Jeb Bush doesn't advocate allowing illegals to pour across our borders.
But, ask yourself this: if there are 11 MILLION illegals in the US, more than the population of both Atlanta and Dallas-Fort Worth, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO REMOVE THEM?
I'm a conservative and totally against the open borders policy of the Obozo admin, but removing that many people is logistically impossible.
It's impossible in terms of money, facilities, manpower needed (I know, that's an un-pc term, get over it) and dozens of other requirements to remove that many people.
And that's if you can even FIND them all!
We have to CLOSE THE BORDERS. More illegals are pouring across every day. Obozo's not going to close the borders; Americans will have to do it ourselves.
 October 4, 2014 at 2:05am
The government did not out Mr. Duncan. It was a neighbor or friend who gave his name to a reporter. Does HIPPA apply to a non-US citizen?
 October 4, 2014 at 1:59am
In one interview the step-daughter stated that she told them they had no food, at which point they said that she and one other person could go to the store. So did they really quarantine the whole family, or are they now doing CYA to avoid criticism after the fact? It’s hard to tell who is telling the truth anymore when you have a government that lies continually.
 September 26, 2014 at 5:26pm
Throw the book at him! He should be out shooting unarmed minorities instead of just dreaming about it. /sarc
 September 26, 2014 at 5:21pm
The trick is to keep your head when all about you are losing theirs.
Let me get this straight. They brought a bunch of Iraqis all the way to Boston just to give them a week’s training on how to fight bad guys back home in the Middle East? How stupid and wasteful is that? I knew the Commander-in-Chief had little concern for America’s security, but doesn’t he care about reducing CO2 to fight climate change?
 September 13, 2014 at 2:27am
Even if Michael Brown had his hands in the air, it doesn’t mean he wasn’t doing it to taunt the officer before bum-rushing him. But if there is no video of the actual shooting, this video could be damaging in court. The thing no one has explained is why the officer only shot Michael Brown. If he had no reason to shoot Michael other than racism, why didn’t he shoot Michael’s friend, too? Wasn’t he also black? If you’re willing to murder an innocent man just because he’s black, why would you hesitate to get rid of the main witness? Whatever it was, Michael must have done something that his friend didn’t do to get shot.
September 10, 2014 at 8:40pm
From now on, what you see when staring at a random blood stain should be called the Rohatsch’s test in his honor.
 September 10, 2014 at 5:02pm
It’s not the best way to get Tyson to calm down by saying, “Tell me about your one-man show. I’m all ears.”
 August 26, 2014 at 1:02am
“If this backup system is working, then Lois Lerner’s emails are there,” he said.
Until this last sentence, I thought there was something new being reported. I thought they had found the backup tapes. But saying “if this backup system is working” means this is just speculation. The IRS admitted long ago that Lerner’s emails were backed up, but the tapes were supposedly “recycled” after only 6 months. Did Tom Fitton forget this little detail? It’s not a question of whether the emails were backed up. It’s a question of whether the backup tapes still exist. If the IRS lawyers only admitted that the emails were backed up, we already knew this. But if they admitted that the IRS lied to Congress and that the backup tapes still exist, then we have something. But the IRS still has to produce them, or we have nothing.
 August 15, 2014 at 12:29am
What incentive is there for government employees to be caring and competent about their work as long as there are no consequences for being lazy and sloppy?
August 12, 2014 at 6:56pm
He appointed more than a dozen lobbyists after saying he wouldn’t. But he did issue a waiver for them each time. That’s a Democratic trick. Issue a rule or law to make you appear ethical, then quietly waive the rule every time you want to be unethical. When the House passed Pelosi’s “Pay As You Go” rule years ago, they announce with great fanfare that the government was now going to live within its means. However, they immediately waived the rule for the next bill (and just about every bill afterward). It was all for show, just as the lobbyist rules are now.
August 12, 2014 at 6:46pm
How can the OMB reverse an executive order signed by the President? Did Obama secretly sign an authorization for the OMB to do this but is letting them take the heat for it? If not, the OMB is acting illegally. The executive order explicitly orders “the heads of executive departments and agencies not to make any new appointments or reappointments of federally registered lobbyists to advisory committees and other boards and commissions.” It doesn’t allow for an exception, so how can the OMB invent one without the President amending the order or issuing a new one?
