Slashdot Mirror


Chris Christie Proposes Tracking Immigrants the Way FedEx Tracks Packages

PolygamousRanchKid submits the news that New Jersey governor (and Republican presidential candidate) Chris Christie said yesterday that he would, if elected president, create a system to track foreign visitors the way FedEx tracks packages. The NYT writes: Mr. Christie, who is far back in the pack of candidates for the Republican presidential nomination, said at a campaign event in New Hampshire that he would ask the chief executive of FedEx, Frederick W. Smith, to devise the tracking system."At any moment, FedEx can tell you where that package is. It's on the truck. It's at the station. It's on the airplane," Mr. Christie told the crowd in Laconia, N.H. "Yet we let people come to this country with visas, and the minute they come in, we lose track of them." He added: "We need to have a system that tracks you from the moment you come in." Adds the submitter: "I'm sure foreign tourist will be amused when getting a bar code sticker slapped on their arm."

576 comments

  1. Yeah, nah. by YukariHirai · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm somewhat interested in visiting the US, but this kind of bullshit would absolutely kill any desire to go there.

    1. Re:Yeah, nah. by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm somewhat interested in visiting the US, but this kind of bullshit would absolutely kill any desire to go there.

      It took this? Not our general policy of running around the world tampering with governments, murdering people, and blowing up cities for profit?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a very effective way to get rid of those pesky foreigners then! Probably exactly what they want.

    3. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Anyone who still visits the US after the iris/fingerprinting/laptop-snooping/body-scanning/anal-reaming bullshit is already an embarrassment to humanity.

      At least a barcode slapped visibly to one's forehead would be an honest expression of what's going on, and frankly I'd rather that than all of the above.

    4. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not a barcode, it's a Star of David and it must always remain visible

    5. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Going to the US soon - unavoidable business trip - I will grow my hair longer now to cover my forehead. I will look like a bomber, but at least the tag won't be visible.

    6. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In general the world is probably a safer place thanks to the US.

    7. Re:Yeah, nah. by stooo · · Score: 2

      Why not a nice tattoo like this one : http://wpmedia.o.canada.com/20...

      --
      aaaaaaa
    8. Re:Yeah, nah. by kyrsjo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if we may be skeptical to or disagree with US policy, it doesn't mean that we dislike everyone who lives there or what is there.

    9. Re:Yeah, nah. by niftydude · · Score: 2

      I can see it now. Ivy league university hires world class researcher, who has to get tagged with an RFID as if they were cattle to be allowed to work in the US.

      Similar for other professions: medical, engineering, etc.

      This will work so well. Christie and his entourage must be completely incapable of critical thought to consider this idea for more that 10 seconds. A proposal like this would destroy the ability of the US to maintain world class leadership of anything.

      --
      You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    10. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of us may be skeptical.

      I always love it when people say "we" as if we're all agreeing on something.

    11. Re:Yeah, nah. by YukariHirai · · Score: 3, Informative

      It took this? Not our general policy of running around the world tampering with governments, murdering people, and blowing up cities for profit?

      Those did kill it most of the way, and the "somewhat interested" is conditional on some pretty unlikely things, such as someone else footing the bill for the trip.

    12. Re:Yeah, nah. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      It's not the tag that will humiliate you. It's the method of implantation.

      "Remove your clothing, face that wall, put both hands up on the wall, put your feet back so that you're leaning against the wall."

      ZIIIP!

      Placing the chip on the head of his penis, the inquisitor approaches you.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    13. Re:Yeah, nah. by niftydude · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On second thought, as long as they do this to all our politicians when they visit the US, I might be OK with it....

      --
      You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    14. Re: Yeah, nah. by Xicor · · Score: 1

      pretty sure he doesnt care about people coming to visit... pretty sure he only cares about those with visas. dumb as shit idea, but it certainly wouldnt affect anyone who isnt planning on immigrating here.

    15. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It took this? Not our general policy of running around the world tampering with governments, murdering people, and blowing up cities for profit?

      Those policies mostly harm people not in the US, and so wouldn't provide a reason to not visit the US. (They might, in fact, be a reason to visit the US - you are less likely to get blown up or murdered by the government while in the US than elsewhere.)

    16. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that trip to NY that I've been saving up for seems to lose it's appeal all of a sudden.

    17. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My passport doesn't have a chip in it - I would still need a visa, even if I only came for a week of sightseeing.

    18. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Point me toward the government that isn't involved in that!

    19. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No question one should only visit countries that do not "tampe with governments, murdei people, and blow up cities for profit" if you can find any.

    20. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unless you're in one of the many countries we invaded because we didn't like your government and/or wanted your resources.

    21. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would a GPS ankle brace tracking and reporting any deviation of your travel plan increase your willingness to visit? Just because, just because..

    22. Re:Yeah, nah. by c4757p · · Score: 1

      Of just talking about the group who do agree...

    23. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not busy tampering with my country, you're not blowing it up, nor are you murdering my people.

      I don't give a shit about bumfuckistan, so I will still visit so long as you don't fuck with me or my people personally. Which this proposed policy does.

    24. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Retard,

      It's for immigrants. It's in the actual fucking title. Christie is not proposing it for visitors.

      HTH

    25. Re: Yeah, nah. by raind2 · · Score: 1

      Right below story there's the ad: "now hiring border control agents". How fitting.

    26. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Of course, without details, people can make this out to be anything they want without being reasonable. Its not necessarily tracking tourists as it is specific to those with visas. It seems to be a way for those with visas to check in on occasion, and could be nothing more than that.

    27. Re:Yeah, nah. by ITRambo · · Score: 1

      Don't worry.Visit the US, if you can tolerate the airport bullshit. Christie has little to no chance of winning unless he knocks off all the competitors. Even then, he still might lose. He's not appealing to the US mainstream crowd.

    28. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can see it now. Ivy league university hires world class researcher, who has to get tagged with an RFID as if they were cattle to be allowed to work in the US.

      And where specifically did you read that people will be tagged with an RFID? They could simply carry an ID card. A perfectly reasonable requirement. They could check in once in a while. Another perfectly reasonable requirement.

      Many here are making up unreasonable scenarios then arguing how stupid they are.

    29. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm somewhat interested in visiting the US, but this kind of bullshit would absolutely kill any desire to go there.

      Don't take this too seriously. You may not be familiar with US politics, but this is primary candidate who is barely registering in the polls for an election that is more than a year a way. He is desperate to get in the spot light and making outrageous statements to generate headlines is a way to do that. Even on the long shot he does become the Republican candidate, he'll get questioned about this and backtrack with some bullshit about how he "didn't mean it literally" or how the mainstream media "misinterpreted" him. After the W Bush era, you can't win national elections anymore by being a crazy right winger.

    30. Re:Yeah, nah. by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      In general I have a lot of issues with the policies of the US government. But neither the US government or the people living in the country are my enemies. And I am planning on visiting in the near future. Unless this kind of crap goes through - I mean, I can avoid bringing laptops or tables to the US, but my body is pretty hard to leave at home.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    31. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Mr. Christ,

      I hereby would kindly ask you to grant me a visa on sightseeing grounds. I swear by the God of the Creationist that I will definitely not overstay or otherwise violate the terms of the visa granted.

      Yours sincerely,
      A True Mexican Tourist

    32. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you're in one of the many countries we invaded because we didn't like your government and/or wanted your resources.

      Many countries? Really?

    33. Re:Yeah, nah. by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1

      Christie and his entourage must be completely incapable of critical thought to consider this idea for more that 10 seconds.

      I think you are beginning to understand the nature of the problem.

    34. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep in mind that calls for draconian immigration reform by a vocal minority are a reaction to the status quo, which is relatively lax immigration enforcement.

    35. Re:Yeah, nah. by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Oh well then, just drop in to your nearest police station or FBI department every morning during your stay to say howdy. Nothing wrong with that.

    36. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's say my holiday involves camping out in the wilderness, with no immigration offices nearby. Checking in regularly is a deal breaking burden.

    37. Re:Yeah, nah. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You're not busy tampering with my country, [...] I don't give a shit about bumfuckistan, so I will still visit so long as you don't fuck with me or my people personally.

      This is why we can't have nice things. Well, actually, it's why we can have nice things while other people have to be collected from all over the room and loaded into buckets for disposal.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    38. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the immigrants will just claim to be visitors instead then drop off the grid. This whole discussion is around a plan to prevent people from dropping off the grid in the first place.

    39. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, many.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations

    40. Re:Yeah, nah. by nanoflower · · Score: 1

      Maybe Vanuatu? It's only truly small countries that are isolated that can fit that set of criteria because they aren't big enough for anyone else to meddle and there isn't much for the people in the country to fight over.

    41. Re: Yeah, nah. by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Visitors overstay their visas all the time so that'll be the next proposal.

    42. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US hasn't been interesting to visit since they went mental and decided that you need to pre-register and get a visum before showing up as a tourist. While they have no such restrictions when visiting Europe. I'll go somewhere else to spend my money. Like Asia.

    43. Re:Yeah, nah. by chipschap · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why are people taking this raving by a candidate with not much chance of getting elected so seriously? Does anyone here really believe visitors are going to get imprinted with a bar code --- which is not even what Christie said?

      If the US is so bad that you don't want to visit, go visit someplace nice, with a better attitude ... you know, like North Korea or Iran.

    44. Re:Yeah, nah. by chipschap · · Score: 4, Informative

      Oh well then, just drop in to your nearest police station or FBI department every morning during your stay to say howdy. Nothing wrong with that.

      The equivalent took place in former communist countries. I remember visiting the DDR (East Germany) and having to turn in my passport every night. Get a little perspective here, please.

    45. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Why once a day, why FBI department? How about once every two months, and at a convenient location like a post office? Swipe your card and go home.

    46. Re: Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      That depends on what you define as regularly. Once every two months maybe? Or check in in advance and let them know.

    47. Re: Yeah, nah. by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

      You are of the opinion people who come visit do not need visas? There's a number of countries that don't need it for short term, but if you stay longer than X days, you'll always need a visa. And most citizens of other countries do need a visa.

    48. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He rose to the red meat bait "the donald" tossed in the air. There was a great clip of Chrisitie in the owner's box of some football team, and when the team wins he goes to high five the owner, who totally disses him.

      NOT presidential material.

      Oh, and he is a hardcore drug warrior, which is unusual for someone who graduated high school in NJ in the 80's.

    49. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Self-loathing American...how original.

    50. Re:Yeah, nah. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      [T]he "somewhat interested" is conditional on some pretty unlikely things, such as someone else footing the bill for the trip.

      Meaning an American girl with frequent-flyer miles to spare?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    51. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow you are the first guy to make up such an insightful parallel! Dumbass.

    52. Re:Yeah, nah. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      you are less likely to get blown up or murdered by the government while in the US than elsewhere.

      FEDERAL government [will be less likely to kill you if you are in the US]. In the US, the municipal governments kill with (relative) impunity. Have you not seen the stories of the unarmed people killed by police?

    53. Re:Yeah, nah. by davester666 · · Score: 1

      The anal probe was fine, but you draw the line at a permanent tattoo on the back of your head ala Hitman?

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    54. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not a nice tattoo like this one : http://wpmedia.o.canada.com/20...

      Because it is already somebody's else "intellectual property".
      Try something innovative like bar codes. You can even start new company - International Barcode Machines.

      Oh, it is already done - face recognition software.
      http://www.medicaldaily.com/boston-police-used-facial-recognition-software-concertgoers-will-it-really-stop-suspicious-298540

    55. Re:Yeah, nah. by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      people on unemployment have to check in the unemployment office once a month in NY.

      would it be so bad to ask the same of visa holders???

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    56. Re:Yeah, nah. by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      you dont wanna come to NY anyway. coming from a new yorker

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    57. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would wager that you haven't seen anything other than the headlines of said stories.

    58. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So then don't come. Win-win.

    59. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, this takes it even further as it conjures up images of Germany identifying Jews and other minority groups using armbands. Essentially it treats minority groups as criminals or untrustworthy even if the have never committed a crime which makes it even easier to use them as scapegoats. This is how the state attempts to justify brutal wars for profit.

    60. Re:Yeah, nah. by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      The last poll I saw had Donald at the top of the Republicans, and Hillary at the top of the Democrats, and Donald leading if there was a Trump-Clinton vote right now. So , based on the proxy polls discussing today's likely outcome, Trump is the front runner to be the next president. And this sounds like something Trump could get behind.

    61. Re: Yeah, nah. by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      The vast majority of that list in the past couple of decades were training missions or disaster aid and other mundane things where we were actually invited in to help. There was some murder and mayhem of course since we are in a war with several terrorist organizations. I'm not a big fan of acting as the world's police force either, it's too damn expensive. Still, it's not near as bad as you make it seem.

    62. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1827 – Greece:[2] In October and November, landing parties hunted pirates on the Mediterranean islands of Argentiere (Kimolos), Myconos, and Andros.

      This was because we didn't like Greece's government and/or wanted their resources?

    63. Re:Yeah, nah. by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's a bar code. I think it's much more modern than that: an RFID chip. We use them over here for cats, dogs and cattle, so it's not like the equipment isn't already in place :)

      As for visiting states: I agree there is little chance of this going through in the form now mentioned. That doesn't mean that if you get enough people saying stuff like this, the other candidates won't feel forced to do something similar in vein.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    64. Re:Yeah, nah. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What about if I visit? I have family there, and an currently investigating a position with a US company that would require infrequent travel to the US. But for me, and a few million others, we hold US passports while living permanently abroad. We get to visit without any of those security measures. No fingerprinting, no scans, no tagging. Just an entry in my permanent file that I was out, and am not not.

    65. Re:Yeah, nah. by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Gee I didn't realize I needed to put in the /s

      But if he's worried about tracking immigrants then once every two months would probably be too far apart for him since that would let someone get quite a distance and settled in a new place during that time. You could get pretty far in a week. Guess it all depends on how paranoid he's being.

    66. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Guess it all depends on how paranoid he's being.

      Probably not as much as the reactionaries.

    67. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I visit the US several times a year (probably the 10th time this year!). I have never, ever, in my entire life, been iris scanned. Never had a laptop snooped. Never been body scanned. Never been anal reamed.

      My list of experiences:

        - May I see your passport/EDL/Nexus?
        - Answering basic questions: "Do you have X? Where are you going? Intent of your trip? What is your occupation? Citizenship? Coming from?"
        - Throwing out the fruit of the month the USDA has put on their no-no list.
        - One time I had US agents open my travel trailer up and have a good look through it.
        - Photo of my vehicle/person taken.
        - License plates noted.

      Frankly, not only have I had the same treatment going to other countries, but I have the same treatment coming back to Canada (minus throwing away fruit). Canada also has me pay money for all the stuff I bring back, too.

      Why would I have an issue with any of that?

    68. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can keep caring about other places. As long as taxes are taking most of my wealth, I'm going to continue with extreme selfish mode and keep what I can.

      Leave me with more of my stuff, stop taking it for yourself, and I might just start to care what you think.

    69. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but are you willing to give up all your electronic devices at the border and risk getting tortured for 10 years in Guantanamo just in order to visit the new homeland of fascism with a military-industrial twist?

      It's just not worth the risk. Let the third-world dictatures stay among themselves.

    70. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are already far too fond of getting taken up the butt by their American friends.

    71. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either the Russians, Chinese, or the US/UK will invade, Europe hardly counts anymore, what can little old Belgium do these days? Which do you prefer?

    72. Re:Yeah, nah. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      you are less likely to get blown up or murdered by the government while in the US than elsewhere.

      The US is the only western nation still executing people, on that score it's roughly on par with China. The US also locks up it's citizens at a higher rate than ANYWHERE else in the world, eg: ~7X the rate at which China imprisons people.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    73. Re:Yeah, nah. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      The fact that he is popular is disturbing.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    74. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Choose an answer:

      1. So stay home?
      2. When the tanks start rolling around you'll be wishing your home country had a way of knowing exactly where you are within the US.
      3. So, I mean... you could always just stay home.

      As far as implementation goes, I wouldn't think they would slap a barcode or RFID on YOU. Maybe on your visa, but not you.

    75. Re:Yeah, nah. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Oh well then, just drop in to your nearest police station or FBI department every morning during your stay to say howdy. Nothing wrong with that.

      The equivalent took place in former communist countries. I remember visiting the DDR (East Germany) and having to turn in my passport every night. Get a little perspective here, please.

      I know 3 people from the former DDR and I've never heard any of them refer to it as "the land of the free".

      A little perspective indeed sir.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    76. Re:Yeah, nah. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The equivalent took place in former communist countries.

      Get a little perspective here, please.

      I think you just gave me all the perspective I need about the USA.

    77. Re:Yeah, nah. by chipschap · · Score: 1

      Nothing like intentionally missing the point. In the Communist countries, this actually happened. It has not in the US and is hardly likely.

    78. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What killed it for me was your policy, instituted in 2002, of basically arresting all foreigners on arrival.

      (Detention, interview, fingerprinting - that's called 'arrest' where I come from.)

    79. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was just refused entry yesterday. In transit, they decided I needed a visa. In fucking transit between two airplanes?

      I had used the last of my financial reserves to buy a ticket to go home. Thanks to this BULLSHIT, I am now, today, in this very moment, stuck in a foreign continent. With no way out.

      Never, ever, will I visit for the rest of my life.

      This shit always hits "everyday people".

      Thanks USA, and fuck you.

      Pity, because most people I've met from there are nice enough.

    80. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FedEx can track boxes (almost) perfectly because they get scanned at each transfer point and boxes don't move on their own. People can change their locations autonomously, so if you want to keep track of where they are, you need an active tracking mechanism. Requiring them to 'check in once in a while' while carrying a passive ID defeats the whole purpose of Christie's idea.

    81. Re:Yeah, nah. by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      It took this? Not our general policy of running around the world tampering with governments, murdering people, and blowing up cities for profit?

      Those did kill it most of the way, and the "somewhat interested" is conditional on some pretty unlikely things, such as someone else footing the bill for the trip.

      Could you explain what killing al Qaeda terrorists with drone strikes in Afghanistan has to do with visiting the US? Which cities do you think the US "blew up for profit"? You seem to be peddling nonsense.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    82. Re:Yeah, nah. by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I'm somewhat interested in visiting the US, but this kind of bullshit would absolutely kill any desire to go there.

      It took this? Not our general policy of running around the world tampering with governments, murdering people, and blowing up cities for profit?

      In 2012 there were approximately 67,000,000 foreign visitors to the US. It seems likely that they don't have the perspective of a self-hating American that twists issues to show the US as a rotten country, sometimes fabricating things in the process.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    83. Re:Yeah, nah. by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Local government "kill with (relative) impunity?" Rubbish. Absolute rubbish.

      If that was the case there wouldn't be multiple police officers currently facing trial in more than one city, and cities wouldn't care about lawsuits (which have cost some of them dearly).

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    84. Re:Yeah, nah. by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      The people being collected from "all over the room and loaded into buckets for disposal" are being targeted because they want to commit terrorist attacks that will cause dozens or hundreds of other people to be "collected in buckets for disposal" for every attack they commit. Preventing them from attacking others reduces the number of buckets needed. Innocent people in village markets have a chance at having nice things since they are less likely to be attacked by terrorists. Why do you oppose protecting the innocent?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    85. Re:Yeah, nah. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      cities wouldn't care about lawsuits (which have cost some of them dearly).

      Where do the cities get the money from to pay for the lawsuits? Seems most of the politicians and police higher-ups don't care too much about losing lawsuits (at least not from the cost standpoint).

    86. Re:Yeah, nah. by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      And where specifically did you read that people will be tagged with an RFID? They could simply carry an ID card. A perfectly reasonable requirement. They could check in once in a while. Another perfectly reasonable requirement.

      The fact that you think this is a reasonable requirement is scary. So much for land of the free eh?

    87. Re:Yeah, nah. by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      Why don't you simply renounce your US citizenship? You'll probably be happier if you do. The next US president will probably be a Republican, and you know you'll hate to visit the country just knowing that. He or she might even get two terms. I doubt you'll survive the anger from it.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    88. Re:Yeah, nah. by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Do you really think that? Money lost in damages comes from taxes which mean taxes go up. That means both unhappy voters and less money for city government. That is before you get to the question of a judge overseeing operations of a city and its police force, which is both humiliating and unpleasant for all involved. There is also the question of state involvement: investigations, oversight, prosecution.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    89. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are people taking this raving by a candidate with not much chance of getting elected so seriously?

      Exactly! Everyone knows that Trump is the next president.

    90. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't be silly
      border policies don't apply to people arriving in private planes
      criminals or not

    91. Re:Yeah, nah. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In 2012 there were approximately 67,000,000 foreign visitors to the US.

      Suckers.

      It seems likely that they don't have the perspective of a self-hating American that twists issues to show the US as a rotten country, sometimes fabricating things in the process.

      I don't hate me, I hate you and your ilk that pretend that our country is not doing evil in our name, because you make it possible for them to do that. I guess you forgot about Dick Cheney lying about WMDs so that we could go bomb some cities and then give the no-bid contracts to rebuild them to Halliburton, eh? How quickly you forget, because it's so very fucking convenient for you.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    92. Re:Yeah, nah. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Because, nice as the US is, has a reputation of harassing ex-citizens. Going back to visit relatives gets you on lots of lists that need inspections, searches, and lots of questions.

      I think the un-Fair Tax is evil, but if it ever passes, it'll simplify my tax liability greatly. I think the only country in the world that taxes non-resident citizens is the US.

    93. Re:Yeah, nah. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Do you really think that?

      What, that politicians are happy to pass on their problems to the next administration? Yes, I really think that.

    94. Re:Yeah, nah. by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      And that means you think politicians are happy to lose elections. Right . . .

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    95. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New passports issued in the EU already contain an RFID. If you carry the passport with you you're tagged.

    96. Re:Yeah, nah. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I'm sure people in communist countries thought so too.

    97. Re:Yeah, nah. by niftydude · · Score: 1

      And where specifically did you read that people will be tagged with an RFID? They could simply carry an ID card. A perfectly reasonable requirement. They could check in once in a while. Another perfectly reasonable requirement. Many here are making up unreasonable scenarios then arguing how stupid they are.

      Of course. A visa over stayer will definitely check in once in a while - they didn't mean to over stay, and of course they will go to the check in point as legally required. A perfectly reasonable requirement which will have absolutely zero effect since the only people who check in are the people who are law abiding and were going to leave on time anyway. But it will create jobs for all the people needed to man the check points, Chris Christie's mates will get nice fat contracts to run the whole shebang, therefore the economy will be stimulated, and the only people that will be worse off will be legal immigrants and american taxpayers.

      The only way to do this in a manner which will actually catch illegals is to tag all immigrants with an ankle bracelet or similar when they arrive - hence my initial comment. Christie's suggestion is less than a thought bubble, it is so lacking in content that it should never have been spoken.

      Yet here you are defending the idea, and modded informative non the less. Maybe people do get the government they deserve.

      --
      You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    98. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On second thought, as long as they do this to all our politicians when they visit the US, I might be OK with it....

      If this proposed policy charged by the pound, Christie would be in BIG trouble.

    99. Re: Yeah, nah. by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      And people who don't need a visa need this funny thing called a "visa waiver".

      Which is just a visa by another name.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    100. Re:Yeah, nah. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Baghdad for example. And Haliburton made a handsome profit from Iraq war.
      By the way, bombing a city with a shock and awe doctrine makes you the actual terrorists by the definition of that word.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    101. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      What is unreasonable, carrying and ID card when you are on a visa? Most people carry ID cards anyhow. Checking in once a month when on a Visa? I would happily do so visiting another country, and I can't think of a single freedom that is taken away from me. I am certainly free to leave.

    102. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      You might be surprised how helpful it would be to know the most recent area a person stayed, to remind them before their visa expires what their options are, and to know within a month that a person that should have checked out of the country did not do so. Just because it does not solve the problem entirely doesn't mean it is not useful.

      Your assumption about ankle bracelets is quite ridiculous. If you want to get modded informative, don't make shit up that isn't reasonable. I understand you don't like Christie, I'm not a big fan but at least I don't have to resort to hyperbole to justify my opinions.

    103. Re:Yeah, nah. by bickerdyke · · Score: 2

      Why are people taking this raving by a candidate with not much chance of getting elected so seriously?

      In fact it tells a lot about the society where a candidate may hope to get votes with such ravings.

      --
      bickerdyke
    104. Re:Yeah, nah. by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      Targets in Baghdad were bombed, Baghdad as a whole wasn't. The US didn't profit from bombing Baghdad, so that is nonsense. Citing Haliburton doesn't make the case stronger.

      You are peddling nonsense.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    105. Re: Yeah, nah. by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Not quite. They need an ESTA registration instead of a visa. "Visa Waiver" is the name of the program that allowed citizens of certain countries to visit the US without a visa (usually bilateral) and has been around much longer than the ESTA stuff.

      What your ESTA registration acutally replaces is that white I-94 form that you have to fill out while on the airplane. So the border and costums patrol knows that you're not planning to visit the states with criminal intent 72 hours before you're boarding the plane compared to checking that nonsensical form at your destination airport.

      I still suspect the whole idea of that is that after years into the visa waiver program, some bean counter noticed that by that program, the US is also waiving billions of visa fees and the found a way to have tourists pay an admission fee even if they don't need a visa. All under the guise of "modernizing" beurocrazy and moving paperwork that used to be ignored for free to a electronic system that earns them $14 per tourist.

