Thursday, July 26, 2007

There is no gorilla in the room

Progress is sporadic in stopping meth
Due to a combination of the prohibition on the sale of cold medicine that contains ephedrine, which can be used to make meth, the number of “mom-and-pop” meth operations has drastically declined. Of course, a lot of meth has instead been coming into the area from Mexico, but by making it harder for local meth “cooks” to produce the stuff, it means children aren’t as often exposed to the toxic, caustic fumes involved.

More good news — maybe: Oregon will receive $375,000 from the feds to finance “Target Meth Oregon,” to involve “citizen leaders, parents, business and faith groups” in the fight against meth. Oregon’s congressional delegation joined a bipartisan, nationwide push to get money to states to combat meth.

The article goes on to explain how the money will be used for a "hotline" and a "film production program." It then laments the lack of money for "a better general understanding of why people become addicted."

Sooo... step one is identify the problem. (hint: it's in bold in paragraph one)

Step two: talk about anything but the problem, distract folks with "film production programs."

Step three: cover eyes.

How about making it more difficult to transport drugs across the border? How about not giving the drug smugglers the crowd cover of millions of other illegal aliens? Can we talk about that? Should I call the hotline to suggest this?

As for the "better understanding" part. Let me explain it really quick: people get addicted to meth because they are stupid. Very very stupid. Instead of a hotline how about funding jail beds that will keep society safer and make life less pleasant for meth users.


Anonymous said...

"Manufacturing the Drugs Americans Refuse to manufacture."

Mandatory LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE for drug smugglers. Solitary if they commit the crime while carrying a firearm. Transporting drugs into the country weakens the country from within. It's a national security issue and should be dealt with accordingly.

Additionally, for every illegal immigrant incarcerated in a US Jail, that persons country of origin should be billed for the cost of that incarceration annually. This would ad tens, if not hundreds of MILLIONS to the us Prison System as well as the prison systems of states and counties.

This is Great News said...

As reported by the AP:

US businesses are bracing for a possible major crackdown on illegal foreign workers, as the government seeks to give immigration authorities more power to punish companies hiring undocumented workers.
President George W. Bush's administration has proposed a federal regulation that unions warn could lead to mass firings nationwide by companies seeking to avoid prosecution and fines.

"It's going to put businesses all over the nation in a bind," said Tamar Jacoby, an immigration expert at the conservative Manhattan Institute.

"If the feds (federal authorities) really follow through with this, and I think they're going to, you're going to see lots of industries ... leave the US," Jacoby said.

The rule under consideration in Washington relates directly to the potentially fraudulent use of Social Security numbers, which employees provide at the time of hiring.

Fake Social Security cards are widely available on the black market, allowing many immigrants to work at major US corporations.

Jacoby said the proposed regulation, left pending since June 2006, was boxed up while Congress debated a sweeping immigration reform plan that recently collapsed.

Since the legislation was buried, businesses have braced for the worksite enforcement regulation to be adopted by the Department of Homeland Security, she said.

The largest chicken processor in the United States, Pilgrim's Pride, has fired more than 100 employees who cannot produce valid Social Security numbers, according to news reports and advocates for the workers in rural east Texas.

Experts describe the firings as a pre-emptive move ahead of beefed-up enforcement.

The company has acknowledged firing workers although it would not say what motivated the layoffs or how many were let go. It has hired replacement workers.

"There undoubtedly will be additional terminations," said Gary Rhodes, a spokesman for Pilgrim's, which has 55,000 employees in the United States and Mexico.

The government routinely alerts companies when suspicious numbers are entered into the Social Security Administration's (SSA) electronic database, but experts say current law essentially allows employers to ignore the warning letters.

In a 2006 fact sheet, the White House said the proposed regulation would make it "clear that employers who ignore the discrepancies between SSA databases and the information provided by their employees may be viewed under the law as knowing that the employees are illegal workers, making it easier ... to prosecute violators."

Companies that knowingly hire illegal workers can face criminal prosecution and be hit with fines of up to 10,000 dollars per worker for repeat violations.

According to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the proposed rule remains pending. But business leaders believe authorities may announce its final adoption before the summer is out.

