DACA, immigration reform whatever

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

3 minutes ago, Equinox said:

Maybe because they're American kids and have a home to go to. 

Let's give this a try:

A family is driving down the road trying to flee a tornado. They made a judgment call that the best chance of survival is going on this specific road. Up ahead is a road block in their lanes. They go to the road block and say, hey look at the tornado, it's going to kill us, can you let us by? The road block refuses. They can't turn around and face the tornado so they drive around the roadblock. Immediately they get arrested and the family is separated. 

Can you now tell me how this is the same as a random mother drunk driving? 

[atomheartbevo 90660]

CNN running this:

Quote

President Trump is visiting Capitol Hill this evening to talk with Republican lawmakers about immigration.

Trump's visit comes as outrage grows over his administration's "zero tolerance" immigration policy, which has resulted in separations of undocumented parents and kids.

Earlier today, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said "all of the members of the Republican conference support a plan that keeps families together while their immigration status is determined." 

I'm guessing he doesn't like having to visit those guys and would rather they visit him at the WH.

And I wonder if this means their internal polling has them flipping out and willing to confront him.

[Spankytoes 1748]

24 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Wow, they are swimming in resources if not only are they able to handle the current increase in illegal immigration, but they can spend who knows how many man-hours going back through paperwork from naturalized citizens.

Maybe they are outsourcing the jobs to illegal immigrants?

[David Dennison 19560]

The Donald's reaction after this meeting has the potential to be very entertaining. They are in open revolt against this policy.

But I really hope it's a boring meeting and he agrees to this short term fix.

[Francisco 2.0 32603]

Even Jeff Sessions' church is getting involved:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/Website_Properties/news-media/documents/A_Complaint_regarding_Jefferson_Sessions.pdf

 

Quote

We, the undersigned laity and clergy of the United Methodist Church, issue a formal complaint against fellow United Methodist layperson Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, by our understanding a lay member of Ashland Place United Methodist Church, in Mobile, AL, and an active participant in Clarendon United Methodist Church, Arlington, VA. While we are reticent to bring a formal complaint against a layperson, Mr. Sessions’ unique combination of tremendous social/political power, his leading role as a Sunday School teacher and former delegate to General Conference, and the severe and ongoing impact of several of his public, professional actions demand that we, as his siblings in the United Methodist denomination, call for some degree of accountability.

We write to you, Mr. Sessions’ pastors, copying his District Superintendents and Bishops, in the hopes that you will, as members of our connectional system, dig deeply into Mr. Sessions’ advocacy and actions that have led to harm against thousands of vulnerable humans. As members of the United Methodist Church, we deeply hope for a reconciling process that will help this long-time member of our connection step back from his harmful actions and work to repair the damage he is currently causing to immigrants, particularly children and families.

Pursuant to Paragraph 2702.3 of the 2016 United Methodist Book of Discipline, we hereby charge Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, Attorney General of the United States, a professing member and/or active participant of Ashland Place United Methodist Church (Mobile, Alabama) and Clarendon United Methodist Church (Alexandria, Virginia), with the chargeable offenses of:

Child Abuse (examples: advocacy for and implementation of documented practices that indefinitely separate thousands of young children from their parents; holding thousands of children in mass incarceration facilities with little to no structured educational or socio-emotional support)

Immorality (examples: the use of violence against children to deter immigration; advocating and supporting the separation of children from their families; refusal of refugee/asylee status to those fleeing gang or sexual violence; oppression of those seeking asylum or attempting to enter the United States with refugee status; directing employees and staff members to kidnap children from their parents)

Racial discrimination (examples: stopping investigations of police departments charged with racial discrimination; attempting to criminalize Black Lives Matter and other racial justice activist groups; targeting incarceration for those engaged in undocumented border crossings as well as those who present with requests for asylum, with a particular focus on those perceived as Muslim or LatinX)

Dissemination of doctrines contrary to the standards of doctrine of the United Methodist Church (examples: the misuse of Romans 13 to indicate the necessity of obedience to secular law, which is in stark contrast to Disciplinary commitments to supporting freedom of conscience and resistance to unjust laws)

 

[yoladu 4191]

1 hour ago, Patrick Bateman said:

SIAP.....

