They need to fire this idiot

[Guest trigem]

FOXNews.com - Rep. Stark Mocks Border Security Advocates: Who Are You Going to Kill Today?

See video

Rep. Stark Mocks Border Security Advocates: Who Are You Going to Kill Today?

A California congressman known for edgy sarcasm mocked an opponent of illegal immigration during a town hall meeting last week, asking, "Who are you going to kill today?" before the constituent, a self-identified Minuteman, posed his question.

span.kLink { border-top: 0px none !important;border-left: 0px none !important;border-right: 0px none !important;border-bottom: 1px solid ;padding : 0px 0px 1px 0px !important;color:blue;background: transparent none;width: auto !important;float: none !important;display:inline !important; } a.kLink { color:blue !important ; border-bottom-style: none;text-decoration: underline;cursor: pointer;font-family: verdana;border: 0px none transparent !important;background: transparent none !important;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 0px !important;text-transform: none !important;display:inline !important;font-variant:normal;top:0px; right:0px;bottom:0px;left:0px;;outline:none } a.kLink:link { color:blue !important ; border-bottom-style: none;text-decoration: underline;cursor: pointer;font-family: verdana;border: 0px none transparent !important;background: transparent none !important;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 0px !important;text-transform: none !important;display:inline !important;font-variant:normal;top:0px; right:0px;bottom:0px;left:0px; } a.kLink:hover { color:blue;text-decoration: underline;cursor: pointer;font-family: verdana;border: 0px none transparent !important;background: transparent none !important;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 0px !important;text-transform: none !important;display:inline !important;font-variant:normal;top:0px; right:0px;bottom:0px;left:0px; } a.kLink:visited { color:blue;text-decoration: underline;cursor: pointer; font-family: verdana;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 0px; } .sponsor { font-family: MS Sans Serif, Verdana; color: #AFAFAF;font-size: 9pt; cursor: default; } a.CBL { cursor:default; } a.CBL:link { cursor:default; } a.CBL:hover { cursor:default; } a.CBL:visited { cursor:default; } .KonaBody { display:inline; }

A California congressman known for edgy sarcasm mocked an opponent of illegal immigration during a town hall meeting last week, asking, "Who are you going to kill today?" before the constituent, a self-identified Minuteman, posed his question.

Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., no stranger to controversy, mocked the idea that the borders are not secure when asked about the federal government's lack of activity on border security.

"We can't get enough Minutemen armed. We'd like to get all the Minutemen armed so they can stop shooting people here," Stark said.

Eventually, members of the audience urged Stark to offer a serious answer.

"If you knew anything about our borders, you would know that's not the case. Our borders are quite secure, thank you," Stark said, drawing jeers.

Stark resumed his hostile act, asking the Minuteman what he would do to secure the border.

"I would send about about 25,000 troops for one thing and build a wall down so vehicles could not pass," the Minuteman said.

"How high and long would it be?" Stark asked.

"As high and as long as it takes," the Minuteman said, elicting cheers.

Stark said he would start a ladder company with the Minuteman if he designed the wall and doesn't shoot the people coming over.

"But I've got to know how high the wall is and I'll sell a whole lot of ladders for people who want to come," Stark said.

"This is a very serious matter and you're sitting there making fun of it," the Minuteman responded.

"I don't have to make fun of you sir, you do a fine job all by yourself," Stark said.

Stark made the comments last week at a town hall audience that included Steve Kemp, a member of the Golden Gate Minutemen, a group that opposes illegal immigrants. Kemp recorded the confrontation.

A spokesman for Stark did not return voicemail messages left at his office or on his cell phone. He also didn't respond to an e-mail seeking comment.

The clash came as the national spotlight focuses on Arizona's tough new law cracking down on illegal immigrants and the protests it is drawing across the country, including a legal challenge from the federal government.

Immigration is shaping up to be among the critical election-year issues as Republicans try to regain control of both chambers in Congress riding a wave of anti-Washington sentiment.

Stark, a liberal Democrat, is expected to easily win re-election against a lightly regarded opponent, political newcomer Justin Jelincic, who describes himself as a conservative Democrat.

Stark earned his primary challenge after he slammed a constituent who voiced his opposition to Obama's health care plan last summer at a town hall meeting.

