Facebook > Email > More Pinterest Print Twitter Play

Jeb’s Trip to the Border

Sizing up that other Bush from Texas.

By Comments

Bob Daemmrich

Forty percent of the people who have served as president during my lifetime are men named Bush. I have no personal animus against the latest iteration, whose name is Jeb, but I doubt I’ll summon much enthusiasm for another Bush until it’s Jenna’s turn to make a play for high office.

With that said, Bush—the Jeb one—is, in addition to being the former governor of Florida and a current candidate for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, a Texan. He was born in Midland and raised in Houston. He is also the father of Texas’s new land commissioner (another George), and enjoys some support in the state. So we would be remiss if we failed to observe that Bush (again, the Jeb one) made a pilgrimage to McAllen this week.

While on the border, Bush spoke on immigration, presumably with a view to striking a more moderate tone than the current Republican frontrunner, Donald Trump, and apparently part of an effort to add nuance to his own reference to “anchor babies” the previous week. Reviews were decidedly mixed, not in the sense that Bush received some criticism and come praise, but in that he was criticized by some observers, and excoriated by others. The editorial board of the New York Times was among the latter, arguing that Bush’s efforts at diplomacy—and his attempt to explain away his “anchor babies” remark—actually made matters worse:

In less than 15 minutes, Mr. Bush managed to step on his message, to give Mr. Trump a boost and to offend Asian-Americans, a growing population that is every bit as important as Latinos in winning presidential elections. And he failed to give Latino voters any persuasive evidence that he had anything better to offer them than his opponents in a revoltingly xenophobic Republican campaign.

Michael Lewis, writing for Vanity Fair, took the contrary view, such as it is, arguing that whatever Bush’s shortcomings, he’s obviously not the most noxious person in the field:

In defending himself to reporters on Monday, Bush claimed, obviously dishonestly, that he was referring to Asian businesses that bring pregnant women in on tourist visas. The Times admits that “the phenomenon is real,” but instead of criticizing Trump for phony umbrage on behalf of both Asians and Latinos, went after Bush for giving Trump the opportunity to start “an unnecessary battle.”

I find it hard to argue with Lewis’s reasoning. To me, Trump makes Mike Huckabee look like a gentleman and a scholar. At the same time, it’s a safe bet that Jeb, as the son of one president and brother of another, can count on being held to the normal professional standards of a presidential candidate, Trump notwithstanding. To that end, if he needs any help with message discipline practice—and recent events suggest he might—I’d suggest he consult his son George P. Bush, who has, after nearly eight months in statewide office, done nothing to discredit the state, unlike several of his peers.

Related Content

  • do you see immigrants as some dems do?

    “Sanger believed that the United States should “keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, Insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.” —“A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, April 1932, pages 107-108”
    http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/22/13-things-you-probably-dont-know-about-planned-parenthood-founder-margaret-sanger/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=thffacebook

    • WUSRPH

      Sounds a lot like MeNDan and Leo Berman plus that crazy congressman from east Texas, not discounting Trump. It has been a GOP fixation for years.

      • nope just another hate filled democrat

        • Indiana Pearl

          Do you have this comment on autopost?

    • Indiana Pearl

      Margaret Sanger did more to benefit humanity in one day than YouNDan have done in a lifetime.

      Partisan hack . . .

    • Blue Dogs

      Mexico threatening to retaliate against TX, who has denied birth certificates of illegal immigrant children!

  • WUSRPH

    George P: ‘Done nothing to discredit the state”……I would tend to disagree….His openly political stance on the endangered species is just too blatant.

    • Erica Grieder

      Hey now. He hasn’t been indicted or declared amnesty for a snack food that wasn’t actually banned. Could be worse!

      • WUSRPH

        But he was stupid enough to get into a fight with a bunch of little old ladies in tennis shoes (as they used to say) over the Alamo…He will rue that day before it is all over.

        • Lilly

          As a personal favor, WUSRPH, would you please not denigrate the members of the DRT by calling them “little old ladies in tennis shoes”? It might have been cute 40 years ago, but it isn’t now. It’s also not true. It minimizes every member of the organization, many of which are under 40.

          • WUSRPH

            Sorry about that… A good friend of mine is a former statewide officer in the DRT. She doesn’t wear tennis shoes either.

          • even if they are little old ladies in tennis shoes

            Dem Patty Murray’s campaign slogan was “Mom in tennis shoes’ but when a man says it it is derogatory?

            Yes there is a special logic some women have it is called liberal logic and it makes absolutely no sense to the majority but it does to them.

      • Lilly

        Damning with faint praise…

      • Yes could be a democrat….

  • Indiana Pearl

    My sympathies are with Columba Bush. She’s not psychologically cut out for the job, nor is Heidi Cruz who had a mental collapse in 2005. Forcing them into this campaign is a form of spouse abuse.

    • Kozmo

      Everyone has forgotten about the ex-wife of a certain Bush, who was spilling the family dirt not long ago but in recent years has become suddenly silent.

  • Rules of Blazon

    Jeb Bush is a lousy candidate. Rick Perry is a lousier (and soon to be former) candidate. But, like all the Republican candidates, there are no significant differences among them as regards the odious things they want to do to Americans, and especially to American women.

    I really don’t get why more political journalists aren’t focusing on just how awful the entire Republican field is. None of them are proposing to do anything–not a single thing–that will make life better for anybody (except maybe a handful of gazillionaires). It’s really all about how much they can hurt people. What a bunch of sickos.

    • Erica Grieder

      American woman here. Thanks for your concern, but what I find odious is your total inability to perceive my manifest disinterest in you as such.

      • Jed
        • Jed

          i can’t make any sense of this comment. must be my reading comprehension again.

      • Rules of Blazon

        I’m with Jed. What a nonsensical comment. If there wasn’t any truth in what I said, you wouldn’t be mad, and if there was any truth in what you said, you wouldn’t have felt a need to say it.

        • Unwound

          it means she doesnt give a shit what you think.

          • Rules of Blazon

            What it means–and what it doesn’t–is obvious. 🙂

          • pow yow! You just been bytchslapped….

  • dave in texas

    Good lord, has

    …after nearly eight months in statewide office, done nothing to discredit the state, unlike several of his peers.

    become the measure by which we judge our elected officials? That’s a mighty low bar.

  • Lilly

    To paraphrase: “Poor Jeb, he was born with a silver foot in his mouth…”

    • Indiana Pearl

      Runs in the family . . .

