Senator Warren's Insensitive comments on Girl Murdered by Illegal Alien.
Warren said, “I’m so sorry for the family here, and I know this is hard not only for the family but for the people in her community, the people throughout Iowa, but one of the things we have to remember is we need an immigration system that is effective, that focuses on where real problems are.
”
Senator Warren, you are wrong, this is a real problem, her life is just as important. What a disgusting statement!
Tags
Who is online
89 visitors
[deleted]
Those immigrants seeking asylum, like the people Warren was talking about, are not illegals.
These people don't give a shit about that. They just need constant fodder for lying about immigration. Shit, they don't even mind having children separated from mothers and then being told that hundreds of them will never be united. These callous, mean-spirited sobs just care about one thing--trying to preserve their bizarre myth "white culture" and work against the invented threat to it in the US.
Amendment: Those who use the word "ALWAYS" in a contention, by doing so, are necessarily generalizing.
New Rules ?
Good old common sense.
Had I said that it was "always" the case, you'd be correct … but by using "necessarily," I was stating cause and effect.
NECESSARILY … as a necessary result …
And we are … arguing semantics … so … I will concede a tie.
BTW, did you ever determine if your camera was all right and maybe the battery was drained?
The "Limits" are abound. One day all we'll be able to do is stare at one another. And even that may come under scrutiny.
Which is also a generalization. Wanna keep going? Your turn.
Do your job and read Comment 3.1.1, in fact read all comments in a stream, before you cast a "Sweeping" judgement.
Careful not to exaggerate this sad, sad, account more than any of the other deaths that take place in the country. Why just this week: a citizen was found to have killed his PREGNANT wife and his two daughters. The two girls were found in a tank of oil on his old job.Sad, sad, and sadder.
So yes, all death is sad, sad, and sadder. And, don't get me started on the whole American shame of Sandy Hook Elementary sad, sad, and sadder. Where were these conservatives wringing hands and 'pooling' then and now? Conservatives! 26 students and teachers are still waiting for an answer from your side!
Reality is a 'mother.' And, please stop with the . . .
. What's next: 'Trot' out the family to the next rally? Conservatives, stop 'profiting' off of real sorrow.
More deflection. I assume you agree with her sentiments.
No deflection. Just looking behind the 'curtain.' I implore conservatives to not exploit another young person. President Trump should be ashamed of himself. But, what are the chances of that.
Sorry, but that is deflection and Pocahontas Warren was at the least, very insensitive. Let's stick to the issue at hand...this girl and others like her killed, maimed and raped but in her case stabbed to death at the hands of someone who should have never been here in the first place.
Nice of her brother. Has anyone else noticed that even CNN only cites an aunt (Caulderwood) and a second cousin besides her brother has come out and asked for it NOT to be politicized? I'll wait for the parents. I am sure they are pissed and even though they don't want to talk about it at this time, we need to see what they have to say.............................
Emphatically. Wait. Don't exploit another young person's death as fodder. While you wait: How about the deaths of those Sandy Hook kids and teachers?? Anything?
Mollie's death is a tragedy. Sadly, the world is full of joys and tragedies. Moreover, we have to fight against the politicization of murder too! Illegals who harm us have to be stopped. But, not by demonizing all people who show up at the southern border!
I like the racist reference! Very doubtful that the murder victim would support such vile views.
If only Molly Tibbitts was killed with a "Assault" Rifle then it would fit the lefts talking point to exploit her. They could then call Cristhian Rivera a white guy.
You know why she was killed? Because she wanted to be left alone. Imagine that! A man killing a woman because she wanted him to leave her alone and he just couldn't have that. His ego was bruised
deleted
When will the MSM show the "folks" showing up at the border....the correct way ?
All the MSM EVER wants to show is the " Illegal " folks doing it the WRONG way, then making martyrs out of them....as "Certain"
Americans weep for them !
How about the death penalty?
Didn't see that one coming, did ya?
seems I know more than you
Wanna trade insults? I can do this all day until I'm stopped
Yep that was a truly sad day in America.........what next? A deflect to Las Vegas? Perhaps Charlottesville? How about Chicago where the gangs and others are killing their own?
Well it seems if he was a illegal he already demonstrated that he had no regard for the law and I'm sure he was convinced he was entitled to do what ever he wanted.
All murders and murderers are bad and bad people. I can agree to that without any deception. However, conservatives are selective in your outrage, and that is a bridge too far!