 

My maths is not too strong, but does that  imply that in this poll a very small amount of people identified themselves as Republican? Interesting? maybe not?

[yoladu 4191]

25 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Even Jeff Sessions' church is getting involved:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/Website_Properties/news-media/documents/A_Complaint_regarding_Jefferson_Sessions.pdf

 

 

I am a Methodist. i had no idea there was a United Methodist Book of Discipline.

 

[Anastasis 23723]

Just now, yoladu said:

My maths is not too strong, but does that  imply that in this poll a very small amount of people identified themselves as Republican? Interesting? maybe not?

From the poll methods:

This RDD telephone survey was conducted from June 14 – 17, 2018 throughout the nation. Responses are reported for 905 self-identified registered voters with a margin of sampling error of +/- 3.9 percentage points, including the design effect. Margins of sampling error for subgroups are available upon request. Surveys are conducted in English or Spanish dependent on respondent preference with live interviewers calling landlines and cell phones. All data was collected and tabulated by the Quinnipiac University Poll. PARTY IDENTIFICATION QUESTION WORDING - Generally speaking, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, or what? REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY IDENTIFICATION Republican 26% Democrat 31 Independent 39 Other/DK/NA 5

[Rimbo 27040]

https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/8s93w7/a_reporter_at_the_white_house_decided_to_play_the/e0xh85t/

Quote

There's an element to this that people really need to get.

The suffering of these children isn't an unfortunate accident. It's not a temporary bump in the road because something didn't get funded, it's not a weird outcome of some other idea that nobody saw coming. It's not one of those weird things you hear about where nobody is really in charge, and is just taking a strangely long time to get fixed. It's not even like those horrifying things you'd hear about governments of old doing, where they'd take kids away from natives to re-educate them. At least back them, the government was merely indifferent to the suffering of those children.

But we're in a whole different moral ballgame now.

The suffering of these children isn't a byproduct, it's the point.

The Trump administration has been trying to pin this on the Democrats, claiming that it's something nobody wanted and making sad, sad noises over the whole thing. This is horseshit, because leaked notes show that this is something they were planning right after Trump got sworn in as a "deterrent."

Everybody needs to pause and let every implication of that sink in, and I mean really sink in. The wails of these frightened children aren't because of some unfortunate oversight or some unexpected externality, it's the desired outcome of a deliberate policy choice. Remember, it's a "deterrent." They want to scare families away. The policy completely fails if children are not shaking, terrified and screaming.

What's all the more flabbergasting is that none of this was even remotely necessary. There's no crisis that necessitates such a draconian policy - illegal immigration has fallen since 2009. Not only that, but a lot of these kids aren't even one of those scary "illegal immigrants" at all. Families are willingly presenting themselves to border authorities to freely announce that they're seeking asylum, only to have their children stripped away from them:

So the idea of zero tolerance under the stated policy is that we don’t care why you’re afraid. We don’t care if it’s religion, political, gangs, anything. For all asylum seekers, you are going to be put in jail, in a detention center, and you’re going to have your children taken away from you.

The little girl wailing in this picture isn't from some skeezy band of gangsters trying to tunnel under and steal all the glorious fruit-picking jobs, she's with a family fleeing horrific violence, seeking asylum and protection from what one presumes is a great nation.

This is an important point, and one that bears repeating - this is a policy of deterrence which is being directed at asylum seekers. Okay, sure, let's say that there's a lot of people to process, and that can be difficult. If they government worried about the number of people they have to process, the Trump administration could simply throw up a few more shelters or hire a few more bureaucrats to work through the paperwork. Hell, the country ain't even close to broke - Trump is always talking about the "booming economy" and just recently proposed a militarized "space force" whose price tag is sure to be unfathomable.

But instead of doing this, they instead decided that it would be cheaper to make little children suffer, in the hopes that the sound of their screams might be broadcast into lawless lands and act as a deterrent upon people considering whether to flee to safety. And even this, the presumption that it's all about money, is the charitableinterpretation of their actions, given the President and his staff's noted distaste for the nonwhite world.

But regardless of their exact motivation, they are the government which represents all Americans, and that's a country which now gets to wake up, look in the mirror and say "Today, our choice was to make children suffer."