  • David Siegel

    George P has done nothing to discredit the state? You don’t think blaming protection of the golden-cheeked warbler for weakening the War On Terrorism is a little much?

  • emptyk

    George P Bush “has done nothing to discredit the state”. Impressive standard. Although the next phrase “unlike several of his peers” probably refers to the Texas Attorney General, indicted on multiple felonies and Ag Commissioner Sid Miller whose attacks on religion (as it happens, Islam) give professional calf-ropers a bad name.

    • why can’t dems beat him? Oh wait I know…voters are too stupid.

      • Blue Dogs

        They tried former El Paso Mayor John Cook (D) running for Land Commissioner last year. George P punked Cook’s butt!!!

        • WUSRPH

          straight ticket voting shows little about the popularity of an individual candidate.

          • why do dems vote straight ticket…are you told to do so?

          • WUSRPH

            I know reality is beyond your comprehension since you live in your only little world, but if you checked you would see that in Texas the GOP candidates get more of their vote from straight ticket voting than do the Democratic. But facts and you do not mix. Why do Republicans vote straight ticket…because they are too dumb to be able to find the place on the ballot to mark, punch or pull more than once.

          • excellent point…..democrats and hanging chads.

          • WUSRPH

            P.S. I have never voted a straight ticket in my life…I bet you cannot say that…Of course, you can that…but you would not be truthful if you did.

          • Pretty sure I skipped John Cornyn last election and you’d be correct thinking I have never voted for a dem in my entire life.

  • Blue Dogs

    Leave Jeb alone: it’s been 13 years since he was on a ballot back in 2002: the year he easily won reelection as FL Governor by double digits!

    • Indiana Pearl

      Bush v. Gore, 5-4; Terry Schiavo; slut shaming.

      We will never forget.

      • Annie Reilly

        Broward S&L…Medicare fraud…rigging an election…voting as a Hispanic…investing and losing billions with state pension funds…and his smuggler wife..his drug addicted daughter his abusive son etc. Hi Pearl

        • Indiana Pearl

          Hi Annie! Meet lilly.

          • Lilly

            Nice to have you here, Annie!

          • Annie Reilly

            Hi Lilly. I look forward to this group’s discussions. I’m not the smartest person here but probably the most liberal lol. Now waiting on Johns response to my not being the smartest…lol

          • Indiana Pearl

            Women who post on TM have to stick together – “the power of collective action.”

          • start a union and I’ll help.
            A union of low information socialist women to post gibberish on TM
            did I forget…hysterical?

        • WUSRPH

          I had forgotten about the Broward S&L stunt…I thought the other Bush brother—Neil, the one you never hear anything about—was the only one with a savings and loan skeleton.

          • Annie Reilly

            That was Neil Bush and Colorado S&L …Silverado I think…

          • Indiana Pearl

            Annie, did you ever get Topo Chico?

          • Annie Reilly

            Pearl I found it by the case at a Latin grocery chain here. I bought 2 cases 24 bottles per case for $29.00. Then WalMart had it again and I bought it there in a 12 pack. So who wants a Topo? Great memory IP.

      • Lilly

        The Pup, with his hyperbolic punctuation, is just trying to be relevant. He wants to play with the big kids, but he just doesn’t have the capability. Ergo the endless inane posts about TV anchors, Filipino politics, and nasty porn pictures. Silly.

        • José

          Google and Wikipedia are no substitute for thinking critically and being well read.
          Exclamation points are unnecessary when the comments themselves are insightful and well written.

          • Lilly

            As usual, well said.

  • WUSRPH

    A side light: Having called the Majority Leader a liar and having been called a jackass by the Speaker of the House, Ted Cruz better hope he is elected VP or President because there is apparently little chance of him having any success as a member of the US Congress. Of course, he brought it upon himself…..

    • or he may be running the whole show…thanks to dems.

    • John Johnson

      He was elected by Texans to do exactly what he is doing.

      • Indiana Pearl

        He was elected by a small subset of Texans.

        • no dems did,,,,

        • John Johnson

          I repeat…he was elected to do exactly what he is doing. He was elected. He is the Senator. They sent him there to disrupt a broken system. That was his charge and he is good at it. McConnell is a liar; Cornyn is a pander’er. Dewhurst would have just moved in where Kay Bailey H left off…another truck to tail employee of the Big’s.

  • Kozmo

    I hope TM is not going to start cheerleading again for the Bush dynasty. Jeb, Jenna, “P” — where will it end? Is this the feudal era or the dying stages of a once-promising democracy? And since when does accident of birth allow some carpet-bagger politicians to claim “Texaness”? Take a look at how long most of the men at the Alamo had been in Texas. (E.g., David Crockett — about nine weeks) This means nothing to me.

    I for one am sick of the Bushes and sick of the way the press fawns over them as celebrities and “leaders”. And I’d not be too quick to applaud “P”, who has certainly managed to keep his head down (is this all it takes to win acclaim?) when he’s not picking fights with old ladies like the DRT. Seizing the Alamo from its caretakers was not what I’d call a signal triumph, and the jury is out on what this will mean down the road for the preservation and commemoration of the Shrine of Texas Liberty.

    • Blue Dogs

      Stop being bitter!

    • Jed

      what would you have poor texas monthly do? all the cheerleading for perry isn’t working. they couldn’t actually support a democrat, so …

      • Indiana Pearl

        Why can’t TM support a Dem?

        • Jed

          you’re asking me?

  • Blue Dogs

    Harris County Sheriff’s Deputy Darren Goforth was shot & killed last night, while pumping gas in Northwest Houston.

    Suspect was captured last night on Lake Crystal in Northwest Harris County.

    Goforth was survived by his wife & 2 kids!
    RIP!

  • Bruce

    The JEB Is UP! He’s the grafted 卐cion of a halfascist CIA Company crime family, fer CHRIϟϟAKE !!

  • Blue Dogs

    Shannon J. Miles, a lowlife thug, named suspect in the shooting death of Deputy Goforth!

    Miles’ mother is a THUG too!

  • John Johnson

    The first candidate who asks these questions in a straightward, and civil manner, will draw lots of positive feedback and support:

    “Why is a pregnant foreign national, who breaks our laws by entering the country illegally, rewarded by us for doing same by affording her free prenatal care, a free birth, free postpartum care, citizenship for her child, and immediate enrollment in Medicaid? Is this reasonable? Is it fair to our citizens who need help and are having a tough time getting it? How about our vets who are being short changed on benefits and medical care? Shouldn’t money spent on 60,000 of these babies in Texas alone each year be going instead to our citizens who have sacrificed so much for us?”

