Re: DACA

[B...@onramp.net]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 13:32:33 -0500 (CDT), Moderate <nos...@noemail.com>
wrote:

>Moderate <nos...@noemail.com> Wrote in message:
>> Obama introduced DACA five years ago as a temporary measure.
>>
>> The left is loosing their minds.
>>
>> Liberalism is a mental disorder.
>>
>> --
>>
>
>Just when you think Liberalism is a mental disorder we get further
> confirmation.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/y8lw5mk3

The only confirmation I see here is that you are a weak-minded idiot
with myopia. DACA was, and is, a great program. 90% of those in the
program have jobs, pay taxes and generate income for America. Many of
the party that you belong to. Congress should just make a law to
continue it. Trump will sign it. Only stupid alt-right morons would
fight that.

[B...@onramp.net]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:57:59 -0500 (CDT), Moderate <nos...@noemail.com>
wrote:

>B...@Onramp.net Wrote in message:

>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 13:32:33 -0500 (CDT), Moderate <nos...@noemail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Moderate <nos...@noemail.com> Wrote in message:
>>>> Obama introduced DACA five years ago as a temporary measure.
>>>>
>>>> The left is loosing their minds.

You need to loosen yours.

>>>>
>>>> Liberalism is a mental disorder.

When you get confirmation of that from the APA let us know.
In the meantime you're making an ass of yourself.

>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>
>>>Just when you think Liberalism is a mental disorder we get further
>>> confirmation.
>>>
>>>http://tinyurl.com/y8lw5mk3
>>
>> The only confirmation I see here is that you are a weak-minded idiot
>> with myopia. DACA was, and is, a great program. 90% of those in the
>> program have jobs, pay taxes and generate income for America. Many of
>> the party that you belong to. Congress should just make a law to
>> continue it. Trump will sign it. Only stupid alt-right morons would
>> fight that.
>>
>

>It was illegal and only temporary, according to Obama. Not even
> he thought it was great.

It turned out to be. All that need to be done is to make it legal.

[Alan Baker]

> Genius. Why not legalize bank robbery?

You think the two are equivalent, doofus?

Explain.

>
> You are seriously mentally ill.
>

[B...@onramp.net]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:44:05 -0500 (CDT), Moderate <nos...@noemail.com>

>Genius. Why not legalize bank robbery?

Only a lowlife fool would make that analogy. The people in this
program have never lived anywhere but the USA, they only speak English
(better than you) and some have families here that would stay behind.
Where would they go? They have roots here and none in the country that
they came from as little children. Have you no compassion? Dumb
question. You would have to have a brain first.

Just end the program from now on and allow the ones here to stay.

>
>You are seriously mentally ill.

Then the majority of the country is too. The fact is that you're a
maggot.

[-hh]

BobbyK wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:44:05 -0500 (CDT), Moderate wrote:
> >B...@Onramp.net Wrote in message:

> >> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:57:59 -0500 (CDT), Moderate wrote:
> >>>
> >>> It was illegal and only temporary, according to Obama. Not even
> >>> he thought it was great.
> >>
> >> It turned out to be. All that need to be done is to make it legal.

I'm not really so sure. I'd have to read the specifics to say for sure,
but my basic understanding is that the EO had directed Agencies
to make DACA'ers their lowest priority (because they registered, etc).
Providing guidance for what ranks as higher/lower priorities when
resources is not unlimited is the traditional role of management.

> >Genius. Why not legalize bank robbery?
>
> Only a lowlife fool would make that analogy.

The irony is that Moderate actually thinks he's being clever.

> The people in this
> program have never lived anywhere but the USA, they only speak English
> (better than you) and some have families here that would stay behind.
> Where would they go? They have roots here and none in the country that
> they came from as little children. Have you no compassion? Dumb
> question. You would have to have a brain first.

Their logic is to punish the innocent child for the crime of the parent, which
is exactly the inverse (aka "opposite") of what they say on reproductive rights.

> Just end the program from now on and allow the ones here to stay.

With full citizenship. They're not responsible for where they happened to
be born, or transported to while clearly a minor, so anything less would be
to punish the crime for the actions of the parent.

Of course, the motivation to note give them citizenship is because of
racism: the Reds believe that the DACA'ers will be Blue voters.

Historically, Wernher Von Braun's 100 all were granted US Citizenship, even
though they had all been officially the enemy and had careers which were
pretty damn complicit. For example, engineering designers of the V-2 rocket,
a Nazi weapon which was responsible for the deaths of over 20,000 innocents:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-2_rocket>


-hh

[MNMikeW]

B...@Onramp.net wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:44:05 -0500 (CDT), Moderate<nos...@noemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> B...@Onramp.net Wrote in message:
>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:57:59 -0500 (CDT), Moderate<nos...@noemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It was illegal and only temporary, according to Obama. Not even
>>>> he thought it was great.
>>>
>>> It turned out to be. All that need to be done is to make it legal.
>>>
>>
>> Genius. Why not legalize bank robbery?
>
> Only a lowlife fool would make that analogy. The people in this
> program have never lived anywhere but the USA,

No you can't claim that.

