Cue the right wing meltdown in Virginia.
« For the next 3 days only, our special platinum constellation casket is priced at only $4,999.95... | Main | Increase The Size Of The House of Delegates? »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b13369e20148c6dd41d9970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Webb And Warner Vote For DREAM Act and DADT Repeal:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/reaction-dadt-vote-few-proud-sexually-twisted
And so goes the meltdowns...LOL!
Posted by: Spock | December 18, 2010 at 04:17 PM
i've been reading the DREAM act. Several provisions would not be good law under any circumstance.
glad it was defeated.
Posted by: kelley in virginia | December 18, 2010 at 04:38 PM
wow they are working themselves into a lather
Posted by: not a virginia state senator | December 18, 2010 at 07:14 PM
It's official. Webb and Warner are left wingers.
Posted by: Tatum | December 18, 2010 at 07:17 PM
are you going to elaborate on that kelley or should i just assume you dont think browns and gays should have the same rights as you?
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 18, 2010 at 08:28 PM
Kelley, I'm curious what you mean. I think the idea of letting an illegal immigrant into the military in order to "earn" their citizenship is a spectacular idea that everyone should support as a great way to secure our country and give people whose parents brought them here illegally a fair chance at life in the US.
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | December 18, 2010 at 10:15 PM
I agree with Ben....No bill is perfect and a few provisions could be less than desired BUT the overall idea is smart. It's not amnesty and most Republicans should know what that is since Regan and Bush both pushes true amensty agenda's while in office. Amnesty is getting away with something without punishmen and this is not that at all. Serving in the military is not easy and takes a lot of commitment which many legal Americans would never want to go through. Lastly, most of these illegals came here as children and lacked the intent to illegally come across the border. Sort of like not blaming a young child whose criminal mother hides shoplifted goods inside their clothes in a store. Same concept applies here.
Posted by: DanielK | December 18, 2010 at 11:10 PM
Glad to see DADT pass. Sorry to see the DREAM act didn't. One of the few times I'd be on Warner and Webb's side. Glad they voted right.
Posted by: Brian W. Schoeneman | December 18, 2010 at 11:32 PM
schoeneman, what the hell are you doing not towing your party line?
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 19, 2010 at 12:40 AM
Brian,
I can't figure out at all why anyone would oppose kids who were brought here illegally by their parents being allowed to serve in our military for two years in order to get citizenship. Can you explain why you are opposed to that?
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | December 19, 2010 at 08:23 AM
Ben, I'm not opposed to it at all. I have been asking the same question myself to the folks that are against it. This is giving these kids the opportunity to earn citizenship - not handing it to them. I don't get why anyone is opposing it.
Posted by: Brian W. Schoeneman | December 19, 2010 at 08:43 AM
Sorry Brian, just reread your comment. Haven't been to sleep tonight yet in Vegas.
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | December 19, 2010 at 09:00 AM
the DREAM act has language that over rides current law on deportation when an illegal commits a felony. That part of the law should be looked at & then re-written. This is the minumum change in the DREAM act.
secondly, the border issue should be resolved before we start more programs that cost Federal dollars. (or maybe just force ICE to do their job???)
if I thought that these youngsters would serve in the military to earn their citizenship (& some may actually do that), I would be more interested in passage of DREAM act. However, if an illegal alien could sign up as student to any school (maybe even one of Brian Moran's schools) at taxpayer expense & become "perpetual" student, then don't you think many would opt for that rather than Ranger school?
and don't give me that "shouldn't brown people have the same rights" as I BS.
Posted by: kelley in virginia | December 19, 2010 at 09:02 AM
Don't worry about it, Ben. You look like you're having a lot more fun than I am. Been sick for two weeks solid.
Posted by: Brian W. Schoeneman | December 19, 2010 at 09:43 AM
I think the premise behind the Dream Act is good but it could use some tweaking. There was a post at Bearing Drift about this a few weeks ago (Brian S. may have written it).
Basically it said they should have to graduate from college with a degree in science, engineering or some sort of health field, or serve four years and get their honorable discharge from the military. I agree with this-we dont want someone getting a green card to finishing one semester. It also put out several other hoops (cant remember what all of them were.)
