Time For Democrats To 'Fess Up

[CowboyTed]

Got to love this thread...

The title tells Democrats to 'Fess UP' and then goes and quotes Ann Coulter...

Seriously...

Famous Quotes from Ann Coulter:
"The Dutch (Afrikaners) were" in South Africa "first."
"100% of heroin/fentanyl epidemic is because we don't have a WALL."
Says South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley "is an immigrant."
"America has already taken in one-fourth of Mexico's entire population."

The problem is the OP probably thinks those things are truth too. The OP is ripe for the Russians to pick, feed her full of bullshit, she is ready to drop...

The OP has lost rational reasoning a good while ago and has gone into tribal warfare where the truth is thrown out the window. She believes that her (and others on this forum) have the right to lie and believe lies because they been told they are right.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

If you support sanctuary cities you support ILLEGAL "IMMIGRATION"

 

[Lesh]

Were More People Deported Under the Obama Administration Than Any Other?

So yes...and not random deportations but rather those with criminal records

 

[PoliticalChic]

Got to love this thread...

The title tells Democrats to 'Fess UP' and then goes and quotes Ann Coulter...

Seriously...

Famous Quotes from Ann Coulter:
"The Dutch (Afrikaners) were" in South Africa "first."
"100% of heroin/fentanyl epidemic is because we don't have a WALL."
Says South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley "is an immigrant."
"America has already taken in one-fourth of Mexico's entire population."

The problem is the OP probably thinks those things are truth too. The OP is ripe for the Russians to pick, feed her full of bullshit, she is ready to drop...

The OP has lost rational reasoning a good while ago and has gone into tribal warfare where the truth is thrown out the window. She believes that her (and others on this forum) have the right to lie and believe lies because they been told they are right.

"Got to love this thread..."


Me too.


Which part did you love most, dolt????


..and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.



1. “In all, nearly 60 percent of immigrants—legal and illegal—are on government assistance, compared with 39 percent of native households. Why would any country voluntarily bring in people who have to be supported by the taxpayer?”
― Ann Coulter, ¡Adios, America!: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole


2. The reason that the Democrats/Liberals encourage illegal immigration is for one reason and one reason only: illegals vote for the Democrats.

There is no other benefit to this nation.
None.
Illegals keep wages low, and unemployment of Americans high; it costs billions in welfare services and police costs high.
It is only through the actions of Democrats and illegal aliens that the Left is able to claim a popular vote victory in the last election.


3. After all, Obama told illegal aliens to get out and vote.



4. The government collects any and all sorts of data about folks in this country.
If you'd like to see how scrupulous the data-miners have been, to actually hide the statistics on illegal aliens, pick any infinitesimal bit of information you'd like to know about inhabitants of America ....oh, say....like how many occupants of American Samoa have battery powered radios in their homes.....
Wanna know? It's actually here: American FactFinder - Using FactFinder
(2,651 in 2010)



5. Now try to find data on how many legal and illegal aliens are living here.

And, based on this obfuscation and/or outright refusal to collect this data, Liberals can simply sneer at the logic and experience of the other side's attempts to estimate the numbers of illegal aliens, how many vote, the financial burden they place on the public services they require, the costs to the judicial system, increases in police forces, prison guards.....and rape counselors.



6. Based on how much detail a census collects.....doesn't it seem logical to ask whether an individual is a citizen or not?????

But.....when Republicans try to ascertain this information.....

"Judge rejects citizenship question for 2020 U.S. census
NEW YORK, Jan 15 (Reuters) - A federal judge on Tuesday rejected the Trump administration's plan to add a U.S. citizenship question to the 2020 census, the first ruling in a handful of lawsuits nationwide that claim the question will hurt immigrants.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan ....."
Judge rejects citizenship question for 2020 U.S. census




7. Here are two easy ones:

What party do you suppose this judge belongs to???


and


Who do you guess appointed this anti-American????




Bet you got both right......even though they're both 'Left.'





Was there anything that wasn't correct?

No?

Excellent.