 

[Equinox 95]

55 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Let's give this a try:

A family is driving down the road trying to flee a tornado. They made a judgment call that the best chance of survival is going on this specific road. Up ahead is a road block in their lanes. They go to the road block and say, hey look at the tornado, it's going to kill us, can you let us by? The road block refuses. They can't turn around and face the tornado so they drive around the roadblock. Immediately they get arrested and the family is separated. 

Can you now tell me how this is the same as a random mother drunk driving? 

Lol not even the same thing. Nice try though.

[JimmyJames 12271]

34 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

From the poll methods:

This RDD telephone survey was conducted from June 14 – 17, 2018 throughout the nation. Responses are reported for 905 self-identified registered voters with a margin of sampling error of +/- 3.9 percentage points, including the design effect. Margins of sampling error for subgroups are available upon request. Surveys are conducted in English or Spanish dependent on respondent preference with live interviewers calling landlines and cell phones. All data was collected and tabulated by the Quinnipiac University Poll. PARTY IDENTIFICATION QUESTION WORDING - Generally speaking, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, or what? REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY IDENTIFICATION Republican 26% Democrat 31 Independent 39 Other/DK/NA 5

Interesting. Only a quarter of Americans identify themselves as Republican now. 

[hpslugga 4097]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/in-america-naturalized-citizens-no-longer-have-an-assumption-of-permanence

I’m curious to know which among us supports this.

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

33 minutes ago, Equinox said:

Lol not even the same thing. Nice try though.

[Dahobbs 18334]

31 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/8s93w7/a_reporter_at_the_white_house_decided_to_play_the/e0xh85t/

 

This is an important point. It would be one thing if this were all the result of bureaucratic accident. But it isn't. It is motivated by a desire to inflict pain and suffering. Cruelty begat this policy and cruelty is its aim.   

[TSipper 176]

The little girl wailing in this picture isn't from some skeezy band of gangsters trying to tunnel under and steal all the glorious fruit-picking jobs, she's with a family fleeing horrific violence, seeking asylum and protection from what one presumes is a great nation.

We owe this girl and her family nothing. I do not care if they are fleeing violence, that is not the responsibility of this country. 7 billion people on this planet, is it our job to take all of them in?

Go fuck yourself.

[Anastasis 23723]

3 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Interesting. Only a quarter of Americans identify themselves as Republican now. 

I believe that the accurate interpretation of those data are: Among registered voters the proportion reporting R vs D is similar within the margin of error. Further the proportion self identifying as Independent is greater than either R or D self identification.

 

What would be interesting to look at is the trends in R vs. D vs. I self-identification over time. 

[Dahobbs 18334]

Just now, TSipper said:

 

 

We owe this girl and her family nothing. I do not care if they are fleeing violence, that is not the responsibility of this country. 7 billion people on this planet, is it our job to take all of them in?

Go fuck yourself.

Evil. This is what it looks like. It isn't about taking them in, it is about treating them fairly while they are here. We can say no. We don't need to kick in them in the teeth while doing it. 

[WhatTheBuck 28932]

1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

We're complicit in all of it.  With the drug war right at the top of the list.  And that part of it is legit both sides. 

The Republicans are 100% responsible for the War on Drugs. It's Nixon's and Reagan's baby (mostly Reagan's). It's a failed policy and Trump/Sessions are doubling down on it. 

Liberals have always been handicapped by the fact that if they support reform they get blamed for being "soft on drugs" by their conservative "rule of law" opponents. It's really not a "both sides" issue.

Can you imagine if Obama had come out hard on cannabis legalization? One of the main talking points of the campaign for prohibition was that it was the drug used by "uppity" blacks. (And lazy Mexicans which is why we now spell it "marijuana" instead of "marihuana".) The first black president backing legalization would've fed right into that narrative. The Republicans would've had a field day with that. (Even the ones who like to call themselves "libertarian" who, if they actually were libertarian, would support drug legalization.)

[TSipper 176]

6 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Evil. This is what it looks like. It isn't about taking them in, it is about treating them fairly while they are here. We can say no. We don't need to kick in them in the teeth while doing it. 