ICE spokeswoman Pat Reilly could not give a timetable for when it might be adopted, but she said it was a "well intentioned regulation and one hopes that it will get full consideration."

Bill Hammond, head of the Texas Association of Business and part of a national business alliance that pushed for immigration reform in Washington, said the migrant job losses at Pilgrim's could be the tip of the iceberg.

There are an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States, with as many as a 10th of them in Texas.

"There are a lot of employees in Texas ... who are undocumented workers," Hammond said. "A lot of them could be out of the workforce over the next six to 12 months."

Immigrant advocacy groups, labor unions and a coalition of national business groups have criticized the proposal.

The AFL-CIO, an umbrella group representing 53 unions and nearly nine million workers, warned the government last year that the proposed rule would "trigger mass firings across the nation" and lead to discrimination against legal workers.

"It's going to put employers in a position pretty quickly of, I think, having to terminate workers," said John Gay, vice-president for government relations at the National Restaurant Association. "We are concerned about it."

Anonymous said...

Daniel: I'm not versed on the nuances and sordid details of your previous life, but for the purposes of this discussion, a question is in order: Did you just sell it, or use it? Or both? Or neither?

Anonymous said...

we can't even keep drugs out of jail, how can we keep drugs out of a whole country?

supply and demand, supply and demand

try and put the toothpaste back in the tube if you want, all you will do is raise the price.

money would be better spent on rehab and slowly weaning people off this shit with safer drugs

like pure cocaine and marijuana

there i said it

BEAR said...

to all the open-borders jerks who are whining about actually having to obey the law......BOO-HOO-HOO! Read our Constitution, our immigration laws, and build the fence, you anti-American pukes!

Anonymous said...

I buy Sudafed in CA. I buy my liquor in CA. I pump my own gas in CA. In Oregon, I am a very, very bad man for doing any of these things outside of "approved" ways.

A different kind of LIB said...

Laws will not prevent human beings from using drugs. Period. It really is that simple. Human beings have sought out and used means of altering their consciousness through the use of drugs, controlled substances, whatever you want to call them, ever since there have been human beings. Is it sinking in yet? Do you get it? Do you understand?

What "war on drugs" are we on now? Fourth? Fifth? Sixth? How's it going? Anyone care to give me a progress report? And if you want to make the "we're not serious about it yet" argument, then go ahead and double, TRIPLE the resources that are pissed away in the "war on drugs," and do you know what you will have? More expensive drugs. (Not to mention a police state.) Period. It really is that simple.

Who was it that defined insanity as doing something and getting the exact opposite result you want, and then repeating it thinking you might get a different result? I think that was Einstein. Whoever it was, he was pretty smart.

And just for the record: I do not, have not, and will not use, sell or buy illegal drugs. Mine is not a "liberal" or "anti-American" position, gentlemen. It's a libertarian position. It's a free market position. It's a get-the government-off-my-back position -- which was, at one time, a conservative position. Unlike the neo-fascist swill you clowns want to dump down everyone's throat.

R Huse said...

Actually what I would like to see is maybe something a lot of the Holier Than Thou cant wait for another Cambodia in Iraq crowd would really love - a reasonable timeline for success or failure in a war.

Iraq? Who the hell knows, I wouldn't mind saying if we aren't anywhere further in two, three or ten years, lets call it good.

War on Drugs? Give me a break, that one aint going no where. Time to pull out. You get hooked on illegal drugs? Screw you, pay for your own damn treatment, we aren't fighting that war any more. Tobacco? Same thing, people are going to smoke it, its a drug, no more taxes on tobacco in the war on cigarettes.

War on poverty? OK 30 years and 11 trillion dollars transferred from the productive to the non productive and poverty virtually unchanged. Pull out now. Cut taxes that were paying for these nitwit programs, there, that solves your shipping jobs overseas problem as well, since we would be more competitive.