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[Lesh]

“In all, nearly 60 percent of immigrants—legal and illegal—are on government assistance, compared with 39 percent of native households. Why would any country voluntarily bring in people who have to be supported by the taxpayer?”
― Ann Coulter, ¡Adios, America!: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole

What a shock

mAnn Coulter is full of shit...as is the OP

Fact-checking a very old immigration meme

 

[PoliticalChic]

“In all, nearly 60 percent of immigrants—legal and illegal—are on government assistance, compared with 39 percent of native households. Why would any country voluntarily bring in people who have to be supported by the taxpayer?”
― Ann Coulter, ¡Adios, America!: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole

What a shock

mAnn Coulter is full of shit...as is the OP

Fact-checking a very old immigration meme

1. "On a national level, most people now know PolitiFact is nothing but another Obama-shilling mainstream media joke -- an entity so in the tank for the White House it ruled as mostly true that "Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president:"
sing inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account.

Yes, you read that correctly. According to PolitiFact, when indexed for inflation, Obama reduced spending.

PolitiFact's motto appears to be: The bigger the lie the more people will believe it. Hm. Sounds familiar. But how else can you palace guard for a failed president?

But PolitiFact isn't just a national cancer on all of us. This reprehensible outfit also "fact-checks" in a number of individual states, including the crucial swing states of Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Virginia.

Unfortunately, my lack of superpowers makes it impossible for me to monitor the left-wing propaganda PolitiFact is surely spewing in each individual state. Thankfully, though, the Republican Party of Virginia has had enough and late yesterday hit back at PolitiFact Virginia with both barrels:

For quite some time we've had growing concerns regarding PolitiFact Virginia's approach towards Republicans in general, and in specific, "separating fact from fiction" against Republican candidates, officials and committees.

On February 16th of this year, the Republican Party of Virginia had a meeting with the Editor and Publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch regarding the paper's PolitiFact Virginia unit. In late April - two months later - we had a subsequent conference call to follow up on our original meeting.

Since the original meeting - nearly five months ago - PolitiFact Virginia has meted-out 36 rulings, not including recent "Ad Watch" articles. Of those rulings, 26 targeted Republican candidates, elected officials, our State Party, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads. At the same time, PolitiFact Virginia handed down only 10 rulings on Democrats and one 3rd party organization.

That might not sound like both barrels, but included in the press release is this 87-page document which goes into great detail to refute a number of PolitiFact's lies, some of them nearly as absurd as PolitiFact's mostly true ruling that "Obama has the lowest spending record of any recent president."

This pushback is crucial and hopefully this is just the beginning. Whether it's on a national or local level, Republicans must treat the media as what it truly is: an adversary.

There is no downside anymore in pushing back and going on offense against the corrupt media. New Media is here to stay and not fighting back against the likes of PolitiFact is no different than not fighting back against the DNC.
VA Pushes Back Against PolitiFact, Shows Other States the Way | Breitbart




2. This bias is evident in:

1) The targeting of Republican political figures for lopsidedly disproportionate

PolitiFact examination;2

2) The showering of Republican politicians with suspiciously negative determinations;

and

3) The basing of these supposed “factual” determinations on highly subjective analysis

and even opinion masquerading as “fact checks.

http://library.constantcontact.com/...nia+--+Political+Bias+--+Final+--+7-10-12.pdf





3. Now comes a study from the George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that demonstrates empirically that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation's leading "fact checkers," finds that Republicans are dishonest in their claims three times as often as Democrats. "PolitiFact.com has rated Republican claims as false three times as often as Democratic claims during President Obama's second term," the Center said in a release, "despite controversies over Obama administration statements on Benghazi, the IRS and the AP."

The fact that, as the Lichter study shows, "A majority of Democratic statements (54 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely true, compared to only 18 percent of Republican statements," probably has more to do with how the statements were picked and the subjective bias of the fact checker involved than anything remotely empirical. Likewise, the fact that "a majority of Republican statements (52 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely false, compared to only 24 percent of Democratic statements" probably has more to do with spinning stories than it does with evaluating statements.