"Mr. Congressman, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining," the constituent told Stark, referring to what he called the smoke and mirrors of the president's plan.

"I wouldn't dignify you be peeing on your leg," Stark fired back. "It wouldn't be worth wasting the urine."

In March, Stark seized control of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee for one day after Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., stepped aside due to an ethics probe. But Stark was quickly pushed aside in favor of Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., after many Democrats privately complained that Stark was too volatile to lead such an important committee.

Stark is known for making inflammatory comments.

In 2007, Stark accused President Bush of sending troops to Iraq "to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."

He also once called former Colorado Republican Rep. Scott McInnis a "fruitcake."

Edited June 30, 2010 by trigem

[gregintenn]

Phil Valentine was playing that audo earlier. The people at that meeting should have piled on and kicked his a$$ until his mother wouldn't have recognized him. I particularly enjoyed the part where the guy said that when he was running for office against his predecessor, he said his predecessor had been in office for 28 years, and it was time for him to go. The guy went on to say that Starks had held the office for the 38 years he'd lived, and asked what his plans were for retirement.

[Guest jackdm3]

What the hell kinda question is that?:

span.kLink { border-top: 0px none !important;border-left: 0px none !important;border-right: 0px none !important;border-bottom: 1px solid ;padding : 0px 0px 1px 0px !important;color:blue;background: transparent none;width: auto !important;float: none !important;display:inline !important; } a.kLink { color:blue !important ; border-bottom-style: none;text-decoration: underline;cursor: pointer;font-family: verdana;border: 0px none transparent !important;background: transparent none !important;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 0px !important;text-transform: none !important;display:inline !important;font-variant:normal;top:0px; right:0px;bottom:0px;left:0px;;outline:none } a.kLink:link { color:blue !important ; border-bottom-style: none;text-decoration: underline;cursor: pointer;font-family: verdana;border: 0px none transparent !important;background: transparent none !important;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 0px !important;text-transform: none !important;display:inline !important;font-variant:normal;top:0px; right:0px;bottom:0px;left:0px; } a.kLink:hover { color:blue;text-decoration: underline;cursor: pointer;font-family: verdana;border: 0px none transparent !important;background: transparent none !important;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 0px !important;text-transform: none !important;display:inline !important;font-variant:normal;top:0px; right:0px;bottom:0px;left:0px; } a.kLink:visited { color:blue;text-decoration: underline;cursor: pointer; font-family: verdana;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 0px; } .sponsor { font-family: MS Sans Serif, Verdana; color: #AFAFAF;font-size: 9pt; cursor: default; } a.CBL { cursor:default; } a.CBL:link { cursor:default; } a.CBL:hover { cursor:default; } a.CBL:visited { cursor:default; } .KonaBody { display:inline; }

Don't tell me. I already know what that is.

Edited June 30, 2010 by jackdm3

[Guest jackdm3]

http://youtu.be/Nfhn5OsKQoI

[BigK]

I just watched the video!!! I'd love to have seen someone walk up there and shove that mic where the sun don't shine. What a jackass.

[Guest oldsmobile98]

That does it. I'm gonna send this elitist chump a letter AND call his office. He needs to be reamed out.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

With him, I'm surprised someone hadn't done it years

ago.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest jackdm3]

That does it. I'm gonna send this elitist chump a letter AND call his office. He needs to be reamed out.

If you ream him out, he'll only be a bigger A-hole.

[Guest strelcevina]

he is right by saying that bigger and better wall wouldn't help.

Mexicans would build it anyway.

anyway nobody gives them credit of building a 1/4 of Nashville in last 10 years.

because of them, our Homes are more affordable.

without them new house price would would be 2x more expensive.

that is why government tolerate illegals. they are beneficial for a economy

sadly.

[Il Duce]

they are beneficial? they dont pay taxes yet use our programs!

[Guest strelcevina]

they are beneficial? they dont pay taxes yet use our programs!

say for example, cheap labor brings a billion dollars in profit, lost taxes and gov. programs cost 100 million.

that is 900 million in profit that it goes to rich bastards.

they tell you it is government fault, but they the one who use those resources them self.

like Phil valentine. he was bragging about his new house, and how he didn't care about illegals building it, after his house was done

he started to talk bad about them again

set up reword cash money for reporting illegals working for a company, than fee a company big $$$

[Guest HvyMtl]

the idea is the cheap illegal labor keeps your costs low.

