Thursday, November 12, 2015

Thursday Sniffle: Plugged Politics on Immigration


Second Tuesday in November
Supreme Court Will Determine If AmeriKa is Dictatorship
Senators Seized GOP Debate

Look whose torch the Globe seized:

"Minimum wage is pushed into conversation by protests; Movement has gotten politicians talking about pay" by Lydia DePillis Washington Post   November 12, 2015

At Tuesday night’s Republican debate in Milwaukee, the first question candidates got was something that hasn’t come up yet in these presidential gabfests: whether any of them would support a higher minimum wage.

Yeah, and the Globe rewrote their whole report away from it. I loved the crack by Rubio about needing more welders and less politicians, 'er, philosophers.

Predictably, they said no. ‘‘Wages too high,’’ Donald Trump proclaimed, arguing that they made the United States noncompetitive. Ben Carson echoed him, saying high minimum wages just create unemployment, particularly for young people and African-Americans. ‘‘If you lower those wages, that comes down.’’

That's just loony.

Putting aside the economic merits of that argument, which has been extensively discussed in other fora, it’s worth considering where that question came from: the masses of protesters outside waving signs for a $15-an-hour minimum wage. A year out from Election Day 2016, the union-backed Fight for $15 organization had staged protests all over the country, trying to send a message that low-income people who may have never voted before will get behind candidates who support boosting the minimum wage, along with priorities such as immigration reform and affordable child care.

And the propaganda pre$$ owned by the corporate cla$$ is on your side! 


It’s very difficult to meaningfully sway election results with some street protests. But even getting candidates to talk about your issues, and make statements that you can campaign against or hold them to down the line, counts as success.

How condescending!! At least they said something about your issue! Now back to bu$ine$$ as usual (and the wealth inequality gap yawns wider)!

The Fight for $15 is certainly addressing an obvious problem. Younger and less-educated people have consistently had lower election turnout rates than older, more-educated people (two traits that correlate strongly with higher incomes). That means they have less clout with politicians, who are then less likely to do things they want, like raise the minimum wage.

Why would the good politicians working for us be like that, and what is that overflowing from their pocket$?

Actually getting them to the polls, however, is a tricky thing - especially when you’re running a broad issue campaign, rather than one focused on a specific candidate. ‘‘I’m dubious that it will get translated into electoral politics,’’ says Jan Leighley, a professor of government at American University who studies voter participation. ‘‘Getting media coverage might be a nice local angle in the context of a statewide race, but I find it hard to believe it can be sustained throughout the season.’’

Goodbye, Bernie Sanders (even the globe hardly mentions him anymore if you scroll my politics for a page or two.

Voter participation typically responds to large structural forces, as well as the traits of the individual candidate. Research on political activism among African-Americans shows that participation rises with the involvement of black elected officials but sinks when people are in economic distress. And now, eight years of news about partisan bickering and gridlock have soured many young voters on politics generally, turning them toward direct pressure on corporations, technological solutions, and ‘‘social entrepreneurship’’ as more productive avenues for change.

It's not just them. We are all $oured on politics, and also on this bullshit narrative and excuse-making apologist media, too. F*** the corporate pre$$ and their liberali$m.

But whether or not they make it out to the polls next November, it’s likely that they’ve already had some influence.

Too bad the founding movement, Occupy, wasn't treated with such love by my pre$$. Remember them? 

Btw, you see the narrative. Bye-bye, Bernie!!!

You can see this effect in the Democratic field: Although Hillary Clinton didn’t commit to raising the minimum wage to $15, she did settle on $12. Her rivals, Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley, have endorsed the higher number, as has the Democratic National Committee.

The Fight for $15’s influence is also evident, however, in statements by business interests who are dead set against it.

Take the Employment Policies Institute, which is closely aligned with the restaurant industry.

What grade did you get?