There is a "truth gap" in Washington, but it doesn't exist along the lines the fact checkers would have you think. It was Obama who said you could keep the health care you had if you liked it, even if Obamacare became law. It was Obama who said the Citizens United decision would open the floodgates of foreign money into U.S. campaigns. It was Obama who said Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video. It was Obama's IRS that denied conservative political groups had been singled out for special scrutiny. And it was Obama who promised that taxes would not go up for any American making less than $250,000 per year.

All of these statements and plenty more are demonstrably false,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans





4. "PolitiFact.com is a project operated by the Tampa Bay Times, in which reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets "fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups".PolitiFact - Wikipedia


5. "The St. PetersburgTampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a traditionally liberal paper. We note that PolitiFact's stories appear to damage Republicans far more often than Democrats despite the fact that PF tends to choose about as many stories dealing with Republicans as for Democrats. If the selection process was blind then either proportions should be approximately even or else the party with worse ratings should receive more ratings overall according to what PolitiFact lists as its selection criteria. Plus our independent research helps confirm the hypothesis. PolitiFact Bias: About PolitiFact Bias/FAQ




6. "The Tampa Bay Times, which produces the PolitFact Truth-o-Meter, has not endorsed a single Republican candidate this century for any of the three most important positions on the Florida election ballot. Accordingly, the Times scores a “Pants on Fire” for its lack of objectivity, according to an extensive analysis by Media Trackers Florida.

Since 2000, the Times has issued 10 endorsements in elections for U.S. President, U.S. Senate, and Florida Governor. Nine of the 10 endorsements went to Democrats, with the sole exception being theTimes’ endorsement of Democrat-leaning Independent Charlie Crist in the 2010 U.S. Senate contest." PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores ‘Pants on Fire’ for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers



7. "PolitiFact’s liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)"
PolitiFact's liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)





In your face, booooyyyyyyeeeeeee!!!!


I ripped you a new one...without a resort to vulgarity.
You should try it.

 

[Foxfyre]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

They supported border fencing before Trump and now that we have a President Trump they say a border fence is ineffective and immoral. They don't provide any rationale for why it was effective and moral before. If you can't see that as prime Grade A hypocritical and far more interested in political advantage than caring about what is right for America, you are really REALLY need to have your eyes checked. SOON!

 

[PoliticalChic]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

They supported border fencing before Trump and now that we have a President Trump they say a border fence is ineffective and immoral. They don't provide any rationale for why it was effective and moral before. If you can't see that as prime Grade A hypocritical and far more interested in political advantage than caring about what is right for America, you are really REALLY need to have your eyes checked. SOON!

It's not an eye problem, Foxy.....

It's along these lines:

 

[PoliticalChic]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

They supported border fencing before Trump and now that we have a President Trump they say a border fence is ineffective and immoral. They don't provide any rationale for why it was effective and moral before. If you can't see that as prime Grade A hypocritical and far more interested in political advantage than caring about what is right for America, you are really REALLY need to have your eyes checked. SOON!

The government school system operates under the doctrines known as “Mushroom Management:”

1. Keep them in the dark.
2. Feed them full of s**t.


Based on both the lack of knowledge, and the missing context, government school grads (Obama voters) can be convinced to support every absurdity of the Democrat Party, and, even when they doctrines reverse 180°, as they did both in the current support for gay marriage, and for allowing Iran nuclear weapons, and for a wall before they were against it.....the indoctrinated seem not to be aware of the change.

We actually saw this predicted in Orwell’s 1984.

 

[candycorn]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

The number of border guards also reached an all time high under Obama.
Strange for an “open borders” guy.

I guess the facts get in the way of a conservative fable; as they always do with Jumbo.

 

[Foxfyre]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

The number of border guards also reached an all time high under Obama.
Strange for an “open borders” guy.

I guess the facts get in the way of a conservative fable; as they always do with Jumbo.

But now the same people say that aggressive border control is immoral and unjustifiable and the Border Patrol are Nazis or worse who rip little children from the arms of their parents, brutalize helpless women and children, and even have been made responsible for some who arrive here so abused and sick that they died here. I.C.E. should be abolished and a wall or other barrier is immoral.