August 1, 2014 at 5:11pm
The only thing Gaza would do with Iron Dome technology would look for ways to fool it so they could kill Israeli civilians. They have no interest in protecting their own citizens because then they wouldn’t get sympathy and financial support from the outside world. If they had any interest in protecting their own civilians, they would have built bomb shelters instead of building tunnels into Israel.
July 31, 2014 at 2:00pm
“The controversy is centered on an investigation of the CIA’s interrogation and detention practices after the 9/11 attacks.”
In other words, Obama’s CIA illegally searching Senate computers earlier this year is Bush’s fault.
 July 31, 2014 at 1:52pm
Transparency for this administration has always been about blaming Bush and nothing else.
 July 29, 2014 at 1:57pm
Does this new bill solve any of the real problems at the VA? One whistle blower doctor revealed that he could not schedule an operating room after 2:30 in the afternoon because everyone wanted to leave work early every day. Another whistle blower revealed that psychiatric doctors refused to see patients after 2 PM. Apparently, they felt they had the right to go golfing on the taxpayer’s dime like their boss. If the new bill doesn’t require healthcare workers to work full time for their pay and bonuses, things are not going to change. Hiring more doctors and workers will only allow them to knock off even earlier in the day while costing us a lot more. I just don’t have confidence that throwing all this new money at the problem is going to solve anything. Government has no incentive to be efficient, especially when the union is applying constant pressure to be less efficient.
 July 29, 2014 at 1:42pm
Surprise, surprise, the left hand has restored what the right hand took away. You would think a bill that passed 426-0 would stay on the books for more than a month. But it’s the people’s money they’re playing with, not their own, so no big deal. It seems that everything they do is for appearance only so they can claim they did something when they actually didn’t. They know 90 percent of their voters won’t bother to fact check them. That’s the kind of government we will continue to get until people wake up.
 July 28, 2014 at 2:09pm
When are negative things about a person included in an obituary? It usually written by family and/or friends. Why would they do that to a friend who just died?
I wondered that as well. In this case, it could well be argued that the man deserves to have his grave spit upon, but why would anybody be surprised that his crimes were left out of the obituary?
Yeah, this makes no sense. You can read the obituaries of convicted murderers after they're executed, and they don't mention the crimes he/she committed.
how dare y'all apply logic and reason...
sad that people not directly impacted by the purported abuse feel the need to make it an issue. there are poor souls that can only be something resembling happy if they are complaining or making someone else's life misearble.
when they are monsters... i dont think hitlers obit left out all his crimes why should this guy get off scott free?
the catholic diocese isnt so much upset that the pedophilia was left out, as they are upset an obituary refered to him as a priest at all. this is from a letter written by the diocese to the newspaper that published the obituary:
"A recent obituary for Robert Purcell of Roxbury has disturbed us deeply, primarily out of empathy and concern for persons who may have suffered as a result of sexual abuse by a member of the clergy. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany discourages any celebration or publicity that would make reference to the former status as priest or deacon of a person who was removed from his ministerial position following the conclusion of an investigation into the allegation. While this does not preclude the celebration of a wake service, a funeral or a memorial Mass due any Catholic, the rites to be observed would not be those normally accorded members of the clergy. Thus a formerly active priest or deacon would not be attired in any clerical clothing or liturgical vestments. Eulogies are also to be avoided as well as any references in obituaries to titles or activities of such clergymen in their former ministerial positions. This would be highly insensitive to the persons who suffered from the abuse during their ministry."
Over my multiple decades of being able to read a newspaper, I'm sure I have read hundreds, or even thousands of obituaries. Everybody does, don't know why. I can't recall ever reading a listing of one crimes, foibles or weaknesses. This is the ultimate non-story, or rather a useless idiot trying to make a story out of nothing.
Agreed. His loved ones wrote the obit, not the paper.
If he did something wrong and did not repent, God will take care of it.
Similarly, an obituary of a person who commits suicide doesn't mention that fact either. I have read many obituaries where a suicide is couched in terms "died at home" or "died unexpectedly". Leave it at that, and as far as this priest is concerned, if guilty, he will face a far sterner judge when he stands before the Lord and has to give an accounting of why he violated his charge to take care of the flock.