It commissioned a survey of hundreds of economists and found that three out of four said a $15 minimum wage would cost jobs. That’s actually not bad for a proposition that a few years ago might have been laughed out of any room full of economists. And on the question of whether the minimum wage should be raised at all from its current level of $7.25, 60 percent agreed it should.

Also Tuesday, the International Franchise Association put out a press release condemning the protests — by arguing that there are better ways to address inequality, which isn’t something business interests typically acknowledge is even a problem. ‘‘There is no question we should be looking at solutions to address the growing economic divide in America,’’ said IFA chief executive Robert Cresanti.

You get this every two to four years, and then it is back to $erving wealth. They only show up with this stuff when they need your vote. How long are you going to keep getting played, Americans?


RelatedProtesters near Northeastern block Green Line tracks

Go yell it to a vet, $cum.

You know who you can hire and who won't complain about that wage?

"1950s roundup fuels immigration debate; Trump lauds, others deplore deportations under Eisenhower" by Matt Viser Globe Staff  November 11, 2015

MILWAUKEE — As Republican touchstones go, Dwight Eisenhower is no Ronald Reagan. But Donald Trump thrust Ike into the Republican Party’s disagreement over immigration this week when he applauded Eisenhower’s mass deportation of illegal Mexican immigrants starting in 1954.

Trump’s comments at the Republican presidential primary debate Tuesday night in Milwaukee added fresh fuel to the fight and handed Democrats and immigration advocates fresh ammunition to bludgeon the GOP.

I'm tired of the coded references and crap terminology meant to draw certain reactions from the recesses of your brain and frame the current argument.

Starting with a name that, by modern standards, is deeply offensive — “Operation Wetback’’ — Eisenhower’s campaign to round up Mexicans working in the Southwest and ship them back to Mexico via bus, train, and boat was a controversial and, say critics, ultimately unsuccessful attempt to curb illegal immigration. 

Funny how the politicians that extoll this nation, its freedom, its equality, its military heroes, act like racism, sexism, and genocide never happened here -- until they want to foist a guilt trip on you to accomplish some other agenda.

Although the Eisenhower-era operation was far smaller than the plan Trump envisions to ship 11 million undocumented immigrants out of the US, Trump hailed it as a success during the debate.

“Dwight Eisenhower. You don’t get nicer,” Trump said of the genial-seeming former president, to laughter from the crowd. “You don’t get friendlier. They moved a 1.5 million out. We have no choice. We have no choice.”

But there are those in the party who do not want to dredge up 60-year-old memories of sweeping deportations, seeing an unwelcome image as the Republican Party seeks to court the nation’s growing population of Hispanics.

Don't worry; if it's 70+ years, Israel can keep throwing out the over-the-top Holohoax™ hyperboles and accuse others of antisemitism.

Operation Wetback involved the practice of shaving the heads of Mexicans so they could be better recognized at the border. Some 88 people died in the desert heat as they were being sent back to their home countries. A congressional investigation compared one transportation vessel to an “18th century slave ship.”

See: The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews

Jewish Involvement in Black Slave Trade to the Americas

As told by a rabbi. 

In an interview Wednesday morning on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Trump repeated his approval of Eisenhower’s mass deportation policy and said he would implement a “deportation force” to “humanely” take people back to their countries of origin.

But those who have studied the Eisenhower’s policies disagree.

“It was not humane by any stretch of the imagination,” said Mae Ngai, a history professor at Columbia University and author of the book “Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America.” “It was done as a military-style operation.”

And look at how militarized this nation is now.

Eisenhower’s administration was attempting to crack down on an influx of undocumented seasonal workers, mostly in California and along the border. It was largely in response to the agriculture industry’s increasing reliance on cheaper, undocumented labor, flouting a government system that allowed them to use immigrants mostly for seasonal labor. Laws were being selectively enforced, creating what some considered to be an unfair system. 

60 years later and nothing has changed!!!! If anything the problem is much, much worse!