    We are stupid.

    • Indiana Pearl

      Because Americans don’t want to pay $10 for a tomato . . .

      • John Johnson

        Really??? You think that babies born to mothers here illegally, and afforded free everything early in life after receiving citizenship, are going to be picking tomatoes? Just as Professor Pedant does on occasion, you make my point for me. Little Johnny Whoever, from East Bumfart, might deserve that money a little more than Little Eduardo…or maybe Sgt. Smith could get a new leg a bit quicker. You want to keep talking about cheap tomatoes, but with all we afford illegal’s once they are here, what do you think they really cost us? I am all for a tightly controlled guest worker program. That takes care of those tomatoes.

        • WUSRPH

          SSD

          • John Johnson

            Hahaha…from 1000 words to three key strokes. Now that’s quite a spread.

          • WUSRPH

            I said it all in less than 100 words the other day….but SSD says it all in only 3 letters.

          • John Johnson

            Well, for all who might actually read our back and forth stuff, go ahead and define for them SSD, or the new SSB, that you are using to define my simplistic, succinct, lowest denominator attitudes.

          • WUSRPH

            Actually, SSD stands for SHALLOW, SIMPLISTIC AND DELUDED. It describes your thinking.

          • John Johnson

            Thank you. Shallow would seem to mean that it is based on lack of info; simplistic would seem to mean that any given subject cannot be reduced down to a basic level; and deluded would seem to suggest that anyone who happens to disagree with your position is wrong. That about sum it up? You are a dinosaur; you have lived in the “pit” all your life, and you are calling me ill informed, too specific, and unable to sort through the chaff to form an opinion? Now that’s rich. I am in the real world, and have been all my life. You? Well, we all know where you’ve been. You are an intelligent guy, but you strong points are Texas government protocol and the history of Texas government. You would be much more respected if you wouldn’t try and stretch that into trying to come across as a prognosticator or someone who knows how those of us out here in the real world feel about any given subject. I believe in tough love. Consider me a friend who is imparting same.

          • WUSRPH

            You got it pretty good there with shallow–your “conclusions” (sic) usually are based on only a superficial analysis of a very limited amount of data–usually pure anecdotal.

            But you are a bit off the mark on simplistic and deluded.

            Simplistic does not mean that a problem cannot be refined and reduced to a more basic level….That is certainly possible….it just means that you gleefully ignore any knowledge, data or information that does not agree with your pre-determined answer in that process (Simplistic adjective sim·plis·tic sim-ˈplis-tik: too simple : not complete or thorough enough : not treating or considering all possibilities or parts.)

            And, deluded does not mean that you have to agree with me to be right…After all, believe it or not, I have made a mistake or two in my time…Instead, it means that, having examined virtually none of the evidence or considered any of the complexities of a problem, you delude yourself into thinking you have THE ANSWER.

            SSD

          • John Johnson

            I am an opinionated poster. I live in the real world. You don’t. My recent posts on the “anchor baby” brouhaha is a prime example. Your delusions about our economy cratering with the drop in oil prices is another. I post links to “expert” opinions on both, but you duck and dodge those and come up with this SSD retort. I have attempted to fight your “anecdotal” tag, but since these “experts” that might have just as much knowledge as you on any given subject are ignored, what am I expected to think about you. You never admit that you got it wrong…you fall back to this SSD stuff. Others, who are really never going to read this back and forth between us, will have to decide who is right and who is wrong if they do venture upon it. I don’t post this stuff for others…just for you…just to keep your head from getting so big that it blows up.

          • WUSRPH

            Assuming—probably incorrectly since it is not something you heard or saw (anecdotal)—you are interested in some real, tested, generally recognized data (the definition of facts) on immigration—legal and illegal—you might check this source:

            http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states

            Of course, I expect you will immediately begin screaming “40 million” because the source talks about all persons residing in the US who were born somewhere else, not just the 11.3 million “illegals”….But it you read the information, you might be a little more informed about the numbers, the source, the cost and even the benefits……If that happened, I might be able to drop one or more of the “S”s in SSD……

            P.S. You clearly did not read what I said last December about the oil price drop or what I have said since then…I have consistently said I was more worried than Erica and that the impact would not show up until the middle or third quarter of this year….I have also said that a major difference why this time may not be as bad as the 80s was that that period also saw the S&L and banking crises…which is not present this time…I have also said that I hoped that I was wrong (thereby admitting the possibility) .but why bother you with the facts when your mind is concreted. I also frequently posted cites to “experts” on the subject…

            P.S.P.S. There is nothing wrong with being “opinionated”…the problem arises when those opinions ignore facts. As the old saying goes: You are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts.

          • John Johnson

            Did you even read the entire link or just go Google something you consider to be “fact” and post it? My gripe is with not enforcing immigration laws and the anchor babies born to those who broke the law to get here, so quit trying to expand the subject as you are oft prone to do. I saw nothing in your link about the financial impact of illegal’s, and the number of illegal’s in this piece is based on census forms submitted. Who in their right mind would think that a majority of illegal’s would actually complete and return a form such as this? The numbers are skewed. This is a fact. Do you believe everything written by some government group or someone calling themselves “official” is the truth…is fact?

          • WUSRPH

            I read it…I analyzed it…I judged it….all the things you do to determine factual basis. No it does not scream out :They cost X dollars”…but what it does is show usage of programs–especially health—-were more than half of aliens have NO coverage…jobs–70% of Mexican aliens are in the work force (above the rate for US citizens or other alien groups)–that means WORKING, NOT the Trolls’ Looters…It gives you numbers…too many for you obviously….It is not based simply on census forms….but that is an easy target for you. The numbers are “skewed” because you do not like them.

          • John Johnson

            Duck and dodge. Don’t expand…just respond to specific questions, please. Contribution or burden to our economy is not addressed. The margin for error is not addressed. It is a typical biased report. Who paid to have it created? Do you know? Pay that heralded market study guru from Waco to produce a study for you and he will make it read however you want it to. What about this don’t you understand?

          • Indiana Pearl

            You don’t live in the “real” world. You live on YOUR world, as we all do.

        • Indiana Pearl

          “Deserve” is not the issue. Little Eduardo’s parents will work for less than Little Johnny’s parents. Basic economics . . .