JUST SAY NO TO POLITICAL EXPLOITATION OF TRAGEDY!!
He turned himself in, didn't he?
I truly don't beleive this murder had anything to do with his being an illegal. It was all about a man's ego being bruised. He would have done this if he had been here legally or in his country of origin
JUST SAY NO TO POLITICAL EXPLOITATION OF TRAGEDY!!
Agreed. **are you reading anti gunners?**
No.....................he admitted it but did not turn himself in. They found him by looking at surveillance recordings showing his car...................
He at least owned up to it. Didn't he lead them to her body?
Yep. Soooooooooooo what is your point? That he's a good guy cuz he didn't make them hunt?
The point? According to some (not me) ... Even though he's AN ILLEGAL ALIEN who was ILLEGALLY working in the USA with FAKE DOCUMENTS, he should be cut some slack for murdering AN AMERICAN CITIZEN because he told LE where Mollie's body was.
Sad isn't it.............
No, that's not my point! I actually forgot what my point is.
Went back up there and looked. KD said something Well it seems if he was a illegal he already demonstrated that he had no regard for the law and I'm sure he was convinced he was entitled to do what ever he wanted.
My point is that he would have done this if he had been here illegally or not. I explained that a little further down, I think.
You and Jasper can make hay out of my comments all you want. If that's all you have, go for it.
deleted
It's sad and very dangerous that some folks find ways to defend the crimes of illegal aliens. Cristhian Rivera's lawyer, Allan Richards, said that discussing Rivera's immigration status is "rhetoric".
And you find ways to continue to be passive agressive. Proud of yourself?
I weep for no one in this. I only know what the MSM puts out there, including conservatives. For I do not live near the border, nor do I claim to own a media company.
So we have a high number of murders in this country. President Trump and his 'bots' should not be flooding the zone trying to demonize and go 'viral' with the death of a young women. I sure hope this time a set of parents are not interested in having their child exploited and 'foddered' just to stand next to DJ©! More power to Mollie's parents, family, and friends in this their time of grief.
JUST SAY NO TO POLITICAL EXPLOITATION OF TRAGEDY!!
Nope. Don't even know what "anti-gunners" is or means for bring it up to me. By the way, I am not against self-defense and the 2nd Amendment. What I want is conservatives and liberals both to get over there "high fences," knock down the barriers, and start talking straight; straight-talk will fix our issues. All this is: BABBLE!
You should take me up on the Bufferins, WallyW!! Chronic head pain is no joke.
Please keep control over your conspiracy theories. Because this has all the markers to be a new conspiracy in Iowa.
Huh? What? Who really knows what happened in Iowa—really.
You tell me.
You already know why he did it, I figure he would have told you.
Due to at least incompetence, if not negligence, by the employer and a feckless ICE (except for being very good at taking children away from mothers).
IMO, A tacky and insensitive statement. Another case of foot in mouth that most politicians (from both sides) seem to have. They have to get their talking points out there no matter how inappropriate the timing.
So the whole insensitive part is "real problems are"?
That's what you're focusing on?
If a republican had said this, none of you would give a shit
Untrue
Coming from you I doubt your statement
Your president has said so many insensitive things and nary a word from you people
That's OUR President (including you) and you cannot POSSIBLY be equating those who support him to every insensitive (read non politically correct) word he utters. I have shuddered a few times with his lack of candor but to broad brush like that is ...............well............so very "nice" of you............
He's not my president and you can't make me say it! Nah nah nah boo boo!
And yes! I can equate every goddamn insensitive thing he's said to everyone of his goddamn supporters. I've never heard a one of you lambaste him for it. So...yeah I got a pretty big paint brush and I never claimed to be nice. Is nice something you expect from every woman?
Soooooo you have renounced your citizenship............interesting.
You are almost as juvenile as I am.
But you got a ways to go before you reach my level
Can you make me say it? I dare you
More than likely not. Got anymore silliness ya wanna play on an anonymous comment board?
Now, go adorn your pink pussy hat, stand in front of the mirror, close your eyes and click your heels three times and repeat "Not my President, Not my President, Not my President." Let us know if Mr. Trump is gone when you open them back up............
I can keep the juvenile shit going all day but I'll get stopped by someone more adult than either of us
p.s. I don't own a pink pussy hat so pfffhhhhttttt................