      --
      bickerdyke
    106. Re:Yeah, nah. by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Ever checked into a hotel in modern days Germany? Hotels are still required to note your home address and passport number (for tourists).

      --
      bickerdyke
    107. Re:Yeah, nah. by bickerdyke · · Score: 2

      That may be reasonable, but is NOT how FedEx-style tracking works. And that, and not something reasonable, was the key point.

      --
      bickerdyke
    108. Re:Yeah, nah. by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      >>Targets in Baghdad were bombed, Baghdad as a whole wasn't.
      Would you have wanted to be anywhere in Baghdad during that?

      >> Citing Haliburton doesn't make the case stronger.
      You seem to be ignoring all the close ties Haliburton has with government officials esepecially including vice president at the time.. Dick Cheney. The war in Iraq made a lot of money for many government officials. Corruption and greed are a far more likely explanation for that war than the extremely dubious looking inteligence regarding WMDs that were cited.

    109. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Well, if you interpose the entire Fedex package tracking approach, you'd have to put them on conveyor belts and run them through distribution facilities. Or, you could just mean the underlying logistics. In reality, it doesn't take anything as sophisticated as what FedEx does.

    110. Re:Yeah, nah. by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Well, if you interpose the entire Fedex package tracking approach, you'd have to put them on conveyor belts and run them through distribution facilities.

      Well, you know, I'm from an area where exactly that has already been done some 70 years ago, and it didn't turn out to be very popular. So you can't exactly rely on that comparing people to a piece of freight is only rhetorical hyperbole. It has been done before.

      --
      bickerdyke
    111. Re:Yeah, nah. by niftydude · · Score: 1

      You might be surprised how helpful it would be to know the most recent area a person stayed, to remind them before their visa expires what their options are, and to know within a month that a person that should have checked out of the country did not do so.

      You are correct - I would be surprised. The most recent area is pointless in a country where you can catch a bus or train from one side to another in a few days. Reminding them their visa is about to expire can be done using the email address/contact details that all US visitors have to provide when they get their ESTA or visa in order to be allowed entry to the country. Knowing to the day that a person that should have checked out of the country and did not do so is already recorded trivially at passport control. None of these tasks require the multimillion dollar cost of setting up and manning checkpoint offices across the country.

      Your assumption about ankle bracelets is quite ridiculous. If you want to get modded informative, don't make shit up that isn't reasonable. I understand you don't like Christie, I'm not a big fan but at least I don't have to resort to hyperbole to justify my opinions.

      On the contrary, my opinion is that ankle bracelets are pretty much the only reasonable way to make a scheme like this work. The self-driven check-in option you've proposed is just a huge waste of money with no useful outcomes (as I said before - probably just a boondoggle to enrich Christie's campaign donors). I don't follow US politics closely enough to like or dislike Christie or even know who he is, as my country has enough political problems to fill my news feed. I'm just pointing this particular idea out for the BS that it is.

      --
      You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    112. Re:Yeah, nah. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The US is not homogeneous. Yes, some cities like Seattle are doing pretty well in reining in their cops and prosecuting them for misconduct. Other places aren't. Seattle (and the entire PacNW) is **not** representative of the US as a whole, it's really quite different. It bears almost no resemblance to, say, Alabama or South Carolina, except that the same language (more or less) is spoken.

    113. Re:Yeah, nah. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      How many politicians at the local level do those jobs for their entire working careers? I certainly don't see that much; they act as Mayor for a few years, maybe a decade at the very most, then they're replaced by someone else.

    114. Re:Yeah, nah. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      RFID chips won't work. RFID chips don't have very good range, and they're easily blocked by aluminum foil. RFID is great for something like keeping track of warehouse goods or shipped packages, where the thing being scanned is inanimate, and the person scanning can see (or know) where the RFID chip is and just scan it, and there's no active attempts to prevent this. They don't work if you want to implant a chip in someone and then be able to track them as they walk around; it's not hard for them to put some metallic material over the chip. If *everyone* has the implant, they of course you can look to see if someone went through a scanner without the RFID being read, and nab him; but if only a subset of the people have them (i.e. citizens) and you're trying to use it to track the "undesirables" or lesser-privileged people, it won't work because they can easily make themselves look like citizens by shielding the RFID chip.

      This is why secure facilities like military bases work with ID badges for privileged people: people who have access get a special pass they have to show. People without access don't get a pass. It wouldn't work the other way around, where unauthorized people have to carry a pass or declare that they're not supposed to be there, because you can't rely on honesty.

    115. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cancel plans to go to Germany, Japan, Russia, China, etc, or do you only have time for self-loathing?

    116. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stay away.

    117. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ignorant idiot.

      Where did America take resources from another country?

    118. Re:Yeah, nah. by bartmcmurray · · Score: 0

      I have to admit we have tampered with some crappy governments, sometimes wrongly but blowing up cities for profit is a lie. It cost us plenty.

    119. Re:Yeah, nah. by siliconsmiley · · Score: 1

      With statements like this, Christie ensures that he will never be our president. While there are certainly those who think reducing human life to an RFID is a good idea, the majority of Americans do not.

    120. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have about a 150.000 Syrian migrants entering Northern Europe now and no Schengen rules and regulations are enforced due to it being unforseen. I'd welcome a system like this or any other order. A very high fence would be preferable as i do not wish to sacrifice my quality of life for some silly liberal or christian values. Referring to full life boat analogy.

    121. Re:Yeah, nah. by qfman · · Score: 0

      This is just an excuse to develop the technology. Once they have it you may as well apply it every one, no matter how you entered the country.

      --
      They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
    122. Re:Yeah, nah. by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Well, no, because people in other countries know the U.S. does that stuff mostly for fun. Now it's getting real.

    123. Re:Yeah, nah. by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Exactly -- immigrants will more than likely get tossed into a truck, then end up at a doorstep or loading dock fairly quickly, with a couple corners bent and at least a few smears of dirt on them, and in very rare cases, with some minor water damage

    124. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not every politician has brains between their ears. This applies more so to American Politicians. And stupidity appeals to the stupid.

      Europe, Australia, Canada, Russia all have a problem... Their birthrate is under 2 children per family. Every country will be down several millions of population by 2050. The middle aged population of today will be drawing pensions, and taxing the health care services of those countries. Japan will be hardest hit with a calculation of being down 18million middle aged citizens.

      Thanks to (il)legal immigrants, the US population is calculated to remain static. There will be sufficient taxpayers to cover your golden years of retirement services.
      The USA has to do one thing only -- two rules. a) Any immigrant has to recognize the language, culture and legal system of the USA. b) Religion does not preempt the law of the land.

    125. Re: Yeah, nah. by kenh · · Score: 1

      Did you know Hsliburton found the Middle East conflicts so profitable that they tried to sell the division that serves those wartime contracts but... Wait for it... No one wanted it. Why?

      Because there was too little profit in it.

      And why did Haliburton's bids have no competitors? Because no one else could do the job Haliburton did.

      --
      Ken
    126. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In general the world is probably a safer place than the US.

      Fixed.

    127. Re: Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask the Neocons, this was plan for Iraq. Didn't quite work out well and worse, the power vacuum helped spawn ISIS. So yes, U.S. Has made a mess of things in the Middle East.

    128. Re:Yeah, nah. by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Yeah that works until one day when you check in and for some unknown reason you get detained. It happened to me in China, and took hours out of my day clearing things up while dudes with guns treated me like a criminal. That's not my definition of free.

    129. Re:Yeah, nah. by Gliscameria · · Score: 1

      Dont passports already have rfid?

      --
      X
    130. Re:Yeah, nah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm somewhat interested in visiting the US, but this kind of bullshit would absolutely kill any desire to go there.

      It took this? Not our general policy of running around the world tampering with governments, murdering people, and blowing up cities for profit?

      Well, actually those measures makes me think it is safer to be in the US than in any other country in the world, because the other countries are the ones that could get any of those.

      Now if you look at history, all the countries have made the same in some way or the other. The only difference is that the US does it to promote freedom. It is a selfish kind of freedom, because it promotes its own values, but when you compare it with other countries like Russia, which invades countries and completely replace its people, well in comparison it is not so bad.

      Compare also with the Spanish empire in latin america.

      I was in the US in 2008 and the airport security is really annoying and time consuming. I'm pretty sure all they do is useless because a terrorist would know exactly what they are looking for. The american mentality is naive and those efforts are really only used for creating a security industry that is neither safe nor useful. Someone had the idea of making some extra bucks on molesting people on airports, like if it were a third world country.

      Unfortunately people in the US have fallen prey to these tactics.

      Real security is done doing intelligence. And that means espionage. Infiltrating terrorist groups. That's the way to do it.

        Checking everyone in an airport is just wasting people time and money, and security professionals know this. But they want the money.

      The ultimate motive of terrorist groups is to take control of the government. Anyone who doesn't agree has not read history. So assuming that people will suddenly become terrorists is non sense. Only a few people have the resources, the will and the zealots to perform such a thing. Ultimately everyone knows who the terrorists are, if you don't believe me, look at Colombia. It is a divided country. The terrorists control half the country, the motivation for them is to control the entire country.

      So it is not like "someone got mad, he puts a bomb"... people get mad, they kill the specific people who made him mad. Unfortunately this happens all the time.

      So understanding why things happen is the key to avoid terrorist acts. People will not put bombs randomly to kill innocent people. Only people who wishes to control the government do that. And of course, people with such ideas are very few, they only can act if they get the funding, they get organized, etc. It is a very specific kind of people who do this. They have a master plan, they don't kill people just for the sake of it. And the only reason the can fail is because intelligence can find out what their plans are.

    131. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      That can happen anywhere for many reasons, a completely false argument.

    132. Re:Yeah, nah. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      I think many do, not sure if all do.

    133. Re:Yeah, nah. by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Not in any country I've been, and I've been to quite a few. Generally the more despotic the regime, the more chance you have of detained or tracked for no reason, ie less freedom. In Western countries except the US, I feel like I can go anywhere and do anything I would normally do at home with fear of detainment.
      The US appears to be going down the path of the frog in the pot. 1 more degree warmer, it's still not a problem...

  2. Track people the Wikipedia way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wikipedia will revert your immigration status and send you back in a sockpuppet.

  3. Unnecessary by MikeRT · · Score: 0, Troll

    Just prosecute the ones that violate their visas and if they violated them to make money, asset strip them. How many Mexicans do you think would come here illegally if CBP or local law enforcement had an explicit grant to use civil asset forfeiture to take everything they own?

    1. Re:Unnecessary by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The last thing I want to see is the travesty that is asset forfeiture expanded.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    2. Re:Unnecessary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good look seizing foreign assets.

    3. Re:Unnecessary by mjm1231 · · Score: 1

      Just prosecute the ones that violate their visas and if they violated them to make money, asset strip them. How many Mexicans do you think would come here illegally if CBP or local law enforcement had an explicit grant to use civil asset forfeiture to take everything they own?

      There's a minor problem with this plan. The ones who come here illegally? They don't have visas. That's what makes their coming here illegal. If they have a visa, then they came here legally.

      --
      Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
    4. Re:Unnecessary by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There's a minor problem with this plan. The ones who come here illegally? They don't have visas. That's what makes their coming here illegal. If they have a visa, then they came here legally.

      You're completely missing the point. He's addressing the large number of people who legally enter (with a visa), but illegally overstay their visas, this becoming illegal immigrants. The people who illegally enter are a related, but different specific problem.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re:Unnecessary by mjm1231 · · Score: 1

      I don't think you read the post I was replying to at all. I mean, I quoted it and everything:

      prosecute the ones that violate their visas... How many Mexicans do you think would come here illegally

      --
      Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
    6. Re: Unnecessary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet.

      When you apply for any sort of residency, you are required by law to keep the INS folks updated with your current address.

      Conceptually, this means "they" always know where "you" are. The degree to which the system works in practice is, as always, a function of how well the bureaucracy works which, in turn, is almost always a function of how well funded it is.

      It probably goes without saying that technology can play a role here. But saying the US government (or any government) could begin to function as efficiently as Fedx (just because we like Fedx) is patently absurd. No less absurd than trying to build a 2,000 mile wall, or busing a few million people south.

    7. Re:Unnecessary by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      The last thing I want to see is the travesty that is asset forfeiture expanded.

      If it was expanded to immigration you could sue illegally immigrated money and then deport them to mexico.

    8. Re:Unnecessary by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Better would be to put the people that hire them in jail. If there was no job for illegals then there would be only a fraction of them here. As long as you have a demand for what's damn near slave labor then desperate people will find a way to get here. Kill the demand by jailing illegal employers.

    9. Re:Unnecessary by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      If you wrote a sentence that could be parsed into something intelligible, I'd write a reply.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    10. Re:Unnecessary by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      If you wrote a sentence that could be parsed into something intelligible, I'd write a reply.

      That would be impossible on this subject. Civil forfeiture is based on the idea that the state sues the money, ie.: "The state vs 1000 dollars in cash", not whoever held the money. There is no way to make that intelligible, and when expanding it to other areas the crazy just spreads. Thus if money is people, then you should be deporting illegally immigrated money.

  4. What a dumb idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This really isn't feasible. It's a waste of government money and I can't imagine how to realistically track visitors to the US anywhere they go. It seems like it would take a lot of government employees to make this happen and I'm sure we've got better things to spend our money on. But it's also not addressing another big issue, which is all the visitors it won't track. There are legitimate reasons to want to prevent undocumented "visitors" to the US, but they're not going to sign up to be tracked. Let's be honest, Christie knows all of this, too. He wouldn't seriously do such a thing. Rather, it's something to fire up the conservative Republican base.

    1. Re:What a dumb idea! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You just require a passport for all internal travel. Worked for the USSR. They kept good track of foreigners.

  5. Christie is ideal by msobkow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Christie would make the ideal VP for Trump. They're both ignorant bigots.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Expending time and thought on the subject of illegal immigration clearly doesn't make someone a bigot.

    2. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christie would make the ideal VP for Trump. They're both ignorant bigots.

      But so would Palin...

    3. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is what passes for 'thought' in the republican shit-show.

    4. Re:Christie is ideal by dinfinity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At first I thought that Trump was deliberately put into the picture to draw the playing field towards 'the right', i.e. make one guy say the most outlandish stuff so that the previously outlandish things the rest said actually seem reasonable (and conversely, making the actually reasonable stuff sound silly and far away from reality).

      But the completely baffling thing to me is that there are actually droves of people in the US that not only support Trump, but actively defend his words and say asinine shit like: "He's a true American. We need a guy like that for president" and: "The media are making him sound racist". I remember being very surprised that a moron like Bush Jr. could become (and stay!) president, but this is definitely a new low for the US. Trump hasn't been elected yet, but the fact that so many people like him and support him is already deeply, deeply disgraceful.

    5. Re:Christie is ideal by Runaway1956 · · Score: 0

      The alternative "thought" from the other side of the aisle, is to throw the borders wide open, and invite everyone in the world to the US.

      That poem, on the placard, inside the Statue of Liberty? It's a fucking curse, not a blessing.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    6. Re:Christie is ideal by jcr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From what I can see, it looks to me like Trump jumped in to do Hillary a favor by helping to deflect attention from Hillary's numerous felonies, and got way more attention than even he expected to get.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    7. Re:Christie is ideal by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "He's a true American. We need a guy like that for president"

      Actually, that's not far from the truth. What's the other party running with, anyway? Traitorous scum of course. Clinton and Kerry both make a patriotic Trump look good in comparison. FFS, the left pampers and rewards outright terrorists with appointments as "professors". What sort of reaction do you EXPECT?!?!?!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    8. Re:Christie is ideal by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      This isn't illegal immigration he's talking about - it's legal, hence the visas.

    9. Re:Christie is ideal by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What I would like to see is neither option.

      I want Visas available for all the jobs we need doing. Right now we can't get american's to pick food and until we have robots doing it we need people to do it. We should have a visa just for this purpose and have people get it legally. They should come here legally, work here legally and NOT be exploited by farmers, factories etc.

      On the other end we need to make it vastly simpler to bring in very highly skilled people from other countries. I am not talking about the H1-B crap that is abused and just for getting cheap programmers pretty much. I am talking about people with masters or PhDs from highly respected universities in biotech, nanotech, material science etc. People that we honestly don't have enough of and bringing the best over won't actually have any impact on americans being employed.

      There are some fields where that are only a few thousand qualified people on earth to do certain high tech jobs and we could employ ALL of them with barely a dent in the demand.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    10. Re:Christie is ideal by swb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trump's immigration "policies" get a lot of support because they basically mirror the same kind of simplistic truth people believe: Illegal immigrants have broken the law and should be deported, walling off the border between the US and Mexico will keep them out, lack of rigorous immigration enforcement enables illegal immigrant criminals to commit crime.

      It seems easy to me to understand why people so easily believe in these ideas, they have a kind of uncomplicated truth to them. If you are not residing or working in the US legally, why shouldn't you be deported? Certainly a large wall on the border would greatly hinder illegal imimgrants from infilitrating the border. We certainly don't want people with violent criminal histories entering the US, bypassing immigration allows these people to enter the US and potentially commit crime and deporting illegal immigrants before they commit crimes seems to have a certain preventative logic to it.

      Of course, none of these "positions" or "ideas" is more than surface deep. The basic logisticts of deporting all illegal immigrants is pretty crazy and lacks a certain humanity in many cases. It's debatable how effective some giant wall would be and who the hell would pay for it?

      None of it seems to address deeper questions of the problems of the current immigration system or why both political parties seem willfully unable to address it, or the value their constituences see in the current system, from cheap, wage-suppressed labor or for political pandering to immigrant groups to expansion of presumably political friendly constituencies.

      And all of them avoid the kind of hard debates on well, who should be allowed to assume residency and work in the US? Is someone going to actually step up to the plate and argue for an open borders policy in an honest an direct manner (it would appear that Trump is the advocate for the opposite policy)? If it's not open borders, then how, exactly will we regulate and enforce an immigration policy in a way that's consistent and achieves desirable goals?

      What's always surprised me is the lack of African American voices in the immigration debate. They have the highest unemployment rates and illegals take the kind of low-skill, entry-level jobs one would assume that would be the easiest for the many African Americans with poor educations to take. This leads to the questions of racial discrimination, although that seems complicated by the idea that Latinos can get these jobs. Then there's arguments about jobs "we won't do" but this begs the quesiton as to why those jobs don't pay more (I guess they don't have to with a supply of illegals) or whether people have some moral right to not work for jobs they don't want, yet be able to demand subsidies for not working.

    11. Re:Christie is ideal by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Which would be only proper. You break it - you buy it. And you broke a lot of countries.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    12. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're native american then?

    13. Re:Christie is ideal by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      We can deport most the illegals, nothing crazy about it. Easy and cheap too, no need for expensive "holding centers" or any of the other strawman arguments raised.

      Countries have borders and laws and immigration procedures. Those that don't obey them are criminals and can and should be thrown out.

      On average, inner city african americans have a subculture that makes them less employable. They or someone needs to change that subculture, because being less capable and lazier than a latino will indeed make them less employable. Oooo, that was racist, I can hear you bleeding hearts wail. Truth hurts, stereotypes that are generally true are useful.

    14. Re:Christie is ideal by Headw1nd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Explain how locating and transporting 11 million people, who by their very nature are not on record, is going to be "easy" and "cheap". While you're at it, explain how you will do this without accidentally capturing and transporting US citizens.

    15. Re: Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the visitors who over stay their visa that Wilks be affected. Because they overstay... Illegally!

    16. Re:Christie is ideal by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Trump's already said he'll get the Mexicans to pay for the wall. He's a builder, he can build it, and it's going to be beautiful. Of course it would be. You think Trump would build an ugly wall?

      Do you really think fat losers like Hillary or Sanders could get the Mexicans to pay for the wall? Why would anyone vote for them? Do you wanna pay for the wall? And you know a wall those losers build would be uglier than Rosie O'Donell.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    17. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "There is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong."
        - H.L. Mencken

    18. Re:Christie is ideal by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Partly - yes. Why? I'm an American. I'm not Russian-American, Mexican-American, African-American, or any other hyphenated hogwash. I'm American.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    19. Re:Christie is ideal by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      simple, you start doing it, others take the hint and leave themselves. employers get punished for hiring such, they take the hint

      you answer your own question about deporting citizens, "not on record". heck more than half of them speak no english at all, no one brought up in this country and in our school systems will be like that.

    20. Re:Christie is ideal by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1

      Explain how locating and transporting 11 million people, who by their very nature are not on record, is going to be "easy" and "cheap". While you're at it, explain how you will do this without accidentally capturing and transporting US citizens.

      But, to Trump and his ilk, brown people aren't "real Americans", so it doesn't matter if some US citizens get sent south of the border in some sweeping dragnet.

    21. Re:Christie is ideal by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      But the completely baffling thing to me is that there are actually droves of people in the US that not only support Trump, but actively defend his words and say asinine shit like: "He's a true American. We need a guy like that for president" and: "The media are making him sound racist".

      I used to wonder that too, but I think he succeeds because his mere existence shows how stupid the rest of the field of politicians actually is. It pops them out of their reality distortion field. Seriously, look at this Chris Christie just outed himself as clearly stupider than Trump. And remember, he's one of the guys who markets himself as competent.

      It might be a similar thing on the Democrat side: Bernie Sanders is popular because in comparison, the other candidates are fake, plastic balls of self absorbed ambition.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    22. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump's immigration "policies" get a lot of support because they basically mirror the same kind of simplistic truth people believe: Illegal immigrants have broken the law and should be deported, walling off the border between the US and Mexico will keep them out, lack of rigorous immigration enforcement enables illegal immigrant criminals to commit crime.

      Disclaimer: white techie here.

      Where I live it's nearly 50/50 black and white population, and the illegals are taking the jobs that would have been held by African Americans with a high school diploma. Quite simply, this needs to stop. If we'd simply level a 50k per infraction fine on any business hiring an illegal immigrant (and yes, the onus would be on the employer to obey the law by verifying that the employees are legit) this problem would go away.

      Here's a bit of info on the issue.

    23. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump doesn't care much for quitters.

    24. Re:Christie is ideal by russotto · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You break it - you buy it. And you broke a lot of countries.

      So you want the US to go full imperialist? It's an idea; solve the Mexican illegal immigrant problem by annexing Mexico. Send in a team of special prosecutors (perhaps ex-US Attorneys headed by Christie) to bring the corruption down to New Jersey levels, then admit the Mexican States to the US.

    25. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately ignorant paranoid Democrats take Trump out of context constantly. Trump's statement about 30 million illegals employed while the left screams foul and sites government studies putting the number more around 11 million for example. Well gee... who are we suppose to listen to, a corrupt government under obummer who has driven this country into the ground while spying on us the past 8 years or a AAA business man who can just ask his buddies in confidence how many actual illegals there are employed off the radar. The thing is Trump holds the key to so many truths this nation needs without playing childish political games, I can't wait for him to make America great again. He has my vote, and the nations.

    26. Re:Christie is ideal by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      But the completely baffling thing to me is that there are actually droves of people in the US that not only support Trump

      Trump is the one guy that's not saying political speak and is not afraid to mince words. I think a lot of people are sick and tired of hearing politicians just dance around issues and since he has no desire to do so, that makes him popular. That is a pretty appealing proposition even to me - though I would likely never vote for Trump.

    27. Re:Christie is ideal by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      We have a peach packing plant in my area that employs hundreds of migrant workers. They are all here legally. They come every year, make their money and return to their homes when the season ends. It's amazing how well it works. Yes, we need the laborers but we need to operate within the law. It's not that fucking hard. It's mostly shoddy operators in the US that want labor with no rules. No visas, no OSHA, no minimum wage. Basically just slave labor that has no rights to complain about conditions. Since they are desperate they get exploited by employers that care only for profits. They can't get American labor to work like a slave in hazardous conditions for next to no pay so they utilize illegals. It needs to stop and all it will take is serious jail time for these assholes. That is never going to happen though.

    28. Re:Christie is ideal by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      That is a pretty appealing proposition even to me

      Oh, for fuck's sake. You people are on Slashdot as well?

      You are as moronic as Trump is. Just because you can relate to swinging an axe does not mean it's the best way to build a nuclear reactor. Moreover, if you really think that Trump is not 'saying political speak', then you are as naive as a 1-year old. If there is one guarantee in politics it is that the populists always end up being the ones who realize the fewest of their promises or just royally fuck up their country sooner or later.

      There is a reason why matters on a national scale generally require complex nuanced solutions (or slave labor, slave labor always works) and that is that running a country properly is fucking hard. Talk is cheap.

    29. Re:Christie is ideal by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      This is exactly the kind of operation I like seeing. People treated like people with safety standards, rights etc. They come and do the job and stay within the bounds of their visa.

      I think we would all be better off if everyone that came into this country (at least to the extent feasible) came in on an actual visa and passed a basic background check. If you have things as big as people making it across your border without knowing then lots of other stuff makes it across also and that is a large security hole that should be dealt with.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    30. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So maybe the illegal immigrants could just form their own government and write up their own documentation, so they'd no longer be "undocumented" on American soil.

      Why not? That's what the European settlers did.

    31. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JCR,

      If that were true, then why does this Mr. Trump draw attention TO those "numerous felonies" ? And why did Hillary so wisely initially refuse to state Trump's name (before he let her know she wasn't "safe" from his straight-talking wrath). She was genuinely caught off guard by Trump entering the race.