Either you have kids in prison with their adult or you separate them, which would you rather have, prison or freedom? 

Are we even sure that every kid that is brought to the border is done so by a parent? No moral hazard for kidnapping or anything.

[bad_teammate 13560]

There's open evil, Dahobbs, then there's..

~*~ very Anastasishly ~*~
If you libs keep harping on these concentration camp for children, then the conservatives won't pay attention to you when REAL problems arise.

[TSipper 176]

Just now, WhatTheBuck said:

The Republicans are 100% responsible for the War on Drugs. It's Nixon's and Reagan's baby (mostly Reagan's). It's a failed policy and Trump/Sessions are doubling down on it. 

Liberals have always been handicapped by the fact that if they support reform they get blamed for being "soft on drugs" by their conservative "rule of law" opponents. It's really not a "both sides" issue.

Can you imagine if Obama had come out hard on cannabis legalization? One of the main talking points of the campaign for prohibition was that it was the drug used by "uppity" blacks. (And lazy Mexicans which is why we now spell it "marijuana" instead of "marihuana".) The first black president backing legalization would've fed right into that narrative. The Republicans would've had a field day with that. (Even the ones who like to call themselves "libertarian" who, if they actually were libertarian, would support drug legalization.)

Clinton signed the 3 strike rule. Hillary coined the term "super predator", not the repubs.

[Rimbo 27040]

7 minutes ago, TSipper said:

We owe this girl and her family nothing. I do not care if they are fleeing violence, that is not the responsibility of this country. 7 billion people on this planet, is it our job to take all of them in?

Go fuck yourself.

Take them all in? No. Treat them like human beings? Yes.

Let me let you in on a dirty little secret. I was on the wrong end of this policy a bit over a year ago. I'm a US citizen, and so are my children. My father- and mother-in-law are US citizens. My sister-in-law and her family are US citizens. And yet, ICE is there to split my family apart.

Tell me again this funny jolly story you want to tell me about how this is a good idea and I should go fuck myself.

[David Dennison 19560]

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I believe that the accurate interpretation of those data are: Among registered voters the proportion reporting R vs D is similar within the margin of error. Further the proportion self identifying as Independent is greater than either R or D self identification.

 

What would be interesting to look at is the trends in R vs. D vs. I self-identification over time. 

Since 2004.

[TSipper 176]

Just now, Rimbo said:

Take them all in? No. Treat them like human beings? Yes.

Let me let you in on a dirty little secret. I was on the wrong end of this policy a bit over a year ago. I'm a US citizen, and so are my children. My father- and mother-in-law are US citizens. My sister-in-law and her family are US citizens. And yet, ICE is there to split my family apart.

Tell me again this funny jolly story you want to tell me about how this is a good idea and I should go fuck myself.

Law enforcement is never pretty, it would seem that it worked out for you. Send the message that we don't want illegals in this country.

[Message Board User 12408]

 

[atomheartbevo 90660]

10 minutes ago, TSipper said:

We owe this girl and her family nothing. I do not care if they are fleeing violence, that is not the responsibility of this country. 7 billion people on this planet, is it our job to take all of them in?

Go fuck yourself.

It’s good that you don’t pretend to be a Christian like some Trumpkins. 

[TSipper 176]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

It’s good that you don’t pretend to be a Christian like some Trumpkins. 

I'm not religious in the least, take that weak shit somewhere else.

[Anastasis 23723]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

There's open evil, Dahobbs, then there's..

~*~ very Anastasishly ~*~
If you libs keep harping on these concentration camp for children, then the conservatives won't pay attention to you when REAL problems arise.

yeah, swing and a miss there good buddy. you need to work fish food into it to be more accurate. 

[Rimbo 27040]

Just now, TSipper said:

Law enforcement is never pretty, it would seem that it worked out for you. Send the message that we don't want illegals in this country.

No. It did not fucking work out for me you supercilious piece of shitcake.

The message that you are sending is that you don't want me in this country. You don't want Christians, you don't want white people, you don't want people who were Texas born and bred in this country. You don't want me in this country -- that's the message you're sending. Nevermind my father's service to this country and his community, never mind anything I've done to try and benefit my community and this country.

Because this is MY FAMILY you are working to tear apart. Legal, citizen, family.