You can't make this stuff up. They are partisan hacks to the maximum degree, hypocrites to the core, and dangerous to America. It is absolutely incomprehensible how they do this with a straight face. And no honorable American should defend it or condone it.

 

[JBvM]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

If you support sanctuary cities you support ILLEGAL "IMMIGRATION"

If you support Trump's wall you belong in a walled-in maximum security facility for the mentally challenged

 

[JBvM]

Were More People Deported Under the Obama Administration Than Any Other?

So yes...and not random deportations but rather those with criminal records

thank you

 

[JBvM]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

They supported border fencing before Trump and now that we have a President Trump they say a border fence is ineffective and immoral. They don't provide any rationale for why it was effective and moral before. If you can't see that as prime Grade A hypocritical and far more interested in political advantage than caring about what is right for America, you are really REALLY need to have your eyes checked. SOON!

not true and you know that

 

[JBvM]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

The number of border guards also reached an all time high under Obama.
Strange for an “open borders” guy.

I guess the facts get in the way of a conservative fable; as they always do with Jumbo.

yes, the imbecilic logic of the wingnut Trumpeteers


thank you

 

[candycorn]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

The number of border guards also reached an all time high under Obama.
Strange for an “open borders” guy.

I guess the facts get in the way of a conservative fable; as they always do with Jumbo.

But now the same people say that aggressive border control is immoral and unjustifiable and the Border Patrol are Nazis or worse who rip little children from the arms of their parents, brutalize helpless women and children, and even have been made responsible for some who arrive here so abused and sick that they died here. I.C.E. should be abolished and a wall or other barrier is immoral.

You can't make this stuff up. They are partisan hacks to the maximum degree, hypocrites to the core, and dangerous to America. It is absolutely incomprehensible how they do this with a straight face. And no honorable American should defend it or condone it.

Conservatives on this board are wanting the FBI disbanded. Your blob isn't paying his coast guard. So cry me a river.

 

[bripat9643]

Were More People Deported Under the Obama Administration Than Any Other?

No.

 

[Foxfyre]

...and admit the one and only reason they support illegal immigration.

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

They supported border fencing before Trump and now that we have a President Trump they say a border fence is ineffective and immoral. They don't provide any rationale for why it was effective and moral before. If you can't see that as prime Grade A hypocritical and far more interested in political advantage than caring about what is right for America, you are really REALLY need to have your eyes checked. SOON!

not true and you know that

It is true. I've following this whole immigration debate since the late 1970's, and I have heard their arguments in the Clinton, Bush 43, and Obama administrations, and I have heard their arguments these past few weeks. Here is just some of history, then and now:
Quit Lying, Democrats. Millions Have Watched Video Of You Supporting Strong Border Security

 

[JBvM]

except they don't SUPPORT illegal immigration

They sure as heck do. When you advocate policy that effectively results in open borders, establish sanctuary cities, give them drivers' licenses, provide them all manner of social services, not the least of which is free education for their kids, they are absolutely and without question supporting illegal immigration.

open borders?

But I thought Democrats supported and funded border security fencing and in some areas, walls?

You can't argue they are hypocrites against Trump, and then turn around and claim they never supported what they did.

understand reality yet?

They supported border fencing before Trump and now that we have a President Trump they say a border fence is ineffective and immoral. They don't provide any rationale for why it was effective and moral before. If you can't see that as prime Grade A hypocritical and far more interested in political advantage than caring about what is right for America, you are really REALLY need to have your eyes checked. SOON!

not true and you know that

It is true. I've following this whole immigration debate since the late 1970's, and I have heard their arguments in the Clinton, Bush 43, and Obama administrations, and I have heard their arguments these past few weeks. Here is just some of history, then and now:
Quit Lying, Democrats. Millions Have Watched Video Of You Supporting Strong Border Security

a silly partisan blog?

no thanks

and please, stop acting like you and you alone have been following the subject.

and even newcomers with access to a search engine could counter your arguments