Talk-Polywell.org

The Border Crisis Is Obama’s Mariel Boatlift

While many are calling the crisis Obama’s Katrina, a more apt political parallel is the Mariel Boatlift of 1980. In that fateful election year, President Jimmy Carter had pointed to his “reset” of relations with Fidel Castro’s Cuban government. The Democrat had softened America’s stance to the rogue regime, establishing an Interest Section in Havana and relaxing travel arrangements for Cuban Americans.

Castro repaid this kindness with an announcement that anyone who wanted to leave his island prison could do so. Hundreds of thousands of desperate Cubans boarded rickety rafts to make the dangerous trip to Florida. But the crafty dictator had also quietly opened the gates to his prisons and mental health facilities, encouraging the recently released to join the exodus.

When the first refugees arrived, the American public was welcoming. The sentiment soon turned sour as more and more dangerous and severely ill Cubans overran Florida’s meager relief capacity. Popular opinion quickly turned against the feckless Carter as he shipped wave after wave of immigrants to sites across the nation.

http://ricochet.com/border-crisis-obama ... -boatlift/


Not only is he a magnitude level of stupider than Jimmy Carter, he actually HATES the sane half of America.

Diogenes wrote:The Border Crisis Is Obama’s Mariel Boatlift

Drug Cartels Are Causing A Refugee Crisis

Officials in the United States might be tempted to view the disturbing surge in young refugees as simply a border security issue. But the problem is far more complex than that – the drug cartels are now major players in Central American countries, driving vulnerable populations northward to the United States to enhance their own profits.

And America’s hardline prohibitionist drug war is only making things worse.

Although the growing power of the cartels is not the only factor accounting for this crisis, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson suggested in congressional testimony that the “push factor” of violence is important.

Drug gangs have gained control of major chunks of Central America, making honest economic activity perilous. Teenagers especially have few options if they are not willing to work for the drug lords. As Caitlin Dickson noted in the Daily Beast, for example, “by making these countries so dangerous and virtually unlivable for its poorest citizens, the cartels have effectively created an incentive for people to flee, thereby providing themselves with more clientele for their human smuggling business.”

Since the cartels have seized control of human smuggling routes through Mexico, often charging refugees several thousand dollars for passage, the flood of undocumented immigrants significantly supplements the revenue that the drug gangs have long enjoyed from trafficking in illegal drugs. Would-be immigrants who can’t pay are pressed into service to carry drugs into the United States. And the surge of unaccompanied minors helps distract the already strained U.S. Border Patrol, making it easier for the drug lords to avoid having their products intercepted.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com ... ee-crisis/

Ah. Republican socialism at work. The drug price support and gang finance program. My understanding is that with drug prices down due to partial legalization the gangs are turning to other sources of revenue. I believe I predicted this a few years back. We saw the same thing at the end of Alcohol Prohibition with the rise of Murder Inc. And the intensification of union violence as the thugs turned to other rackets. Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters comes to mind.

With Prohibition ending we will have 20 years of this shite to live through. And it was all so predictable had Republicans just studied history. OH. Well.

The other thing to be learned from history is that most prohibitions of "new" drugs (like coffee) last about 50 years. Looks like time is about up.

So it occurred to me, and maybe I missed it being said already - if this guy's the worst (+-1), how does an entire major party in the greatest country on the planet not find a single better alternative, and what does that say about Republicans.

I think you're confusing what is a "better alternative" with what will get elected. The Republicans ran a stiff, difficult to connect with white guy, and a very old white guy before that. Republicans don't seem to focus much on who can get elected so much as who can get results, or they might have delivered to us just as deplorable a performance. And do note the Democrats would have lost the last election if the truth about Benghazi had been known. It was the conspiratorial acts of the press that elected OBama the second time around, not The People. The last election was entirely an exercise of the Free Press acting irresponsibly and politicly.

Betruger wrote:So it occurred to me, and maybe I missed it being said already - if this guy's the worst (+-1), how does an entire major party in the greatest country on the planet not find a single better alternative, and what does that say about Republicans.

That is one theory about what happened. I happen to have a very different theory. Mitt Romney was a FAR BETTER choice than Barack Obama. By every measure, Romney is the superior in intellect, experience, temperament and accomplishment to Obama. (as is pretty much anyone including the local dog catcher.)



But politics has only a tenuous grasp on reality. In politics, perception is the only thing that matters. How is perception shaped? Well people form perceptions based on what they see, and in this case specially regarding what they are able to see.



Well were do people get their information? Most get it from television. What did we see on Television? We saw a constant tear down of Romney by all the news and entertainment services, and we saw a constant coverup of Obama's many fiascoes and also constant expressions of praise and respect by those same news and entertainment services.


You see, Obama gets his positive Campaign commercials for free. They are a gift to him from the New York and Los Angeles based Liberal Democrat Union members who run the news and entertainment services.