[-hh]

From a deliberately narrow and pedantic interpretation,
correct: they were typically born outside of the USA and
then carried in by their parents. But that doesn't mean
that they were old enough to realize or remember this.

And to illustrate Bobby's real point, tell us: what's your
personal earliest memory? Include your estimated age.

Because ... regardless of early that memory is, you did exist
prior to your earliest memory, and yet you're trying to
claim that this "lost memory" element is somehow profoundly
influential and critically important to who you are today.
Let's see some actual proof to support that position.

And sure, we can see that it was as a toddler that most people
learned to not shit in their pants, in public, etc - - but that
doesn't make you uniquely American, as evidenced by Mr. Moderate,
who makes it quite painfully clear that at least some 'Americans'
still have yet to learn these social norm behaviors.


-hh

[B...@onramp.net]

OK, the greater majority then.

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-09-08 7:19 AM, Moderate wrote:
> Moderate <nos...@noemail.com> Wrote in message:
>> Obama introduced DACA five years ago as a temporary measure.
>>
>> The left is loosing their minds.
>>

>> Liberalism is a mental disorder.
>>

>> --
>>
>
> I will just leave this here.
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/y8bsyqzj
>

OK.

So?

[MNMikeW]

Never having lived outside the US implies they were born here. DACA is
not about that at all.

[Alan Baker]

Yes, yes, Mikey.

He's said it badly, but it's clear he means the "greater majority" of
THEIR LIVES.

[B...@onramp.net]

That may not be the reasoning for it but as hh pointed out most only
have a memory of living in the USA.

[MNMikeW]

Complete Baloney.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/05/us/politics/who-are-the-dreamers.html?mcubz=0

Average age: 6

[Alan Baker]

1. That is the MEDIAN age, not the average age. That means that half of
all of those children were less than 6; well technically, 50% of them
less half the 6 year olds, so 46.3%. So that obviously includes lots who
have no memory of their life before they entered the US.

2. Who the hell really cares? A child who is brought to the US has no
choice in the matter and after they've spent years in the US, you are
tearing decent people away from the only culture they really know.

That matters to other decent people, so where does that leave you?

[B...@onramp.net]

Read again. That's median age. 45% are 5 or younger. I remember very
little at age 5.

[MNMikeW]

Which is the greater majority? Those under 5 or over?

[Alan Baker]

Let's keep nit-picking about this?

I child of 7 is brought to the states and is now 17.

Why should the US deport him?

[B...@onramp.net]

According to this article approximately 55% 6 or over, 45% under 6.
What difference would that make?

[MNMikeW]

It makes this "OK, the greater majority then", wrong.

[Alan Baker]

And again, aside from helping you discuss what is actually RIGHT, why
are you focusing on this?

[B...@onramp.net]

No it doesn't. That figure isn't based on 100% of Dreamers but a
subsection. These figures are the age of admission to the program.
There are some that are college graduates now, approximately 21 years
old. Even if they were 10 when enrolled they could have lived here
for several years before that.

Read the whole article and see what the majority of the 800,000 are
contributing. That's a major reason for allowing them to stay....and
possibly get citizenship.

>

[-hh]

MNMikeW wrote:

> B...@Onramp.net wrote:
> > MNMikeW<mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> B...@Onramp.net wrote:
> >>>
> >>> That may not be the reasoning for it but as hh pointed out
> >>> most only have a memory of living in the USA.
> >>
> >> Complete Baloney.
> >>
> >> <https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/05/us/politics/who-are-the-dreamers.html?mcubz=0>
> >>
> >> Average age: 6
> >
> > Read again. That's median age.

Looks like Mike needs a basic class in Statistics.

> > 45% are 5 or younger.
> > I remember very little at age 5.
>
> Which is the greater majority? Those under 5 or over?

The statistical definition of MEDIAN is the value at which
half the sample has a higher value and half a lower value.

For this particular data set, because it is expressed as
integers, it doesn't have the resolution to provide the
precise "50%" value: up to age 5 = 46.8% of total and
up to age 6 = 54.2% ... that means that the "majority"
breakpoint is slightly after age 5 but before age 6.

If one interpolates, figure five and five months age.

The above NYT cite has the by-age breakdown. For example,
the data shows that the statistical MODE was age 3.

Now the definition of MODE is the most commonly observed
datapoint, which means that more DACA'ers were brought in
when they were age 3 than at any other age.

From a memory retention standpoint, everyone has an "earliest"
memory (by definition), which is commonly going to be of some
event at around kindergarten/first grade age. However, it is
just an isolated landmark or two with lots of gaps ... might
remember getting a puppy/etc, but not also the day of the week,
what month it was, etc, unless there's a good reason for that
to also have been associated.