World War 2? - Ok lets give up, We lost, we are still over there in Europe after 60 years. Time to pull out. France? Germany? Screw you, try paying for your own defense and then go on at us about how we are barbarians for not paying for national health care.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the previous thread, regarding Daniel's comment about the "illegal" who tried to sell him tamales:

Notice how Miglavs did not respond to the question of how he knew the woman who was selling tamales was an "illegal" and whether he asked her about it. The reason he didn't respond is that an honest answer would have been, "I didn't ask her about it." Which means, for any fool who still needs it spelled out for them, is that Daniel Miglavs assumes that ALL Latinos are "illegal aliens." And if you need someone to explain how that's racist, there's no point in anyone trying.

R Huse said...

Yep, totally correct. Assuming some is illegal just because they are selling tamales is completely racist and there is no excuse for it.

By corollary, and I am definitely NOT saying you are doing this:

Assuming someone is racist, because they are against illegal immigration, is bigoted.

billybob said...

RHuse, you really bends over backwards to show everyone how stupid you are, don't you?

Re-read Anon 6:34's post:

Daniel Miglavs assumes that ALL Latinos are "illegal aliens."

Rhuse: Please direct my attention to the words "selling tamales" in that sentence. I guess I'm just not seeing them.

I look forward to your stupid, tortured response.

Anonymous said...

Which means, for any fool who still needs it spelled out for them ...

LOL! And true to form, Rhuse needed it spelled out. 'Nuff said.

R Huse said...

Awww geee....Mr Cranky Wanky billy bob. So sorry worry to get you in a tizzy. Me crying now, so sad over hurt I have caused.

Did I accuse Daniel? I simply said an assumption about immigration status based upon the sale of tamales was racist. I then went on to draw a corollary about an equally silly assumption.

I did not address the obviously idiotic "all Latinos" thing

Wait! Hark now! Forsooth do I hear yon Lalo Schfrin theme song?

Be still all. for it doth rocketh my mortal coil, what urgent and compelling notes do sway me? Why!.... its Mission Impossible!

Dah Dah
Da Dadah Dah Dah
Dah Dum Dum Dum Dum
Dah Dah Dah Dah

Dildoo, Dildooo

Your assignment Jim, should you choose to accept it - find where I mentioned Daniel. Once you have found it, destroy my argument with that proof.

As always, should any of your IM force be caught or killed, the secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions.

Good Luck Jim!

Dah Dah

Da Dadah Dah

Dah Dum Dum dum

Dah Dah Dah Dah


R Huse said...

Ahhh, the ever present Mr. Anonymous, still flailing about I see.

Duh duh "you're a stupid head".

If nothing else it is funny, however I do have to wonder if you have always been so fragile. Its cute in a cuddly "want to take care of the sad lost kitty in the rain" kinda way.

billybob said...

Thank-you for your stupid, tortured response.

R Huse said...

No prob, thank you for the concession.

I would say though that if asking you to state where I say what you claim tortures you, then I do wonder if you need to reassess to whom you apply the word "stupid".

Anyway, better luck in the future but perhaps this just aint your game?

Anonymous said...

Intelligent Commentary

By RHuse

Dah Dah

Da Dadah Dah

Dah Dum Dum dum

Dah Dah Dah Dah


- The End -

R Huse said...

Yeah, kinda weird isn't it? Obviously it wasnt going to take a lot to point out that Billy Bob didn't have the faculties for the argument he was trying to start. Ill never understand the point of asking someone to defend something they clearly didn't say.

Anyway I just sort of had the MI theme going in my head and it seemed so appropriate. Obviously it was effective in this case. Thank you for the complement.

Anon 10:12 said...

It wasn't a compliment, you dumb fuck.

R Huse said...

I guess I wasn't clear. I was thanking you for complementing me on my previous remark with the Mission Impossible theme vis a vie Billy Bobs silliness. Obviously you got it and I was thanking you for showing your appreciation of it. That's all I was saying.

Damn, I don't know about you, but that's one that I just cant get out of my head. You know I just found out Lalo Schiffrin also scored the music for the Thomas Crown Affair. I wonder if he is still alive? Were you a fan as well?

Anonymous said...

only losers like yourself have ever been involved in hard drugs. A real man never takes a nasty dive into the "world of meth." Why don't you twist up some good healthy bud and relax.