      Initially, she wouldn't even say his name regarding the "rapists" blurb he made -- she said something like "...a candidate that entered the race recently...". Smart on multiple levels -- 1) because he's contributed to her in the past and those are the only people that seem to get any kind of respect or courtesy from these clown, and 2) because she realizes just SAYING his name gives him more publicity. When she said that, a person in the crowd shouted "SAY HIS NAME!" and she poo-poo'ed the comment away. Later and lately, she has tried her sad best to give him a jab or two. Nothing will stick though.

      No human american want's politics as usual. Electronic voting machines may help you out with making the right choice however.

      Anyway, you have bad facts, so you're fired.

    32. Re:Christie is ideal by swb · · Score: 1

      Immigration right now is a classic example of the bootlegger and the baptist.

      The bootlegger wants booze illegal because he makes a bigger profit. The baptist wants booze illegal becaue it keeps the pews full on Sunday morning. It's a reciprocal relationship that makes everyone worse off.

      Immigration works the same way. The Republicans like porous borders and weak enforcement because it provides a cheap and compliant labor force as well as suppresing wages generally. The Democrats like porous borders and weak enforcement because they believe a larger non-white population will give them a demographic advantage in elections.

      The irony for the Republicans is that bulk importing poor people from the third world only drives up government expenditures and ultimately taxes. Democrats assume that the generally devout Catholics of Latin America will somehow embrace a political agenda of secular liberalism, as if the history of Latin America wasn't littered with wreckage of right wing authoritarianism.

    33. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea that Trump pulls the field to "the right" doesn't stand even momentary scrutiny. Most of his social policies are far to the left of the Republican field, and his economic policies are mainstream. He's notable for two things: the moderation of his positions (such as they can be determined), and the simultaneous (a) strength and (b) deliberate vagueness of his language.

    34. Re:Christie is ideal by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2

      simple, you start doing it, others take the hint and leave themselves. employers get punished for hiring such, they take the hint

      Like how arresting drug dealers stops drug dealing you mean? The only thing simple about this is you....

    35. Re:Christie is ideal by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      I was simply giving you the perspective of people I know that like him.

      I was planning on voting for Sanders unless he's clearly out and then would have to figure out what Republican I would vote for in the primary. Not a lot of good options.

    36. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People generally are pulled over once every 5 years. If you don't have a license and cannot give any info that matches what's in the system, and if english isn't your first language, then we should strongy suspect you are not here legally. You are then put on a plane and sent home.

      CA alone spend $12B/year educating illegal aliens. Deporting is cheap compared to educating someone here illegally. If the child was born here, but the parents were not, then the parents needs to leave and the child can leave with them and come back when 18.

    37. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Explain how locating and transporting 11 million people, who by their very nature are not on record, is going to be "easy" and "cheap". While you're at it, explain how you will do this without accidentally capturing and transporting US citizens.

      E-Verify. You remove the financial incentive (not being able to secure employment) and they will leave in droves. Problem solved.

    38. Re:Christie is ideal by strikethree · · Score: 1

      I want Visas available for all the jobs we need doing. Right now we can't get american's to pick food and until we have robots doing it we need people to do it. We should have a visa just for this purpose and have people get it legally. They should come here legally, work here legally and NOT be exploited by farmers, factories etc.

      You clearly do not understand the issue here. The reason that illegal immigrants can find work is because they work without the protections afforded to the American worker. This makes the immigrants cheaper to hire. This means the farmers and factories are in fact exploiting the immigrants. Without the economic incentive, there would be fewer illegal immigrants.

      To word it in another manner, it is the ability to exploit the illegal immigrant that makes the illegal immigrant valuable. Americans would do the work but the farmers and factories do not want the baggage that comes with American workers (Social Security, payroll taxes, unemployment insurance, potential lawsuits, etc). Understand?

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    39. Re:Christie is ideal by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      Saying "even to me" means that you support that way of thinking. Don't hide behind "I'm explaining other people's thoughts".
      You have to realize that supporting the "at least he's honest/straightforward" way of thinking in any way is detrimental to the wellbeing of a representative democracy.

      Real honesty is when politicians say: "Well, I can't really make any promises. There are a lot of factors influencing this and I will probably gain new insights in the future which will give me a more complete picture of the matter, which in turn might lead me to another solution than the one I currently believe is the best one. I can promise that I will try to select a solution to the best of my ability at any time in the future."
      NOT:
      "We're going to deport all those illegal immigrants."

      The problem with the first one is that everybody chews up the guy saying such things as 'having no vision' or 'being weak' or whatever shortsighted qualification the primitive brain comes up with. Nuance doesn't sell.
      The second one may sound very straightforward, decisive and 'leader-like', but it locks the speaker to a specific action, which removes all opportunity of using new insights (which may determine the action to be unwise). Promising the attainment of specific results ("We're going to let the economy grow by 3% next year") is also extremely problematic, as there is no way to guarantee it will come true.

      So, what can you do, as a politician? True honesty gets you ridiculed and keeps you from getting elected. Making a lot of promises will get you elected, but will bite you in the ass in the future (many choose this path anyway, trusting that they can take or mitigate the bite). What remains is trying to dance around the issues and promise as little as possible while sounding as if you know what you're doing and are a great person.

      My point is that public opinion breeds political speak. Stop lamenting the 'straightforward' assholes and start praising the truly honest politicians.

    40. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Numerous felonies? Can you point to even one that exists outside the world of Fox News?

    41. Re:Christie is ideal by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's not really baffling when you realize that the main attraction of Trump is that he's saying what the Republican base has been thinking but hiding for several decades now. He represents the ultimate, final closure of the dog whistle politics.

    42. Re:Christie is ideal by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      US has almost annexed Mexico back in the 18th century, actually (ironically, the main reason why this wasn't popular was racism and anti-Catholic sentiment).

      I can't help but think that if they did, it would have turned out much better for the Mexicans.

    43. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (1) require proof of citizenship for any kind of welfare

      (2) require proof of citizenship / work visa for any kind of job, with easy electronic verification and severe penalties for employers of illegals

      (3) watch the illegals deport themselves, or laugh as they die in the streets

    44. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's always surprised me is the lack of African American voices in the immigration debate. They have the highest unemployment rates and illegals take the kind of low-skill, entry-level jobs one would assume that would be the easiest for the many African Americans with poor educations to take. This leads to the questions of racial discrimination, although that seems complicated by the idea that Latinos can get these jobs. ...

      Racial discrimination isn't a question. humans have discriminatory tendencies by design by the evolutionary phenomena of 'kin selection'. Latino's simply have a lighter shade to discriminate against than dark African americans. The House Negro (light skinned) vs. The Field Negro (dark skinned) stereotype has a grain of truth in it that reveals the same phenomenon.

      In regards to my birth culture, us African Americans simply do not have the organizational gumption or fortitude to organize a voice that matters, and is replicable among the culture in a meaningful way (X and King were nice but two outliers do not a social and cultural movement make). We don't employ the same methods of improvement (scientific method) that other cultures seem to do on this rock, and I've become inclined to think the African American culture with its widely differing spectrum of mindsets, needs a Genghis Khan like consolidation of mindsets and unification among the clades to then have enough organizational momentum to partake in a scientific cultural revolution to get back in the game. It seems we're mentally 2000 yrs behind or something on aggregate when it comes to cultural timelines... sigh

    45. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty easy.

      If they don't speak English, they must show their papers.

      If they are brown, short and fat as a doughnut, they must show their papers.

      If they are working at Mac Donalds, they must show their papers.

      If they don't have papers (like passports, visas, and the like), go to jail for 3 days. They are allowed to make phone calls to friends and family to bring the passport.

      If they do not show up in 3 days, it means they are illegally in the US and must return by the same tunnel they got in, by walking. Pretty cheapo.

      The only problem: Mexico main income is the flux of dollars that arrive every month because illegal immigrants working in the US send money to their families. Without that the economy in Mexico will collapse. The end result is that Mexicans in the US will jump from 11 million to 130 million, because they will starve in Mexico. Of course that can only happen if they find a way to enter (a tunnel) and stay hidden in secret factories underground.

      So do them a favor and nuke them. It is far faster, far cheaper and cleaner. I forgot to mention: humanitarian. Dying of hunger is far worse than dying all of a sudden with a flash of light.

    46. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a much better solution.

      Teach English since early childhood in every school and forbid Spanish everywhere. Spanish is the language of stupid people.

      Use dollars in all of Mexico. Make their economy work for the first time in history.

      Forbid the dark, round, short, ugly people to go into the northern states. Put them in jail if they disobey.

      Change their diet so that they eat less cheese. They become congested.

      Forbid Catholicism because of all the pedophile priests. Put the pedophile priests in jail.

      Create a law so that everyone has a month vacation with all expenses paid to go to Mexico in the summer.

    47. Re:Christie is ideal by jcr · · Score: 1

      Sorry to break it to you, but "fox news" is not some magic word that dismisses all the crimes committed by the people you worship.

      Hillary Clinton has violated the espionage act, and other statutes relating to securing public records. She has knowingly attempted to destroy evidence. She has lobbied for foreign interests in exchange for millions of dollars paid into her family slush fund. She may or may not do time for it, depending on whether the Obama regime thinks they can get away with ignoring it.

      She is a crook, and that simple fact would remain, even if Fox News had never existed.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    48. Re:Christie is ideal by dywolf · · Score: 1

      I dearly hope that is simply an impression of a RWNJ.
      Cause if serious, that is one of the most delusional posts I've read today.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    49. Re:Christie is ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that while Trump got a deferment over a blister on his baby toe (though he can't remember which one), Kerry was not only an actual war hero, he then did one of the most Patriotic and American things you can do: standing up to his own government and denouncing actions it had taken that would be considered war crimes had any other nation committed them. Nothing is more American than standing against your own government over an issue of integrity and moral rightness.

      Ah, but then Patriot doesn't mean to you people what it does to sane folks with dictionaries.
      Damn chickenhawks.

    50. Re:Christie is ideal by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Hey, what's moving a few million immigrants when folks like Flyhelicopters think its perfectly reasonable to 'just move' the 4 billion people living near a coast as their answer to climate change and rising seas?

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    51. Re:Christie is ideal by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Yep it was racist.
      Congratulations, you've identified the problem.
      Step 2 is doing something about it.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    52. Re:Christie is ideal by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... The terrorist who was rewarded by the left with a professor position

      Hillary, capitalizing on her appointment as secretary of state to the tune of 300 million dollars

      RWNJ? No - I'm far more centrist. I'm not left or right. I'm a realist. Delusional, you say? Phhtt. Look around you. The left sells America out, just as readily as the far right does.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    53. Re:Christie is ideal by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except that much of what Kerry babbled about was simply untrue. He wasn't there, he didn't see it, he didn't participate. He made shit up, in the aftermath of real atrocities, committed elsewhere.

      Oh - wait - you saw that, didn't you? I readily admit that the US did indeed commit atrocities in Viet Nam. They are on record. It happened. I'm not defending them, I'm not defending the people responsible, nor am I defending the dirty politicos who made it happen.

      But Kerry is a lying sack of shit. Kerry was an opportunist from the day he entered the military, to the day he wrote his own Purple Heart commendations, to the day he lied to congress, to the day he was elected, and now today, sucking Muslim dick while hoodwinking the American people.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    54. Re:Christie is ideal by whodunit · · Score: 1

      So you want the US to go full imperialist? It's an idea; solve the Mexican illegal immigrant problem by annexing Mexico. Send in a team of special prosecutors (perhaps ex-US Attorneys headed by Christie) to bring the corruption down to New Jersey levels, then admit the Mexican States to the US.

      Woah, woah, slow down there pal. Do you really want another California?

  6. Let's tattoo numbers on their arms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..and make them wear yellow bages

    1. Re:Let's tattoo numbers on their arms by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I thought it was blue triangles for immigrants.

    2. Re:Let's tattoo numbers on their arms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No the blue triangles are for vacationers from outside the CONUS. Immigrants get a yellow rectangle or a purple square depending on where they originate.

  7. SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I dunno, I've been watching the rise of the SJW phenomenon online over the last few years, mostly with distaste - in particular for unabashed hate movements like feminism - but when it comes to racism I've slowly been forced to conclude that quite a lot of Americans really are racists to a surprising degree. Now that doesn't mean unchecked immigration is a good thing, but what Trump and company are smoking out of the bushes are a huge population of genuine xenophobes.

    The other thing I've noticed is the degree to which SJWs actually cause the reactions they want to claim are reactionary. If they weren't out there shrieking about white privilege and telling white people to kill themselves, it seems likely that Trump and Christie wouldn't be getting the support they're getting. The SJW approach is less to support the downtrodden than to attack whoever they feel is oppressing others, which in turn causes the "oppressors" - who for the most part aren't anything of the sort - to become radicalised and polarised. SJWs creat the monster they claim exists, and it didn't have to be that way at all.

    I think Morgan Freeman has the best approach to dealing with racism, and that is to just stop talking about it.

    1. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's it, these SJW's are the problem, why they even make you call them SJW. They make themselves a target and encourage bullying. If only they'd shut up, it'd go away.

      Wait, wait, no, this isn't recent, this isn't new, this is the same argument that was used in the 1840s and 1850s against abolitionists, or in the late 1700s to early 1800s against American and French revolutionaries, and in the 1500s against Protestants. And don't believe I don't have examples I could bring up earlier or more recently.

      But I get it, you'd rather believe things would have naturally ended, that it would have resolved itself. As Morgan Freeman said, you're wrong, of course. So was he.

    2. Re:SJWs by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, anyone you don't like or who says things you don't like is an SJW...

    3. Re:SJWs by AchilleTalon · · Score: 2

      I think Morgan Freeman has the best approach to dealing with racism, and that is to just stop talking about it.

      So, you should have shut up in first place.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    4. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not wanting illegal immigrant isn't xenophobia. Peoples of all race are welcome, with due process from the official and legal channels. Why would someone obtain citizenship privileges and rights but none of the duty and responsibility. This isn't fair! Immigrant must integrate into society and pay taxes like everyone else.

      Also why are you supporting criminal smuggler and human trafficker? If the legal system is so oppressing to them, why do they want to come here in first place? Immigrant that hide from the state are criminal, plain and simple. deal with it.

      Morgan Freeman on black history month: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      Morgan Freeman do not take race bait! I also love the part when that pretend white asshole race baiter play the Jewish card to get out of trouble; "Don't be mad at me. I am not white, I am Jewish. I am your ally against the evil white peoples!" LOL. Gas the Jews, race war now.

    5. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wait, wait, no, this isn't recent, this isn't new, this is the same argument that was used in the 1840s and 1850s against abolitionists, or in the late 1700s to early 1800s against American and French revolutionaries, and in the 1500s against Protestants.

      Abolitionists weren't calling everyone a racist, they were telling people that slaveholding was wrong. American and French revolutionaries weren't branding every citizen of Britain or France tyrannical despots, they were addressing specific issues. Protestants weren't calling all Catholics scumbags, they were protesting against corruption in the church. Although many of them did eventually graduate to general sectarian hatred, despite which the Catholic church is still going strong.

      What the SJWs are engaging in is a form of collective punishment, which is at best only going to create enemies where none existed before. Claims of some sort of ideological heritage with groups who used completely different methods and who would have found SJWs risibile are easily discounted.

      But I get it, you'd rather believe things would have naturally ended, that it would have resolved itself. As Morgan Freeman said, you're wrong, of course. So was he.

      His position is a bit more nuanced than you seem to think. For starters the very idea of race as black, white, brown, yellow, etc was first popularised in the early 19th century, a time when scientific racism also began to flourish. Surely you can see how attacking people based on this fundamentally flawed premise is only perpetuating the concept?

    6. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I cannot begin to express how happy I am that the world doesn't work the way you think it does.

      Seriously, you need to shut up and learn a few dozen things about reality.

    7. Re:SJWs by jcr · · Score: 0

      quite a lot of Americans really are racists to a surprising degree

      Yeah, and you can see them drop the mask whenever a member of a minority doesn't toe the leftard party line. The Democrats have always been the party of institutional racism.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    8. Re:SJWs by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Are you really that confused about the difference between someone's ethnic heritage and the things they choose to do, as individuals or cultures?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    9. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This news about Christie, and the issue he's trying to address, has NOTHING TO DO with what you and your ilk call SJWs. The voters that Trump and Christie are pandering to are angry about immigration; they're blaming immigrants for their own career and financial difficulties.

      The immigrants are an easy target; getting their own lives and careers in order is tough, it takes many years of discipline and focus.

      It has nothing to do with SJWs.

    10. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This comment doesn't even make sense.

    11. Re:SJWs by Runaway1956 · · Score: 3

      Funny thing is - it DID just end in all the rest of the world. Only in the United States are the descendants of slaves still reviled by a significant portion of the former slave holders.

      Only a small percentage of all the slaves transported from Africa to the New World were destined for the US. Brazil got far more slaves than the US did. Brazil has no serious race problem, do they? Maybe you can point to the history of SJW's in Brazil struggling to keep the black man on the plantations? No? Didn't think so.

      YES, SJW'S CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEM!!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    12. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abolitionists weren't calling everyone a racist, they were telling people that slaveholding was wrong. American and French revolutionaries weren't branding every citizen of Britain or France tyrannical despots, they were addressing specific issues. Protestants weren't calling all Catholics scumbags, they were protesting against corruption in the church.

      Sure they weren't, but the point being made was that their detractors made the same criticism as is being made today, about these alleged SJW, so what are you trying to prove with this assertion? You could assert that that is true, and I'd not argue with you, but that doesn't mean the criticism didn't exist.

      As it does today.

      What the SJWs are engaging in is a form of collective punishment, which is at best only going to create enemies where none existed before. Claims of some sort of ideological heritage with groups who used completely different methods and who would have found SJWs risibile are easily discounted.

      Yes, this is exactly the same kind of criticism that was made by the slaveholders, the aristocrats and the counter-reformationists.

      Thanks for repeating it, it saves me the trouble. It's not a new or recent development, but a long-standing practice.

      His position is a bit more nuanced than you seem to think.

      His position is less nuanced, and more mistaken than you seem to realize.

      For starters the very idea of race as black, white, brown, yellow, etc was first popularised in the early 19th century, a time when scientific racism also began to flourish. Surely you can see how attacking people based on this fundamentally flawed premise is only perpetuating the concept?

      Why is it perpetuating the concept to recognize that your premise is fundamentally flawed? (And I do say your, I haven't heard Morgan Freeman say this) That is baffling. Because your words here? Very flawed, as the conceptualization of race way predates the 19th Century, even glancing through Shakespeare will show that, let alone other, more explicit works. The pseudo-scientific basis might be slightly newer, but that's not of much merit as a criticism, it's more often used to attack "science" and "progress" for other things rather than recognize that that one particular usage was itself wrong.

      IOW, it's used in the same way you complained about above. Taking all scientists, rationalists, progressives and whatnot under the same banner, and tarring them as "racists" or whatever suits the agenda of the day. No nuance.

      Sorry, but those merely developed to justify existing racism under the arising paradigm where more effective means of analysis were becoming popular and when the prior racism was being destroyed, so the proponents of it sought ways, somewhat unconsciously, I believe, to continue their existing practice.

      There is validity to the genetics argument, but it's of little point in establishing what its proponents, then or now, want. It's more useful for looking for the occasional genetic defect or improving certain medical treatments, and little use in actually showing the worth of a person, as the actual racists want to do.

    13. Re:SJWs by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      If SJW are only people he doesnt like, that would be true. It is unlikely, so I am going with some people he doesnt like are SJWs.

    14. Re:SJWs by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Racism DID NOT end in Germany. They just stopped talking about it publicaly. Sure the law says that a business can't discriminate based on your race but they actually do. One of the students in my class went back home to India after being accepted in a masters program here in Germany since he found several landlords that told him they did not rent to people from India.

      Europe is too much of a monoculture to see much outward racism but it still exists and it is pretty vile since it is not talked about. Laws against racism seem to be almost never actually enforced at least in Germany. It was just recently a German professor told an Indian male student that she did not accept male students from India because of their rape culture and her university DEFENDED her. She is facing no sanctions of any kind and other professors in Germany have stood up and said they do the same thing. That is truly evil.

      The USA is having a hard time trying to deal with racism but it actually trying to deal with it and the road is going to be bumpy and violent but I think it will work out in the end and meanwhile Europe will just quietly keep it and hide it.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    15. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure they weren't, but the point being made was that their detractors made the same criticism as is being made today

      No, you're referring to the tone of the argument. I'm referring to the scope of the argument. Blanket-condemning vast numbers of people on the basis of their skin colour is a tactic used by the SJWs and I'm saying that's counterproductive, creating opposition where none needed to exist.

      Because your words here? Very flawed, as the conceptualization of race way predates the 19th Century, even glancing through Shakespeare will show that, let alone other, more explicit works.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/b...

      The theory that all the peoples of Europe belonged to one white race which originated in the Caucasus (hence the term 'Caucasian') was first postulated at the turn of the 19th century by a German professor of ethnology called Johann Blumenbach.

      Blumenbach's colour-coded classification of races - white, brown, yellow, black and red - was later refined by a French ethnologist, Joseph-Arthur Gobineau, to include a complete racial hierarchy with white-skinned people of European origin at the top.

      SJWs are as much to blame for perpetuating these false and very damaging pseudoscientific theories as any hardcore racist.

    16. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my oh so humble experience it is the SJW types that are the worst undercover racists. The SJWing is just to assuage their guilt and self-hatred.

    17. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny thing is - it DID just end in all the rest of the world.

      Except there were many fights and struggles, dating back into antiquity. Yeah, those movies about Spartacus never play it up, but the Romans were QUITE racist too.

      Only in the United States are the descendants of slaves still reviled by a significant portion of the former slave holders.

      You seriously believe that? Really? There's revilement for those perceived as other all over the world.

      Only a small percentage of all the slaves transported from Africa to the New World were destined for the US. Brazil got far more slaves than the US did. Brazil has no serious race problem, do they? Maybe you can point to the history of SJW's in Brazil struggling to keep the black man on the plantations? No? Didn't think so.

      Ok, you do seem to believe it. Not sure you want to say SJW's are keeping the black man on the plantations, it would be the plantation owners, who did. You may be buying into the belief that it's the SJWs who are keeping black populations weak with racism and welfare that treats them as contemptible. This would require you to ignore how most welfare in the US actually goes to whites, and it's just a common misconception that it's all about the minorities. It's not unusual for people to think that.

      Besides, racism in Brazil is a real problem, not just with Blacks, but towards Native populations, and more. In fact, it's the belief that "Brazil has no racism" that is challenged.

      http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/05/22/408813624/expats-find-brazils-reputation-for-race-blindness-is-undone-by-reality

      http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/opinion/vanessa-barbara-in-denial-over-racism-in-brazil.html?_r=0

      http://www.dw.com/en/racism-a-new-issue-for-brazilian-society/av-17242285

      http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/three-personal-stories-that-show-brazil-is-not-completely-beyond-racism/article25761242/

      Want to talk about the rest of South America, the Caribbean, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Europe?

      Yeah, I'll grant you that nobody in England is making hay over Norman issues as far as I know, but there's still plenty of Scottish, Welsh, Cornish, and Irish issues.

      YES, SJW'S CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEM!!

      Sure dude, believe that. If only the SJW's would go away, it would all be fine, keep telling yourself that. That's exactly what the racists and their apologists say, they make the people standing against them out to be wrong.

      Why it's just the SJW's that are making hay over Brazil having lingering problems with racism, you can't possibly believe them! It's all a made-up lie!

      Where's my sarcasm tag when I need it?

      Seriously, I need it so much.

    18. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was just recently a German professor told an Indian male student that she did not accept male students from India because of their rape culture and her university DEFENDED her.

      That's far more feminism in action than racism.

    19. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're referring to the tone of the argument. I'm referring to the scope of the argument.

      Tone? Scope? I'm not sure what you mean or why it matters so much to you. What kind of distinction are you trying to draw here?

      Blanket-condemning vast numbers of people on the basis of their skin colour is a tactic used by the SJWs and I'm saying that's counterproductive, creating opposition where none needed to exist.

      With this? I quite recognize that is what you're saying, which is why I'm saying that complaint, however you conceptualize it, is one that has been brought up before, it is not a new one, but a long-standing practice. But it is nothing more than a counter-productive method, because I recognize the tactic you're practicing as false and fraudulent now as it was when used before.

      I don't care what you call it, it's a lie, and you should stop trying to use it. Especially since you're so upset about "blanket-condemning" which means you shouldn't use it against SJW yourself.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/b...

      The theory that all the peoples of Europe belonged to one white race which originated in the Caucasus (hence the term 'Caucasian') was first postulated at the turn of the 19th century by a German professor of ethnology called Johann Blumenbach.

      Blumenbach's colour-coded classification of races - white, brown, yellow, black and red - was later refined by a French ethnologist, Joseph-Arthur Gobineau, to include a complete racial hierarchy with white-skinned people of European origin at the top.

      As I said, the "The pseudo-scientific basis might be slightly newer..."

      Now how does this prove racism didn't exist beforehand? It doesn't. You're just noting it changed. Whup-de-doo. The racism of the Roman Empire fluctuated too, so what? It still existed, and represented the perceptions and situations of their day. Ostensibly new arguments and representations made, they can still be false ones.

      SJWs are as much to blame for perpetuating these false and very damaging pseudoscientific theories as any hardcore racist.