          • John Johnson

            Well, if a guest worker program won’t get ur done, then I guess we pay more for that tomato.

          • We do pay more for the tomato, we’re giving billions in entitlements and all they have to do is vote democrat. Then the money goes into a pipeline to Mexico. Meanwhile illegals democrat voters are committing crimes against citizens. A small price to pay for a vote.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Who’s “we”? Most of your fellow citizens will not or cannot pay more for a tomato.

            http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/203984-illegal-immigrants-benefit-the-us-economy

          • John Johnson

            How many times are you going to use that flawed Combs report as proof that illegal’s help out economy. They don’t. They are a burden to it. We did not use to have a problem getting tomatoes, a new roof, a yard mowed, or a plucked chicken. We have laws. Enforce them or change them. Too much to ask or expect?

          • Indiana Pearl

            Why is the Combs report “flawed”?

            I have observed you reject any data that don’t support your hypothesis.

          • WUSRPH

            Because he does not agree with its conclusions. It does, however, have some problems in that some data just does not exist…..He used to scream that it did not count local costs and therefore had to be invalid—until I pointed him to the sections of the report that specifically cover local costs. It is most likely that he never read it…He did read one article from the Houston Chronicle, which he posts frequently, which had a figure on the amount of remittances to families at home and somehow convinced himself if they had that much to send home they must not be spending anything here. There are other reports and estimates available but none that cover Texas as much as the Combs report. For example:

            http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states

            The problem is that myths are always more powerful than facts—especially when he declares all data in any report the disagrees with (and has not read) to be false and manipulated.

          • John Johnson

            Well, I got dressed down on this by the Profesdor a few months back…but a few things in my mind make it so…how the figures were gathered ( how do you determine how much is being paid to illegal’s in cash, how do you know which workers are illegal and which aren’t, and what about the $5B that is sent out of Texas to Central America and Mexico each year? This is money that is earned in Texas but does not end up being pumped back into it. Combs ignored this aspect entirely, and when subtracted from her analysis, shows that the illegal’s presence here has a negative effect.

          • WUSRPH

            Would it be too tacky to point out that JJ is so familiar with the report in question that he attributes it to THE WRONG COMPTROLLER? It was by Carole Strayhorn, Susan Combs’s predecessor, not Comptroller Combs.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Isn’t she one with funny teeth?

          • Indiana Pearl

            You advocate for a guest worker program. How would you lobby for that in Texas? Where would you begin? Who would you contact?

          • WUSRPH

            Former Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson was a major backer of a guest worker program. He reads this blog so he may enter some information of use to you. He even got the Texas Republican Party to endorse such a program in its 2012 party platform….but they ripped it out in 2014 screaming “amnesty, amnesty, amnesty”. Jerry leans libertarian but he also can decipher the facts from the myths.

            The problem is that, where this involves dealing with foreign nations, that power is limited to the US govt. and the GOP is too afraid of “amnesty, amnesty, amnesty” to pass one.

            There were three bills introduced into the Texas Legislature during the recent session that would have tried to begin working with the feds for such a program. They were by Sen. Lucio and Reps. Cook and Pena. None, needless-to-say, got anywhere.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Did you see the NYT article this a.m. about the Artic Circle? More political infighting that only serves to hinder American interests . . .

          • WUSRPH

            Nope…I will look for it.

          • Indiana Pearl
          • John Johnson

            I will leave that to people smarter than me to figure out…but how about giving those who are qualified and signed up as a guest worker the opportunity to apply for citizenship after a certain number of years of participation in the program with no hickies on their records?

          • WUSRPH

            That is basically just what the Senate passed bill did for the “guest workers” already here….You came out of the shadows, you signed up…you paid a fine…you paid fees…you got a work permit….you learned English and after a few years you could apply for citizenship. If you did not, or you screwed up–home you went. Funny the U.S. Senate—with GOP and Democratic support–passed what you are advocating in 2013 and you apparently did not notice.

          • John Johnson

            Did not notice? What I know is that it is not law. It takes more than one body to sign off on a bill to make it so. What’s your point, smartass? Throw people in jail for hiring illegal’s and then the guest worker program starts to look better to all concerned. Dem’s don’t want to piss off Hispanics; Repub’s just want to continue to have a cheap labor pool. Therefore, we have impasse.

          • WUSRPH

            Actually, it may not take both houses of Congress…If the president’s program had been implemented much of what you advocate (and the US Senate passed) would already be in place. By executive order and agency regulations….not by the passage of a law. This, minus the penalties for hiring that the GOP will likely never pass, would have resolved much of the problem of the current, already here “guest workers”….I would prefer a law and I have questions about how far the president can go with his approach—a question now being decided by the court system–but the man you hate so much DID ACT to break the deadlock….

          • John Johnson

            So what? It isn’t happening. It won’t. Throwing people in jail for hiring illegal’s would change the dynamic and get the ball rolling toward true reform and some sort of compromise. This isn’t going to happen either. This is why Trump is gaining ground. Cruz, too. They both cuss business as usual in D.C.

          • WUSRPH

            But Cruz–like you—opposed the only real attempts to do something about the problem in years—the Senate bill and the president’s order.. We do not yet know what will be the fate of the president’s initiative….that is being decided in the courts, as it should be. But I would bet that the GOP prays that it is finally approved since that will solve much of the problem without forcing them to take a single vote while allowing them to attack Obama. You, or course, predictably fail to give him any credit for ACTING while others talk.

          • John Johnson

            He is the Worst President Ever. I have no respect for him. I have, however, given him his due a couple of times. I will do so again here if he breaks this impasse.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Duh. We know that.

          • John Johnson

            You, my dear, are extremely perceptive.

          • Indiana Pearl

            You betcha!

          • WUSRPH

            Until we get something better. It ain’t perfect, but it basically confirms to other factual, non-ideologically based studies.

            P.S. The hundreds of thousands caught upon entering and the similar numbers deported from inland each year might differ with you about whether or not we were enforcing the existing laws…..That does not mean that new laws are not needed…I have, in fact, laid out a couple program on several occasions….The best we have seen from you is a piece here and a piece there…

            P.S.P.S. There was a chance to maybe get something better during the last legislative session when your friendly GOP state senators tried to pass a bill requiring the Comptroller to do another study. The problem was that this one would have been right down your alley—it was specifically limited to the COSTS and excluded any study of the BENEFITS…

          • John Johnson

            I just want good, “clean”, accurate figures from both the cost and benefit side. Thus far, they have been skewed. Furthermore, I think that accurate numbers are almost impossible to compile. My main gripe now is how we reward a pregnant mother who breaks our law and the associated costs to the taxpayer. Money that could be helping vets or others here legally and in need.