So your house cost $200k instead of the $400k it might have cost had real citizens got paid real wages to build it.

It is a pro-illegal argument, with some truth behind it. Same concept as "The illegals will do the jobs Citizens won't." The last statement is untrue. The statement should be "Citizens won't do jobs at the pay level illegals will..."

EXAMPLE: You want me to clean toilets, you are gonna have to pay me more than the $5 an hour you pay an illegal to do it. But, the hotel, to be competitive, has to keep the room rate low. The easiest way to cut costs is cut labor. So, they hire the illegal, as they will do the job for less than 1/3 a Citizen would. So, you get your cheap hotel room.

Same reason you buy at Walmart, as they pay their people minimum wage, you reap the benefit of cheaper Clothes, Groceries, and T.V.s. Meanwhile, Walmart has, in the past, put info on the employee's check stub on how to get social benefits, from health care, to housing aid, to food stamps. I have even read an article where a majority of Tenncare's recipients are Walmart Employees. Read the U of Cali report Walmart costs the state of Cali $54 million a year more in social benefits than the State receives in tax benefits from Walmart...

The point is this: The assumption the US Consumer will not pay top dollar for services and products, and therefore costs must be cut someplace. That someplace is the loss of jobs by the Citizen, replaced by the Illegal.

AS FOR THE Elected Official. Well. Typical for that area of the Nation.

[Mark@Sea]

As long as we're pontificating on subjects about which some of us have no clue (background in construction? No? Economic theory? Hmm.... I sense a trend here), how about explaining how good cap and trade will be for us.

Knowing people in the construction business (at least, above the professional level of 'roofer') would probably be helpful in building talking points... but the 'evil capitolists exploit cheap labor' meme doesn't hold water.

Illegals lead our society in a number of socially significant areas: gang violence, criminal activity, identity theft, draining social welfare programs, drug running, and oh yeah, picking crops. Where would we be without them?

I'm rapidly losing tolerance for ignorance. Does it show?

[Guest HvyMtl]

Cheap labor argument does hold water. Otherwise, they would not be here, as there would be no jobs for them. I was trying to explain strelcevina's viewpoint. Note: I did not state if I was pro or con.

Construction business - I might know a thing or two... My Grandfather built houses long before you were a twinkle in your daddy's eye...

I too can lose tolerance for ignorance. Does it show? Cuts both ways. (Sarcasm off.) So, before you blindly attack someone in a forum, ask yourself: Will your statement make you look and sound exactly like those you "lose tolerance" for?

If you want to stoop to personal attacks, feel free. Just do them in private messages. Stop wasting bandwidth.

Apologies to the forum.

Matter of fact, if you live in certain areas (Crieve Hall, Goodlettsville) you just might be living in a home he built. "Fortunate" for him he died before the present influx. Would have put him out of business, for he did not tolerate those who broke the law, and would not have done business with those who hired illegals. This is the same man, who, in the 1950's, drove across town to return the $2 he accidentally overcharged a customer. Someone I am proud of.

As for cap and trade, have not looked into it. So, feel free to inform.

As for the Cali dude. Again, that is a typical viewpoint of their elected officials. Sad they get elected. And probably will continue to be. Cali has long shown a lack of being in touch with the majority.

FYI: Former part time Walmart Employee.

Edited July 1, 2010 by HvyMtl

[Mark@Sea]

This isn't your grandfathers country anymore, if you haven't noticed. Are you in construction? Project manager, Foreman, something like that? Your experience to back your position is??? Anecdotes are not data. I'm not in construction - but a friend is, at a managerial level. We just had this conversation. His experience varies - vehemently - from your position.

(Construction jobs? In todays' economy? Hahahahaha... That'd be funny if it didn't hurt so much). They're here for welfare, food stamps, housing assistance, social security, 'free' healthcare, easy loans (Thanks, ACORN) etc. etc. ad nauseum. The majority who are working are 'domestics' or temps. That includes the day labor types hanging out at Home Depot. Those who hold a permanent position are likely manning the cash register at the local stop and rob. There are exceptions, of course. Last major raid (and the one before that, come to think of it) that I saw in the news was a meat packing plant. Can't remember the last time I saw "construction site raided, 40 illegals arrested".