So you are a rookie ...............best to leave me out of the "more adult than us" thing.............
OH, no, I'm no rookie when it comes to the juvenile shit. However, I don't go on vacation until next week and would like to at least not get a suspension between now and next Friday just so I can stick around and irritate the likes of you
Only thing you are irritating is my funny bone...........thanks for the laughs...........and look forward to "debating" you some more should the need arise. I'm pretty good at posting opposing views in a civilized manner.......with a little funny thrown in here and there.
Later..............
You mean doing what you're doing to Warren and any Dem that's convenient?
" but one of the things we have to remember is we need an immigration system that is effective, that focuses on where real problems are ."
Gee Miss Warren....people are focusing on how and where this problem came from.
I swear..... folks like Warren just pride themselves on being "DENSE" .
Senator Warren could have given a more sober answer in keeping with the question asked in the moment. I am not quite sure why she pivoted. She is the professional here, so she can respond to that action herself, may be some time during the day she can be asked for a clarification.
NO EXPLOITATION OF THE DEAD.
She's a Professional ……. Politician ….. Needing to play to a "Base".
Nothing more....nothing less.
If she REALLY cared about this Country and it's LEGAL Citizens....a "BUT" wouldn't have even entered her mind.
After all, she's sooooooo "FOR" the American Citizen......pfffffft.
No additional comment. I've expressed my view on this already.
Many on the Left would be happy to take away every gun in America from every law-abiding citizen "if it would just save one life." But they won't build a wall to save just one life, even though the wall doesn't infringe on anyone's constitutional rights.
How many?
And do we know how he arrived?
Did either one of them call for taking every gun in America away from every law-abiding citizen?
No.
Obama mentioned background checks. Is that background checks for NOT buying a gun?
No.
Dishonest hyperbole. Again. Not surprising, really.
I'm not trying to claim either one of them did. They're both politically a lot smarter than that.
My point was about the "if it saves one life" argument. I'm sure you supported it when they said it. Why not when Trump says it? Whether we agree with what Obama wanted to do, his actions literally infringed on 2nd Amendment rights. You can say they were reasonable infringements, and that's fine. But a border wall doesn't infringe on anyone's constitutional rights. So why not do it? Especially if it could save just one life.
Ask the people whose lands have been seized if they feel they might have been victims of illegal seizure. I find eminent domain to be constitutaionall problematic.
Also, moving goalposts.
That's a pretty thoroughly adjudicated issue. The 5th amendment says private property shall not be take for use without just compensation. That means the government can take as long as they compensate you.
I wouldn't be too worried about it. I don't think they're tearing up a lot of homes and swimming pools and so on. It's mostly pretty empty desert. Heck a lot of the people who live down there are the ones who have been begging for a wall.
Again, if it saves one life, we have an obligation to try, right?
The property acquired must be taken for a ''public use;''.....That is the one part of this that, IMO, really has abuse written all over it.
Kelo vs City of New London is the perfect example of this..''Public Use'' has been stretched to include private ownership to private ownership.
Actually that isn't quite accurate. There are properties that have been cut in half so to speak. I wonder how this is going to work out with the Spanish Land Grants? Lot's of interesting questions.
No intention of substantiating your original statement?
This is becoming quite a pattern.
Substantiating what? That some on the Left want to get rid of all guns? Is that really a controversial claim?
I see nothing in common between Kelo and the federal government securing the border. That's about as "public use" as it gets.
I do too! I had also seen that this was an issue. I find it fascinating. It will be interesting to see (if there's any news coverage of it) how they handle that.
I was speaking of the ''public use'' as it has been applied where it actually isn't ''public use'' at all and using Kelo vs City of New London as the classic example of that.
There is going to be an issue when the try to build a wall on the Tohona O'odham land in Arizona. The outcome of that will be most interesting. Along with the Spanish land grant issue we have at least two situations that could be end up with SCOTUS making the decision.
I believe that there are some 50 or so cases still to be adjudicated resulting from the 2006 wall building episode.
You said many. You've yet to name one. You provided two videos of people who've never once recommended anything of the sort, and hoped that would suffice. It doesn't. You're evading.
And this is a pattern of repeated behavior.
Wow, that couldn't have less to do with this topic if you intended it to. Or was that your intention--to derail?
For the purpose of showing them saying "if it can save just one life, we should do [insert government action]. Was that too subtle? Am I typing too fast?
