rolling around in head)

 

[Lysistrata]

You are the one who is duped if you think that Obama is a Muslim. This has been a baseless lie continuously pushed by the right-wing and you continue to take the bait, hook, line, and sinker. I remember when the ignorant among us made a big deal over the fact that he took off his shoes to enter the Blue Mosque in Istanbul. So did I when I entered the same mosque. One takes off ones shoes to enter a mosque or a Buddhist temple. This is well known, except among yahoos with keyboards and no brains nor education.

If coulter can't get even the most basic facts right, why should anyone believe her. We know that she is a paid shill for the right-wing woman-hating crowd, as well, while she claims to be a woman. More reason not to trust her or have any respect for her.

Obama has proven his Islamism and Jihadism repeatedly >> Fort Hood, Chattanooga, al Baghdai (ISIS) collusion, pulling the troops out of Iraq, paving the way for ISIS to move in, allowing ISIS to travel on open desert roads without airstrikes against them, etc etc etc

Nonsense. What did he do at Fort Hood or Chattanooga? He was there? He fired a gun? The rest is a matter of policy unique to the military situation at the time. Remember that Dubya's invasion of Iraq (actually that was criminal Cheney's idea), destabilized the region and opened up a total Pandora's Box that has not been shut until this day.

You are easily swayed by propaganda, and you don't even know where this propaganda is coming from and who pays for it.

 

[protectionist]

Nonsense. What did he do at Fort Hood or Chattanooga? He was there? He fired a gun? The rest is a matter of policy unique to the military situation at the time. Remember that Dubya's invasion of Iraq (actually that was criminal Cheney's idea), destabilized the region and opened up a total Pandora's Box that has not been shut until this day.

You are easily swayed by propaganda, and you don't even know where this propaganda is coming from and who pays for it.

OK Ms Question Mark. Here is some of that mountain of information that your liberal OMISSION media has been withholding from you, for years. All of the other information-deprived libs in this forum should read this too.

Obama committed treason by not removing Hasan with a dishonorable discharge, as was requested by every Army officer in Fort Hood from the rank of major and above. One word explains why Hasan wasn't removed despite months of jihadism >> Obama. You don't know what Hasan was doing there during the year of 2009 ? Why am I not surprised ?

Obama also had Fort Hood and the facilities in Chattanooga "gun-fee zones", giving the killers a green light to come in and blast away.

 

[protectionist]

I'm proud to say I don't have 100% of them.

You mean you only have 99% of them ? LOL

Sorry, I couldn't resist. The door was too wide open.

 

[Lysistrata]

Nonsense. What did he do at Fort Hood or Chattanooga? He was there? He fired a gun? The rest is a matter of policy unique to the military situation at the time. Remember that Dubya's invasion of Iraq (actually that was criminal Cheney's idea), destabilized the region and opened up a total Pandora's Box that has not been shut until this day.

You are easily swayed by propaganda, and you don't even know where this propaganda is coming from and who pays for it.

OK Ms Question Mark. Here is some of that mountain of information that your liberal OMISSION media has been withholding from you, for years. All of the other information-deprived libs in this forum should read this too.

Obama committed treason by not removing Hasan with a dishonorable discharge, as was requested by every Army officer in Fort Hood from the rank of major and above. One word explains why Hasan wasn't removed despite months of jihadism >> Obama. You don't know what Hasan was doing there during the year of 2009 ? Why am I not surprised ?

Obama also had Fort Hood and the facilities in Chattanooga "gun-fee zones", giving the killers a green light to come in and blast away.

Hasan was dishonorably discharged. But what does this have to do with you deliberately falsely reporting Obama's religion?