Illegal immigration and the myriad programs that support and encourage it is, bluntly, a vote-buying program for the democratic party.

Glad you're losing tolerance. It's correctable, with early intervention.

Please note the difference between a personal attack (you smell funny) and an attack on your argument (your position is wrongly based on 'what everyone knows' - AKA 'popular wisdom' - rather than fact). Grasping the subtle difference lowers blood pressure, prevents premature baldness, and improves social skills.

As far as that politician, I would agree in somewhat stronger terms that he doesn't represent the views of a majority of his (legal) constituents.

Edited July 1, 2010 by Mark@Sea

[Guest strelcevina]

They're here for welfare, food stamps, housing assistance, social security, 'free' healthcare, easy loans (Thanks, ACORN) etc. etc. ad nauseum.

if you strongly believe this misinformation, than you are capable of believing anything.

in order for you to qualifies for all above programs" welfare, food stamps, housing assistance, social security, 'free' healthcare," you have to be legal in this country.

none of illegals are using them.

difference is that their kids born in US are natural born US citizen.

just like yourself

there is no difference whatsoever

so if that child qualifies for a government programs, that has nothing to do with illegals.

do you wont to blame a child who is an American, for who his parents are. and take his god given rights to get all that help.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

if you strongly believe this misinformation, than you are capable of believing anything.

in order for you to qualifies for all above programs" welfare, food stamps, housing assistance, social security, 'free' healthcare," you have to be legal in this country.

none of illegals are using them.

difference is that their kids born in US are natural born US citizen.

just like yourself

there is no difference whatsoever

so if that child qualifies for a government programs, that has nothing to do with illegals.

do you wont to blame a child who is an American, for who his parents are. and take his god given rights to get all that help.

I didn't catch that misinformation you say Mark stated. Don't start that nonsense about "the children", either. The illegals are waging war against this country. If these people are so great why didn't they come in through the front door, instead of sneaking in? They are criminals, strel.

You don't have to be an American citizen to use the emergency room of most hospitals,

all across the country. Of course this ties in to your love of Obamacare.

Nancy Pelosi and friends have seen to it these illegals get welfare and food stamps and the public schools(a lot of good that will do), and we get to pay for it. Thanks.

I hope that the "anchor baby" situation is challenged in Federal court because it gives an illegal status that doesn't hold muster with the Constitution.

[Mark@Sea]

Yes, I'm pretty gullible. Shoot, I believed in the tooth fairy until last year, and I still believe there are communists who are trying to destroy the American way of life and institute their murderous socialist garbage.

[Dolomite_supafly]

If you think Starks antics were upsetting in the previous video take a look at this one:

Condescending, ignorant fool.

Watch it to the end to see what kind of person he really is.

Dolomite

[MCSCOTT]

Strel, for once I agree with you in a way, but Mark is right in the fact that illegal aliens are a drain on our economy. They abuse our system to get all of the government aid that Mark is talking about, and they create a need for more and more law enforcement officers which are a waste of time because the illegals do not have to live by our laws. If you think I'm wrong in this then you obviously haven't spent much time in the poorer neighborhoods across the country. Personally I've hung around with all types of people, so I've seen first hand just how many out there take advantage of our tax dollars, and a good portion of these are either illegals or are using government aid to support illegals in their households. I see the point that their cheap labor may save us half the cost of construction over the course of several years, but at the same time if there were no illegals living here to cause the added government expense our taxes most likely wouldn't have to be so high.

Also as I've said before I don't really blame a child that is born here in these "anchor baby" situations. I do however think that the parents should be deported as soon as the child is born and given the option to either take the child back to their country, or have it taken away from them.

[Armed Aviator]

What part of Illegal do you not understand. Come in legally, following the rules, I welcome you with open arms. Come over illegally, you should be hunted down as the criminal that you are. PERIOD!

[leroy]

...Yes, I'm pretty gullible. Shoot, I believed in the tooth fairy until last year, and I still believe there are communists who are trying to destroy the American way of life and institute their murderous socialist garbage. ...