          • WUSRPH

            “I think that accurate numbers are almost impossible to compile.”

            Of course, totally accurate numbers are impossible. they always will be in an open, free society….BUT estimates based on the best possible numbers…checked, weighed, analyzed and subjected to statistical tests….with admitted degrees of inaccuracy—-which is what a good study is based on–are available….The report meets most of those tests…It is the best we have to date….As does the report I cited yesterday.

          • John Johnson

            B.S. She left out the $5B. That is no small oversight. With regards to whoever complied the report on the link you sent me to, they made no mention of a margin of error based on census forms not returned. I just watched Youtube Bill Maher show clip with Ann Coulter on. She stated in her new book that, based on federal figures compiled, there could be as many as 40 million illegal immigrants in the U.S….a far cry from the numbers commonly broadcast.

          • WUSRPH

            There are an estimated 40 MILLION aliens in the U.S. true…but no where near that number of illegals…You just cannot hide that many people.

          • John Johnson

            Heck, I don’t see any of them hiding now. Why would they be hiding? Forget the 40M…what about no mention of margin of error? What about Combs conveniently leaving the $5B out of her report?

          • WUSRPH

            Because more than 400,000 of them were deported and turned back at the border last year and every year. That is why they hide…and why they have a lower crime rate—you do not want to draw attention to yourself…even in left-leaning Travis County which virtually leads the state in handing over those charged with crimes to immigration.
            P.S. For mentions of margin of error, etc. you usually have to look at the footnotes and/or the full description of methodology….If you have questions about either…contact the authors…as they suggest at the bottom of the report.

          • John Johnson

            Yeah, I’ll do that tomorrow.

          • WUSRPH

            That is what a person who was really interested who had real questions would do….You will not because you are not interested in any facts but the ones imbeded in your concrted mind…A couple of more you will ignore in your proclamation that nothing is being done:

            * over past decade the US has spent $10.7 billion on fences, cameras and oher measures; and

            * doubled number of border patrol agents to over 18,000

            But then nothing is being done…

          • John Johnson

            It’s the wrong approach. Everyone with any sense knows it. Send 2/3’s of the border agents home and demolish the fence…but pass go-for-your-throat laws that means prison time and stiff fines for anyone hiring someone not possessing proper documentation (eye or hand print scans???).

          • Indiana Pearl

            “Everyone with any sense”? Come on, JJ. Who????

          • WUSRPH

            I see you have gotten beyond turning our borders into a fortified zone (as you advocated before) to turning the whole nation into a land where all of us must register and carry official papers at all times.

            Of course, we cannot just limit this ID to getting a job…What about those government services? Shouldn’t everyone have to PROVE that they “DESERVE” them? I mean an “undeserving” person might get health care, food stamps, a library book or something else he is not entitled to. No, to do the job it must be ID for everything and everyone!

            Isn’t it nice how little things like basic freedoms and the Constitutional and its Amendments (the 14th and in this case the Fourth) should not stand in the way of driving out those three percent of the population who had the guts and ambition to seek out a better life for themselves.

          • John Johnson

            Oh, you could do one or the other. A fortified border would just be a lot more expensive. I find kicking these ideas around stimulating.

            Have you gotten those figures calculated yet taking Strayhorn’s figures and subtracting Ratcliff’s?

          • WUSRPH

            No….but it makes no difference whether I do or don’t you would not accept any outcome except the one fixed in your mind.

            There is a little problem, though, with your approach. It seems it would be impossible to subtract the $5 billion from anything….because nowhere in the published report is there any estimate of the total INCOME of illegal aliens in Texas. You would need such a figure to try to make any sense our of your calculations. What you would have to do is subtract the $5 billion from their total income and then estimate whether the remaining dollars they had to spend could produce the amount of revenues, including from sales taxes, she estimated they produce. You cannot do that without an income number…I can’t…RG couldn’t and didn’t and you can’t either.

            I assume that some such number had to exist somewhere, but it is not in the published report. It is probably buried deep in the formulas used in her economic model…..but it is not publicly revealed.’

            I tried to see if I could fill that gap for you by looking for information on the incomes of illegal aliens. There is some data on the amount of economic activity they produce (more than $150 billion per year nationwide) There are also some estimates of the total amount of state and local taxes they pay (more than $11.8 billion per year)…and how many of them are in the labor force (more than 8.3 million out of the estimated total of 11.3 million) but there is little on their incomes. So far, the best I can find is an estimate by the Pew Research Center folks (a well respected private outfit) that the “median household income” of illegal aliens is about $36,000 per year. (Median of course, means that half the households make less than $36,000 and half more. They did not provide any top or bottom figures, other than to note that ” A third of the children of unauthorized immigrants and a fifth of adult unauthorized immigrants lives in poverty. This is nearly double the poverty rate for children of U.S.-born parents (18%) or for U.S.-born adults (10%).). But I am still trying to tie down where they got that figure. So, sorry I cannot make your calucation…assuming…as I do not…that it would mean anything if I could.
            .http://www.pewhispanic.org/2009/04/14/a-portrait-of-unauthorized-immigrants-in-the-united-states/

          • John Johnson

            You are a product of your surroundings…and it is obvious yours was in the political arena. No income figures? “Some formula”? Strayhorn’s report wants to reach a conclusion and does not even list the starting point used to get there…how much they made and had to spend? Would your professor have let you get away with that, Professor? Never.

            Strahorn states, I believe, a figure that illegal’s contribute to the state’s economy. Ratcliff’s, what they remove from it. What difference does what their gross income might be make? We know they made enough to send $5B out of the country that was earned in Texas. Strayhorn needed this info to get the figures she needed to reach her conclusion. We don’t here.

          • WUSRPH

            The problem you are having in getting an answer is very simple: You saw two numbers in a newspaper story 9 years ago and became fixated on them. The problem is that you did not understand the numbers when you read them and still don’t. You might have had you ever bothered to read the report from which one of the numbers was derived., But you have consistently refused to do that since you KNOW it is wrong before you even look at it.