      And continuing my quote: "it's more often used to attack "science" and "progress" for other things rather than recognize that that one particular usage was itself wrong."

      Thanks for demonstrating an example of what I said. You're not attacking the racism in itself, you're using it to attack SJWs, in fact, you're basing an attack on the SJW on a concept from the 19th Century and into the early 20th, which means what? You're going for a collective punishment.

      Yeah, the pseudo-science of those days was bad. So too that of today. Great. But all you're doing is pretending it's your conceptualization of SJWs who are at fault, so how is that helpful? We can't even identify these people, you're just using a descriptive, not an identifying term.

      Why not just say racists are bad? Why not actually say racists are bad?

      Is it because you want SJWs, whoever and whatever they may be, to be the enemy instead?

      What is your agenda? Or are we just in Poe's law territory?

      I dunno, I can't read your mind, but I can see what you've said, and it's nothing that hasn't been said before. Reminds me of the two mistakes many people make about 1984. The first was that it was anything new. The second is that people think it's only one political agenda that practices it.

    20. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're stupid and ugly. Shut up, or leave the country.

    21. Re:SJWs by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      So - lemme get this straight. India does indeed have a rape culture. It's pretty well documented. There are new atrocities published multiple times every year. So, a woman objects to being in proximity to a male whom she might reasonably expect to have been indoctrinated into the rape culture. That is RACISM?!?!

      Sorry, you lose points in the credibility department, because you don't know the difference between racism and other forms of prejudice. Further, I'll hold that not all forms of discrimination are bad.

      The only people who commit more rapes than Indians, are probable the swine from Daesh, al Queda, and other sects of virulent Islam.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    22. Re: SJWs by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Saying that all Indian men are rapists is racism and sexism. Hip hop artists are misogynist homophobic glorifiers of crime but that doesn't mean that all black men are like that and seeing they are it's racist and sexist as well.

    23. Re: SJWs by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Saying not seeing stupid autocorrect.

    24. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is an "SJW"?

    25. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then you realize that due process is nothing more than bureaucratic paperwork intended to keep out the "unwelcome" under shoddy pretenses and ostensible fairness.

      It's actually the immigration process that creates the smuggling and trafficking though, and no, hiding from the government when it's acting immorally under the law is not making your a criminal.

      Not sure why you keep going back to Morgan Freeman though. He's an actor, and any profound wisdom he might speak, is as likely to be from the author of the script, or the director, rather than his own. I've never even heard of him going off-script to be honest, though it may happen, I don't know.

    26. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've mangled quite a lot of what you're trying to say, which is usually either critical theory in action or someone trying to bluff their way out of a tight spot, often both, but to attempt to salvage some sort of point here:

      Tone? Scope? I'm not sure what you mean or why it matters so much to you. What kind of distinction are you trying to draw here?

      I'm saying that complaint, however you conceptualize it, is one that has been brought up before, it is not a new one

      It was explained perfectly clearly above, so feel free to scroll back up and re-read it.

      Now how does this prove racism didn't exist beforehand? It doesn't.

      SJWs don't say "Americans of European extraction" or "American women of low to middle income backgrounds", they say "whites" and "women". There's a very big difference indeed; xenophobia along nationalistic and tribal lines was far more prevalent than bone fide racism before Blumenbach came up with his racial version of manifest destiny. There's a good reason his theories are noted in the history books, because that's when the conversation changed.

      You're not attacking the racism in itself, you're using it to attack SJWs, in fact, you're basing an attack on the SJW on a concept from the 19th Century and into the early 20th, which means what? You're going for a collective punishment.

      By this convoluted logic one couldn't be critical of the KKK without being accused of collective punishment. You do understand the difference between ideology and human beings, right?

      Why not just say racists are bad? Why not actually say racists are bad?

      You mean people attacking others on the basis of their skin colour?

      What is your agenda?

      To highlight the fact that when you attack others, they tend to retaliate. When you lump vaste swathes of people together and attempt to demonise them, you get a popular groundswell of support for Trump.

      Regardless I have no illusions, the process has gone too far to be stopped at this stage, the ship has sailed, too many have been radicalised on either side. It won't end in some communist revolution, it might end in some very nasty purges and the odds don't favour SJWs on that front.

      All that remains is for this observer to sit back and watch.

    27. Re: SJWs by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      "Indian" is not a race, is it? I thought it was a nationality. India encompasses multiple races, multiple religions, multiple cultures, multiple tribes and sects. India. Let me check - I could be wrong . . .

      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=India+dem...

      Try this link first, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    28. Re: SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Single Jewish Woman - Slashdot is becoming a fetish site.

    29. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've mangled quite a lot of what you're trying to say, which is usually either critical theory in action or someone trying to bluff their way out of a tight spot, often both, but to attempt to salvage some sort of point here:

      When somebody starts criticizing how somebody articulates something as a matter of form, without giving clear information as to what they're complaining about, they're usually on the losing side of an argument, because they can't win the battle of ideas. They also tend to use disparaging terms, and make themselves out as somehow more rational and effective.

      After all, if you can't attack the substance, attacking the form can work.

      Hey, look, I can play that game too. It's one where nobody wins.

      Really, I'd appreciate if if you gave me some effective points to address, some guidance to improvement, but all I'm seeing is a generic complaint that serves no purpose except as an attack.

      You can spare yourself the trouble, we're both AC's here.

      It was explained perfectly clearly above, so feel free to scroll back up and re-read it.

      Not clearly to me, otherwise I wouldn't have asked, hence my request for an explanation. If you want to quote a section of your comment that offers sufficient context to explain, you can do that, but I simply do not understand point you were trying to make.

      SJWs don't say "Americans of European extraction" or "American women of low to middle income backgrounds", they say "whites" and "women".

      How do you know that they don't? How are you to speak for an entirely large and arbitrary group that you can describe what they actually say definitively?

      Or is that just your conceptualization of the "SJW" which you are jousting against, and you have no problem with those who use other terms?

      Seems to me you're making up a group there that does what you purport they do.

      There's a very big difference indeed; xenophobia along nationalistic and tribal lines was far more prevalent than bone fide racism before Blumenbach came up with his racial version of manifest destiny. There's a good reason his theories are noted in the history books, because that's when the conversation changed.

      No, it really didn't. The conversation was the same at its fundamentals. A shift in presentation, but the same old thing.

      And of course, it didn't stop the old conversation at all, as anybody who noticed WW1 and WW2 propaganda would tell you. Or political movements like the Know-Nothing Party.

      Sure, the concepts are variant, and they're based on nebulous representations (see elsewhere in this thread with discussion on Indian as a race or nationality), but the core remains present and recognizable.

      By this convoluted logic one couldn't be critical of the KKK without being accused of collective punishment.

      Coincidentally enough, that's something they DO, actually, say. Was this unclear to you? And it's not just the KKK, it is many others, through the practice of time who have made the same assertion.

      I thought I said it in my initial reply to you. Has this been escaping you? Can I get an acknowledgment of it? I'll repeat it:

      Wait, wait, no, this isn't recent, this isn't new, this is the same argument that was used in the 1840s and 1850s against abolitionists, or in the late 1700s to early 1800s against American and French revolutionaries, and in the 1500s against Protestants. And don't believe I don't have examples I could bring up earlier or more recently.

      More recent examples would be how the segregationists did indeed argue against the Civil Rights Movement. Whether called the KKK, Dixiecrats, WCC, or Know-Nothings, American Independent or the Freedom Party, they did bring that idea forth as a shield. Earlier examples would include Rome, the Egyptians and Chinese. Not that these are exclusive, or exhaustive.

      Is this truly

    30. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      racism: attributing characteristics to an individual that may be found to some degree in a group that person seems to be part of, without any evidence that this is so for that individual. arguing from the general to the particular without evidence. pre-judging a person. prejudice.

    31. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, when someone declares that all of one group is something without cause. I could just as equally declare that all female professors can't think logically, and while not racist (since it would be sexist) it would still be abhorrent.

    32. Re:SJWs by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      Do you really think a highly educated indian male with a masters degree already and applying to a German university for a PhD and probably to stay if accepted is a likely person that supports all the rape that happens in india? So far my experience in Germany is that the Indian students I have met say that the rape culture is evil and they need to find a way to fix it but they have no idea how to do it.

      An Indian with a German PhD would end up being a highly productive member of society for any of the EU countries and countries like Germany actively make it easy for people with advanced degrees to get in and find jobs.

      In the end the view is definitely racism and unwarranted.

      However if would NOT recommend that any woman actually go to India since you would not exactly be around the best at brightest that way.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    33. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid. So many logical flaws.

      Don't post here again until you've thought about where you're going wrong.

    34. Re:SJWs by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      So - an educated man cannot be an evil man. Got it. Get a degree, and most people are good with anything you might do. Smart men don't do anything evil. Geez, Louise!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    35. Re:SJWs by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Logic? You want logic? That's funny - racism isn't logical. Rape isn't logical. Theft isn't logical. Hatred isn't logical. Life is not logical. Real life is life, you deal with it. I presume that you're whining about my perception of India's rape culture. The rape culture is real. Women must take that into account.

      What logic, exactly, leads you to believe that an Indian with a degree can't rape women? You need to read the India Times. There are a lot of educated Indian men who defend the rape culture. Men in high government offices have resisted attempts to "fix" the problem. Men in law enforcement have protected rapists. In fact, senior law enforcement officers have participated in gang rapes.

      Pull your head out, and stop equating education with ethics, morals, and humanity. Just reach behind you, grasp both of your ears, and pull hard. Your head should pop right out of your anus, at which point you can breathe freely. Give it a few minutes for oxygen to circulate to your brain before thinking about logic.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    36. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rape culture in USA is severe. It is pretty well documented:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture

      USA in fact has a much higher rape rate than India (even after accounting for a very large margin of unreported rapes in India).

    37. Re:SJWs by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Funny thing is - it DID just end in all the rest of the world. Only in the United States are the descendants of slaves still reviled by a significant portion of the former slave holders.

      Only a small percentage of all the slaves transported from Africa to the New World were destined for the US. Brazil got far more slaves than the US did. Brazil has no serious race problem, do they? Maybe you can point to the history of SJW's in Brazil struggling to keep the black man on the plantations? No? Didn't think so.

      YES, SJW'S CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEM!!

      Well you could blame US race relationions on a SJW phenomena that has only been around for 10-20 years, or you could blame it on a country which had to fight a civil war with the south to eliminate slavery, had another massive political fight with the south to eliminate institutional racism, and still has legislators and government officials actively trying to suppress minority voters.

      Yeah, I guess it's totally the SJWs' fault*...

      * Yes I realize you said "contribute" not "cause" but racism is heavily entrenched in US society (and many other societies). SJWs are guilty of suppressing some legitimate speech, but not of causing racism.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    38. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rape culture in USA is severe. It is pretty well documented:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Strange that there's not a single reputable journal in the entire list of references.

      One would think that any severe societal problem would have been subject to many studies done by social scientists.

      There are a number of studies in social science journals, oddly enough not cited in your reference, that find many rape claims are false, thus the incidence of rape is vastly exaggerated. There are other papers that claim to debunk these papers, but you'll find when you read the counter-papers that they have pretty serious methodological problems, and are more marketing than substance.

      For some reason, the folks inclined to believe propaganda never seem to have the critical thinking and reading skills needed to assess research. The social sciences are every bit as complex as the physical sciences, and it is a lot harder to make good measurements in these fields. If you don't have a strong background in this area -- your comment suggests that you don't -- then take a couple of research design classes. It will also help if you make some acquaintances in the social sciences, people that can help you understand research fundamentals.

      As they say in climate change circles, the preponderance of the evidence accepted by the scientific community does not support your assertion.

      You might try to understand the difference between propaganda and real science.

    39. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only in the United States are the descendants of slaves still reviled by a significant portion of the former slave holders... Brazil has no serious race problem.

      Nice propaganda piece. Do you get paid for posts like this, or we just seeing a failure of basic research skills?

      The vast majority of US citizens are descended from people who came to the country after the US Civil War. Even within the white population, only a few percent are descended from people that owned slaves on the North American continent prior to the end of the US Civil War.

      I make that distinction because who knows what the numbers are once one considers other continents. Slavery existed throughout most of human history, and in all likelihood all people today have ancestors that were slaves, and ancestors that were slave owners. The English language word slave, after all, comes from "Slav", meaning people of Eastern European descent, a result of the Viking depredations in that region. That in turn was - ironically - only a minor aspect of the general Arabic-Greek-Italian slave trade that went on for thousands of years (and involved millions of Europeans ended up in Africa or the Middle East as slaves).

      Even among those that are so-descended, the vast majority couldn't care less about race. You'll have to look elsewhere for the source of race problems.

      Current prejudice towards persons of recent African descent (as opposed to the entire human race) tends to be greatest in the US mid-west region, an area that didn't even have slavery (but does have strong fringe religious movements, many of which feel challenged by the African variants on Christianity). It's the same nuts that don't want to believe in science, especially evolution, that seem to be contributing the most towards fanning the flames (the associated between white supremacy groups and fanatical religion is extremely strong).

      All this is part of a long term trend throughout history, where religion does at least as much hard as good, the result of incredibly powerful brain-washing techniques and the fanaticism that creates. To their credit, modern mainstream religions both accept science and reject race issues entirely.

      Only a small percentage of all the slaves transported from Africa to the New World were destined for the US. Brazil got far more slaves than the US did.

      The reason Brazil and the Caribbean area got far more slaves than the US did was because the average lifespan of a slave on the Spanish/Portuguese/British/French/etc sugar plantations was about five years. Except for a few places, it wasn't possible to grow this crop in North America, which is why far fewer slaves ended up there. I don't know that anybody has meaningful numbers as to how many current Brazilians are the descendants of slaves.

      But looking at the Wikipedia page on slavery in Brazil, it would appear there are significant race problems: "Slavery and systematic inequality and disadvantage still exist within Brazil. Though much progress has been made since abolition, unequal representation in all levels of society perpetuates ongoing racial prejudice. Most obvious are the stark contrasts between white and black Brazilians in media, government, and private business".

    40. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly what I would say about the purported rape culture of India.

    41. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your rambling is full of biased and dishonest hand waving uttered with a tone of condescension, while lacking in substance.

      You should improve your writing skills and learn how to make an effective argument. Hate to break it for you -- you are not as intelligent as you think you are.

    42. Re:SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's one way to completely misrepresent what Kosh was saying, which is that it's unlikely they are going to support that particular brand of evil.

    43. Re: SJWs by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      I'm not interested in your tedious pedantry. Stop being racist.

  8. Not amused by aepervius · · Score: 2

    "I'm sure foreign tourist will be amused when getting a bar code sticker slapped on their arm."

    Yeah i am sure amused to be tracked all the time like cattle with a tag and not having a private moment. Being treated like an animals sound fun. Why don't you start first Chrissie sweetie. How about we attach a gps tag on your ankle. That sound fun right ?

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Not amused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you don't own a smart phone or use the internet, because you're already being tracked and treated like cattle by Obummer and his NSA goons.

    2. Re:Not amused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow talk about going full nazi. Not Godwin since they clearly started it first with barcoding people.

    3. Re: Not amused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christie didn't say or imply that you fucking idiot.

    4. Re:Not amused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah i am sure amused to be tracked all the time like cattle with a tag and not having a private moment.

      Do you happen to carry a smartphone?

    5. Re:Not amused by hattig · · Score: 1

      Maybe they could be tattooed on? And maybe the visitors could be kept in camps, to stop them wandering around and breaking the system.

      This guy is a fascist, pure and simple, and he's pulling his ideas from historical fascist policy.

  9. America has been put in a bad position. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    America has been put in a bad position. There are laws of the land concerning who may enter and remain in the country. Yet as we've seen, the enforcement of these laws has been quite lax. We see third-worlders streaming into America, typically from its southern border, in violation of these laws. There are severe economic consequences of this. There are political consequences. There are social consequences. It's absolutely awful for the migrants who came to the US legally. These people did things properly, jumped through many hoops, and then are forced to watch as the worst of the third-worlders bypass all of the laws and get preferential treatment.

    Had the laws been enforced, and illegal aliens prevented from entering or removed after they had been found, then America wouldn't be in the position it is currently in. So it's not totally unreasonable for there to be tracking of visitors. It doesn't have to apply to all visitors, obviously. Just those who are a risk for violating American law. The Japanese business executive who is in America for several days for business meetings does not need to be tracked. The Nicaraguan with no job, no education, no English skills, and much to gain by illegally remaining in America probably should be tracked.

    1. Re:America has been put in a bad position. by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is that people who are there legally should be the ones to be tracked. No microchip = deportation.

    2. Re:America has been put in a bad position. by mjm1231 · · Score: 1

      There are severe economic consequences of this.

      Yes, there are. They are generally positive. But don't believe me. Have a look at what a conservative think tank has to say:
      http://www.hoover.org/research...

      --
      Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
    3. Re:America has been put in a bad position. by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      The problem is that Americans think their problems are a result of immigration. The issue is nothing more than a convenient political scapegoat that populists are all but desperate to eat up as it appears to legitimize their xenophobia and present a simple, or at least theoretically attainable, goal. A goal which is a solution for nothing, but a goal none-the-less. When folks have socially unacceptable attitudes, they are easily led to believe they are part of the "real talk" truth - as if they are somehow inherently mature or realist. It's the same reason why nutjobs fell into the 9/11 truther bullshit. It's nothing but a dog and pony show for the middle class so that they don't tune into the real problems America faces.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    4. Re:America has been put in a bad position. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      The problem is illegal immigrants do not get visas, since they are illegal by definition.

      You're not paying attention. The topic at hand are the people who enter the country legally with a visa, and then decide to illegally overstay their visa, becoming illegal immigrants, by definition.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re:America has been put in a bad position. by polymath69 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      According to the article, 40% of illegals are visa overstayers. This breaks the syllogism you attempted to imply all asunder.

      --

      --
      I don't want to rule the world... I just want to be in charge of mayonnaise.
    6. Re:America has been put in a bad position. by godrik · · Score: 1

      > The Nicaraguan with no job, no education, no English skills, and much to gain by illegally remaining in America probably should be tracked.

      Well, this hypothetical Nicaraguan is likely not to get a tourist visa to the US. The process of obtaining a tourist visa includes showing that you have enough ties in your own country that you will not stay. I know people who got their tourist visa refused based on that criteria.

    7. Re:America has been put in a bad position. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are legal mechanisms for overstaying. The practice in each country is different, in some you can overstay for 6 months in other for 3 months and so on. And you can always ask for an extension and it is usually not a problem.

      Only in communist countries you are put in jail if you overstay for one day.

    8. Re:America has been put in a bad position. by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Not enforced? Tidal wave?

      A few inconvenient facts:
      -net immigration across the Mexican border has been 0 for the past few years
      -Hispanics call Obama the Deporter in Chief, since he's deported more immigrants than any other President before him, more than the last 4 combined
      -the number of legal immigrants is woefully tiny, as immigration to the US is practically impossible. the old dream of seeking a better life by just showing up at the door is long dead and buried; you can only get in if you already know someone inside

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  10. Firing up the base by tomhath · · Score: 1

    Yup, playing to the unwashed masses. Same as Hillary saying the Republican party is a "terrorist group".

    1. Re:Firing up the base by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      Well, if by terrorist group she means keeping people constantly afraid that some immigrant is going to rape and kill them, and that we have to ship them all away...

      Watch fox news for about 10 minutes, and there will be some fear-mongerer there.

      (Note, I could not read you link, Time seems to be buggy and not show anything more than the first paragraph.)

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    2. Re:Firing up the base by CaptainLard · · Score: 1

      And your Hillary quote begets any number of Republican presidential candidates comparing the Sitting US president to hilter and so on and so forth. We've reached the hyperbole singularity and have nowhere to go but straight to the very bottom. I'm surprised no one has seriously accused the other side of literally eating babies on camera yet but there are still 14 months till the election (as John Oliver put it, there will be babies born before the election who's parents haven't even met yet).

      My point is, we're so far off the deep end there is nothing to be gained by pointing out "but but but they said...". Fortunately there is also nothing to be lost! So good sir, I implore you to just give up on all this bullshit till Nov 2 just as I have resolved to do. Enjoy!

    3. Re:Firing up the base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it's okay for /. editors to post bullshit off topic articles about an also ran Republican candidate, but it's not okay to point out that bullshit is flowing from the Democrat front-runner? Got it. Thank you for your input.

  11. Barcodes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wouldn't it be easier to implant a microchip into everyone who crosses the border?

  12. Dumbest thing I've heard today. by 3vi1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FedEx packages are travelling through a confined system of checkpoints. Unless Christie wants to put checkpoints all around America and have everyone showing their papers to TSA agents on every public highway, it just won't work.

    1. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He probably does.

    2. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RFID implant in the brain? :-)

    3. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1

      And it is not that accurate as Christie believes it is. There is a limited number of locations the package can be: cargo airplane, truck, border/customs, distribution centers. FedEx doesn't update a map with the GPS coordinates of your package.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    4. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. FedEx doesn't know where my package is when something out of the norm happens.

    5. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by rmdingler · · Score: 1
      I rather want to believe he thought it was a joke rather than an immigration policy initiative...you know, the kind of thing a celebrity bounces off his sycophantic entourage instead of a single critical ear.

      Part of Trump's charm seems to be his lack of a filter in this be careful as fuck what you say era we live in.

      It would appear the Jersey Governor may lack the Donald's Teflon skin.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    6. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is EXACTLY what the TSA wants to enact.

    7. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually packages can only be at two locations: "your house" and "still in transit".

    8. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Well, once the infrastructure is in place, we might as well use it to scan other groups of US citizens, as well. Such as, convicted criminals and the members of the Ohio Presbyterian Grandmothers Association Luncheon.

      Why members of the Ohio Presbyterian Grandmothers Association Luncheon?

      Why not? "Because we can", says the NSA . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    9. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and people are whining about Trump simply wanting to keep them the fuck out from the start?

    10. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by kevmeister · · Score: 1

      FedEx packages are travelling through a confined system of checkpoints. Unless Christie wants to put checkpoints all around America and have everyone showing their papers to TSA agents on every public highway, it just won't work.

      The day is young! This most likely means you have just not heard the latest comments from some other candidate. If all else fails (and it probably won't), you can depend on The Donald.

      --
      Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
    11. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in soviet russia...uh wait, no really

      the rule was that unless you had intourist handlers, you had to surrender your passport
      at the hotel where you stayed, or if it was a remote enough area - register and leave it
      at the police station. a generous tip was expected.

      it wasn't a watertight system, but there were enough informants around that if, for example,
      you bought gas and hadn't registered, it was likely that the local police would randomly
      show up and say hello.

      it took..what...25 years, but i'm glad to see we're finally catching up

    12. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      The only technology I know that'd let you do something similar to FedEx for humans would be GPS-enabled ankle monitors. You know, those we use to track dangerous criminals and where even then it's rather controversial in most of the (sane) world.

      If Christie wants to be associated with that kind of stuff, I suggest he first volunteer for one. I'm sure he'd appreciate everyone knowing how many mistresses he has and with which party donor he goes to eat out.

    13. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I'm sure they believe it's all tracked with RFIDs read by the GPS satellites. Never underestimate the stupid of people. Bush, a good 10 years after barcode scanners were in all supermarkets, went on a publicity trip and was amazed by them. Politicians live in a separate world, we can't begin to understand.

    14. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by whyde · · Score: 1

      Last week I had a situation where my package was both at "my house" (according to FedEx, no signature required--left on doorstep), and "still in transit" (according to me, working from home and saw the truck pull up near my driveway, driver set a package on the dashboard then go into the back to fetch a 2nd package which he delivered to a neighbor, then drove off without actually delivering mine).

      After a complaint call to FedEx about no packge, they promised to get back to me straight away. Never did, but my package did appear on Monday (mis-delivery was on a Friday) without any mention of it in the tracking log or a follow-up phone call.

      So, I believe this is a case of Schrodinger's status, where it was both "delivered" and "in transit" at the same time for the entire weekend.

    15. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      Face recognition cameras installed on every intersection. Only for tracking the immigrants, honest.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    16. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BINGO. the republican social organization strategy in a nutshell. extend it to everyone, of course: checkpoints everywhere, a huge security apparatus, constant spying, 2 way tvs, thoughtcrime, sexcrime, hate rallies, erasing history, elites/indentured, frightened professionals/vast proletarian addicted to videodramas. we are SO CLOSE, come on, lets just DO IT!

    17. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Working with a similar system, I can say with certainty that that's caused by a few factors:
      1) Packages have a known shipper and consignee, but those locations are only loosely tied to the crossdocks where the package scanning occurs.

      2) The crossdock can have anywhere from 18 hours down to 15 minutes between when the freight arrives and when the freight must be on a truck that is pulling away from the dock. When there's 18 hours to scan, things get scanned multiple times. When there's 15 minutes to scan, nothing gets scanned. So it's a constant guessing-game of "is this scan real, and if it is, does it represent more than one step in shipping since the last scan?" Trust me, this logic is a bitch to code.

      3) Scans aren't statuses. Scans are checkpoints. Statuses are changes in relation to the shipper or consignee (or both). A scan may change a package's status. It may not. It may change multiple statuses on that package. And it's completely related to timing (and date/time code is hard) and previous scan data.