To stir this hornet's nest up a bit; I agree fully with Mark. There are very powerful forces, principally in the Demorat party that are, indeed, trying (...and succeeding in many parts of the country like several rust belt states, the northeast, and that mecca kalefornia...) who want to change the capitalist and self-reliant principles that this country was founded on to the socialist utopian dream of "…from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. …" baloney. When you take the time to think about what is going on; you will soon come to the conclusion that about one third of the voting population still believes in the capitalist / self reliance ideal, about one third believes in the socialist ideal, and one third just get drug along by whatever bunch is doing the best job of articulating their particular message. The current demorat administration proves just how tenuous the freedom/socialism battle is; because with a mere 5 million vote majority; the socialists among us were able to drag this country hard left and make progress the socialists had not made since the "New Deal".

This happened, I believe, because the Republicans ran an RINO candidate that no real, conservative, Republican or independent that loves liberty could back (...so they thought...). They bought the "Hope and Change" baloney, and look what it has brought; the greatest assault on capitalism that we have seen in modern times. The American voter threw a tantrum (...a well deserved one, I believe...) at the republicans who traded the capitalist/ self reliant ideal for the old governing master idea and voted in the "Hope and Change" party.

The good news is in modern times (since about 1976), the Demorat party has had to rely on a combination of telling lies about who they really are and voter dissatisfaction with the Republicans to get elected. Jimmy Carter (...the dumbest president in modern times...) was elected because the American voter was incensed that Gerald Ford (...an unelected president in his first term...) pardoned Nixon, and gave the impression that the governing elites were above the law. The great Bill Clinton was elected because he said: "I’m not like them left wing Demorats...". We could probably quibble about that a bit ---HEHEHE.

Most recently, the great Nobama was elected because he ran on "Hope and Change" and ran against a weak RINO Republican and a Republican White House and Congress who had forgotten who elected them, and what they were really there to do. I believe that voter dissatisfaction will throw this bunch of chumps out as well.

The moral of this little epistle: There are, indeed, very powerful forces in this country who would demand that we change this country from a capitalist system to a socialist utopia (…with them, of course, as the exalted leaders; and you as their serfs…). The Demorat party as it has been constituted for many years, is indeed, the party of socialism. There are those (…including yours truly…) who believe the Republican party has abdicated its long held role of espousing smaller government, capitalism, and conservative principles. That is why they were thrown out. The Republicans had better wake up, or they will morph into the demorat party and the real Republicans will become a third party (…think Tea Party…).

RE: The issue of “cheap labor”. The illegal argument is an interesting one. The Demorats want amnesty for illegals because they see them as a new voting block and a group of new socialist serfs that will help them to bring in the new socialist utopia. Some Republicans see the illegals as a labor pool to do the work that the “sons and daughters” of the kingdom will not do. The fact of the matter is that two things will have to happen; both of which factions in both parties will have to accept. The first is that the sons and daughters of this country will have to accept the idea that they need to go to work in the first place; that there aint no ‘Rainbow Stew”; that no body, especially government, owes them a living; and that ALL work is honorable. In short, it is the idea of self-reliance and that “you are responsible for you”. That means rejecting the social drivel about being mistreated and the elitist lie that says that some labor is beneath the dignity of certain groups of people. The second is that we are simply going to have to secure our borders and fix the problem of illegals in this country; no matter how painful that will be for both the Demorats and the Republicans.

Don’t be dragged off in the woods with the drivel about this economy needing illegals to do work that no one else will do. If you change the culture and attitude that a majority of unemployed sons and daughters of the kingdom have toward work in this country; you will fix the “labor problem”. The “cheap labor” issue is a construct that factions of both sides of the political spectrum are using to try to feather their respective political nests with. It aint about social justice, fairness, or the American ideal --- It’s about partisan politics --- pure and simple!!!

Food for thought.

Kind regards,

Leroy

Edited July 2, 2010 by leroy

[Ebow1]

Excellent post.

[greenego]

Pete Stark is an example of an elitist politician.They think they are better, smarter have more rights than the average person. These are very dangerous people. They will stop at NOTHING to get their way. By demeaning the person asking the question., pete just reaffirmed he is superior. He couldn't answer the question with any truth, so he does what any elitist politician does, demean his opponent. These are the people that are the greatest danger to the Republic.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Ain't ashamed to admit error. It now seems obvious that I was wrong and Henry Waxman is NOT the most sanctimonious smarta** in congress. But a question remains-- is Stark the reigning champion or are there other worthy contenders?

Alan Grayson perhaps?

Edited July 1, 2010 by Lester Weevils