[Dolemite 143]

 

[Rimbo 27040]

1 minute ago, TSipper said:

I'm not religious in the least, take that weak shit somewhere else.

Well, in that case, it’s good that you don’t pretend to be a Christian like some Trumpkins.

[Dahobbs 18334]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

yeah, swing and a miss there good buddy. you need to work fish food into it to be more accurate. 

Looked pretty accurate to me. And I think I actually probably agree with you on most things--but your posting style is maddening. 

[Equinox 95]

2 minutes ago, Dolemite said:

 

Uh oh, now you done did it.

[TSipper 176]

3 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

No. It did not fucking work out for me you supercilious piece of shitcake.

The message that you are sending is that you don't want me in this country. You don't want Christians, you don't want white people, you don't want people who were Texas born and bred in this country. You don't want me in this country -- that's the message you're sending. Nevermind my father's service to this country and his community, never mind anything I've done to try and benefit my community and this country.

Because this is MY FAMILY you are working to tear apart. Legal, citizen, family.

I stopped reading at "us citizen", the people in question are not "us citizens" so your situation is in no way comparable.

[Rimbo 27040]

https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/8s90f0/trump_doubles_down_as_anger_grows_over_child/e0xlrnx/

Oh, and you should feel EXTRA good about the family separation: The contractor behind it has a history of human trafficking and child abuse. 

Nice to know where you stand on child rape, TSipper! Go back to Baylor.

[Rimbo 27040]

Just now, TSipper said:

I stopped reading at "us citizen", the people in question are not "us citizens" so your situation is in no way comparable.

You're telling yourself a lie. Because my wife is an immigrant. A legal, green-card-holding, taxpaying immigrant, for the past 28 years.

Of course, her parents and sister were naturalized, and everyone else in her immediate family was born here.

Keep telling yourself lies so that you can sleep at night you fetid ballsack.

[BigOrange1 6611]

19 minutes ago, TSipper said:

 

 

We owe this girl and her family nothing. I do not care if they are fleeing violence, that is not the responsibility of this country. 7 billion people on this planet, is it our job to take all of them in?

Go fuck yourself.

how about you go fuck yourself up your nazi ass?

[austingirl 2194]

12 minutes ago, TSipper said:

 

 

We owe this girl and her family nothing. I do not care if they are fleeing violence, that is not the responsibility of this country. 7 billion people on this planet, is it our job to take all of them in?

Go fuck yourself.

Jesus. I hope you and yours are never in a position where you have to beg someone else for help only to hear "we owe you nothing." Some of y'all are acting like you built this country with your bare hands and that you're protecting it from howling Injuns coming to rape and pillage, instead of asylum seekers. One slight cosmic shift and it could've been any of us born in a country we needed to flee at some point. I highly recommend y'all read Home by Warsan Shire. An excerpt:

Quote

no one leaves home unless
home is the mouth of a shark.

All this is going to come back on us and we will pay, as a country. I don't know when and I don't know how but I firmly believe it. The bill always comes due. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[MaybeACoordinator 8350]

32 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/in-america-naturalized-citizens-no-longer-have-an-assumption-of-permanence

I’m curious to know which among us supports this.

My ex is not even naturalized -- she is a green card holder, and she is too proud of England to become a citizen. And technically, we did lie on her application to come here. She entered on a tourist visa and we thought that was okay because we'd gotten married in England. INS fined us $100 bucks on the spot -- I had to hit an ATM in the Nashville airport and get the cash there and then or they might have detained her, even though she was nine months pregnant with our son at the time. (Who is now in the US fucking army right now, like so many immigrants and kids of immigrants.) But the point is some algorithm could sniff her out and get her deported. There was a time when I would have appreciated that, but we get along now, and from talking to her lately, I think she would appreciate a free trip back to England. 

Our daughter is 13 and when it comes right down to it, I would rather see her in England now than over here, even if that meant only getting to see her once or twice a year.  

Edited June 19, 2018 by MaybeACoordinator

[Anastasis 23723]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Looked pretty accurate to me. And I think I actually probably agree with you on most things--but your posting style is maddening. 