Not at all. As I said, I didn't think it was even a controversial statement. You haven't explained why it bothers you. Do you really think leftists don't want to kill the 2nd Amendment? Do you really think they don't want to get rid of all guns?
First of all, remember that the very reason we had a Supreme Court case called D.C. v Heller was because the District of Columbia banned all handguns and required that all rifles be disassembled. This was followed by McDonald v Chicago because Chicago had passed a law banning handguns.
So, it's been tried already.
The Democratic Party has had in its official platform some kind of gun ban - for handguns, "assault weapons" or both - in every presidential election year since 1968.
year to year, 24% to 40%+ answer this question "Yes"
Quinnipiac University Poll . April 6-9, 2018.
John Paul Stevens: Repeal the Second Amendment
Repeal the Second Amendment
Want to end gun violence Mr. President? Get rid of guns
It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them.
Should guns be banned in America?
Congresswoman Admits "Assault Weapons" Ban is "Just the Beginning"
Getting Rid of Guns
A Congressman Proposed Repealing the Second Amendment in 1992. His Reasons Are Eerily Resonant.
Bret Stephens: Repeal Second Amendment; Restrictions On "So-Called" Gun Rights Imperative For Safety
This Democratic congressman wants to take your guns away. At least he's honest
There's more out there. I'm trying to be brief.
Are hand guns and assault rifles "all guns"?
How do YOU define "many"?
Are you aware that many liberals are gun owners?
They certainly are.
Yet, this term "assault rifles" is a miss used phrase.
NOTE: This is not an attack. I am simply giving my perspective,
I have a battle rifle from the late 1800 which was used in war prior to my possession. Good chance one of those models was issued to my Grandfather when he was shanghaied traveling through Bolivia on his journey back home after escaping Lenin's October Revolution. He saw it a couple times when I was young and then had bad days. I then kept it out of his sight when we visited.
That was a lead in.
Do you remember that demented guy who executed a real assault against some Dallas police officers a few years ago? I think he killed 5 or 6? Something like that?
He used one of the so called "assault rifles". I said it then and I will say it now, Give me a Ruger No. 1 rifle, which, btw are breach loading single shot rifles, chambered for a .243, modded to my spec, rounds loaded by me, I guarantee I could have created a situation much worse than that wacko.
I am simply not going to do that.
IMO, we have a lot of wackos. I am not going to argue the hows and whys of that, but, IMO we need some "smart people" to focus on that instead of placing the shiny object at the top of the Christmas tree above all else. I am not saying to ignore that shiny object, I thinking to place a greater emphasis on the root cause.
JMO.
Yes I am. You seem unwilling to concede that a strong anti-gun bias has existed on the Left for a long time. Fortunately, most politicians understand what a hot-button issue it is, but all we have to do is start calling gun ownership racist or some kind of hate speech (at the risk of giving people ideas) and pretty soon we're going to door to door picking up guns (facilitated by registration).
Virtually every proposed regulation or ban serves mainly to punish law abiding citizens. It's usually Republicans who come up with things like sentencing enhancements for using a gun while already committing some other crime. That actually punishes criminals at least.
Progressives, in my view, have a bad habit of offering up simple-minded - if well-intentioned - legislation that is aimed at the symptom of a problem rather than the problem itself. Then they pat themselves on the back for caring. And it ultimately has the impact of strangling a free society rather than improving it.
Are shotguns handguns or assault rifles?
No.
Are most rifles used for hunting handguns or assault rifles?
No.
Sandy, I am a little dense here this morning.
I am not sure I understand your questions relative to the answers.
Tacos claimed that many leftists want to take every gun away from every law-abiding American citizen.
After much evasion, he then supported this hyperbole by showing links to a few people who want to ban handguns and assault rifles. That's not every gun, semantics games aside.
Alright, thank you for he perspective of those question. Now they make sense. Admittedly, I did not read the entire thread.
And you left out the multiple instances where the people supporting those ideas said those actions were just a beginning or were people actually advocated for the repeal of the 2nd amendment and where they said only cops and the government should have guns. The truth is you won't admit that there is any anti-gun bias at all on the Left.
I never said there wasn't any anti-gun bias on the left. I still don't see "many" calling for banning all guns. I see you providing a few examples, but you apparently didn't read all of your links. Your first calls not for a total ban, but a ban on assault rifles and raising the minimum wage to buy anything other firearms. The second link also says gun ownership should not be outlawed. You should read past the titles.