      4) Sometimes, everything goes wrong with the operational data and things suddenly appear as part of a delivery without any warning. The inbound X12 data didn't get transferred (because someone else's dockworkers didn't "release" a truck). The data import process flaked out. The scans didn't happen (for any of a million reasons ranging from user error to bad cellular coverage). The data export process failed. The outbound X12 data failed (usually because someone's SSL has expired and the automated tool can't auto-accept a new one). These things happen, and one day you come home to a package that is still marked as "in transit".

    18. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could, but it wouldn't be the GPS location of your package, it would be the GPS Location of the last scan, and if that happened to be a truck or cargo plane, you might get a nice blinking light on a map, but it's not actually tracking your package, it's tracking the location your package was scanned in to.

    19. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by romco · · Score: 2

      Have you been paying attention to the republican plan?

      1. Track Aliens
      2. Put walls up at both Canada and Mexico
      3. Destroy Public schools
      4. More private prisons
      5. Stronger drug and other sentencing to fill said prisons.
      6. Bigger war machine
      7. No minimum wage
      8. Cut taxes for rich and business, increase tax for everyone else
      9. Health care plan "Let them die"
      10. Reduce voting of poor people.

      These people are no longer republican, they are fascist. Yes, they are going to want to see your papers.

      --
      AdFuel
    20. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe FedEx doesnt, but I've seen real-time data where my package was during delivery. Of course that's just the GPS location of the truck the packet is assumed to be in, but it was quite nice to see in which streets "my" truck had packges to deliver - and the calculated arrival time was quite accurate.

      In theory you could add GPS to every vehicle and have those evil tourists check in every time the change vehicles/buildings. Or just give them a GPS monitor and sender and make it a felony of not having it on you all the time (waterproof, so still possible to get nekkid and take a shower)

    21. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > travelling through a confined system of checkpoints

      Why won't it work? His team has had a good headstart in doing just this...
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Lee_lane_closure_scandal

  13. I'M VOTING FOR THAT FAT MOTHERFUCKER HONKEY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amen!

    Yours,
    Richard "Spear Chucker" Pryor

  14. Lock them in trucks? by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sounds like Christie was inspired by last week's news from Austria.

    Like so very many problems, this one becomes much simpler once you stop thinking of "them" as people.

    1. Re:Lock them in trucks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That shit used to happen all the time in Texas about 15 (?) years ago. And it was made worse by the high temperatures in the summer.

    2. Re:Lock them in trucks? by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      So what are we looking ideally?
      1. Chip that is compatible with Electronic toll collection used in EU(Autopass, etc) just for tracking
      2. Plant it on them, with identification
      3. Do nothing really, except enjoy statistics and maps

    3. Re:Lock them in trucks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fifteen years ago? That sort of stuff happens at least once a year in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico or California (the border states). The reason you don't hear about them anymore is because it is no longer news, just something that people have gotten used to hearing about.

      They also find evidence of Cuban immigrants in the route from Cuba to Florida all the time. Again, a few years ago it was still new and news, not so much anymore.

    4. Re:Lock them in trucks? by Alomex · · Score: 1

      They are not people. They are illegal aliens (from another planet I guess) who come here to steal our jobs (does anyone hold certificate of ownership to a job? because if you don't then it cannot be "stolen" from you) and rape our children (even though their incarceration rate outside of immigration offenses [duh!] is lower than the general population).

      Just ask that man of the people, Donald Trump.

    5. Re:Lock them in trucks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Like so very many problems, this one becomes much simpler once you stop thinking of "them" as people.

      Well, it 'worked' for Jews, gypsies and fetuses, so...

  15. Until they can't by dirk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sure, FedEx can tell you exactly where a package is, until they can't anymore. It's not like they don't lose packages. The only reason they can track them as well as they do is because they are going to a limit number of areas where they are scanned going in and out of each. And they still lose them sometime. Unless we are going to have immigrant get scanned in everywhere they go, there isn't a way to track people the same way we track packages.

    --

    "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    1. Re:Until they can't by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      Well, they could always take a book out of China (until some years ago) or North Korea's book, and demand that all foreign visitors are at all times followed by a minder...

    2. Re:Until they can't by physicsphairy · · Score: 1

      Unless we are going to have immigrant get scanned in everywhere they go

      Credit cards? You could require people with visas to be paid only through special accounts accessible by card. Mind, I'm not saying you should. But you'd have a lot of incentive for them to "check in" regularly and data about their habits which would probably lead to detectable changes even if they handed off the card. Of course, with premeditation, human beings can still disappear, but it might be evident when it happens and where to start the investigation.

    3. Re:Until they can't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FedEx "SmartPost" works through OTR carriers and the USPS.

      FedEx sends an EDI 204 (X12) to the OTR carrier they have a contract with for a given area. That carrier must send back an EDI 214 (X12) for each pallet they deliver. The pallets are delivered to USPS offices. Then, depending on the quantity of freight, either the USPS delivers it all (small items) or FedEx dispatches a truck to the area to assist with larger items. Only that FedEx truck will provide delivery confirmation scans. USPS will not.

      So once FedEx gets rid of the freight, you'll see a few status updates for the OTR carrier moving the freight through their system, then eventually delivering it to the USPS. Then, you might see a delivery update from FedEx directly.

      To my knowledge, traditional end-to-end FedEx shipping is scanned at every touch, and will always provide proper updates that don't rely on third party systems.

    4. Re:Until they can't by retchdog · · Score: 1

      My God, man, that's just unthinkable!

      I mean, because it would be so expensive. Apart from that, I don't think anyone would have much of a problem.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    5. Re:Until they can't by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      :)

    6. Re:Until they can't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, they could always take a book out of China (until some years ago) or North Korea's book, and demand that all foreign visitors are at all times followed by a minder...

      It's a job creation program!

  16. these politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    have their heads so up their asses they don't even realize how unattainable and even how ridiculous their proposals are. the worst is that these morons can say whatever they want and people will still vote for them. country of morons.

  17. (facepalm) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make it 2.

  18. To make these potential illegals easier to spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not add an easy to see identifier, like a yellow star. . .

  19. the playground bullies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i have a counter-proposal: every american voter exits the voting booth with a tattoo across their forehead with the name of their presidential vote.

    no more of this BS anonymous polling that leads to elementary school opinions favoring playground bullies - what will it take for voters to grow up and take their responsibility seriously?

    whatever it is, i'm shocked that all evidence to the contrary, we aren't already beyond this point.

  20. Idea stolen from nazi germany by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy want to number people just like jews where tagged during the holocaust, or did i miss something?

    1. Re: Idea stolen from nazi germany by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

      I thought that tattooing was generally confined to Auschwitz, but you've got the general idea. It was a way to keep track of prisoners so that camp officials could monitor and report on process improvement. The process being the extermination of human beings. Just thinking about it makes me feel like vomiting.

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  21. or tatoo by aepervius · · Score: 1

    I am sure Chrissie sweetie would cream his pant at the idea of attooing or putting tag on tourist/visa visitor, but the idea is quite old : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and it was done efficiently too.


    /gowdinning the whole article.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  22. FedEx knows exactly where my package is? by darthsilun · · Score: 1

    Ha ha ha. I call bullshit.

    I usually get three or four status updates when I track a package: The first is usually something like "package left Wichita, Kansas facility." Two or three days later I see "Arrived in Marieta, Georgia facility." Then "package is out for delivery." A couple hours after delivery there's a "package delivered" update.

    That's a damn far cry from knowing where it is at any given moment.

    1. Re:FedEx knows exactly where my package is? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      I can't remember which one it was, but I once had a package that was still saying "in transit" two or three days after receiving it.

    2. Re:FedEx knows exactly where my package is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's between your legs!

  23. As with all insane shit politicians want to do.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should do it to themselves FIRST.

  24. Wrong people to strip by realxmp · · Score: 5, Informative

    They still would come because they have nothing to lose, most of them have net assets of close to zero. The first generation tends to live hand to mouth. The people who make the money are the American factory owners and farmers who employ them. These are the people you would need to asset strip to stop employment of immigrants but if we think politicians are going to go after these people (their biggest donors) we are naive. Incidentally if the U.S. did manage to deport all 11 million of them it would cause a massive economic implosion due to a drop in demand for basic goods. It would likely also cause a closure of US factories and increase the offshoring of US industry.

    1. Re:Wrong people to strip by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      if the U.S. did manage to deport all 11 million of them it would cause a massive economic implosion due to a drop in demand for basic goods.

      The savings in entitlement expenses would more than compensate

      It would likely also cause a closure of US factories and increase the offshoring of US industry.

      The lower operational risk would more than compensate.

      But I agree that parasitical businesses are the problem, besides confiscating their assets we could also have Chinese-style executions.

    2. Re:Wrong people to strip by Alomex · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The savings in entitlement expenses would more than compensate

      [citation needed]

      In fact I'll save you the trouble, people have studied this and found the exact opposite. Illegal immigrants can access few entitlements yet pay many taxes, so they are usually net contributors.

      That is, if you care about the facts.

    3. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, it would probably put a lot of homeless to work. Which is about the same amount nationally.

    4. Re:Wrong people to strip by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      To the point that not long ago, some conservatives were encouraging more immigration as a way to save social security.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:Wrong people to strip by jittles · · Score: 1

      The savings in entitlement expenses would more than compensate

      [citation needed]

      In fact I'll save you the trouble, people have studied this and found the exact opposite. Illegal immigrants can access few entitlements yet pay many taxes, so they are usually net contributors.

      That is, if you care about the facts.

      Do those studies take into consideration the cost of emergency medical services, or just welfare, WIC, SNAP and other programs that would pay directly to the recipient? I haven't done any research into the matter, just curious.

    6. Re:Wrong people to strip by volmtech · · Score: 1

      Then we need more immigrants. At some point there must be diminishing returns. How many would that be? 50 million, 100 million?

    7. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the Germanic tribes were net contributors to Roman economy. European settlers sure contributed to the economy of the natives living in the Americas. Yes sure thing immigration works.

      What is a country if it is not defined by it's borders?

      I am going to come into your house, take your food, take your wife, and take your life. If you do not like this, you are a racist (according to the mainstream media and those who believe their lies)

    8. Re:Wrong people to strip by TedHornsby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I work in the construction industry, an industry especially notorious for the employment of illegal immigrants, so I have some personal experience in regards to illegal immigration. First of all, this picture Donald Trump has been painting of violent criminals and Mexican citizens coming here in droves to live off government welfare programs is just not true. These are blue-collar, hard-working, decent people who have come here to escape ruthless violence (fueled by American demand for illegal drugs) and extensive poverty. They have become the foundation that several sectors of the US economy are built on. What people like Donald Trump and his ilk need to realize is that the violent criminals, for the most part, have no real inclination to pack up and move themselves across the Rio Grande. It's much easier for these drug gangs to operate on their side of the border, where widespread corruption has enabled them to operate with near impunity, than it is for them to "invade" America, where they have to deal with state, local, and federal law enforcement agencies that are more motivated by arrest and seizure statistics than a personal bribe. Speaking from my own experiences, the career criminals that do come across the border end up being arrested over here, which results in their deportation back across the border. 99% of Mexicans here illegally are ordinary people simply trying to support themselves and their families. As things are now, these people live in constant fear that any encounter or interaction with police or government officials will end up with them sitting in a holding cell, awaiting deportation, while their wife and children remain in America. These families are torn apart, with wives and mothers suddenly finding themselves with 3 children to support and no source of income. One woman I know of has resorted to collecting scrap metal to support a 5 year-old son and infant daughter. The sight of a 5 year-old kid helping his mother load an old water heater into a truck so that they might be able to keep a roof over their heads is something that those arguing for tougher immigration enforcement never have, and probably never will, experience. The truth of the matter is that those working here illegally are not much different from the people who comprise our own working-class. In fact, Mexican workers that are paid "under-the-table" (as in they don't have anything taxes taken out of their paycheck) are relatively rare. Meaning they financially contribute to a system under which they are considered as faceless statistics and under which they have no voice. This has gotten long enough, so I'll stop here. Just remember, that just because someone is labeled "illegal" does not make them a criminal. P.S.: Before somebody decides to get pedantic with that last statement, I am aware that being here illegally means they are in violation of the law, and technically a criminal. What I was trying to illustrate was the absurdity that people are criminalized for simply providing for themselves and their loved ones.

    9. Re:Wrong people to strip by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]

      In fact I'll save you the trouble, people have studied this and found the exact opposite.

      While I agree with you, it's rather ironic that you started your post with "citation needed" but then made a counter-statement that isn't supported with any citation.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    10. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://patch.com/california/lagunaniguel-danapoint/democratic-law-makers-introduce-10-bills-expand-benefits-people-who-entered-country-illegally

      Not the use of the word "expands". You are welcome.

    11. Re:Wrong people to strip by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      That's why it hasn't been stamped out. Too many people benefit. Employers employ these poor people because they are desperate. They often pay them less than minimum wage with no benefits and in environments that would make OSHA have a fit. Who are they going to complain to? The perfect victims.

    12. Re:Wrong people to strip by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      EMS (generally) isn't government money. The private hospitals eat the cost of unpaid bills. Do you have anything to indicate that illegals pay their bills less than the equivalent citizen? The few things I've seen on it (that didn't touch on health care) indicate illegals pay bills better, because they don't want the attention that not paying bills brings.

      WIC and SNAP and such are generally tied to SSN as the identifier. An illegal doesn't file for welfare in the US, because it would bring unwanted attention. In other places, the human right of food is higher than the state right of borders, to they don't mind illegals on welfare as much (though, from what I've seen this has changed, to where more are US like now). Perhaps if a citizen baby was being cared for by an illegal, the parents may file for WIC to see what happens, assuming they can't get deported with an anchor baby. But I've not seen any studies done on that part either. Both sides would rather ignore the problem and keep it as vague talking points for election time.

    13. Re:Wrong people to strip by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The one family of illegals I know came over from El Salvador when the death squads targeted his family (long story, he did nothing). Oh, and the death squads were US-backed because they opposed the communists. So the political refugee came across. Of course, not being dumb, he got fake Mexican papers on his way through, and when he was caught the first few times, he was deported to Mexico, not El Salvador. So in my limited personal experience, 100% of "illegal aliens" from Mexico are not even Mexican. But to Trump, that distinction is meaningless.

      The real issue is that because we don't have sensible immigration laws, we have a lot of people coming over the southern border. Any terrorist who was already on a watch list (unlike the 9/11 crew, who were recruited because they weren't on a list), could just fly into Mexico, and walk across with all the other illegals. Sealing the southern border and making new classes of migrant worker visas and such would be a much better idea, but for whatever reason, neither party wants to seal the border and still let in lots of Mexicans. Though that's the only rational choice.

    14. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How about they work to better their own countries instead of coming to the US? Why doesn't Mexico have an illegal immigration problem of its own with a flood of people from Central American countries? Oh that's right. They tightened their southern border with Guatemala and those that do get through are trying to make it to the US, not stay in Mexico.

      How come Japan doesn't have a problem with illegal immigrants? Oh that's right - almost no one is allowed to immigrate.

      Why doesn't Australia have a problem with illegal immigrants? Oh that's right - they lock them up in prisons in shithole locations like the middle of a desert until they can deport them.

      I don't care that you are trying to support your family - being an economic refugee who paid a smuggler to bring you the US is not the same thing as fleeing government-sanctioned death squads who want to kill you because of your political/religious beliefs or your ethnicity. How many of them then come to the US to be exploited again in a sweatshop, swinging a hammer, or hunched over in the middle of a farm field rather than having marketable skills?

      I would also have no issues whatsoever with the US confiscating profits and property from those that exploit illegals - when the demand dries up, then the supply will also - how many will want to come to the US if they know they aren't going to find work? Oh that's right - our weak-minded leftist President and his democrat cronies think it is just great that those who produce should then shell out taxes to provide handouts to illegals who shouldn't be here to begin with.

      I am just waiting for the day we get some leaders with some balls who will completely dismantle the democrat plantation in all of its forms.

    15. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Schools. When the local districts spend $10K per student, and an illegal family has children in school (often multiple), it is a lot more than they contribute in taxes.

    16. Re:Wrong people to strip by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      It didn't seem like he was talking about the Mexicans running over the border. But people like me who fly in with valid B2/whatever visas, who are then thankfully untracked once in the country. Getting the visa and fingerprinted at every entry was unpleasant enough, and although this bullshit clearly has no chance of being implemented, something like this would could be the final straw that will get tourists or business visitors reconsider coming to the US.

    17. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What people like Donald Trump and his ilk need to realize is that the violent criminals, for the most part, have no real inclination to pack up and move themselves across the Rio Grande.

      Donald Trump claims to believe that the Mexican government is rounding up its criminal population, shipping them to the border, and telling them 'Go out or go to jail.' His solution to this is basically tit-for-tat, round up all the US gang members and ship them back to Mexico (or Guatemala, or wherever it is they all come from these days).

      The fact that these are fantasies is completely beside the point. It's great theater for a certain portion of the GOP base. He's playing the narrative they've been building up for the past four decades (at least), and imagining how an omnipotent autocrat would respond. That's what egomaniacal bullies do.

    18. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just how many uneducated, unskilled, non-English speaking immigrants that sneaks across the US southern border pay enough in taxes to cover the cost of educating their child at $10K per year per child? Of course, there are a myriad of health care, public safety, judicial, and penal resources funded by US citizens that they consume. Many work off the books and so they pay a pittance, if any, in income taxes and social security taxes. Further, they depress the wages at the lower end of the wage scale increasing social welfare costs to support US citizens and preventing US citizens from benefiting and contributing to the US economy in a meaningful way.

    19. Re:Wrong people to strip by mjwx · · Score: 2

      Sir, I wish I had some mod points.

      Instead, please have some carriage returns (sorry about that, you make a very compelling argument but seriously, wall of text).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    20. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The real issue is that because we don't have sensible immigration laws, we have a lot of people coming over the southern border.

      What exactly is your idea of sensible immigration laws? The US has the most accessible and permissive immigration laws in the world. Unskilled labor without any savings (the kind of people who tend to stream across the border instead of just overstaying their visa) have almost no chance at all of legally immigrating to any country but the US.

      Are our extremely porous border and very permissive immigration laws not extreme enough?

    21. Re:Wrong people to strip by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, we make up for that by having very few refugees. Our policy on that is one of the tightest in the world. Sure, we are #11 on the list of # of refugees, but bottom half of the list when you look at refugees per resident. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      And the laws aren't nearly as permissive as you state, or we'd have the millions of illegals be millions of immigrants. There's a difference. You can't have it both ways. If we are so permissive, why are there so many millions that are "illegal"?

      And I use "immigration" loosely. We should have 5 million migrant worker visas to pass out to Mexicans and others who want to work seasonal labor in the US. Often they would rather work a season, then go to Mexico until the next season, but they can't because crossing the border is too hard.

      So our unwillingness to issue visas causes illegal immigration that would otherwise be a temporary work trip. The current political climate refuses to recognize the difference between immigrant and non-immigrant visas. Someone with an H1-B can't live in the US indefinitely. So it's not a "immigration" issue. It's a work-visa issue.

      And plenty of places around the world have work visas for high-demand jobs. They just have those jobs generally listed as skilled jobs. In the US, our work demand is mostly for unskilled labor. So our rules are no better. Our standards no higher. It's just the jobs we need the most help with are "lower".

    22. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't disagree - most of those that come here, whether they're uneducated workers from Latin America or tech workers from India overstaying their Visa, are trying to improve their situation.

      They have become the foundation that several sectors of the US economy are built on.

      The left tends to reiterate the point that America was "built by immigrants". It has always been about cheap labor. Do not think for a second that there has ever been any altruism involved. Most of us in the middle class don't really care if huge construction conglomerates pay a 6% dividend and $100 million bonus to the execs instead of a 4% and $20 million bonus, since we don't benefit either way. If lettuce becomes too expensive because farmers just can't make a killing, there are plenty of alternatives. I won't be losing sleep if the rich aren't able to keep perfectly manicured estates using hundreds of undocumented workers.

      Illegal immigrants can access few entitlements yet pay many taxes, so they are usually net contributors.

      They absolutely do receive entitlements. Do you wonder why medical costs are the #1 cause of bankruptcies these days? Because we're all paying for the millions of illegals that don't pay into the system, but cannot be refused health care. The costs of those ESL classes, extra cops, prisons,etc. that nearly all communities need are now paid for by the ever-increasing property taxes and speeding tickets.

      And even if they did pay more into the system than they're taking out, it is a net loss. The labor participation rate is at its lowest in decades, regardless of the BS unemployment statistics put out by the feds. When I was a teenager, I worked part-time service jobs to pay for gas, cigs, food, etc. I simply do not see teens working anywhere these days. Instead, it's immigrant adults bagging groceries and flipping burgers. So parents now get to work another few hours a week to pay the difference.

      Older folks getting canned and replaced by H1Bs don't simply 're-train' since they already have the skills we so desperately need. Instead, most of them find a way to obtain disability, which has increased massively since 2008 and will force a Social Security crisis earlier than expected.

      In the mean time, I've noticed that less and less of middle class (whites) are marrying and having families. I make a decent career, but somehow, after making a salary supposedly in the 80%, I end up with little left each month due to huge rent costs and about 40% taxes (fed, state, sales, tolls, etc., - I keep stats). There is absolutely no way I'd be able to comfortably afford any house in this area and start a family when my average contract lasts about 6-12 months, and then I'm required to scramble for something else, often hours away. Indian H1Bs have not only taken over most of the private sector, I now have to compete with them on US Government contracts.

      In DC, educated women are waiting so long to start families, that clinics are advertising IVF treatments on the metro. Meanwhile, I pass by areas with dozens of teenage and early 20's Latina women with two kids in tow and another on the way, while their men sit around half the day at Home Depot waiting for day gigs. I'm friendly with many foreigners that are here on H1B or obtained green cards. Most of them have been able to bring their spouse and/or parents over. Their parents ALL receive medicare and social security. Meanwhile, my company has gone to a 'catastrophic' health insurance plan, which means I pay about $5K a year for health insurance, but don't actually get any benefits until I've hit the $3K deductible. But somehow millions of latinos are enjoying large families. Millions of older folks from India, China, and Latin America that never put into the system as workers, are now here on Medicare obtaining billions in medical services, courtesy of the middle class suckers like me who subsidize it, but won't be able to afford their own family anytime soon. Corporate profits and

    23. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A US citizen needs to make about $60K a year to be a net contributor. Consider the cost to educate a child from K12 is about 120,000. So a family with 3 kids will incur $360,000 in education expenses.

      If you earn $50,000/year, you have an effective tax rate of 17% (most of which is SS). You have a local tax rate of perhaps 10% on 25K of your earnings, so that is about $2,500/year.

      All up, a person earning $50,000 is paying taxes (not SS, but taxes) to the tune of about $7500/year. And their kids are consuming $36,000 a year in school alone.

      Immigrants here illegally are overwhelmingly are earning below the $50K median. They are nowhere near pulling their weight.

    24. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>First of all, this picture Donald Trump has been painting of violent criminals and Mexican citizens coming here in droves to live off government welfare programs is just not true.

      LA county alone is spending $650M on welfare for illegal immigrants. That is $650 for every man, woman and child in LA. A family of 4 is paying $2400 in welfare benefits to illegal aliens.

      That is a lot.

    25. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your stance is that we should have no restrictions at all with regard to immigration?

      You can't have it both ways. If we are so permissive, why are there so many millions that are "illegal"?

      Our immigration system is extremely permissive. The fact that there exists millions of illegal immigrants is due to the fact that our laws aren't maximally permissive (i.e., nonexistent), which is not something that I ever claimed. There's no contradiction in my statement. We still have the most permissive immigration system in the world.

      There are plenty of people in this country capable of doing the unskilled jobs. "Jobs that Americans won't do" is a lie that is perpetrated by those who benefit the most from underpaying their workers. I'm sure you'll follow up with half-baked rationalizations about how we all benefit from the situation (because you personally do, or think that you do), but it is still a lie.

    26. Re:Wrong people to strip by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So your stance is that we should have no restrictions at all with regard to immigration?

      Nope. I never said that. Perhaps you should read what's in front of you, instead of making up lies to make you feel better.