Posted by: SE VA MWC Alum | December 19, 2010 at 12:50 PM
oops didnt see it required two years of college. Anyway it should requir a degree
Posted by: SE VA MWC Alum | December 19, 2010 at 01:18 PM
kelley, perhaps you would be so kind as to cite the section number and paragraph where you say it overrides deportations based on felony convictions (or which rightwing groups talking points your reading) because section 4, paragraph C makes it very clear that anyone sentenced to prison for more than 1 year (which is the basic difference between a felony and misdemeanor) or anyone convicted of 3 or more offenses isn't eligible and will be deported.
As for being a perpetual student, most universities will kick them out rather quickly if they fail to maintain a certain GPA or graduate in a reasonable amount of time. Furthermore, I doubt an illegal immigrant could be a perpetual student at a for-profit university, even with tuition assistance.
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 19, 2010 at 04:00 PM
As a philosophy/literature major (and married to a philosophy/poli sci major), I think having an educated populace who can think in a robust way is a good thing for our country, so the degree the student receives is not at issue.
Posted by: Gretchen Laskas | December 19, 2010 at 07:21 PM
It will be fun to see what excuses the left wing Harvard professors use now to block ROTC from recruiting on campus!
Posted by: ??? | December 19, 2010 at 07:42 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/12/the-ivy-league-makes-peace-with-rotc/68251/
nice try question marks
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 19, 2010 at 08:12 PM
I like the military provision in the DREAM act. I'm not so sure about the going to college provision. That's not a sacrifice the person is making for their country, it's something they are doing to provide for their own future economic well being. Perhaps those who got education degrees and agreed to teach in disadvantaged school districts...just seems to me there should be some equivalent service to country rather than self.
Posted by: Steve Vaughan | December 20, 2010 at 09:29 AM
Moral arguments aside, the DREAM Act just makes sense - in terms of dollars and cents.
Based on a Supreme Court ruling, we cannot bar illegal immigrants of school age from attending public schools from K-12.
Without legal status, it is very difficult for these kids to go to college and get decent paying jobs. So, we're creating a permanent underclass despite the efforts of our public school systems.
Many opponents of immigration reform that contains a pathway to citizenship cite the burden to society and local governments of illegal immigrants and/or recent immigrants. The DREAM Act would help get a better return on our investment.
Posted by: Kevin in Arlington | December 20, 2010 at 11:01 AM
I would support the DREAM act with the following provisions:
1) The parents of those who sign up are immediately deported.
2) Those failing to complete the requirements are also deported.
3) The possessions of all deported illegal immigrants are confiscated to pay for implementation of the DREAM Act.
Posted by: jack | December 20, 2010 at 11:32 AM
I would have liked to have seen the DREAM act pass, mostly because I believe having an educated and disciplined first generation immigrant class will bring exponential dividends not only within immigrant communities, but an educated workforce is always better than one that isn't.
This doesn't mean I didn't have concerns -- a very large one being that right now, we have an entire industry that preys upon students, drowning them in college debt and leaving them more often than not without the degree. (A discussion much talked about here!) Given that these students, who are first generation immigrants as well as first generation college students, they would be particularly vulnerable to scams. And that does concern me, just as it does with any population who is trying to make their lives better and is cheated (legally).
Posted by: Gretchen Laskas | December 20, 2010 at 12:57 PM
Is that timed to coincide with the left-wing meltdown in Virginia over President Barry's tax deal?
Posted by: James Young | December 20, 2010 at 03:23 PM
JY: Yes, it's an across the board political meltdown.
Posted by: Steve Vaughan | December 20, 2010 at 04:10 PM
While there might be some merit (somewhere) in the “dream act”.
One question that comes to my mind is… if we now have 15% (real) unemployment, why would we want to legalize millions of “new” citizens feeding from the taxpayer trough?
Is it so that we have millions more “social slaves” to support a party of dead ideas that has driven us to the verge of bankruptcy in their short experiment in western socialism???
Posted by: change | December 20, 2010 at 04:20 PM
Bubbles, Thanks for the link as it is somewhat encouraging. That being said, I am guessing that left wing faculty at these various Ivy League schools will still want to get in their last anti-military licks (as some have, I think). In addition, I do wonder what these schools will do when students attack military recruiting tables in the name of "peace." The probability is "nothing," though we may be pleasantly surprised.
Now that DADT is repealed, maybe Ben can enlist. Imagine, we can have our own "Private Benjamin." Ha ha ha ha ha.