 

Sorry, I'll work double time to adopt the more prevalent and accepted Surly CR posting style, consisting of hot linking tweets all day and acting like it is engaging in political discussion. 

[Post Oak 20570]

27 minutes ago, TSipper said:

 

 

We owe this girl and her family nothing. I do not care if they are fleeing violence, that is not the responsibility of this country. 7 billion people on this planet, is it our job to take all of them in?

Go fuck yourself.

Imagine being so tribalistic you support child abuse.  

 

Burn in hell you morally bankrupt shitgibbon

[Rimbo 27040]

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

See the above Reddit post I linked -- the contracting agency involved has a history of human trafficking.

There is definitely bad shit being hidden.

[TSipper 176]

Jesus. I hope you and yours are never in a position where you have to beg someone else for help only to hear "we owe you nothing." Some of y'all are acting like you built this country with your bare hands and that you're protecting it from howling Injuns coming to rape and pillage, instead of asylum seekers. One slight cosmic shift and it could've been any of us born in a country we needed to flee at some point.

I am never leaving nor am I ever running. 1st Amendment gives me the right to tell you to fuck off and the 2nd Amendment gives me the right to defend myself should your anger at being told to fuck off manifest itself physically. So, fuck off.

I highly recommend y'all read Home by Warsan Shire. An excerpt: All this is going to come back on us and we will pay, as a country. I don't know when and I don't know how but I firmly believe it. The bill always comes due.

The bill will come due, we're at $21 trillion and counting and the bleeding has to stop and this is a step in that direction.

[TSipper 176]

2 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

Imagine being so tribalistic you support child abuse.  

 

Burn in hell you morally bankrupt shitgibbon

You first.

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

Holy shit, Steve Cortes is going all in and calling immigrants "invaders". 

[Chrispy 132]

7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

Sorry, I'll work double time to adopt the more prevalent and accepted Surly CR posting style, consisting of hot linking tweets all day and acting like it is engaging in political discussion. 

Come on over to the right, the water’s fine. 

[Zepol87 9342]

4 minutes ago, TSipper said:

 

 

I am never leaving nor am I ever running. 1st Amendment gives me the right to tell you to fuck off and the 2nd Amendment gives me the right to defend myself should your anger at being told to fuck off manifest itself physically. So, fuck off.

 

The bill will come due, we're at $21 trillion and counting and the bleeding has to stop and this is a step in that direction.

Man what a pussy you are. 

[Anastasis 23723]

20 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Since 2004.

long cat spoiler.  interesting.  not as much movement as I would have expected from 2016 to now. 

Republicans	Independents	Democrats
	%	%	%
2018 May 1-10	26	43	29
2018 Apr 2-11	24	45	29
2018 Mar 1-8	23	45	29
2018 Feb 1-10	28	42	27
2018 Jan 2-7	22	44	32
2017 Dec 4-11	25	46	27
2017 Nov 2-8	25	42	30
2017 Oct 5-11	24	42	31
2017 Sep 6-10	29	40	30
2017 Aug 2-6	28	41	28
2017 Jul 5-9	25	45	28
2017 Jun 7-11	26	42	30
2017 May 3-7	29	40	28
2017 Apr 5-9	25	44	28
2017 Mar 1-5	26	42	30
2017 Feb 1-5	31	37	31
2017 Jan 4-8	28	44	25
2016 Dec 7-11	28	39	29
2016 Nov 9-13	27	40	30
2016 Nov 1-6	27	36	31
2016 Oct 5-9	27	36	32
2016 Sep 14-18	27	40	32
2016 Sep 7-11	29	38	31
2016 Aug 3-7	27	38	31
2016 Jul 13-17	28	42	28
2016 Jun 14-23	28	39	31
2016 Jun 1-5	27	41	30
2016 May 18-22	27	45	28
2016 May 4-8	31	37	30
2016 Apr 6-10	25	44	31
2016 Mar 2-6	26	38	32
2016 Feb 3-7	30	37	30
2016 Jan 21-25	29	39	31

 

[TSipper 176]

2 minutes ago, Zepol87 said:

Man what a pussy you are. 

You're the one willing to give away the keys to the castle to assuage your liberal, white guilt. Sorry if the rest of us don't fall in line, pal.