    27. Re:Wrong people to strip by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      japan is a dying country because they have no immigrants. look at the statistics about how many elderly japanese they are going to have with so few young japanese supporting them. the japanese attitude on immigration is nothing to admire, it is in fact something to pity. to see xenophobia so strong that so many japanese would rather their country slowly shrivel and die. it's pathetic sick racist self-destructive and weak. frankly, korean people are pretty much identical to japanese genetically, so the hate against koreans is just moronic

      as for your attitude on hard working immigrants, i would like to know your background. if it isn't native american, why don't you fuck off with your ignorant hypocrisy and go to europe. many of the mexican immigrants have aztec mayan and other native american bloodlines far closer to the original inhabitants here, and so as a racial argument that is so popular with social retards like yourself, have more right to be here than you

      btw, if your ancestors were italian or irish, they got exactly the same thuggy hysterical racist hate you heap on mexicans

      if you endorse civil forfeiture, you really should educate your ignorance of the kind of abuse that has played out with that applied to american citizens. with noncitizens, that abuse will probably get far worse, and just force them to stash their money with mexican mafias. thereby actually creating the crime you and your low iq propaganda tries to pin on these hard working people

      I am just waiting for the day we get some leaders with some balls who will completely dismantle the democrat plantation in all of its forms.

      the demographics are clear and the nation is trending democratic. so why don't you hurry up and die with the rest of your old knuckledragging retard friends

      fighting fights from 50, 100, 150 years ago that were already lost with previous waves of immigrants that are now called "true american"

      btw, my WASP ancestors came over in the 1600s to new england. fought in king philips war, being scapled by native americans and scalping native americans

      that's my legacy. and so according to the "logic" of you racist mouth breathers that makes me a "real american"

      so granted this fake authority by your loser thought processes, i make the following judgment on you and your ilk: a guy 15 minutes off the plane from somalia or bangladesh or ecuador, if they have a positive outlook and a tolerant attitude, they therefore embody the real american spirit and real american ideals, and i embrace them as fellow real americans

      rather than some "entitled* racist shitbag who thinks he's special because his bitch mother shit you out on in dirt called american, just so you could begin your life of feeling superior for false, ignorant reasons. i wouldn't want to deport you, so you could ruin some other poor country with your dim brain wattage, so perhaps you could be dumped in the marianas trench or some such, apologies to south pacific nations for the stink of your useless stupid corpse

      you're simply not an american in my eyes

      i mean that with every fiber of my being

      you have no fucking clue what real american ideals are

      all you have is whiny entitlement (ironically, considering right wing talking points on that concept)

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    28. Re:Wrong people to strip by CaptQuark · · Score: 1

      In fact, Mexican workers that are paid "under-the-table" (as in they don't have anything taxes taken out of their paycheck) are relatively rare. Meaning they financially contribute to a system under which they are considered as faceless statistics and under which they have no voice.

      Relatively rare? So where do the rest of the illegal aliens send their taxes? Do they fill out a W-4 with a fake SSN? Do they use a fake Tax ID number instead? Since they can't claim any excess taxes because they don't file, do they claim 10 exemptions to minimize the withholding amount?

      And what about all the petitioners that are waiting 20+ years for their chance to legally immigrate to the U.S.? Are we to tell them "Sorry, the illegal population is so large that we don't have room for you again this year."? http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      --

    29. Re: Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lies. Illegals get welfare if they have a kid because they get the money on behalf of their us citizen child. You types always seem to forget this.

    30. Re: Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shit up you mewling little whore-cunt.

    31. Re: Wrong people to strip by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      you speak with such authority

      too bad you don't have any

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    32. Re: Wrong people to strip by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yes, only because the conservative's only solution is to complain about anchor babies and threaten to deport the baby, which is illegal, based on the Constitution and treaties we've signed. Revoke the 14th Amendment if you don't like it.

    33. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This should be downmodded.

      Sure weaken those immigration laws.

      Net result:
      * Fuel latin american birth rate with Money that flows back down there,
      * get cheap labor to enact pressure on those stupid workers that demand a living wage (the NERVE!),
      * and then find out that this pressure destroyed the birth rate of your population. Ooops.
      * Demand more immigration to fix this somehow.
      * Suffer culture fracture.

      Then: Wonder how it got that far?

      My Hypothesis: Squeeze your working-class too hard and you will suffer the consequences, whether you want it or not.

    34. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should take your own advice.

    35. Re:Wrong people to strip by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      The US has the most accessible and permissive immigration laws in the world.

      To the point of treating every tourist at the border as a potential legal or illegal immigrant. It's always amusing to see a CBP agent at immigrations at the airport bewildered to the idea that someone might actually look forward to go back to their home country other than the US after their holidays....

      --
      bickerdyke
    36. Re:Wrong people to strip by jittles · · Score: 1

      EMS (generally) isn't government money. The private hospitals eat the cost of unpaid bills. Do you have anything to indicate that illegals pay their bills less than the equivalent citizen? The few things I've seen on it (that didn't touch on health care) indicate illegals pay bills better, because they don't want the attention that not paying bills brings. WIC and SNAP and such are generally tied to SSN as the identifier. An illegal doesn't file for welfare in the US, because it would bring unwanted attention. In other places, the human right of food is higher than the state right of borders, to they don't mind illegals on welfare as much (though, from what I've seen this has changed, to where more are US like now). Perhaps if a citizen baby was being cared for by an illegal, the parents may file for WIC to see what happens, assuming they can't get deported with an anchor baby. But I've not seen any studies done on that part either. Both sides would rather ignore the problem and keep it as vague talking points for election time.

      Well that depends entirely. In my current locale, the only hospital that accepts medicaid is run by the state. Other hospitals in town will only stabilize you and then transfer you to the state hospital ASAP. They do bill that to medicaid, if you have it. From friends that work at the state hospital, over 90% of the patients there never pay any of their bill. So 90% of the costs incurred for treatment are never reimbursed and are covered by state and federal money. Now, I also know that that hospital treats the local homeless community as well. So who is to say how many of them are illegal.

      Illegal immigration is a difficult problem to solve. I would love to see these people become legal so that they can pay their taxes and also receive the benefits that they are entitled to as US citizens but at the same time I feel like granting amnesty and allowing them in with a wave of the hand may just encourage future illegal immigration. I don't think we want to encourage people to break just laws. By entering the country illegally, they are setting themselves up for exploitation. I believe that, by and large, the jobs that they are 'stealing' from citizens are jobs that most citizens feel that they are 'too good for'.

    37. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cause a closure of US factories and increase the offshoring of US industry.

      Well that has already happened.

    38. Re: Wrong people to strip by Alomex · · Score: 1

      Nope, they get money for the kid who is an American citizen. That's the kids money, not the parents, and no, no one forgets this. If it weren't for children's programs illegal aliens essentially collect zero dollars in welfare.

    39. Re:Wrong people to strip by Alomex · · Score: 1

      The fact that you compare someone coming here to work with "taking your wife, taking your life" means that yes, you are a racist. Congratulations, you can pass go and collect your KKK badge.

    40. Re:Wrong people to strip by Alomex · · Score: 1

      Religious private schools (which is the closest we have to comparable to public education) is $6K per year. Illegal immigrants tend to have smaller families, so lets say $12K a year. So you are off by a factor of 3. Lastly schools are financed mostly out of property taxes, which everyone pays equally, legal and illegal residents alike.

    41. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the democrat plantation

      Mr. Smith!

    42. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US border patrol and customs agents are dicks, especially to foreigners but even to citizens, but that's a matter of the execution and not our immigration laws. Honestly, border patrol and customs agents have been dicks, on average but to different extents, in every country that I've traveled to (and I'm a polite and nice guy). I'm sure they're less of a jerk to their own citizens, but that job does not seem to attract the nicest of folks.

    43. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that is only in construction. They are blue-collar and hard working, but those are the only ones you have had experience with. What you need to understand is that the cartels have been massively expanding their channels through the US. That criminals ARE entering the country in droves. I have known many murders being deported from the US, to enter and reenter into the US again. With all due respect, having lived in Mexico for ten years, my experience not only include yours but more. I have seen all of it.

      And no, the workers paid "under-the-table" are the norm, not the exception. It may be different in construction, but that does not mean you limited experiences are representative of other industries.

    44. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are 100% correct.

      We need robots to replace them. Robots don't sleep, they don't disobey, they do not make mistakes, they are not lazy, they don't steal, they don't rest, they don't need vacations, they don't need food, the don't soil the restroom and they don't need a salary.

      In other words, we are loosing money by using carbon based equipment instead of plastic based equipment.

      The implosion of consumption of basic services and products can be replaced with more exports. Since the products will become much cheaper, the US get get a larger portion of the international markets.

    45. Re:Wrong people to strip by dywolf · · Score: 1

      No it wouldn't. To say it would shows a blatant disregard for the facts, or just simply blatant ignorance, as to precisely how much of the entitlement expenses, as you call them, they receive.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    46. Re:Wrong people to strip by dywolf · · Score: 1

      +9999
      Nail on the head.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    47. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two island countries separated from potential immigrants by large distances of water, and a border that is roughly 5% of the size of the US/Mexico border are your points of comparison? stupid racist.

    48. Re:Wrong people to strip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently this gent has never heard of sales and property taxes.

    49. Re:Wrong people to strip by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Bwhahahahaa.

      How can you post that tripe with a straight face?

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    50. Re:Wrong people to strip by whodunit · · Score: 1

      These are blue-collar, hard-working, decent people who have come here to escape ruthless violence

      It sure would be nice to separate the honest hard-working blue-collar folks who come into the country seeking a better life from the drug runners and gangsters who caused the "ruthless violence" you speak of, and are doing their damnedest to export it across the Rio Grande - more than they already do, that is, firing .50 caliber machine guns across the river at the DEA. Immigration is about accountability - how are we supposed to send the thieves and thugs packing if we can't even keep track of who is who? Trump is making a damn good point - we can track a UPS package from store to doorstep with childish ease, but the much more serious issue of keeping track of noncitizens in our country is in a hopeless shambles.

      In fact, Mexican workers that are paid "under-the-table" (as in they don't have anything taxes taken out of their paycheck) are relatively rare.

      I'd love to know how their taxes are being reported to the IRS without their non-legal status being noticed - simple complacency? Does the IRS not care as long as they get their cut? But aside from that nobody should be personally insulted if they ARE paid under the table; the only reason most businesses hire such people is that they can get away with paying them less than minimum wage. The fear of deportation after any law enforcement contact cements their status as nonpersons that can be abused and exploited at will.

      If our immigration system was better structured and more efficient, these things wouldn't be a problem. People wouldn't have to overstay their visas illegally to stay in the United States; the path to citizenship would be clear-cut, and we could afford to stop summary deportations because we'd know damn well who was on the straight and narrow and who wasn't. The biggest victims of our fucked-up immigration system are the immigrants themselves.

  25. Our system is NOT GOOD! by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    How do fucktards like this even get to be a governor? People in this country who vote are really fucked in the head.

    1. Re: Our system is NOT GOOD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're just figuring out that most Americans are fucked in the head? Seriously?

    2. Re: Our system is NOT GOOD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      people in this country don't vote. They register as voters and the parties get votes automatically. This is where the system is broken - voter registration is completely broken concept.

    3. Re: Our system is NOT GOOD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's New Jersey. They don't even allow you to pump your own gas.

    4. Re: Our system is NOT GOOD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do fucktards like this even get to be a governor? People in this country who vote are really fucked in the head.

      You said it yourself. If only idiots are voting, or they are the majority, then you're fucked.

  26. Silly season is in full swing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Each year since the late 90's the Republicans have become more and more batshit insane. It's become like a contest now.

    And there are a lot of us out there who would vote Republican again if only they would lose that crazy shit, and get back to real conservative principles, like watch the money, but pay the bills, and to let people alone.

    What is amazing though is that some of their base will go along with this, even though Christie's Star of David patch idea smacks a little of a mark of the beast as well. The amazing thing is that a mainstream candidate like Christie would not think twice about proposing this really bad idea with really bad precedents.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    1. Re:Silly season is in full swing by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the Republicans are batshit insane. But - you're going to pretend that the OTHER PARTY IS NOT?!?!?! The Dems are at least as psychotic as the R's are. How 'bout that bitch, Hillary Rodham?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  27. I raise you, Mr. Freedom and Small Government by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Informative

    Both the Republicans and Democrats know the only way to stave off Social Security money scarcity is to inhale large numbers of younger workers (this, by the way, is the exact problem Ponzi schemes have, and why they were made illegal, and why it's a legitimate comparison -- they always run out of new investors to pay back previous ones. They just don't have the legal power to force everyone to invest, delaying, but not stopping, the inevitable. No "investor" gets back as much as they put in...in either.)

    The Republicans are just pissed The Donald has made a stink of it, and now they have to respond with idiocies like this, the more outrageous the better, apparently. Seriously.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:I raise you, Mr. Freedom and Small Government by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      Social security is not a Ponzi scheme and they planned for this LONG ago. People contributed a lot more than necessary to build up a fund to make sure social security stayed solvent and based on their predictions it worked.

      The problem social security has is other parts of the government took the money and replaced it with IOUs.

      Social security is not broke, it was robbed and it now broke as a result. I hope the cost of those wars we got with the money was worth it.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    2. Re:I raise you, Mr. Freedom and Small Government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fix would be nice since the $3 trillion trust fund will run out in about 2033, after which Social Security will only be able to pay out about 75% of the benefits promised. A "fix" from the GOP is going to be at least as bad as the problem since the GOP has wanted to kill Social Security since before it became law. The Democratic Party (excluding the right wing) would rather lift the payroll tax cap, which currently taxes only the first $118,500 earned, and fund this hugely successful anti-poverty program indefinitely.

    3. Re:I raise you, Mr. Freedom and Small Government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Social security is not a Ponzi scheme and they planned for this LONG ago.

      By definition, "a Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator, an individual or organization, pays returns to its investors from new capital paid to the operators by new investors, rather than from profit earned by the operator."

      All of that definition except the fraudulent part clearly applies to social security. The operator is the government, and the taxes are the new capital. Since no investment is going on, there is no profit. Given that many other social policies create inflation (it's not an accident that so many jobs have left the USA and moved overseas), and that this can not be entirely counter-acted by monetary policy, it is clear that every person in the program will need money above and beyond what they invested, for the program to accomplish its stated goals. Without profit, this money needs to come from future generations. A matter of basic economics, in the final analysis.

      They couldn't plan for this, of course, when the system was set up they had no way of anticipating how human lifespans would radically increase over the second half of the 20th century, putting a huge stress on the program.

      Further, many people will assert that there is indeed fraud.

      By definition, "fraud is deliberate deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain.". Given that politics is more concerned with the appearance of reality than the actuality, and that politicians frequently (even routinely) misrepresent the truth for gain, it is likely that deliberate deception and unfair gain have played key roles in both initially getting the social security program approved, and its continuation to present times. A lot of the claims regarding this program are pretty dubious, both on face value and on a deeper examination, which supports the view that deception is involved, and the gain aspect is unquestionable (whether that gain comes to the politicians in the form of power, wealth, or re-election).

      Thus, by a simple matter of applying logic to definitions, it seems pretty reasonable that many people will choose to call social security a Ponzi scheme.

      Claims that it is not a Ponzi scheme seem to be based on hand waving "arguments" rather than reasoning logically from the definitions of words, which brings the motives of those making such claims into question, and suggests such claims are propaganda.

      Given that the return on even weak investments, when compounded over the many years until retirement, can be expected to dwarf the social security returns, it seems like another approach to handling retirement would have been wiser. For example, a portion of the total tax take could be reserved to give every person a basic income, with some reserved for investment in an approved retirement plan (with rules like a 401k or IRA, or perhaps even stricter) for those under 65. Unfortunately, this seems to be less appealing than the current system to socialist fanatics, who vigorously defend the current (badly broken) system. With the usual inability of fanatics to reason logically, they seem to prefer a scheme that doesn't accomplish its goals, to a sensible one that would do a much better job.

    4. Re:I raise you, Mr. Freedom and Small Government by dywolf · · Score: 1

      As usualy, what you posted is simply not true at all.

      In fact, just one simple change that wont affect 99% of Americans would fix the manufactured Social Security crisis: raise or eliminate the income cap.

      Right now only income equal to or less than $118,500 is taxed for Social Security purposes. Earn 200k, 5 million, or even a billion dollars? That's ok, still only taxed on the first 118.5k of it.

      And of course, there's the other issues such as: it's not a Ponzi scheme, you against prove you don't even understand it or how it works, or even that the scare of it running out of money is purely manufactured BS. All of which is frankly tiresome reminding you at this point, so let cut to the chase: you're wrong, and ignorant, again, as usual.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  28. Classic slippery slope by kheldan · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Let's say for arguments sake that people actually thought this was a good idea; how long would it be before someone came up with some half-assed justification to treat everyone, citizen and visitor alike, this way?

    Also, what ever happened to:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

    An idea like Mr. Christies' flies in the face of one of the things this country was supposed to be about in the first place. I know damned well that the United States I grew up believing in never really existed, but damnit, why can't we make it that? I want the Founding Fathers of this country to turn out to be right, not George Orwell!

    Finally, what kind of an asshole do you have to be to come up with an idea like this? Fuck that, and fuck Christie sideways with a rusty chainsaw for even suggesting something like this.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    1. Re:Classic slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christies plan is everything I've come to expect from the party of small government.

    2. Re:Classic slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Given that human beings evolved in Africa, we are all either immigrants or descendants of immigrants. I am as white as they come, yet I have five ancestors who came over on the Mayflower. They were immigrants, and I am descended of immigrants.

      I hope Christie is really bitten in the butt for this, but then he has a lot of butt to give.

    3. Re:Classic slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This country does not belong to the outsiders, it belongs to me and mine - AMERICAN CITIZENS!

      The Cherokee would like a word with you ...

    4. Re:Classic slippery slope by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      "Give me your tired, your poor,
      Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
      The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
      Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
      I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

      I really like that poem. However, you should know that at the time, immigration was a controversial issue, too. In 1882, congress passed a law completely stopping immigration from China, for example. The poem (written in 1883) was an example of propaganda, coming clearly on the side of encouraging immigration. But do not be deceived into thinking that everyone felt that way.

      I really like that poem, though.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:Classic slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want to waste mod points on a moron like you, so I'll just say: on behalf of the Mohawk and Cayuga People of the Six Nations, kindly grab your tiny pale penis and fuck off to whatever overseas land spawned your ignorant ass. You're clearly so insecure you can't even face the fact that YOU are a descendant of immigrants.

    6. Re:Classic slippery slope by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      The people of the Six Nations are in turn IMMIGRANTS. Archeologists have established that there were people here 20,000+ years ago - but they can't find evidence of people here 50,000 years ago. Your great-greats came here from SOMEWHERE. And, once they were here, they didn't stay in one place any more than the newest invaders have.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    7. Re:Classic slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ohh snap! That was a truly brutal takedown. Bravo, you shut him up good.

    8. Re:Classic slippery slope by kheldan · · Score: 1

      Here's a tip for you: If you're going to troll, you need to actually put some effort into it. You clearly didn't put ANY effort into any one of your posts, and by the way responding to yourself in support of yourself only proves that you're not even as smart as a 6th grader. You have moved no one with your words; they have been ignored, and you have just embarassed yourself repeatedly. The only way you could possibly look like more of a total nudnik is if you'd actually signed your silly little posts with your real name. By the way are you from Florida? I'll bet you're from Florida.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    9. Re:Classic slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ``Among the Romans emancipation required but one effort. The slave, when made free, might mix with, without staining the blood of his master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture." -- Thomas Jefferson.

    10. Re:Classic slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the Founding Fathers wrote in the preamble to the Constitution

      to secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

      you replaced that with some poem by a Jewess and said that you want the Founding Fathers' vision to win.

      And then you have the chutzpah to call your political enemies Orwellian.

    11. Re:Classic slippery slope by dywolf · · Score: 1

      All these anti immigration idiots also forget that illegal immigration is creation of recent history. the 1960's specifically, as part of a bargain struck in the civil rights era. it used to be that the immigration caps on the new world were practically unlimited (something like 120k yearly, but much larger than the actual numbers), and since a lot of them were migrant workers who came up for the harvest season and then returned, they didn't count to it anyway, and no one much cared as, then as now, Americans generally weren't taking those jobs. creating the stricter immigration laws only caused them to stay put once they got here, creating a permanent underclass.

      they talk about people coming here legally, as if the current, nearly impossible horribly expensive and requiring an inside friend, process was how it always was. when the reality is the odl 'immigration process looked more like this:

      Man on dock: Welcome. Names?
      Immigrants: (names)
      Man on dock: Any of you sick?
      Immigrants: Nope.
      Man on dock: Excellent! Have fun! Good luck! It's a big country, go get ya a piece.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  29. Brand them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bar code them -- in fact bar code or chip them .... perfect!!

    In fact it would save time if at birth everyone got a number/code tattooed and get chipped that way when you travel or go through a door, or get in a car or move anywhere -- we would know where you are...

    In fact -- the technology exists to also include "shut down and hold" in such chips .... makes crowd control easy.

  30. Would would all become 'Not Sure' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insert your arm in the IPPA machine.
    Your name is now registered, Not Sure.

  31. This guy needs to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy needs to start a kick starter project. Sounds like absolute genius. Maybe we could even implement remote locking of doors for when people litter.

  32. But it wouldn't work anyway. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But it wouldn't work anyway.

    I don't think he even understands FedEx. FedEx cannot tell you where a package is RIGHT NOW. They can only tell you where it was LAST SCANNED.

    The reason this works well for packages is that packages don't move themselves. And even then it has failures. This will completely fail because HUMANS can wander around on their own.

    Sounds more like Christie wants to associate his campaign with something that people have a mostly positive opinion of. But I'm pretty sure that FedEx will not want to be associated with a losing candidate OR the concept of tagging and tracking undesirable races/nationalities (shades of Nazi German there).

    1. Re:But it wouldn't work anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Now now you're a little bit ahead

      First step: track foreigners and tourists
      Second step: mandatory scanning at all hotels, taxis, monuments, tourist attractions, museums, etc
      Third step: since some foreigners might slip through, mandatory checking of _everyone_ at said spots, just in case they are foreigners or not
      Fourth step: mandatory bar codes on _everyone_ to simplify job #3!

      Welcome to the United Jails of America! If you're act service we will let you do labor for your favorite corporation!

    2. Re:But it wouldn't work anyway. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      This will completely fail because HUMANS can wander around on their own.

      Also, for some reason they tend object to having barcodes stamped on their foreheads. I don't really understand that one.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:But it wouldn't work anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GPS + RFID

  33. So leave them on my porch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and let my neighbors steal them?

  34. Real fix for immigration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think anyone who cannot trace their ancestry back to those came by the land bridge should get the "F" out of here.

  35. Wut? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it make more sense to focus on keeping *illegal* immigrants out than tagging and tracking *legal* ones? What the actual fuck?!

    OF course, the real purpose of this proposal is that it's one step closer to tagging and tracking *all of us*.

  36. Sure, Christie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's brand foreigners in the US, just like cattle, or like the Nazis used to do with the Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, etc. Let's go back to that kind world.

    1. Re:Sure, Christie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This garbage is from a governer that can not even run a state.
      He has become an irrelevant big mouth who hopefully will be served criminal charges or an indictment soon.
      Besides using his state's tax money as his personal piggy bank to run for office, the list is long.
      Start with www.http://watchdog.org/category/new-jersey/
      Then some interesting reading can be found at http://www.northjersey.com/news/the-gwb-files-christie-and-the-lane-closures-at-the-world-s-busiest-bridge-1.1080372
      He also has been added to the "Soprano State's" pages http://www.thesopranostate.com/update15.htm
      It will be fun watching Christies' republican clown car's race to the bottom.

  37. The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 0, Troll

    What there is no insane mod, or poster has an irrational hatred mod ?

    The world is enjoying it's longest most peaceful time period since the fall of Rome and idiots get upset over what it took to achieve it.

    1. Re:The above is informative ? by Calydor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think people are more upset at the perceived risk of getting a barcode tattoo reminiscent of what they used in concentration camps (yeah, I Godwin'ed the thread), or maybe getting pulled over and shot by a cop for having a broken tail light.

      Such things really does count against visiting the US compared to taking a week on a beach somewhere else.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's your definition of "peace"? There are always multiple wars going on in numerous places in the world, constantly. Many of these are being interfered with, instigated, or supported by the US and its allies. It's profitable to sell weapons to both sides, to keep the wars going. The only more profitable situation is when you get your puppet installed as leader, then you can just pilfer the public assets wholesale.

      Just because it's peaceful in your little gated neighbourhood, doesn't mean the rest of the world is a-ok.

    3. Re:The above is informative ? by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      The world is enjoying it's longest most peaceful time period since the fall of Rome

      WAR IS PEACE IGNORACE IS STRENGTH SLAVERY IS FREEDOM

      The USA has been, if not in a state of war, at least fighting some kind of military action continually since when? Just because you're not suffering, you're comfortable. But somewhere, someone is being murdered with a drone so that you can sleep soundly.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      https://www.hawaii.edu/powerki...

      Deaths from wars and other state violence are at historic lows.

      But really foam at the mouth more.

    5. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      https://www.hawaii.edu/powerki...

      My definition of peace is based on war being a cause of death.

    6. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 0

      Drinkypoo (well named on the poo portion) is a broken record on this.

      His comments on anything always morph back to America being the source of all evil in the world. He is like a poorly written character from boondocks.

    7. Re:The above is informative ? by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      Deaths from wars and other state violence are at historic lows.

      So it's okay with you if we do it every day, so long as we do it less than was done in the past overall? You're comfortable with a certain level of murder in your name, as long as it's less than it was in the past?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:The above is informative ? by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      The number of wars going on in the world has been decreasing for decades, as has the death rate. The world is becoming a peaceful place.

      Many of these are being interfered with, instigated, or supported by the US and its allies

      That's really a US-centric view.......America isn't as powerful as you think it is. People have their own reasons for fighting, and not because they are sheep.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re:The above is informative ? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Nice link. I found a nice graph to go with it, that you might be interested in. The world is becoming more peaceful.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    10. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      You're comfortable with a certain level of murder in your name, as long as it's less than it was in the past?

      Sure, it beats the heck out of it being more than it was it in the past.

    11. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that's a particularly nice presentation.It has the major types all in one image.

    12. Re: The above is informative ? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Depends where you live. Maybe not interfering in the Middle East, South America, Africa and Indo China would've had the same result.

    13. Re: The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      https://www.hawaii.edu/powerki...

      Death by communism. Somehow I think if we hadn't been doing things to move the world forward things would have been much worse.