Posted by: ??? | December 20, 2010 at 04:48 PM
change -- the big economic point (which you can read about even in conservative publications such as the Weekly Standard and National Review) is the split between those who have a college degree and those who don't.
Unemployment for those with a college degree is around 5%. Unemployment for those without a degree is between 10-15%.
So it is in our country's economic best interests to put the best and brightest of first generation immigrants into college or give them the discipline that being part of the military does. For a relatively small amount of money up front, we will see far more economic returns in the long run.
Posted by: Gretchen Laskas | December 20, 2010 at 08:36 PM
The entire point behind illegals going into service to earn 14th amd rights has everything to do with the military complex needing fresh blood to fight their empire building wars.
If you haven't noticed Saturday marked 700 of our treasure killed to build UNOCAL's pipeline and protect the poppy fields for the banksters to make their dough. You don't have to take my word for it. Heavens no, just google Axis Logic and watch their excellent documentary on PNAC - The New American Century.
Posted by: Helen Tansey | December 20, 2010 at 09:31 PM
Helen plainly offers the moonbat perspective on the purposes of American military involvement, but she stumbles unwittingly onto an important, often undiscussed question: Is it healthy for a republic to have a substantial portion of its military staffed by non-nationals?
Posted by: James Young | December 20, 2010 at 09:35 PM
Oh, I forgot to add suicide rates are escalating and that our treasure is now on 4, 5 and 6th tours.
So, let's throw the illegals in there to fight the neocons wars.
I have an idea, one that 0 promoted on the campaign trail - bring all of our treasure the hell home!
Posted by: Helen Tansey | December 20, 2010 at 09:35 PM
???,
Yes we get it, you hate left wing professors. Now to the important discussion:
Do you honestly think Ben would pass the fitness requirements for the armed forces? The closest thing in his life that counts as exercise is him walking from his car up to the counter to order a burger. If you look at his postings he is clearly unhappy... and fat. Now the real question is, does ben eat because he is unhappy or is he unhappy because he eats?
Also, has anyone else noticed that the caps suddenly break their losing streak when Ben is away from DC?
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 20, 2010 at 11:00 PM
Mr Bubbles, that's not very nice! Although you are right, I could never be in the military for medical reasons (and not just because I'm fat!)
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | December 20, 2010 at 11:06 PM
JY - ridicule me all you want...I've been called worse than "moonbat" trust me.
Bottom line - our treasure is exhausted, coming home in body bags, and committing suicide at alarming rates. What about this travesty this destruction of our once proud military doesn't prick your conscience?
Like I said, bring our treasure home! And don't send anymore of our treasure to fight another countries war.
Posted by: Helen Tansey | December 21, 2010 at 10:10 AM
Helen: You fail to distinguish between Iraq, which I agree was Bush 43's war of choice and Afghanistan, where we went with the perfectly legitimate mission of bringing to heel the folks who attacked us on 9/11.
It's unfortunate that both the Bush and Obama administrations lost sight of the mission there -- to kill Osama Bin Laden and cripple Al Queda -- and got sucked into nation building in a country that's never in its history been a stable nation. We've yet to finish the mission of killing Bin Laden and crippling Al Queda, but I'd agree at this point that's better accomplished by drone strikes and small hit teams than by a large number of boots on the ground in Afghanistan.
Posted by: Steve Vaughan | December 21, 2010 at 11:18 AM
Yea, remember Tora Bora?
Posted by: Kalimantan | December 21, 2010 at 04:09 PM
Gretch,
I agree with your point on education.
However, why would it not be “in our country’s economic best interest”, further educate our “legal” youth, and sending those who are here “illegally” back from whence they came; that they might be useful citizens of their mother country until such time as they might choose to enter the USA legally like so many have done before?
We would then have fewer people on the “taxpayer dole”, more opportunities (and resources) for current citizens, and a bonus would be that all of these other countries might be able to prosper from these “great resources”.
Sure the USA might miss the chance that one of these genius “wonder illegal aliens” might find the answer to why some people wear red and some wear blue bandannas. However, I believe our great country could probably survive the loss.
Posted by: change | December 21, 2010 at 04:18 PM
More on the Ivy Leagues:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703886904576031802138298800.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Bubbles, We can understand why the military might not want someone of Ben's intellectual and emotional challenges. And Ben, I think you are quite the expert in saying things that are "not very nice." See also "emotional challenges," above.