As part of the crackdown, the administration allowed some of the undocumented workers to become legal — an aspect that Trump does not mention. But the administration also wanted to make a prominent point to remove those who were here illegally.

Eisenhower, Ngai said, “had unprecedented numbers of border control officers. Buses, airplanes, ships, everything.”

“Insofar as they were trying to have a show, it was successful. It was a big performance,” she added. “But they could not sustain that level of enforcement. And it didn’t stop the problem. So in that sense, it was unsuccessful.” 

Looks like the kickoff to any war you name.

During the debate, Ohio Governor John Kasich and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush criticized Trump’s tough anti-immigration stance and attacked the concept of mass deportations.

“Think about the families. Think about the children,” Kasich said, in an exchange that was by far the most viewed clip on YouTube, according to an analysis by Google Trends.

Stop waving children at me when the AmeriKan war machine is grinding them up and scattering them.  

You wanna wave kids? Start with the dead Palestinian babies murdered by Israel.

Bush also jumped in, saying that it would be impractical to deport some 500,000 immigrants a month, and would tear communities apart. He said the party needed to be more pragmatic, and avoid pushing Latino voters into the arms of Democrats.

“They’re doing high-fives in the Clinton campaign right now when they hear this,” he said. “That’s the problem with this. We have to win the presidency. And the way you win the presidency is to have practical plans.”

Bush was right: Democrats are salivating over the direction the GOP’s immigration debate is heading.

“The idea of tracking down and deporting 11 million people is absurd, inhumane, and un-American. No, Trump,” Hillary Clinton tweeted on Wednesday in both English and Spanish. 

So how many illegals are going to show up on the voter rolls? 

And her gaseous bellowing is all the context of criminal wars carried out on her watch or ones in which she approved with a vote. Big supporter of the Libyan overthrow and all its consequent refugees. The woman is contemptible if for nothing else that her hypocrisy.

In a campaign that has been more about personality than policy, the comments about immigration Tuesday prominently revealed the profound rift in the Republican Party on the issue.

That's what the propaganda pre$$ does to every campaign. Let's face it, the corporate control and rot of AmeriKan politics is so complete they can't campaign on the two most important issues: war and economy.

Two candidates with some of the most momentum in the campaign — Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz — are both Hispanic with parents who emigrated from Cuba. A third candidate, Bush, fell in love and married a woman from Mexico and raised his children in a Spanish-speaking household.

With Hispanic population growing in key swing states such as Colorado and Florida — as well as traditionally Republican states like Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas — some Republican analysts have warned about alienating a fast-growing segment of the electorate.

But Trump’s inflammatory statements branding Mexicans as rapists and his call for an unprecedented program to ship millions of people back to their countries of origin threatens to undermine party efforts to attract Hispanic voters. During a 2012 Republican primary debate, Mitt Romney called for “self-deportation” of illegal immigrants, a phrase that came to haunt him during the general election and contributed to his anemic 27 percent support among Latino voters.

Trump referenced Eisenhower’s policy during a September interview with CBS’ “60 Minutes,” saying the deportation program worked. Trump proposes tripling the number of immigration and customs enforcement agents and ending the practice of granting citizenship to people born in this country — a right that is embedded in the Constitution.

“The Eisenhower mass deportation policy was tragic,” Alfonso Aguilar, a conservative Republican and director of the American Principles Project’s Latino Partnership, said Wednesday morning on NPR. “Human rights were violated, people were removed to remote locations without food and water, there were many was a travesty, it was terrible. To say it’s a success story, it’s ridiculous.”

For any AmeriKan $hitter to be spouting human rights given this lying, mass-murdering government that engages in torture.... ugh!

Prominent advocates for immigration reform are blasting Trump’s deportation plan.

“This is a plan that would cost us billions of dollars and radically undermine our economic stability,” Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said in an e-mail. “This is an impractical and outlandish approach to immigration policy. Voters expect better.”