      Really is there any point in history, that you can look at and say the world would be better off if you could have erased America ?

    14. Re:The above is informative ? by chipschap · · Score: 1

      Interesting how the main anti-US comment was modded +5 and the main pro-US comment modded 0 (as of this writing). I don't know what that tells us about opinions in general but it certainly tells us about /. posters.

    15. Re: The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      War is never the cause of death.

      The cause is usually something like a bullet, bomb, sword or starvation.

    16. Re:The above is informative ? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The world is enjoying it's longest most peaceful time period since the fall of Rome and idiots get upset over what it took to achieve it.

      Constant wars. That's what it takes to avoid war. War. And lots of it.

    17. Re: The above is informative ? by PatientZero · · Score: 1

      Really is there any point in history, that you can look at and say the world would be better off if you could have erased America ?

      Maybe ask the Native American tribes that question.

      Arguing that today's violence is acceptable because the overall death toll is lower today than yesterday is weak. It's like saying you shouldn't complain about being locked up for no reason because your captors stopped beating you.

      --
      Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
      I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
    18. Re:The above is informative ? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So more threats and less deaths make for an acceptable imperialist invasion? I'd count "war" by the number of countries with uninvited foreign troops on their soil. Civil wars, unless proxy wars, aren't "war" in the traditional sense, and your statistics are heavily skewed by a few internal actions (Soviet Union and China coming to mind, and if Germany hadn't invaded Poland, "war" wouldn't be related to the holocaust deaths). It's a good thing government murder is down, but that isn't war. You are using the wrong statistics, because they support your opinion, rather than finding something that best describes reality, and forming your opinion based of reality.

    19. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps Chris Christie should track them. Nah, they're not really a threat since nearly all of them are all talk and no action.

    20. Re:The above is informative ? by pepty · · Score: 1

      Lets track the jobs instead. Next time you apply for a job, you first go to a govt office have to have your I-9 updated to include your biometric data (fingerprint or iris scan: your pick). The biometric data kept will not be enough to uniquely identify you, just good enough so that subsequent fingerprint/iris scans have a false positive rate of ~1% of identifying someone else as you and a false negative rate of less than 0.01% (chance of not identifying you as you.)

      Now: apply for your job. State your name and address and get your iris scanned. The employer's scanner encrypts the info and sends it off to the feds. The Feds match you correctly (99.99% of the time), sends back your taxpayer ID and starts the correct W2 or 1099 paperwork for your employer. The employer checks that you gave the correct taxpayer ID and hires you. The Feds can subsidize cell phone sized scanners that work on current cell phone networks, so if folks can send a text they can check whether farmworkers or babysitters are eligible on the spot and within seconds.

      Sure, it could be hacked and people would still be hired under the table. But so long as the penalties for hacking or hiring under the table are steep enough most employers won't want to mess with it.

      I remember telling a law student this idea and she said that it was awesome. Then I emphasized that it wasn't just for immigrant labor: for it to be useful it would be for CEOs, lawyers: all jobs. Her expression turned sour and she said it wouldn't work.

    21. Re:The above is informative ? by reboot246 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you subtract the number of wars in which Muslims are involved, the world is nearly totally peaceful. Mod me down if you wish, but look and read and learn first. An easier way would be to name the wars NOT involving Muslims.

      There can be no peace with a religion that insists on converting you or killing you.

    22. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, Chris Christie is proposing to hire fedex to implement an immigrant tracking system for what purpose?

    23. Re:The above is informative ? by Nehmo · · Score: 1

      The number of wars going on in the world has been decreasing for decades...

      This is a good place to post The Fallen video link https://vimeo.com/128373915 It's true. We are now in a period of peace. Deaths declined after WWII.

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
    24. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, but there will be people who claim religious exemption to having biometric data being held by the government, so it becomes a first amendment issue.

    25. Re: The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should we ask them in Spanish? For all the crying that goes on people forget that the Native Americans started their decline well before the USA was founded

    26. Re:The above is informative ? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I think people are more upset at the perceived risk of getting a barcode tattoo reminiscent of what they used in concentration camps (yeah, I Godwin'ed the thread),

      So you basically admit that people are "upset" about an imaginary threat that doesn't currently exist, and is unlikely to ever exist?

      ... or maybe getting pulled over and shot by a cop for having a broken tail light. Such things really does count against visiting the US compared to taking a week on a beach somewhere else.

      We're pretty much still in the same place as the last statement - an imaginary threat. People in the US aren't shot by the police for having a broken tail light. That may be the precursor to a more serious issue, such as someone assaulting a police officer and being shot, but it isn't the cause.

      I'm curious, where are these imaginary boogeymen causing you to flee to? Where are these "trouble free" beaches located?

      Does the threat of Godzilla keep you from Japan, or the threat of volcanoes keep you from Italy? Does the threat of deportation keep you from Greece?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    27. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      Civil wars, unless proxy wars, aren't "war"

      The people dying might beg to differ.

    28. Re:The above is informative ? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Not all killing is murder. It is legitimate to defend yourself from enemies that want to kill you and others.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    29. Re:The above is informative ? by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2

      I don't know what that tells us about opinions in general but it certainly tells us about /. posters.

      The most it tells us is about 4 Slashdot posters (3 that modded one post up, and 1 person who modded one post down). Not really enough information to make any sort of judgement about the whole user-base.

    30. Re:The above is informative ? by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 3, Informative

      An easier way would be to name the wars NOT involving Muslims.

      Same goes for Americans doesn't it?

    31. Re:The above is informative ? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So the person dying in war says "I'd have been happy, if only it had been a car crash."?

      Your statistics would count police shootings. Are those "wars"?

    32. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      I see you didn't actually read the links.

    33. Re:The above is informative ? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      The Ukraine.

      But that's a bit like "Hitler was a Vegetarian." I actually agree with your position in that I would say it's safe to say the Muslim World is currently in a last ditch fight for relevancy before modern society completely moderates its last grasp on political power (just as Catholicism destabilized much of Europe to maintain control).

      But when nearly half the world is Muslim of course most of the conflicts are going to involve Muslims.

    34. Re:The above is informative ? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      No, I did read the links. You obviously didn't understand them. The reason the recent history has been better is that the numbers are heavily skewed with a few World Wars, and the internal actions of China and Russia. Correct for world wars, and a few "isolated" internal actions, and the deaths you are counting are relatively steady.

    35. Re:The above is informative ? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Come on a current elected US politician is recommended something along the lines of this, http://www.ezidavid.com/FAQ-PI.... So at the airport all that nasty filthy rotten animal foreigners are bent over, their buttocks bared, men, women and children and they have an RFID tag injected into the buttock of the choice. I am sure there are literally hundreds of thousands of Americans who would just love to humiliate and abuse those nasty filthy rotten animal foreigners. This will get airplay overseas and immediately impact tourism to the US because of the immediate negative view this generates of US politicians and the kind of treatment tourists should possible start to expect.

      It is only a matter of time before widly abusive US law enforcement realises what easy prey tourists are because they are desperate not to ruin their holidays, they can be deported on the slightest excuse no matter what US law enforcement has to them and they are very unlikely to hang around to sue. So rather than hanging poor areas to target minorities to fill quotas, it would be far more profitable to hang around tourist traps and target foreigners for cash confiscation (obviously all that money is to buy drugs not spend on food and accommodation), plus failure to carry full ID at pools (immediate arrest, big fine an expulsion), many don't speak English so limited legal access (it is only a matter of time, especially with US politicians attitudes to nasty filthy rotten animal foreigners).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    36. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      Seeing as the site was entirely about death caused by governments you must have remarkably low reading comprehension to ask

      So the person dying in war says "I'd have been happy, if only it had been a car crash."?

      Your statistics would count police shootings. Are those "wars"?

    37. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      What does that have to do with the price of tea in China ?

      The OP expresses his hate of America and it's foreign policy as a reason not to visit. This has nothing to do with the topic and seems to be little more than a neurological disorder. The only thing informative about it is it's letting you know he is not particularly sane.

    38. Re:The above is informative ? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the guy in the car crash isn't counted in your statistics.. Your complaints about "war" use a broad killing that isn't very well focused on "war". It also counts police shootings. You know, the ones caused by governments (the police are government employees). Do you think that anybody on the planet but you considers a shooting at a traffic stop "war"?

    39. Re:The above is informative ? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      So you basically admit that people are "upset" about an imaginary threat that doesn't currently exist, and is unlikely to ever exist?

      I knew you were stupid, but I didn't know you were that stupid. Guantanamo Bay is an American concentration camp for abducted muslims and most of them were released after they finally had access to a lawyer after many years of being imprisoned for nothing. The only two differences to Auschwitz are
      1) you don't gas the prisoners yet, just torture them.
      2) it is on Cuban soil, not in Poland.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    40. Re:The above is informative ? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      *facepalm*
      No, it is not.
      It is legitimate to defend yourself from enemies that try to kill you. Everything else is a crime.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    41. Re:The above is informative ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      #Blacklivesmatter

    42. Re:The above is informative ? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      (yeah, I Godwin'ed the thread),

      I really wish people would shut up about about this. There's nothing wrong with making references to and comparisons with Nazi Germany, in fact it's a good thing because we need to learn from that experience as a society, and there's countless parallels to be made, and constant vigilance is necessary to make sure we don't repeat this portion of history, as is often done with people who don't bother to learn history. Mr. Godwin himself has said that he never intended to squelch references to the Nazis, he was only making an observation about the trajectory of internet threads.

    43. Re:The above is informative ? by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Actually I wrote that to pre-empt anyone who wanted to call me out on it.

      In my opinion SOME references to Nazis are pretty far out there. Others, like wanting to put barcodes on 'undesirable' people, aren't.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    44. Re:The above is informative ? by Calydor · · Score: 1

      I think people are more upset at the perceived risk of getting a barcode tattoo reminiscent of what they used in concentration camps (yeah, I Godwin'ed the thread),

      So you basically admit that people are "upset" about an imaginary threat that doesn't currently exist, and is unlikely to ever exist?

      I admit nothing. I said 'the perceived risk', I don't take a stance on whether it is likely to happen. The fact is it has a detrimental effect on people's desire to visit the country in the first place.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    45. Re:The above is informative ? by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      I know it's fictional, but the campaign that Paul Atreides used to take command of the galaxy was mostly peaceful, right? I don't remember any Muslims being involved in that one.

    46. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear Tunisia has some nice beaches

    47. Re: The above is informative ? by PatientZero · · Score: 1

      How silly of me. I forgot that past genocides excuse all future genocides.

      --
      Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
      I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
    48. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Muslims are a large percentage of the world's population and many live in poorer parts of the world so those would be the actual factors involved.

      List of ongoing armed conflicts
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts

      The USA is directly involved in three of the four largest wars, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and indirectly involved in the fourth providing at least arms and tactical support for some of the countries in the Boko Haram conflict. Really, most of the other medium sized conflicts the USA is at least somewhat involved in indirectly.

    49. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the problem is always the 3 monotheistic religions...

    50. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's really not true, actually. Go to Wikipedia's list of ongoing conflicts, and browse through - I think probably less than half of them are motivated by religion. Okay, sure, many of them 'involve Muslims', but that's just because there are Muslims are all over the world. I'm sure they all involve Christians and atheists, too.

      Nearly all wars are basically caused by inequality. Religion is just an excuse.

    51. Re:The above is informative ? by jandersen · · Score: 1

      Such things really does count against visiting the US compared to taking a week on a beach somewhere else.

      It does, indeed. However, common sense would suggest that less intrusive measures would be applied than barcode tattoos if it ever got to this; in fact, common sense suggests that this sort of thing will never be more than the extreme views of a stupid poitician out to grab attention.

      There are two things in what you say. One is the fact that many would be visitors stay away from America because of the news coming out. That is a real shame - America has a lot of interesting, impressive and beautiful things to see, and Americans are very nice people, in most cases. Unfortunately, there's also this massive, dark side that looms large in people's consciousness; I have, over the years, seem many, worrying stories in European news about people coming to the states as ordinary tourists and having extremely bad experiences. Things like one Danish young family, who did what all Danes do: go to a small restaurant, leaving the pram with their baby right outside the window where they could keep an eye. So, did criminals snatch it? Not at all, the police turned up, the couple ended up having to fight a long, hard battle in court against losing their child 'for neglect'. That is one couple, whose friends and family will never go to the States again. It is such a shame, because you guys could do a lot better.

      The other thing is the question of making people identifiable - to be honest, I wouldn't mind being 'chip-marked' like many pets and horses are now. There are situations where you would definitely like to be identifiable, like if you're found unconscious without ID somewhere. Or perhaps more likely, as a simple convenience; it would be good if I never had to worry about remembering my passport or driving licence. I'm not worried about being monitored - anyone who carries a mobile around is being monitored, and probably hasn't a clue about what is being collected about them. I had a quick look at what is in my phone (Samsung) - something like tens of apps that I have not installed, and which have permission to snoop into everything including using GPS, microphone, camera and networking. If that doesn't worry me, why would I worry about being passively monitored by 'the government' in other ways, by a chip or similar means? At least they don't sell my data to scammers, the way private companies do. I think.

    52. Re:The above is informative ? by dywolf · · Score: 1

      There should be an insanity mod, because your post is in woeful need of it.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    53. Re:The above is informative ? by TopherC · · Score: 1

      The reasonable posts like this are always too late to get moderated. A shame.

    54. Re:The above is informative ? by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Hey look.
      A bigot modded up by four other bigots.

      but look and read and learn first

      No. you. http://www.cfr.org/global/glob...

      And let's not just ignore the US's hand in destabilizing the region and exacerbating the conflicts you're referring to.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  38. Won't happen by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    He'll never be president, he has to many skeletons in the closet... ...of cows.

    1. Re:Won't happen by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Beyond that, he's not even going to make it to the main stage in the next debate. He's in 12th place right now. That's why he's turning on the crazy.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  39. BS!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Typical wasp with regular shit.. How do these fools get to stand for pres election?? Im sure this kindled kanye west for the next election.

    1. Re:BS!! by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      I thought your title was "B5". I was thinking, "Yeah, but the crew of Babylon 5 could take their com badges off if they did not want to be tracked."

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  40. News at 10 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fat Fucking idiot willing to say anything stupid to stay relevant.

  41. What FedEx does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FedEx tracks packages that are in its custody.

    Every business does some degree of tracking of merchandise, equipment, employees, customers, visitors that are on its property.

    So, strictly speaking, all he's suggesting is that police check the passport of a foreigner when they arrest them. And at no other time.

  42. What has happened to the Republicans? by QuietLagoon · · Score: 3, Insightful
    One Republican candidate wants to round up 11 million people and ship them away.

    .
    Now another Republican candidate wants to put bar codes on the people to track them.

    Have the Republicans gone insane?

    1. Re:What has happened to the Republicans? by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about their sanity (always hard to tell from a distance) but they do seem to want to avoid being elected. Otherwise I'd be hard pressed to explain their statements.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    2. Re:What has happened to the Republicans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're calling arresting criminals insane? What else do you want done with them? Shoot them in the head in the middle of the street? No, it is Republicans like you that are insane.

    3. Re:What has happened to the Republicans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The candidates will say anything to get elected. Their voters who actually vote want to hear the insane things they say they are insane.

    4. Re:What has happened to the Republicans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it is you libtards who have gone insane when you are surprised people wants immigration laws enforced and our borders respected.
      Fuckin liberals are so so stupid.

    5. Re:What has happened to the Republicans? by retchdog · · Score: 1

      Eh, just think of it as try-outs. You know, some company wants to see whether policy X will fly, but they don't really want to be associated with it, so they flog it out to some branch manager with a hard-on for power. He'll be zealously enthusiastic about it. If it works out, they pay him off with a moderate sum and bring him into the fold; if it doesn't work out, they'll deny any association ("Shocked! I'm shocked at this xenophobic nonsense! This is a country of liberty!").

      When there are almost twenty competitors for the Mr. America crown, you'll be willing to do anything to stand out. The minders just sit back and watch how the public reacts to this pageantry; they check which lines are safe to cross in which demographics, and at the end they program the Romney-bot (or, equivalently, the Hillary-bot) to pander optimally to the lowest common denominator without rocking the boat too much.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    6. Re:What has happened to the Republicans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which Republican candidate is that? Or have you be reading too much of the liberal echo chamber? I do not know of a single candidate that has advocated for mass deportation. Deportation of known criminals, yes, but not of law-abiding people.

  43. So, what is he suggesting. by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

    We all have rfid implants, and set up scanners everywhere? Because how would you know the visitors from the residents unless you track everyone?

    Even if this wasn't a giant affront to rights, how would he even expect to technically implement this?

    Do republicans really go apeshit for this kind of complete fantasy bullshit? So much for "freedom 'murcia." (oh right, freedom only applies to people born here that are christians)

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  44. There are better ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well we have plenty of ID systems in the US. Most States offer a non drivers ID or a Drivers license. I am not sure why we cannot improve upon what we have? The problem is, we must make a effort to document people and unfortunately the South boarder seems to be the biggest offender of not following immigration policy. Why is that? Ignorance, language barriers? unable to fill out paperwork? Unwilling to go through proper channels? The problem is Mexico and everyone who goes through Mexico to get to the US. I guarantee you make it easier to document who comes and goes and they will obey those policies better. Nobody wants to smuggle into the US unless they are doing something wrong. But we also should keep out rather then protect people who commit crimes and are deported and return to commit another. Maybe instead of deporting we need to imprison them so we know where they are? Most Countries work much harder at keeping track of people in their Country. Why the US cannot do this is the big question.

    1. Re:There are better ways by sribe · · Score: 1

      Most Countries work much harder at keeping track of people in their Country.

      Really? Try visiting the EU. Your passport will get checked once when you get off the plane. (And once when you get on, but that's really only to make sure that you'll be allowed entry into the US when you land back here.)

    2. Re:There are better ways by marsu_k · · Score: 1

      Schengen Area. Doesn't include all of EU, but does also include non-EU countries.

    3. Re:There are better ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. We lived on a US base in Germany for 8 years. Only ever need the passport to leave/enter the EU. Not each county. Driving to Austria was like driving to the next state over. Some new road laws and sign telling you you were crossing a border.

    4. Re:There are better ways by retchdog · · Score: 1

      heh, maybe not even that.

      when i landed in Charles de Gaulle airport, almost the entire staff was apparently on strike. there were a few people milling about doing odd jobs, but no one at debarkation. the French arrivals seemed jaded to it, and the rest of us just shuffled, somewhat confused, through a barren airport and wandered into France without so much as a glance.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    5. Re:There are better ways by sribe · · Score: 1

      when i landed in Charles de Gaulle airport, almost the entire staff was apparently on strike. there were a few people milling about doing odd jobs, but no one at debarkation. the French arrivals seemed jaded to it, and the rest of us just shuffled, somewhat confused, through a barren airport and wandered into France without so much as a glance.

      When you fly into Marseille, at baggage claim you find a plaque on the wall next to a phone, which translates to "if you have anything to declare, please use this phone to dial extension xxx and request a customs agent". On that trip I returned through Houston, crowded, miserable holding pen with drug-sniffing dogs working the mass of humanity. So what does our paranoia actually get us in terms of a safe society?

  45. Deep bench? by Alomex · · Score: 1

    Is that part of the "deep bench" from the GOP?

    Do they mean by deep bench "we can replace any of our lackluster, mediocre candidates by another equally untalented, saying equally thoughtless platitudes, to the delight of the unthinking GOP base"?

  46. FIXED THAT FOR YOU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Chris Christie Proposes Tracking Dark People the Way FedEx Tracks Packages"

  47. Just Like Fedex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they'll be put in a box and lost in Memphis? How is he going to get the illegals to get into the box?

  48. Bar code = mandatory passport for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're a criminal (illegal citizen) then you don't have the same rights as law abiding citizens and are subject to tracking. Seems perfectly reasonable and I would be totally in favor of such practice. Sadly the OP left his tin-foil hat on too tight and thinks that once a program like that is a huge success they'll replace standard IDs or something else.

  49. So thieves can track them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would be amazing for the criminal industries, the data won't be secure and now they will have a way of tracking tourists to rob! excellent suggestion, why hasn't this been implemented before, this is progress in action people! (pulls on his turtleneck)

    Secret word: pacifist

  50. Turnabout is fair play? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    I know when I travel to Asia, South America, or Europe, I need to present my passport at all hotels I stay at. When I worked in Belgium, Chile and China, I had to register with the Government and provide the local police station with my information - and inform them if I moved to a new apartment/house. In the US, I don't think that tourists need to provide their passports at hotels, nor do visa holders need to register with the local police station. So - how is what is proposed much different than 90% of the rest of the world?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    1. Re:Turnabout is fair play? by Known+Nutter · · Score: 1

      I know when I travel to Asia, South America, or Europe, I need to present my passport at all hotels I stay at. When I worked in Belgium, Chile and China, I had to register with the Government and provide the local police station with my information - and inform them if I moved to a new apartment/house. In the US, I don't think that tourists need to provide their passports at hotels, nor do visa holders need to register with the local police station. So - how is what is proposed much different than 90% of the rest of the world?

      It may not be terribly different than what you describe, but you're forgetting one thing: The US Government has a bad habit of coloring outside the lines.

      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    2. Re:Turnabout is fair play? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      According to the news, so do most countries. The UK, Germany, France, and of course most of Asia all have a record of spying internally on their citizens and legal residents.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    3. Re:Turnabout is fair play? by mjwx · · Score: 2

      I know when I travel to Asia, South America, or Europe, I need to present my passport at all hotels I stay at

      Sounds like you've never travelled to Asia, South America or Europe... Because you only use your passport as a method of ID at hotels. A Hotel needs to know that you are the person you claim to be. I travel to a few places in SE Asia on a regular basis. They know who I am and dont bother asking for ID any more. So much so I've even got a rapport with a few customs officers at Perth. Also, I was also required to present ID at every US hotel I stayed at. The most convenient form is the Passport as they're fairly standard from country to country. I had more than a few US bartenders squint at my Western Australian drivers license for a while before they served me.

      When I worked in Belgium, Chile and China, I had to register with the Government and provide the local police station with my information

      When I travel to the United States, I have to Register with the Electronic System for Travel Authorisation in order to board a flight to the US. No ESTA, no entry. It costs about $4 and there are a variety of middlemen who charge upwards of $20 to do the same thing (so make sure you go to the DHS website). This form asks for a variety of information, not just for ID purposes, but personal questions as well (like "Do you have gonorrhoea") feel free to go through it yourself. At least they've stopped asking if I'm a Nazi.

      Also when I was coming back to the US from South America a few years back I had to provide proof of an outgoing flight and my hotel prior to being permitted to board a flight in Panama.

      I don't think that tourists need to provide their passports at hotels, nor do visa holders need to register with the local police station.

      Next time, stop writing after "think".

      As an Australian traveller, the US is an oddity. There are few places in the world where I need to fill in an application form to visit.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:Turnabout is fair play? by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Well the most obvious difference is that a lot of countries around the world are still oppressive regimes. America apparently is different (freedom and justice and all that), although that seems to be changing fast...

    5. Re:Turnabout is fair play? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Oh, I lived - and worked - in Belgium and Chile for 2 years each. Had to register with the local police. And when I lived in China (6 years) it was the same thing. Sounds like you've never worked (legally) overseas... Or did you confuse "working in XXX" with "tourist to XXX"?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    6. Re:Turnabout is fair play? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Oh, I lived - and worked - in Belgium and Chile for 2 years each.

      I know for a fact the Belgium one is a lie. When you get a working visa for the Schengen countries you're automatically registered with the governments of the Eurozone. That's the purpose of getting a visa and you cant work without a visa.

      You dont register with the local police, if the local police need to know anything about you they can look you up.

      Lesson 1 about lying on the internet. Keep your lies believable.

      Now that we've established the Belgium part is a fabrication, I'll wager good money the Chile and China parts are also fabrications. I've got a working visa in Hong Kong, no need to register with the police there. Shortly I'll have one for the UK, done a crapload of research, again no need to register with the police.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    7. Re:Turnabout is fair play? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Even EU citizens need to register with city hall inside of Belgium. It's also the de-facto standard for foreigners working there. Get your own facts straight before calling someone else a liar.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    8. Re:Turnabout is fair play? by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Now that we've established the Belgium part is a fabrication, I'll wager good money the Chile and China parts are also fabrications. I've got a working visa in Hong Kong, no need to register with the police there. Shortly I'll have one for the UK, done a crapload of research, again no need to register with the police.

      The GP left out the part where he's a registered sex offender. What can he say? He likes to piss on buildings. The fact that it was an elementary school at 10:00AM is all just a big misunderstanding. Is it his fault they site the bar within staggering distance of a school? And he just woke up. And he drank a LOT the night before. Perfectly natural mistake.

      But he has to check in with police everywhere he goes.

  51. will make it to easy to see the HB1 fraud by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    will make it to easy to see the HB1 fraud

  52. Don't worry ... by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... it's just a little code tattooed on your forearm. Oh, and we'd like you to sew this little gold star on your clothes.

    1. Re:Don't worry ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty nice. Everyone packed and returned to their home country or have a Nazi approved emblem on their clothes.

      Those emblem is for the police to ask for papers.

      you have no papers? you are packed into an Amtrak to go directly to a concentration camp in the desert.

      It is time to clean our race.

  53. This is Stupid by whistlingtony · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here are the top ten leading causes of death in the USA.