            I could go on and on, but I will limit my comments as follows:

            First, of all the $1.7.7 billion figure you want to subtract the $5 billion in remittances from IS NOT WHAT YOU THINK IT IS. It is not, nor does the report suggest, any indication of the income of or the spending by illegal aliens in Texas. Instead, it is the comptroller’s estimate of the impact of the absence of the estimated 1.4 million undocumented immigrants in Texas on the Gross State Product

            Second, what you are trying to suggest is that, if somehow that number did mean what you think it does, if you subtract $5 billion in remittances there would not be enough income level for the illegals to have produced the revenues Strayhorn says their purchases and activities actually did.

            Third, it is theoretically possible that what you want to calculate could be done IF we had any data on the total income of illegals in Texas. If we had that data, which we do not, we could subtract the $5 billion from it…..determine how much is left…run it through the Comptroller’s model and estimates of the spending patterns of the illegals and perhaps show whether the revenues she found are feasible. BUT WE DO HAVE THAT NUMBER.

            Fourth, RG never said that the $5 billion in remittances to the home folks made her figures invalid. He did not even suggest that. You leaped to such a conclusion on your own.

            Fifth, The report does not provide a step-by-step, number by number presentation…It would have to be dozens of pages of numbers and formulas, none of which you (and often me) would understand. It reports on the outcome of the use of various formulas and models…No report would include that kind of specificity. However, it does give you some idea of the assumptions used to reach the various conclusions.

            Sixth, it is useless to try to explain the report to you. You would have to read it yourself—which you refuse to do because you know before you read it that is fraudulent…… READ THE GD REPORT.. After you have, perhaps I will be willing to discuss it with you…UNTIL THEN PLEASE STOP TRYING TO SUBTRACT APPLES FROM PEARS….because all you are getting is prunes.

          • John Johnson

            You are simply made up of one massive pile of words that you string together in humongous lumps of obfuscation whenever it suits you. “Baffle ‘um with bullshit”. One minute your are defending Strayhorn’s position and numbers, which you have done every other time we have debated this point, and now you are stating they don’t tell the entire story. Which is it?

            Her $17.7B number does not indicate spending? “The Stayhorn report used a model that was built on how much immigrants earn as well as the return on capital from their labor to produce an impact on the gross state product”.

            “Overall, the survey found that illegal immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive in state services.” Are state tax revenues not derived from spending? Indirectly from the rent they pay, or the home they pay for, or the products they purchase?

            I guess my whole argument is based on the fact that this, and any other “study”, or as they call this report…a “survey”…is flawed. Deeply flawed. I call it “fact” because you cannot guess how many illegals are here, or how much they are paid, how they are paid, and how many of them receive free services and call the results anything but a guess and not worth much. This is fact.

            Another study by the Lone Star Foundation said that the total cost to the state back in 2005 was $4.5B and that illegals paid just $1B through tax collections. Who you going to believe?

            Furthermore, if your economy is based on a spending cycle, or spending “circle”, and one entity is throwing $5B a year out of that “circle”, it has a negative impact anyway you want to look at it. This might be too simple for you to understand.

            And since this discussion has also revolved around rewarding pregnant women here illegally with the prenatal care, free delivery, free postpartum care, citizenship for the child and free everything else afforded an indigent citizen of the U.S., the fact that the cost to Texan’s for these American’s born to the parents here illegally was not included in Strayhorn’s study. Using 60,000 of these anchor baby births each year, extrapolate and see what you come up with in the cost to the state over an 18 year period. You might want to call this “anecdotal” thinking once again, but if you do, I am going to suggest that Strayhorn’s “study” was no different.

            Black is black, and white is white; the sun comes up in the east, and the sun sets in the west. Other than these, and a few more basic, obvious absolutes, it appears that almost anything can be twisted, contorted and misrepresented these days to offer up the results that government or Big Business wants to project.

            This was your job while you worked in government, was it not? Spinning? You are good at it, but I can’t let you get too carried away and keep filling up this blog site with the same pompous, horribly wordy, contorted proclamations without calling out “bullshit!” every now and then. I’m doing it for your own good. Your head is going to explode if allowed to keep enlarging at such a rapid pace.

          • WUSRPH

            I am not going to discuss a report with someone who has NEVER READ IT…and whose repeated comments confirm that again and again.

            For example, as to your demand for some cost of a
            “anchor baby”, No, the report does not present the information in that format. But it does present, for example.
            +5 1/3rd pages of detailed information about the cost of health care for illegal aliens;
            +2 1/2 pages of detailed information about the cost of providing education to their children;
            +4 pages on criminal justice costs;

            out of a 22 page report. NONE OF WHICH YOU HAVE READ.

            In short, there is more than enough data to answer any of your questions. But, you are going to have to spend a few minutes of your precious time answering them…because I am not going to spoon feed someone who is not interesting in learning anything.

            Your TOTAL KNOWLEDGE (and I use that word quite loosely when it comes to what you really know) is based on a single newspaper story from 9 years ago….out of which you extracted two unrelated numbers….from which you made some great discovery that in your concreted mind invalidated the entire study….But what you did, in computer terms, is you put in shit and you got shit out!

          • John Johnson

            Wrong…I read the entire report, but years ago when it came out. I then read two pieces recently which analyzed Strayhorn’s report…the one by Ratcliff and another by Liz Peterson at the Washington Post. I have quoted those reports in my retorts to you, but they don’t seem to mean much. I pose specific questions to you and your never answer them. You just come back with more obfuscation. You are a master at this technique. You are turning into a pompous old blowhard. As far as “shit in, shit out”, isn’t that what Strayhorn did? Since, as you say, we don’t know how she came up with her “formula” as you call it for determining numbers of true illegals, amount of valid income, amount that any one person labeled “illegal” actually spends or pays in taxes, are you going to call it validated or “fact” … or will you use the “it’s the best we’ve got to go on” line? Either way, it is just more contorted, twisted and worthless info, which is what we have come to expect from our government. Want me to cite more examples? I can go on all day…but I grow weary of your lack of answers to specifics. Duck, dodge and change directions. Professor Pedant, you are the best I have ever seen at it.

          • WUSRPH

            Source@MigrationPolicy.org
            Why don’t you gut up and tell them how much you distrust their figures?

          • John Johnson

            Why don’t you go look at their website and the resumes of their trustee’s? That gives me a pretty good idea what their mission might be. Look at how many foreign governments fund them. What a rube you can be.