Steve, It's nice of you to ignore Saddam's financing of terrorists who killed American citizens as well as his weapons programs (which he stated in writing that he had every intention of restarting). Perhaps you would have liked to have waited until someone used one of his chemical weapons? Remember that Bill Clinton supported the idea that Saddam possessed WMDs on January 20, 2001. Then again, that little conflict with Germany and Italy ion the 1940s was FDR's "War of choice." Oh, never mind, a Democrat was president!
Helen,
"Now we shall have peace in our time."
Posted by: ??? | December 21, 2010 at 06:13 PM
???-time to get some new talking points. The truth of yours was was disproved by 2004 at the very latest.
Oh, never mind you just equated the war in Iraq with World War II, you're a moron who doesn't need to be answered.
Posted by: Steve Vaughan | December 21, 2010 at 06:47 PM
No, Steve, you just show how you would rather call names than refute facts. Some "journalist" you are!
Posted by: ??? | December 21, 2010 at 09:38 PM
Ben,
I'm just judging you based on your twitter feed. If you didnt have that ugly thumbnail picture of you eating some kind of baked good and could go 5 minutes without letting us know which bar your at, I'd be nicer to you :) But look at it this way, when wilford brimley kicks the bucket you'll have a great future teaching us about diabeetus.
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 22, 2010 at 03:23 AM
oh and good luck with the cougar (though she's probably a whore)
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 22, 2010 at 03:24 AM
Mr Bubbles- Get some glasses, in my twitter picture I am holding up the secret plastic Easter Eggs I found in an office scavenger hunt, not eating a baked anything!
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | December 22, 2010 at 03:49 AM
Mr. Bubbles:
That's spelled "diabetes".
Posted by: Jay Hughes | December 22, 2010 at 10:48 AM
Them plastic Easter eggs is good eatin'! LOL
Posted by: ??? | December 22, 2010 at 08:44 PM
Anyone who believes we went to Afghanistan to get Osama and knock out CIAQueda is not keeping up with on the ground sources.
Ask yourself this simple question - why has our military, especially air power, focuse ammo on destroying mountaintops and other slopes where the UNOCAL pipeline is being built? hhhhmmmm. think about it!
Oh and btw, Osama, according to Bhenazir Bhutto died of kidney disease in December of 2002. Other sources back this claim.
You don't need to believe me. Simply google Bhenazir's interview. And while you're at it google Al Queda + CIA + BBC. Oh, and Hill admitted the other day the Mujahadeen was a creation of the CIA. Google that interviw with Greta.
Happy reading.
Posted by: Helen Tansey | December 22, 2010 at 11:21 PM
Jay Hughes:
Way to not get the joke, dipsh!t...
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/diabeetus
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 22, 2010 at 11:39 PM
oh and ben, zooming in it looks like a cupcake with blue icing and a marshmellow egg on top. yum...
Posted by: Mr Bubbles | December 23, 2010 at 03:35 AM
I just think it's great that Warner and Webb were kind enough to give the opposition some good ammo to use when they attempt to get re-elected.
It's a Festivus Miracle!
Posted by: A Voter | December 23, 2010 at 10:35 AM
Don't worry, Republicans, GEORGE ALLEN will take out Webb.
http://hamptonroads.com/2010/11/poll-webb-narrowly-leads-allen-runup-2012-senate-race
Or,maybe not. Down four points with near 100% name recognition is pathetic. Though I'd be up for seeing Allen get beaten again.
BTW, he also beats Crazy Cooch by double-digits.
Posted by: RichmondDem | December 23, 2010 at 03:53 PM
Although I agree that our military is a treasure that must be only VERY sparingly spent I think Helen Tansey is a conspiracy theorist on the margins. She is truly needed as much in our democracy as Cuccinelli (and characters like Palin). Begone!
As a US Army retiree (not that it matters) I say hurray for the end of DADT and too bad for the situation of DREAM.
Posted by: Centipede | December 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM
At that time, McGrady in the league with kobe Bryant is almost equal, and now, but only on the piston tmac take veteran minimum-salary contracts. But even so, recovering from injury in this game tmac forced out of Bryant's true fire, which let time about as if returned to three years ago.
Posted by: Air Jordan Shoes | January 07, 2011 at 02:55 AM