During the debate, Cruz aligned himself with Trump’s approach and said Republicans need to stand firm.

“For those of us who believe people ought to come to this country legally, and we should enforce the law, we’re tired of being told it’s anti-immigrant,” Cruz said. “It’s offensive.”

I've always wonder what part of ILLEGAL this government that claims it is a nation of laws didn't understand, and it is looking like Cruz may come out as the candidate of the conservative/religious segment of the Republican party.

Rubio, who did not jump into the debate over immigration on Tuesday night, was once a leader in his party on immigration reform, joining with seven other senators and pushing a comprehensive immigration reform package in 2013 that would have provided a pathway to legalization in return for stricter border control measures.

See: Rubio's Retreats

Rubio helped steer it to passage in the Senate, but then backed away from the plan amid intense conservative backlash. He now says that more has to be done to secure the border before anything is done to deal with undocumented immigrants.

“No one has done more work on it and tried to find a solution,” he said at a recent town hall in Dover, N.H. But, he added, “You cannot deal with this all at once. There is no way in one big piece of legislation.”


Christie now has reason to cry:

"Defendants seek documents from Christie on scandal.... The case poses a continuing problem for Christie as he campaigns for the Republican nomination for president. The filings were made just after Christie appeared at a televised debate, along with three other candidates whose weak showings in the polls kept them out of the prime-time debate held on Tuesday night in Milwaukee."

While on the subject of successful student protest:

"Arrest made in threats to Missouri campus; Student accused of posting about shooting people" by Summer Ballentine Associated Press  November 12, 2015

COLUMBIA, Mo. — A white college student suspected of posting online threats to shoot black students and faculty at the University of Missouri was charged Wednesday with making a terrorist threat, adding to racial tension at the heart of the protests that led two top administrators to resign this week.

Hunter M. Park, a 19-year-old sophomore studying computer science at a sister campus in Rolla, was arrested shortly before 2 a.m. at a residence hall, authorities said. The school said no weapons were found. Boone County prosecutors recommended that he be held without bond.

Is that his real name or is this another made-up psyop for purposes of mind-manipulating rote response?

The author of the posts, which showed up Tuesday on the anonymous location-based messaging app YikYak and other social media, threatened to ‘‘shoot every black person I see.’’

Yik Yak a honey trap!

"Yik Yak’s fine print says the service can disclose to police each user’s Internet protocol address and GPS coordinates, along with details about the phone or tablet, and date and time for each message. Internet users of the Yik Yak social media app popular among college students aren’t nearly as anonymous as they believe: Missouri police within hours arrested a student accused of threatening violence, the latest in a string of such arrests at colleges in recent months involving threats of mass violence posted online using the service. A Yik Yak spokeswoman declined to discuss investigations or provide details about how often police ask for information."


The stuff is EXACTLY WHAT I SAID IT IS! This is ALL STAGED AND SCRIPTED BULLSH** to support the narrative!

The posts followed the resignations on Monday of the University of Missouri system president and the chancellor of its flagship campus in Columbia.....


Related: MIZZOU HUNGER STRIKER Claims He’s Oppressed, Rips ‘White Privilege’ – Comes From Family Worth $20 Million; His father is a railroad vice president and made over $8 million last year

He's a 1%.

Well, that settles it. Missouri is nothing more than staged and scripted false flag and psyop in order to divert and drive racial division. The focus of the elite supremacist media pretty much confirms it

You need to understand protest coverage in the propaganda pre$$. The glowing coverage of agenda-pushing global-warmers, illegal immigrants, gays, and any color revolution you can find outs them as controlled opposition. They wouldn't be pimped and promoted otherwise. 

Then compare that to the generally biased and slanted coverage (if any) regarding Occupy and antiwar protesters. 

All clear now?

NDU: Entire charade of supposed 'racism' at MIZZOU revealed as elaborate HOAX perpetrated by the student body