          • WUSRPH

            I accept their figures as being most accurate BECAUSE I test them against other generally reliable sources. To be useful, data must be generally accepted and verifiable….The information in this report meets that test. What it says is generally the same as the accepted figures—figures that have been tested, audited and compared.

            You, of course, had not even the read (if you have yet is questionable), much less tested it before condemning it. If you, in fact, read it you will find some data that you could use in your arguments…but you have to read to find it.

            This report is a compilation of data…not a source of original data. What gives it value is that it brings information from many sources on many related topics together.

            Any trained analyst—or historian as I was—will not just accept something without checking including by weighing any potential bias. To do otherwise would be to be a true fool. Information and datum are useless unless they have been so tested….To assume I would do other is to insult me. But you have never had a problem with insulting people who disagree with you and/or questioning their motives.

            The fact that you are so consumed by distrust can only suggest that you must have been terribly hurt both in life and business to have such a distrust of anything and everything. It is a shame to see someone so eaten by fear of his fellow man that he cannot trust any of them.

          • John Johnson

            You might not realize how good you have become at insults and name calling. You are great at it, too.

            You are an egotistical, pompous, blowhard. The biased reports you tout are based on good data; everyone else’s on bad.

            You want to push gov reports as valid because…well because, it’s the government. Forget the fact that we all know figures get twisted and contorted by them every day. If they don’t read right, change the procedures. Case in point? How inflation is now figured. I could go one, but the point is, it’s a waste.

            As stated yesterday, I’m here just to keep your head from getting too big for your body. I’m way too late…but will keep trying. No thanks necessary.

          • WUSRPH

            A question about how much attention you have actually paid to the report might arise in some minds based on the fact that you keep attributing to the WRONG COMPTROLLER. The report was issued by Comptroller Carole of the many names, Susan Combs’ predecessor in office. But why should a few minor details like that stand in the way of your knowing all about it and its weaknesses?

            P.S. Below is the cite for RG’ Ratcliff’s story on the STRAYHORN REPORT, which appears to be the total source of your knowledge on the subject.. You might want to review it.

            http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-tallies-costs-benefits-of-illegal-1582179.php

            P.S. The report is now 9 years old….but its basic conclusion that they contribute more than they get are borne out in several other studies. Including at least one by that bunch of number manipulators the Congressional Budget Office. You can find them and others by doing a google search.

          • the taxpayers, did you read my post?

          • WUSRPH

            In fact, today residents of the US spend A LOWER %age of their income on food than in ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD.

            http://www.ibtimes.com/us-spends-less-food-any-other-country-world-maps-1546945

            Why:

            *Our farmers/ranchers are more efficient (little things like all those federal programs at land grant colleges had a little to do with that).

            * We still produce most of what we eat and do not have to pay import prices (Much of what we do import comes from low cost counties); and

            * LOW PRODUCTION COSTS (wages).

            We could probably pay more (and with the California drought will)…..but low wage labor is a major factor in keeping us from the $10 tomato. But that is another factor that JJ will ignore.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Many U. S. born Latinos I’ve met in Texas have worked as migrant farm laborers. They call it “migranting.” They tell me that when school is out, the whole family hits the road and follows the harvest. The most responsible child – perhaps five or six – stays with the babies at the camp while the adults work in the fields.

            Non-citizens probably fare even more poorly. I’ve been told that they are often cheated out of their slave wages or abused in other ways. As illegals they are helpless when it comes to legal protection.

            As a midwesterner whose only experience with farming was observing old white guys in air conditioned International Harvesters scooping up corn and soybeans in relative comfort, it has been an eye-opener.

            A guest worker program would help address some of these issues and bring these people out of the shadows. It’s a moral issue.

          • WUSRPH

            The apple pickers in Michigan were probably from the lower Rio Grande Valley. They are there…just out of sight wherever there is a crop that demands hand labor. … even in Indiana…

            We had a guest worker program during WWII up to the early 50s…It was called “Bracero” . After it most of the work was done by US residents but after a generation or two, they settled into other jobs. That is when we got the unofficial program we have today, but they too are settling in…

          • Indiana Pearl

            Most agriculture in Indiana is corn and soy. Hand-picked stuff comes from organic farms. Michigan has cherries. Indiana has limestone . . .

          • WUSRPH

            I would not take too close a look at the labor force on those organic farms or any truck crop farm if I was you. Nor would I look to carefully at the people working in meat processing plants or most of the less desirable jobs around food….

          • Indiana Pearl

            Northern IN – and most of the Great Lakes states – was flattened by the last glacier. In IN it is flat until about 20 miles south of Indy, so northern IN has great farmland with rich soil. Southern IN is rock, rolling hills, and spectacular trees. Pigs are prolific.

            Trust me on this. (I know you like to be right.)

          • WUSRPH

            Having spent four years in northern Indians and driven thru it only two years ago in the height of the farming season I know a little about the area. But wherever you have agriculture, especially vegetable and truck farms, you have illegal alien labor….except on the Mennonite farms, that is.

          • John Johnson

            Agree. There was a program on 20/20 or 60 Minutes years ago about the child worker abuse picking berries up in the north somewhere, and the poor living conditions afforded them. Any program who need strict guidelines and inspection.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Met a woman at a wedding in San Antonio whose parents were migrant workers. She had a Ph. D. in biology. Said the government provides schooling for migrant workers and that got her on the right track. I’m sure her family helped a lot.

          • WUSRPH

            There are hundreds of thousands if not millions of such stories…It is the American story enacted by generation after generation of immigrants to this country from all over the world…It is what makes us “exemplarily”.

          • Lilly

            I’m curious about the premise – ” a pregnant foreign national [woman].” It appears to demand a rewriting of the 14th Amendment. So how in the world of Mr. Magoo what would replace ” All persons born or naturalized in the United States”? Citizens and “natural born citizens” are references in several sections of the Constitution. Must both parents must be citizens? That would certainly leave out our current president as well as the junior senator from Texas. It would also leave out many who are the product of WWII war brides at US military. Or would foreign fathers be acceptable, but not foreign mothers, so we’d only targeting foreign women? If we did find foreign father’s unacceptable, how do we prove it? DNA tests? Who would pay for the testing?

            And how far back does this go? One could certainly look at the emancipated slaves. If you look at slavery as an illegal institution as evidenced by its abolition, then some might argue that all former slaves were the product of illegal immigration. Therefore they would not be legal citizens, and neither would the children of the mothers (and fathers, if both parents are needed for citizenship), or the grandchildren, or great-grandchildren, etc.

