Ponderable

Hüsker Dü said:
There seems to have been a quote malfunction putting your post in mine. Not reading the entire string of posts following the idea the nutters got confused and thought they should be referring to me . . . typical nut house behavior. With how bad they have looked for more than a year now, (going from staunch conservative upholders of The Constitution to just the opposite supporting someone with no regard for the rule of law, America or The Constitution) it's no wonder they have become a pack of rabid weasels looking for anything to pounce on, even when they are, once again, wrong.
Click to expand...
Hot Air
 
Racist nutters: a tale of two parties - 2/6/18 February 6, 2018The real difference between the Democratic Party and the Republicans is easy spot, if you just bother to look at the way they treat genuine hateful racists. More


February 6, 2018
Racist nutters: a tale of two parties
By Thomas Lifson
The real difference between the Democratic Party and the Republicans is easy spot, if you just bother to look at the way they treat genuine hateful racists. In the same state of Illinois, no less.

Republicans have woken up too late to the fact that in a Congressional district so safe for Democrats that no legitimate Republican filed papers before the deadline for the primary ballot, a genuine Holocaust-denying Jew-hater will win the party’s nomination by default. Alarms are ringing all over GOP-land, and we can safely expect many Republican voices to be raised against him, urging support for the Democrat.

Meanwhile, when a Democrat racist enough to declare a Jew-hater like Louis Farrakhan “a fine human being,” The Democrats elect, and re-elect him to Congress., and accept him into the Congressional Black Caucus. Peter Hasson writes in the Daily Caller:

Democratic Illinois Rep. Danny Davis defended Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan as an “outstanding human being” on Monday.

Farrakhan is known for embracing radically anti-Semitic and anti-white views, as even the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center has acknowledged. Farrakhan’s history of racially extreme comments includes blaming Jews for the September 11 attacks, saying white people “deserve to die” and praising Adolf Hitler as a “very great man.”

And when Barack Obama palled around with Farrakhan, the media took no interest in his history of cozying up with him at a Congressional Black Caucus meeting:






Republicans shun the racists that identify with us, while the Democrats elect -- and re-elect -- theirs.

The real difference between the Democratic Party and the Republicans is easy spot, if you just bother to look at the way they treat genuine hateful racists. In the same state of Illinois, no less.

Republicans have woken up too late to the fact that in a Congressional district so safe for Democrats that no legitimate Republican filed papers before the deadline for the primary ballot, a genuine Holocaust-denying Jew-hater will win the party’s nomination by default. Alarms are ringing all over GOP-land, and we can safely expect many Republican voices to be raised against him, urging support for the Democrat.

Meanwhile, when a Democrat racist enough to declare a Jew-hater like Louis Farrakhan “a fine human being,” The Democrats elect, and re-elect him to Congress., and accept him into the Congressional Black Caucus. Peter Hasson writes in the Daily Caller:

Democratic Illinois Rep. Danny Davis defended Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan as an “outstanding human being” on Monday.

Farrakhan is known for embracing radically anti-Semitic and anti-white views, as even the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center has acknowledged. Farrakhan’s history of racially extreme comments includes blaming Jews for the September 11 attacks, saying white people “deserve to die” and praising Adolf Hitler as a “very great man.”

And when Barack Obama palled around with Farrakhan, the media took no interest in his history of cozying up with him at a Congressional Black Caucus meeting:







Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/02/racist_nutters_a_tale_of_two_parties.html#ixzz56LGAuS7a
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
 
27545393_1511592775606301_2223051630197634239_n.jpg
 
Study finds refugees actually pay the US government thousands more than they get from it

On average, it costs about $15,000 to help settle a refugee, including both initial background checks as well as job and English training once they arrive. As refugees are also immediately eligible for welfare assistance and Medicaid, the government spends approximately $92,000 in governmental assistance for the first 20 years each refugee spends in the US.

Over the same time, refugees pay an average of $129,000 in taxes — netting the government approximately $21,000 more than it spends.

The study also looked at how refugees fared once they settled in the US compared to Americans who were born here.

On average, refugees who arrived before they turned 14 finished high school and went to college at the same rates as their native-born peers. Older teens who arrived in their late teens struggled the most and had much lower graduation rates, due, in part, to the fact that they come with low English skills and are often separated from their parents.

As for those who come to the US as refugees as adults, most struggled with low employment rates and reliance on government assistance at first. But in only six years in their new country, the same group of refugees surpassed native-born Americans it came to employment and their reliance on welfare or food stamps.

According to this study, refugees aren't quite the drain on society that some lawmakers have painted them to be.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-do-refugees-cost-us-taxpayers-2017-6
 
Booter said:
Study finds refugees actually pay the US government thousands more than they get from it

On average, it costs about $15,000 to help settle a refugee, including both initial background checks as well as job and English training once they arrive. As refugees are also immediately eligible for welfare assistance and Medicaid, the government spends approximately $92,000 in governmental assistance for the first 20 years each refugee spends in the US.

Over the same time, refugees pay an average of $129,000 in taxes — netting the government approximately $21,000 more than it spends.

The study also looked at how refugees fared once they settled in the US compared to Americans who were born here.

On average, refugees who arrived before they turned 14 finished high school and went to college at the same rates as their native-born peers. Older teens who arrived in their late teens struggled the most and had much lower graduation rates, due, in part, to the fact that they come with low English skills and are often separated from their parents.

As for those who come to the US as refugees as adults, most struggled with low employment rates and reliance on government assistance at first. But in only six years in their new country, the same group of refugees surpassed native-born Americans it came to employment and their reliance on welfare or food stamps.

According to this study, refugees aren't quite the drain on society that some lawmakers have painted them to be.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-do-refugees-cost-us-taxpayers-2017-6
Click to expand...
Yeah, right.
 
Booter said:
Study finds refugees actually pay the US government thousands more than they get from it

On average, it costs about $15,000 to help settle a refugee, including both initial background checks as well as job and English training once they arrive. As refugees are also immediately eligible for welfare assistance and Medicaid, the government spends approximately $92,000 in governmental assistance for the first 20 years each refugee spends in the US.

Over the same time, refugees pay an average of $129,000 in taxes — netting the government approximately $21,000 more than it spends.

The study also looked at how refugees fared once they settled in the US compared to Americans who were born here.

On average, refugees who arrived before they turned 14 finished high school and went to college at the same rates as their native-born peers. Older teens who arrived in their late teens struggled the most and had much lower graduation rates, due, in part, to the fact that they come with low English skills and are often separated from their parents.

As for those who come to the US as refugees as adults, most struggled with low employment rates and reliance on government assistance at first. But in only six years in their new country, the same group of refugees surpassed native-born Americans it came to employment and their reliance on welfare or food stamps.

According to this study, refugees aren't quite the drain on society that some lawmakers have painted them to be.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-do-refugees-cost-us-taxpayers-2017-6
Click to expand...
Sucker
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top