I do seem to recall flaming leftist Ronald Reagan pushing for a ban on assault weapons.
Under Obama, we concentrated on tracking down deporting recent illegal immigrants (in other words, sealing the borders), and tracking down and punishing/deporting criminal illegal immigrants (in other words, protecting Americans). Perhaps if we had continued using our resources in those ways instead of wasting resources deporting people with jobs who’ve been living here for decades this illegal wouldn’t have been around to do this harm.
But, it’s not easy to find criminals. It takes substantially more resources and your numbers don’t look as good. What we’re doing now is better pablum for the base.
Warren’s comment on having effective policies is not insensitive, those policies might have saved this girl.
Bingo.
Bullseye!!!
Murder is always a tragedy.
Individual events are a very bad basis for deciding policy.
Those are both true statements. One appeals to our sentiments, the other to our reason. Both are valid approaches.
The problem is that sometimes the conclusions drawn from these two approaches are opposed. In a nation of 360 million people, policy must be driven by statistics, not by emotion. The statistics are clear: undocumented immigrants commit less crime than the general population.
In the case of Mollie Tibbets, the law worked as it should: the killer was identified and arrested.
Murder is the crime that is the most often solved: 62% nationwide. But there were over seventeen thousand murders. How many were committed by undocumented immigrants?
Murder is always a tragedy... but the media circus being whipped up by Fox&Friends is clearly not about Mollie Tibbets. It is just another abuse of personal tragedy in service to an agenda.
And, this is why I find articles like this one nothing but, hyperbole.
deleted
Oh, they're thoughtful but, they just don't care, it fits what they believe, even if deep down they know that they are wrong.
They have an agenda and, it is connected to what Trump promises so, as long as Trump keeps promising and, at least pretending to deliver...…..
It doesn't fit what they want done so, they don't bother.
It's easier not to, it isn't that they aren't thoughtful, they are, as I said above, they're either lazy or, just don't care.
Trump couldn't be happier. This girl being murdered by an illegal is the best thing he could have hoped for.
Illegals are a Real Problem. This murderer was living under an assumed name, if he had run he could have started a new life under another name and gotten away with it.
No reasonable individual condones a life taken by way of a criminal act ... be it perpetrated by a criminal who is here legally or illegally!
Warren’s comment is poorly thought out and constructed, on that I will readily agree; but the reason she ultimately needed to attempt to put things into some kind of perspective, is because of those who will rant indignantly, not to condemn a crime for what it is, rather for the race or immigrant/alien status of the perpetrator!
When the same bigots and xenophobes yell for the deportation of neo-Nazis and the like, or, even minimally condemn the politicians who protect them with their silence ... politicians who pander to hatred for political expediency, at that unlikely moment, the Elizabeth Warrens won’t feel the need to metaphorically piss into the wind in an effort to remind us of the obvious ...
... nor will I.
HOORAY! Thank you.
Gingrich’s comment is confirmation that The party of Trump caters to haters!
Why does Gingrich always have to be heard hanging out around the republican 'cesspools'? Another tapped into the mindset of Pat Buchanan: No longer politically relevant, but keeping their 'scent' on-going!
Let's mark this date in history. Elizabeth Warren has said something that isn't entirely leftist claptrap.
She is absolutely right. Sucks that that girl was murdered, but people are murdered everyday in the US, I am not gonna give more of a shit because she was murdered by someone here illegally than I do about people who are murdered by US citizens. Fact of the matter is we need an effective immigration system and the country relies on immigrants to prop up our current economic/government programs.
There is a lot of 'currents' flowing in this comment. Overall, I get your drift. (Smile.)
Look, it is terrible what happened to her, I am not denying that. All I am saying is let's not lose sight of the bigger picture because of one incident (and one in the small minority). The argument I am hearing from people who pretend to care so much about this girl (they don't, at all, she is just a prop like vets) is that we should use some sort of nuclear option because of one incident. Its like saying that because a bridge collapsed once we should never again build bridges.
Very well explained and cleared up! Thank you very much!
There are virtually no demographics within which deviant and criminal behaviors are completely non-existent; so, to intentionally conflate crimes that are not inherently related to any particular demographic, but nevertheless connect them, is to do so to exploit a racist agenda.
All immigration should be stopped until we can get control of it. Football teams draft the best available players, that should be an example to use