-hh

[Dene]

I agree...they should stay and become citizens. I also think Trump's recent action was wise. Congress needs to fix this.

[DumbedDownUSA]

Moderate wrote:

> Moderate <nos...@noemail.com> Wrote in message:
> > Obama introduced DACA five years ago as a temporary measure.
> >
> > The left is loosing their minds.
> >
> > Liberalism is a mental disorder.
> >
> > --
> >
>
> I will just leave this here.
>

You're the guy who is so proud of his turds he doesn't flush...

>
> http://tinyurl.com/y8bsyqzj

So now you're a Clinton supporter? First in the group; congratulations.

Do you agree with her? Do you have an opinion? Of your own?

--
Trump ***Irresponsible, unprofessional and sending the wrong message.***

[-hh]

Incorrect, because what's not been demonstrated by Mike
is that age 5 is a psychologically significant breakpoint
in child development to use as a criteria in the first place.

And once again, scientific research shows that Mike isn't
going to win his point anyway:

"...research with adults suggests that people can remember
early childhood memories back only to about age 6-to-6-1/2
(Wells, Morrison, & Conway, 2014). Researchers agree that
few experiences before age 6 become lifelong memories."

<https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/longing-nostalgia/201504/what-your-oldest-memories-reveal-about-you>

"Ask most adults to conjure up their earliest memories and
they usually can't recall any that occurred before they
were school age. This phenomenon, known as infantile amnesia,
has been recognized for decades and studied closely in adults."

<http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/12/science/la-sci-child-memories-20110512>

And FYI, the wiki page on this indicates that memory
retention doesn't really become all that relatively
reliable until after age 10:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childhood_amnesia>

..and the above data cited in the NYT shows that three
quarters of the DACA'ers arrived at under age 10.


-hh

[-hh]

On Friday, September 8, 2017 at 2:31:12 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:

> Bobby writes:
> > Read the whole article and see what the majority of the 800,000 are
> > contributing. That's a major reason for allowing them to stay....and
> > possibly get citizenship.
>
>
> I agree...they should stay and become citizens. I also think
> Trump's recent action was wise. Congress needs to fix this.

True, it is Congress's problem to fix, but that's also been
the crux of the matter: Congress has been "trying" since 2007,
but hasn't been able to advance the topic - - and usually, the
basis of the obstruction has been Republican-centric.

So just what has really changed?

-hh

[Dene]

We don't have die hard ideologue in the White House.

[Alan Baker]

No.

You have an narcissistic ignoramus.

[John B.]

No we have something much worse.

[John B.]

What's broken?

[-hh]

A claim which changes Congress's responsibility ... how?


-hh

[B...@onramp.net]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 16:59:30 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>What's broken?

DACA isn't a law passed by Congress. Yet.

[John B.]

Does it have to be?

[-hh]

On Friday, September 8, 2017 at 11:28:17 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> Does it have to be?

That's where I'm not really sure that the "illegal!" claims are correct about
the Executive Order:

the reality is that there'a always limits on resources for anything, including
for law enforcement ... and there's stuff we all do daily that's technically
a violation of the law, but LEO's don't generally bother to enforce because
they have bigger fish to fry.

For example, jaywalking. Yes, it is technically illegal, but when was the last
time you heard of a normal citizen actually getting a ticket for it? Like, never.

Ditto for getting a speeding ticket on an Interstate highway for doing 2-3mph
over the official speed limit - we know that police generally (but 'unofficially')
ignore speeders who are doing less than ~5mph over the legal speed limit.


Because an EO generally can't change the laws, what it does do is to
provide direction on how to prioritize within existing (fiscal) resources, etc.

As such, I think that the DACA EO can probably be simplistically summarized
as essentially saying the following:

"This population of illegals is technically a no-no, but they're not a priority for
your resources (you have bigger fish to fry), so long as they have met the
following conditions: (a) registration, (b) registration data review was okay, (c) ...

All in all, it is merely implementation guidance, a point which one would have
a hard time arguing as illegal. Devil is in the details, of course...


-hh

[B...@onramp.net]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 20:28:14 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Does it have to be?

If it isn't enacted by Congress and signed by the POTUS, Dreamers will
still be at risk.

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-09-09 4:41 AM, Moderate wrote:
> -hh <recscub...@huntzinger.com> Wrote in message:

> The federal court ruled it illegal. Your jaywalking analogy is
> ridiculous.
>

Cite, please...

[-hh]

An update to the above:

Last Friday's "Washington Week" mentioned that reform has
been around for longer than merely 2007; it had been known
as the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors
("Dream") Act, which dates back to 2001:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DREAM_Act>

So, asking once again 'So just what has really changed?'..

...and nothing that the "die hard ideologue" (Obama) wasn't
POTUS for four terms (2001-2016), to try to claim that the
POTUS was the problem simply cannot be correct.

So remind me again, just what has really changed?


-hh