            One might even deny the First Nation people as well. After all, they have their own nation (after a kind), so how can they also be citizens of the US?

            And then there’s the immigrants who came before there was the concept of legal immigration. There status might be considered “undetermined,” since there is no documentation that they entered the US legally.

            So many questions. They need a big picture view, not myopia.

          • WUSRPH

            We had an extensive discussion of the 14th Amendment and birthright citizenship earlier. See

            http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/birthright-citizenship-is-real-says-the-constitution/

            I asked those who were arguing that it did not apply to these kids to provide a fuller explanation of their argument, but they did not do so.

          • Lilly

            Sorry, did not mean to repeat a previous thread.

            But I found nothing on that thread on the children of foreign national fathers and citizen mothers. In other words, there’s a target on the backs of foreign mothers and their children, but what if the fathers of those children are citizens?

            I think you and I are in agreement: it’s a complex issue that requires more thought than a simplistic sound bite of “anchor babies.”

          • WUSRPH

            The 14th Amendment authorizes the Congress to pass legislation implementing it….Among the laws so adopted are those covering situations where one parent is a citizen and the other is not, both when the child is born in the US and born overseas. In both cases, the Congress has established that the child is a US citizen at birth. (Whether that means a “natural born” as required for president is not clear, however.)

            What is of interest, is that the law provides that if only one is a citizen and the child is born overseas, the child must spend several consecutive years in the US (I think it is 5) after becoming 18 or their citizenship is voided. In other words, they have a “conditional” citizenship. That does not apply to children born in the U.S.

            Some of those who attack citizenship by birth claim that, if the Congress can define what makes a citizen, it can abolish citizenship by birth with a statute, without the need to amend the constitution.

            Others disagree holding that citizenship by birth is clearly established by the 14th Amendment and Congress cannot change that. They would point to the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). -in which the SCOTUS found that the child of two non-citizens (who could not become citizens under US law) was a citizen by birth, statute or no statue.

            Some of those who attack citizenship by birth do in fact claim that there HAS to be a US citizen parent for it to take effect. This interpretation would, as you noted, void the citizenship of millions of Americans who were born the children of immigrants who had not yet become citizens. National Review, which is one of those making this argument, softens the blow by providing that this should only be enforced “prospectively”. (How they get by Wong Kim Ark is beyond me…but they just ignore it.)

            P.S. Citing only women is a typical male instinct. After all it goes back to Adam and Eve and more recently to St. Paul as women are always the source of the problem.

            Sorry if I am being repetitive here.

          • John Johnson

            Maybe we do need the Amendment altered. Again, all of you don’t want to address the fact a pregnant woman here “illegally” gets “rewarded”…and the reward is not insignificant or cheap. What about the wounded vet needing help and waiting years for it because of lack of funding? I have posed this question several times, but have yet to see an answer back. I’ll keep looking.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Even the First Nation people came here from somewhere else.

          • Lilly

            True. But am I correct, the land was uninhabited then? But that may not count towards “legal immigration.”

          • Indiana Pearl

            It is arguing about how many angels can sit on the head of a pin. Onlynwhitenpeole seem to count in these debates.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Just some wooly mammoths . . .

        • Indiana Pearl

          See below.

  • No wonder my comments go over the heads of most here….but I do understand as most here aren’t equipped for abstract thinking.

    “Researchers don’t know if sarcastic people are smarter, but they do know that sarcasm requires abstract thinking—discerning meaning beneath the surface—which is known to be a hallmark of intelligence.”

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/people-love-your-sarcasm-really-1440451942?mod=e2fb

    Now don’t your panties in a wad it just means I can think rings around most of you.

  • WUSRPH

    The problem is that you have never demonstrated any knowledge of the report that goes beyond R.G. Ratcliff’s story.

    • John Johnson

      How about we accept Strayhorn’s figures without question? That work for you? If so, then subtract the $5B+ that Ratcliff states was wired from Texas south and out of our economy. Once you do this, please report back what the net figure is you come up with.

      • WUSRPH

        Not worth the effort….You would dispute any figure anyone came up with….so why bother. Plus it makes no difference in his conclusions because SHE NEVER REPORTED AN ESTIMATE OF WHAT THE INCOME OF ILLEGALS WAS…Had she done that, then you might be able to subtract the $5 billion and say—Is the remainder enough for them to have paid this much in sales taxes by making that many dollars worth of purchases? But you cannot do that with the data available. I can’t and RG couldn’t and didn’t Sorry.

        I would assume that some calculation might exist somewhere, but not in the printed report…so I cannot make any estimates or guesstimates. That, of course, will not stop you from jumping to your conclusion….You have never needed or wanted data….anyway.

        • John Johnson

          Once again, you insist on obfuscation. You duck, dodge and change direction. You stretch instead of trying to shrink. You have been referring to my years of observation as a basis of opinion as anecdotal; yet yours based on reports generated by people with obvious biases are considered fact. Heretofore, you have defended Strayhorn’s report as being sound. For arguments sake, I have given that to you. Now, I want you to tell me whether or not you consider Ratcliff’s info correct…the $5B he says was taken out of our state’s economy through $ wired out of the country by illegal’s. If the two figures work for you, then subtract them and tell me if this number is in the black or in the red. We have finally gotten to the bottomline. No anecdotes here; no “yeah, but’s”. Just do it.

          • WUSRPH

            If you bother to read the COMPLETE POSTING…you responded before it was finished. You will see that it is impossible to do your calculation with the available data. I can’t, RG can’t and didn’t and you can’t either. So go back and read the entire thing….To be truthful I do not know whether R.G.s. information is valid or not. I cannot locate report he cited…I can find others….that say that the total remittance from the US to foreign counties is substantially more than $5 billion…but that includes remittances by legals, illegals and by US citizens. His story is so old–from 2006–that the report he cited is no longer available. I am not saying it did not exist. I am sure knowing RG that it did..but I do not know what else it said….Nor can I test that number against any income number to determine how much illegals would have had available to spend….which is what you are actually asking.

          • John Johnson

            All you need to do is do a search like I did a month or so ago when I posted the link. $5B out of Texas. Houston Chronicle.

  • Indiana Pearl

    Oh naughty! After you dumped on me for attacking Dogs . . .

    • John Johnson

      Attack??? Me??? Naw. Don’t you see the smiley face?

      • Indiana Pearl

        Smiley faces ain’t worth jack.

  • WUSRPH

    Moved.