Romney had to pay for his, and even that wasn't enough to counteract all the snide mockery and propaganda from the Democrats who control what gets on television. We heard about Romney's Dog on his roof, we heard about how he gave a kid a hair cut back in high school, we heard about "binders full of women", and we heard about his Taxes, and allegations of tax cheating, and pretty much any other derogatory thing about him that the Democrat reporters could find to accuse him of.



We saw Candy Crowley deliberately LIE to save Obama from Romney getting the better of him in the debate by pointing out that he was lying.


We saw every news and entertainment outlet work in Unison to attack and diminish not just Romney, but every Republican candidate that they could find with some potential awkward statement or possible dirt.


The bottom line is this. The Liberal Democrats who work in the media deliberately used their positions of influence to mislead the American people into voting for the fool instead of the competent man. As more and more of our population has become brain dead stupid, the task has simply gotten easier with each passing year.


The sane and responsible can simply no longer hold back the tide of the silly and insane, especially with the connivance of the media systems set to deliberately mislead them.


So it isn't a question of the Republican party not putting forth a good candidate. It wouldn't matter who was put forth, the Democrat media system would have worked very vigorously to cut off him off at the knees, and it is only once in awhile that someone like Ronald Reagan can come along and render them ineffective through the sheer power of his wit and charm.

GIThruster wrote:I think you're confusing what is a "better alternative" with what will get elected. The Republicans ran a stiff, difficult to connect with white guy, and a very old white guy before that. Republicans don't seem to focus much on who can get elected so much as who can get results, or they might have delivered to us just as deplorable a performance. And do note the Democrats would have lost the last election if the truth about Benghazi had been known. It was the conspiratorial acts of the press that elected OBama the second time around, not The People. The last election was entirely an exercise of the Free Press acting irresponsibly and politicly.

By the way, has anyone seen how much respect the Russians are showing Obama?





And


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08 ... d=noscript






Yeah, they are really scared of him.

Betruger wrote:So it occurred to me, and maybe I missed it being said already - if this guy's the worst (+-1), how does an entire major party in the greatest country on the planet not find a single better alternative, and what does that say about Republicans.

Evidently the Republicans like Obama Care 1 aka Romney.

Me? I 'm looking for a libertarian leaning guy with military experience. Probably an oxymoron. Second best would be any one with military experience. Third best? Well I'll let the rest of you decide.

Diogenes wrote:
Yeah, they are really scared of him.

#2 son works in the complex that the lasers were played on. He is coming for a visit in a few days. I'm going to ask him what he thought of the light show.

MSimon wrote:

Diogenes wrote:
Yeah, they are really scared of him.

#2 son works in the complex that the lasers were played on. He is coming for a visit in a few days. I'm going to ask him what he thought of the light show.

I would expect him to say it was embarrassing, but I shall be interested to hear his perspective.

Needless to say we do not discuss politics by e-mail or when Skyping. Every time the first mate even hints at going in that direction I advise against it.

We are going to try to talk him into leaving. But he has a mind of his own. Which has its good and bad points.

Yeah, they are really scared of him.

Remember 1984? It is no accident that the leader was "Big Brother." #1 world thug needs to wear the perfume of being harmless. Also, "speak softly and carry a big stick."

No, Obama's handlers are clever. Putin's military budget is 1/10 of the US, hence, more Hollywood tough guy imagery.

Obama's Iraqi Mission Impossible

For President Barack Obama the decision to send in the Night Stalkers was an agonising one. The audacious bin Laden raid in Pakistan had been a success but also preying on his mind was the failed 1980 Delta Force operation to rescue American hostages in Tehran.

Sandstorms and mechanical troubles led the mission to be abandoned and eight American troops were killed when two aircraft collided. The debacle cast a shadow over Jimmy Carter’s presidency.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... 23753.html



Obama was worried about repeating the Jimmy Carter disaster? He shouldn't worry. He's already far surpassed the disaster that was Jimmy Carter.

Obama was worried about repeating the Jimmy Carter disaster? He shouldn't worry.

Look, everybody knows and Obama knows even better that his organization's propaganda machine is without peer and can deal with any screw up. As you have pointed out his administration bested even Carter's and there has been no fall out. Looks like smooth sailing for him until his term is up and he can start working on the position of Obama the First, emperor of the world.

Just the suggestion of that should give the media a thrill up their leg and glaze their eyes over.

The audacious bin Laden raid in Pakistan had been a success but also preying on his mind was the failed 1980 Delta Force operation to rescue American hostages in Tehran.

This is a crock.

The Tehran raid was doomed before it lifted. It's failure enabled a (good and bad) structuring of special operations, that at least in general prevents missions from planning themselves self-doom, and also provided for the coordination of joint service assets in a more equatible and cooperative (I use this term loosely here) methodology. The establishment of JSOC and SOC was a needed step forward.

We would have to work really hard to repeat the failure mechanisms seen for that mission.

ladajo wrote:

The audacious bin Laden raid in Pakistan had been a success but also preying on his mind was the failed 1980 Delta Force operation to rescue American hostages in Tehran.

We would have to work really hard to repeat the failure mechanisms seen for that mission.

Never underestimate the power of idiots in high position.