    1. Heart disease
    2. Cancer (malignant neoplasms)
    3. Chronic lower respiratory disease
    4. Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases)
    5. Accidents (unintentional injuries)
    6. Alzheimer's disease
    7. Diabetes (diabetes mellitus)
    8. Influenza and pneumonia
    9. Kidney disease (nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis)
    10. Suicide (intentional self-harm).

    I looked. Homicide is 15th. Death By Terrorism isn't on this list. Overdose from drugs bought from drug dealing immigrants isn't either. Just once I wish we'd wage a war on Cancer or Drunk Driving, ya know?

    Also, because it has to be said.... Maybe we can put their tracking bar code on some kind of armband? This shit is !@#$ing stupid and dangerously close to Nazi levels of moron. We have a serious politician blaming the Jews Immigrants and willing to label them. Oh. Come. On!

    The Republican party invited in the stupid and completely has lost it's !@#$ing mind.

    1. Re:This is Stupid by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Just once I wish we'd wage a war on.....Drunk Driving, ya know?

      We do, that's why drunk driving deaths are way down. Right now, there is a campaign to get breath alcohol ignition interlock devices installed in all cars. Do a search for MADD sometime.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:This is Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why isn't Chris Christie dead yet?

    3. Re:This is Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just America. *Every* country in the world at the moment seems to blame foreigners for lack of employment

    4. Re:This is Stupid by kqs · · Score: 1

      I agree with all that, especially the Republican Party (of personal liberties fame) losing their mind. But to be fair, we have spent lots of resources on most of that list. Drunk driving is way down due to harsher penalties, stronger enforcement (including lots of checkpoints on holidays), and changing culture. Cancer is very tough but lots of government funding has given us good treatments for a few forms and lots of promising research; same with the other diseases. Accidents; well, you know those nasty toxic chinese products that are recalled on a regular basis? It used to be our factories putting those out and no recalls. We all survived them, but lots of kids from the 40s-80s didn't. A lawsuit culture has lots of problems but a few side benefits.

      Still, I don't think any of those problems have received the continuing media panic and funding bonanza as the wars on drugs and terror. As well as we've done, think about how much better we could be doing with many fewer people working rather than rotting in jail, with better information sharing and liberties, and with money spent on improving the country rather than locking it down and tracking us all.

    5. Re:This is Stupid by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Just once I wish we'd wage a war on Cancer or Drunk Driving, ya know?

      Erm, there has been a war on Drunk Driving... or have you not been paying attention for the last 20+ years? More lives have been destroyed by this war than have been saved, but whatever. Being practical is never the right answer.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  54. Re: Europe has a close 2nd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you visit Europe then every hotel you stay in records your passport details and submits them every night. It would not be a big step to get hotels to submit that at midnight every night to Interpol. That'd be as close to FedEx tracking as you could come. It isn't beyond the realms of possibility for that to be done in the USA.

    BUT...

    This will not track immigrants, legal or illegal as they don't tend to stay in motels or hotels.

  55. What can "brown" do for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oblig.

  56. Why come you have no tattoo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...

  57. Number Six by alvieboy · · Score: 2

    > Who are you?
    > The new number 2.
    > Who is number 1?
    > You are number 6
    > I am not a number, I am a free man

    I am not 1010010111101010100010111101101000101, I am a free man.

    US problem is not visa attribution - US problem is same problem as everywhere else: too many people, too few jobs, too much lack of education, too many dreams and too many deceptions.

    Labeling people will not only not help, but will make thinks worse.

    The Nazi system labeled jews, you still recall for sure.

    I read an intresting summary today (I am not sure it's accurate though), but it stated that when The Berlin Wall was torn down in 1989 there were other 16 such walls in the world (not necessarly built same way). Nowadays 65 exist, either already in place or being finished. Last one is between Hungary and Serbia, being finished. This is a border line. Not different from the border you see at any international airport.

    Most migrants are not searching for The Ultimate Life, but rather seeking survival.

    Labeling them is to treat them as if they were animals - or even worse! I guess I could more easily get a permit for my Dog than one of those migrants can get a Visa for entering the US.

    And yes, I am somehow revolted, even with my country, due to how it refuses to receive migrants from North Africa.

    Alvie

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    1. Re:Number Six by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I am not 1010010111101010100010111101101000101, I am a free man.

      Uh. I think you're #61292

    2. Re:Number Six by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      six of one, half a dozen of another!

    3. Re:Number Six by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm with you.
      People migrate today for the same reason they always have: to seek something better.
      It's why people risk leaving behind families and all they've ever known.
      It's why my forefathers crossed the ocean and then an unknown strange continent.

      I believe the true goal is an eventual borderless world, no more citizens of arbitrary lines on a map. I believe that most of Western Civilization has hit upon a pretty good set of ideals to live by, though some (like the US) are a lagging a bit behind the others these days. The EU has problems too, but the concept behind the Schengen Zone is absolutely brilliant, fostering a greater mobility of people and goods, of freedom of movement.

      Along those lines I say open the borders.

      Economically, so workers can travel from the US to other nations more easily, but also so workers can travel here more easily, without caps and threats of deportation (like the Schengen zone).

      But also in terms of immigration itself: put an immigration center at every major entry point, be it an Intl Airport or crossing from Mexico or Canada to the US. The rules are simple: Live and work and pay taxes for 5 years, and get boom, you're a citizen. no more hiding in the shadows, no more abusive employers threatening deportation to get away with underpaying, no reason to overstay a visa, essentially eliminate nearly all roadblocks to immigration and thus all incentives to immigrate 'illegally'. Basically, more like how the system used to be. 'Illegal immigration' becomes a tax crime, minor and easily solved, because we instead send the message that we welcome people willing to make a go of it, for themselves or their families.

      In a way it democratizes social, national, and governmental policy. turn it into a psuedo competition. People can go where the work is, pursuing opportunities. They get to vote with their feet, leaving their home country for work but taking citizenship with them, or leave that citizenship behind for a new citizenship if they feel the need.

    4. Re:Number Six by alvieboy · · Score: 1

      You know what's funny ?

      There's a lot of control over migration and jobs all over the world (even in Schengen - and look at UK position). They do this supposedly to protect their own citizens, to keep wages at an acceptable level, so on. No one is open to let the system self-regulate. And, as odd as it may seem, in EU its the northern countries that oppose to migrants.

      The opposite happens in the finance world: They still believe the system self-regulates, there's absolutely no control over whatever, and we have concrete proof that this system, as it is, is a huge bomb that explodes once in a while. Still, no one wants to change it.

      Rich people can move big money, Poor people can not move themselves, because people seek money (it's all about money - unfortunately you need money to live).

      Alvie

  58. Disgraceful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a nice compliment. It implies that the people engaged in this conversation possess some degree of 'grace' to begin with. That would have to include Donald Trump, Christie, and the editorial staff who ok the agenda of the nation's mass stenography pool.

    Christie proposed something that is so incredibly expensive and politically extreme hat it's impossible to implement without recreating elements of a Nazi police state combined with colonialist and apartheid-like policies. He only did it because it's one up from Trump, but it'reported like it's both plausible or acceptable.

    Conservatism is now officially dead when anything this expensive, intusive and paranoid actually is treated as credible. Apparently Trump is forcing the inherent insanity under the facade of the Republican mindset to percolate up through the thin veneer that once coloured allowed the Grand Old Patronizers to seem respectable.

    Trump is the perfect sound board for conservatism.

  59. Here we go again. by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    The race to the bottom has begun in earnest. We are stupid people and we deserve the stupid politicians we keep electing.

  60. How about? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whenever a politician suggests something stupid like this then they have to apply it to themselves first to see how it works. Not when it passes, just when they bring the idea out in the public forum.

  61. Be careful what you wish for by sjbe · · Score: 2

    "Yet we let people come to this country with visas, and the minute they come in, we lose track of them." He added: "We need to have a system that tracks you from the moment you come in."

    And about 3 nanoseconds later this would be used to track citizens and violate all kinds of civil rights. If we actually aspire to be a free country we have to let people go about their business especially when we have no reasons to suspect them of anything.

    1. Re:Be careful what you wish for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we actually aspire to be a free country we have to let people go about their business especially when we have no reasons to suspect them of anything.

      Are you a Fourth Amendment Terrorist? There are laws against agitators like you, you know. And mobody is going to look twice when you get your kneecaps smashed by police on a "routine control".

    2. Re:Be careful what you wish for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are already being tracked by your credit card, by your phone, by your email, by your Facebook account, by your face on WIFI cameras all over the world.

      This is just a step in the right direction. We have the technology. What is lacking is the will.

      People will ask for this in order to track criminals, terrorists, pedophile priests, etc.

      There is nothing you can do to stop progress.

  62. In mah belly!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because this worked so well for tracking that last pallet of ding dongs.

  63. Tag, you're it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So he wants to put a barcode on everyone?

  64. Don't know much about history. by westlake · · Score: 1

    There are always multiple wars going on in numerous places in the world, constantly. Many of these are being interfered with, instigated, or supported by the US and its allies.

    I've got news for you, kid.

    It has always been like that and you don't need an imperial power to drive the action, all you need is a sense that you are losing ground against the other.

    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East, The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror

  65. A system to track everything by ememisya · · Score: 4, Funny

    We need to have a system that tracks you from the moment you come in.

    Yea if only we had such a device just about everybody carried around in their pockets with a GPS, camera, microphone, gyroscope, radio etc. Now it would be ideal if only there were handful of giant service providers, so we could work with them to get it done. Naah, who am I kidding? This is America, we have rights, you could never get something like that done.

  66. Your double standards are showing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right now we can't get american's to pick food and until we have robots doing it we need people to do it.

    That's pretty much the same argument that Microsoft, Facebook, etc. trot out when claiming they need more H1B workers. So surely you will accept the implicit qualifier "... at the pittance salary we want to pay" part of that argument?

    I am not talking about the H1-B crap that is abused and just for getting cheap programmers pretty much.

    Doh! I guess you think employers will only use foreign workers to abuse supply and demand effects on your salary and think that can't possibly explain why current Ag worker wages are so low that Americans can't accept them.

    Just be honest: you want to be paid high wages and you want to pay low prices ... no matter who else has to get screwed in the process.

    1. Re:Your double standards are showing by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      H1-B makes it very hard for people to leave a job and go to another one. That is a lot of what keeps wages down since companies can bring in workers and treat them very badly and unless that person can find another company willing to do quite a lot of paperwork very quickly and take over their visa they will get thrown out. As a result they put up with a lot of abuse.

      I want people to have a regular work visa where they are free to work at any company and move around as the market changes.

      I do want to figure out some way to close the loopholes that companies abuse and require they hire american's first. However there are many engineering and scientific fields that are not related to computer science that really do have shortages and it is very hard to bring anyone in since normally all the H1-B vanish in a few hours since computer companies take them all for nearly slave labor.

      We are probably the only first world country that makes it hard for highly skilled people to come in. If you have an actual engineering degree (chemical, mechanical, aerospace etc) that is basically free admittance to canada or any EU country.

      I even know of PhD researchers where they are one of only two people in the world doing research into an area of biotech that US companies care about a LOT and neither of them live in the USA. If we could make it easier to get in for people like that it would help us a great deal.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
  67. Fedex "tracking" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fedex "tracking," and I UPS and USPS. At least in the past they used algorithms to deduce where a package 'probably should be." If it was scanned in Memphis on Monday, and if it was such and such a rate (such as Parcel or Expedited), and going to Seattle, on Wed. it should be in a depot in Salt Lake City. I don't know if they still report such info when you look up tracking, but I'm pretty sure they used to report the location based on such 'calculations.'
    So, once again, a politician thinks he can wave a magic wand and it will happen.

  68. Scott Walker proposes Candana border fence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This just in!

    Back to Fedex immigrant tracking: will the taxpayers get stuck with the insurance bill if a 'package' is lost of damaged?

  69. Victimless crimes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I was trying to illustrate was the absurdity that people are criminalized for simply providing for themselves and their loved ones.

    No, what you were trying to argue is that illegal immigration and working without a work visa are "victimless crimes". Much like many on this site argue that using marihuana, or other drugs, is a "victimless crime" and thus does not deserve criminal punishment.

    Your argument is exceptionally ironic because you claim these illegal immigrants needed to commit their crime to escape "ruthless violence fueled by American demand for drugs." IOW you have recognized that crimes which appear to be victimless may actually have victims that are just less obvious because they are separated in time and space from the crime. So why can't you accept that the crimes committed by your coworkers actually have victims even if you didn't see them and those victims might even be severely hurt by their crimes?

    Two wrongs don't make a right.

  70. Great Idea!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we could tattoo a number on their wrist and maybe implant a RFID too.

  71. sauce for the goose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess whomever supports sh*t like this never leaves the country. If they did, and this was applied to them upon entry, we might hear a different song. I guess the Repubs figure anybody who travels doesn't vote for them anyway so who cares about pissing them off?

  72. Re:SJWs` by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    Social Justice Warrior. It's a pejorative for anyone that points out we don't have a perfect society

  73. Godwin law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think someone else tried this 50 odd years ago.

    Can't wait to see how Israel reacts to its citizens being tattooed again.

  74. Package != Person by Macdude · · Score: 1

    I wonder how long it will be until someone explains to Chris Christie that there is a fundamental difference between a inanimate package an an animate person. Secondly I wonder how long it will take the Governor to understand them...

    --
    "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
    1. Re:Package != Person by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must have missed 1981 when people became commodities.

  75. No touists in New Jersey? by ukoda · · Score: 1

    I guess tourism not big money in New Jersey or else he wouldn’t say something so stupid. I know people who bypass the USA now because the airport experience is so bad compared with the rest of the world, this would step that whole avoidance of the USA another magnitude.

  76. Doh by jppiiroinen · · Score: 2

    Somebody should tell Chris Christie that it might not be a good idea to downgrade from GPS tracking of the smart phone devices or from the malware which jumps over air.

    I think that it is a bit naive to believe that you would not be tracked 24/7 already, it should not take a rocket scientist to create a software, when you have the unlimited federal funding (backed by the floating currency). All in all, I personally don't care if somebody wants to track me online or offline, it is their problem, and more likely if that gives someone their daily allowance for food and gadgets, so be it.

    In general, going public and saying that we got your back and we track all the bad people and all the good people, is only going to hurt the good, and as long as people have faith that "no-one" knows what they are doing we are safe.

    I think that the best idea ever would be that all immigrants would receive a smart phone with GPS chip for free for the duration of their visit, if they dont already own one. Then they would need to return the device when they leave the country. Then also those who don't have the iPhone or Android device, would be covered. And if you would want to be more efficient, you would provide them with prepaid visa or mastercard, which would then give you the "full profile" of their behaviour (more or less).

    But what really makes me worried is that if they would treat you, like the FedEx treats their packages.

  77. I propose... by drunk_punk · · Score: 1

    We track all politicians like we track cattle in the west. A large brand and a tag through the ear.

  78. Wall on the border with Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Meanwhile, scott walker is talking about building a wall on the border with Canada.

  79. I love all the European comments in this thread by Karmashock · · Score: 2

    ... What is happening in the EU right now with immigrants? Hmmm? Its easy to point fingers at the US and say "well that's not good"... but then look at what's happening in your own backyard. Is that good?

    Frankly, we're not going to get through our shared problems here without some political incorrectness.

    REAL nations can and do hold their borders. That's what borders are in part. They're the line in the sand you hold. Now if you don't do that... then so be it. You don't have a country then.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:I love all the European comments in this thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice to know your racism is still in tact.

      Borders an imaginary lines on a map.
      Nothing more.

      What is facing the EU is simply coming to terms with nativism groups and how committed the EU truly is to its stated ideals.
      But make no mistake, they are still far ahead of the US in their treatment of 'others'.

    2. Re:I love all the European comments in this thread by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Then all countries are imaginary, all law is imaginary, fiat currencies are imaginary...

      And that welfare you're collecting on the basis of imaginary money and imaginary law because you crossed an imaginary line... that all collapses.

      Your fucktarded position would lead immediately to total and complete anarchy. And because you're probably too stupid to realize the problem with total instant anarchy, consider that the immediate response to that will be that the people will accept the first authoritarian that stands up in the anarchy and restores order...

      Which could be ANYONE and more likely than not will be someone that wants to be an authoritarian and is comfortable in that role. which means the result of your complete and total idiocy is that you'll probably spend the rest of your sad little life under a fascistic dictatorship which will also likely be very racist because being racist in such environment would stoke INGROUP/OUTGROUP loyalties thus strengthening the cohesion of the dictatorship... and they would probably not be the passive racists that just don't like X... they'd more likely be the oven and poison gas type.

      Here's the problem with you... you don't think anything through. You know NOTHING of human group psychology. You know nothing of politics. You know nothing of sociology.

      You basically are one of the most ignorant people I've met on this forum. And yes, even though you're cowardly hidind behind AC I know exactly who you are because no one on this site shares your opinion besides you. And I question if more than 1 in a million in this world share it either. And before you act the hero on that point, let me point out further that 1 in a million also has a quite a few astounding idiots in it.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  80. Tattoo the number for security by Nyder · · Score: 2

    Since stickers & ID cards can be lost, we should probably tattoo the number on the persons forearms.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  81. So you're a moron, then? by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    Social Security money scarcity is to inhale large numbers of younger workers (this, by the way, is the exact problem Ponzi schemes have and why they were made illegal, and why it's a legitimate comparison

    It's a legit comparison if you're a moron who doesn't know WTF he's talking about. If SS was a Ponzi scheme, the first person on the program would have been a billionaire. The next few thousand people would have been millionaires, and so on until the last to join would be left with nothing.

    None of that is the case. None. Which is why you, sir, are a moron.

    SS is completely self-funded. The "trust fund" was never supposed to be permanent, but the Boomers paying ahead on their earned retirement benefits. Guess where the Boomers will be by the time the trust fund is depleted? Dead.

  82. Nobody has been listening to these fuckers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They've been saying the similar shit for more than 30 years; and yes that includes both clinton and obama.

    You want to fix the immigration issue, you have to work to fixing the socio-economic problems of your neighbors.

    Instead the Faggot Republicans have been working to undermine in infrastructures because that creates cheap products people like, and more gun-sales because of fear of socio-economic driven crime, which the NRA creams their panties over.

    Boondoggles like this are just going to exasperate the issue especially when Citizens who aren't required to carry papers have their papers demanded of them from assholes with badges.

    You want to change things you're going to have to boot out the Republicans, Libertarians, and Faux-Progressives like Hillary and Obama. And institute policies that will help our neighboring countries grow. And NAFTA shit is the wrong way, that just pushes the bar even lower without raising the standard of living for anyone. It just turns places where manufacturing used to happen like Detroit into free-fire zones.

  83. Scottish, Irish, Germans, and Italians by FrankDrebin · · Score: 1

    Love to see Chistie's reaction when his European cousins come for a visit and get their ankle bracelet applied at Newark International.

    --
    Anybody want a peanut?
  84. Ug, SS is not a ponzi scheme by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    it's a socialist program meant to keep old people who can't work anymore from becoming homeless. The only question you need to answer when you ask yourself "Can we Afford Social Security?" is "Is America too broke to keep old people from being homeless?". I'd like to think my country isn't that broke (or stupid), so long as we put some caps on the number of mansions folks like Dick Cheney and the Koch bros. can have.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  85. Biometrics? by Nehmo · · Score: 1

    There's no technical reason for barcodes or even RFIDs. Facial recognition, gait recognition, or even fingerprints would work. But Christi doesn't need to introduce the idea. It will happen anyway - and not just to immigrants.

    --
    (||) Nehmo (||)
  86. The CEO knows the how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "he would ask the chief executive of FedEx, Frederick W. Smith, to devise the tracking system"

    Yes, I am sure the CEO knows all the details of making a system like this work.

    Full disclosure: I had some short IT consulting jobs with FEDEX.

  87. Number tattoos by billstewart · · Score: 1

    I once worked for a guy who had a number tattooed on his arm. There are some still around, though more of their kids and grandkids, and enough living in NYC or New Jersey that you'd think Christie would have more sense.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Number tattoos by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      What has Christie ever done to make you think he has any sense at all? He's just a loud-mouthed moron.

  88. Christie's catching up on his TIVO... by jpellino · · Score: 1

    and it's loaded with "Person of Interest".

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  89. You want to track them? by fox171171 · · Score: 1

    Issue them a smartphone and a Facebook account when they enter the country. Problem solved.

  90. They did this in the movie Idiocracy.. by toonces33 · · Score: 1

    One would hope that this isn't where Christy is going for ideas.

  91. I say we by EthanDemurs · · Score: 0

    track them the same way he tracks calories.

  92. way too many states to track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they should not track tourists in jersey, they wont go there anyway

    also, wouldnt it be simpler to just make fed ex president the new usa president and the fed ex workers the new usa administration? they have the know how after all...

  93. Dehumanizing People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read most of the comments and interesting enough most of the comments centre around illegal immigrants.

    2. It seems to me that the proposals are not for illegal immigrants but for Visa holders. Visa holders come into America legally. A small percentage of these might stay on past their Visa allowance. But if you have seen the Visa requirements you will understand that it really is not that big of a problem. The proposals will basically dehumanize people making us like cargo. The question becomes how would you as an american feel is you go to another country and are constantly tracked like a piece of cargo. If you want to inflict it on foreigners I'm pretty sure it will be inflicted on you pretty soon.

    2. Weather we like it or not we are a global community and economy. I think the only economies that are relatively isolated are America and China. But if the South African economy hits a road bump it affects both America and China and of course the other way around. So immigration rules should really be revised it is starting to make less and less sense. Normal economic pressures will equalise immigration and emigration if the countries either relax or remove all the artificial rules regarding this.

    3. Instead of strengthening immigration rules even further (as if it helped in the past) Go the opposite direction and make it possible for immigrant to contribute to american society. Then you have solved the problem. Instead of being scared be bold and solve the problem not just add to it.
     

    1. Re:Dehumanizing People by neminem · · Score: 1

      > "2. It seems to me that the proposals are not for illegal immigrants but for Visa holders. "
      Well, it is true, it's pretty easy to track people who use credit cards... that's why spy shows always stress paying by cash. Oh wait, not that Visa.

  94. Negro Passbooks and Nazi Barcodes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, to travel around the good ol' USA you need the same old Negro Passbook to show who you are and where you've been, just like back in the USSR, and check the barcode on your arm to verify that you are who you are. What a Brave New Wolrd, late by three decades.

    Freedom, huh?

    So, this is what they call "small government"? "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" is no longer legal.

  95. Already doing it by Vadim+Makarov · · Score: 1

    With all the tracking and intelligence collection capabilities US has, no extra effort is needed. Uncle Sam already knows where you go and what you do, if you use any kind of electronic communication or device while in the US (and while outside the US for that matter, for most of us). That, plus airline & hotel & cc usage data tracks the paths of 99% visitors. I guess if you are in the remainign 1% who really "disappear" from the electronic communications after crossing the border, you are automatically a suspect.

    --
    17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
  96. How would this work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Why did he use FedEx as an example, and not the USPS?
    2. In order for the tracking to have any type of recent results, it would have to be tied to an activity that was necessary and frequent (i.e. spending or receiving money).
    3. Anyone that would be responsible for tracking people wouldn't know who to track, so everyone would have to be tracked.
    4. This could be solved by a national ID system, and the replacement of cash by electronic currency. The US government could then disable either at any time, and flag people for capture.

  97. Re: Europe has a close 2nd by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    If you visit Europe then every hotel you stay in records your passport details and submits them every night

    Even France gave this up in the late '80s.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  98. Re: Europe has a close 2nd by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    (sorry, I forgot to add why -- the police asked the government to stop it as they had no more room to put all the stupid cardbord files).

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  99. matrix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we are not that far from machines taking over, almost everyone says, we have time to make thinks right, really? ...matter is not all that we should be looking for...

  100. WTF??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm an American and this idea makes me sick... It's a complete invasion of privacy. Chris is committing political suicide. Listening to him talk is like listening to a stoner puke up half baked ideas. Let's put camera in every bathroom so we can stop people from having and privacy... Oh and mandatory polygraph tests every month with extremely personal questions. OH! And we could make all cars not go above the speed limit.... I think I can run for president. I'll rid the ocean of sharks and divert rain to California with giant fans that blow rain clouds to the west coast.

  101. Already have an ID Card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They already have an ID card. It's called a Passport, and it has a unique ID # that is used to register you when you enter the country. Same goes for other countries. It won't track anybody though (unless the holder carries it and walks through a specific RFID reader).

  102. New Jersey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what happens when you drink the water from New Jersey...

  103. Immigrant Tracking System Would Be a Hit with the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure tha

  104. I agree with Chris by NewYork · · Score: 1

    Indian Upper caste/Brahmin can infect you with a disease called Caste, a type of Cancer; Cure is http://goo.gl/8nr4bD

  105. Why do people focus on the bad elements in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally i've been to the us a number of times and I like it. There is a tonne of great stuff that originates from the USA and alot of the people are awesome. It seems to me though that its always the negative things about the U.S that's highlighted as of late ? that being said christie is a moron.

  106. Christie has no issue with this suggestion, as... by Kevoco · · Score: 1

    ...he is easily identifiable from outer space.

  107. Immigrant Tracking Made Easy - Gov. Christie Style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why even suggest something if you haven't thought it completely through? Only proves that you can be a couple cards short of a full deck and still be a politician.

  108. But i though we were all living in america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0