I love immigration,  once again you either ignore or miss the point completely.   It is illegal immigration that is the problem.  In your analysis did you consider extreme poverty, hunger and/or oppression might be stronger motivators to emigrate from an area than intelligence?

In order to make it seem like conservatives don't want ANY immigration, the liberal/progressives lump in illegal invasion with legal immigration.  Thus they can make the conservatives look like they are racist, xenophobic knuckle draggers, and instead of having a reasonable discussion just try to make us look bad, and end the argument.  It is a tried, and true primary tactic of the liberal/progressives, and, Michael as do others, use it all the time.   

Lol, world's top scientists....

Now don't laugh at our scientists.

Most of them have triple digit IQs.

If "everyone" is "rich" you still have the upper 5% and the bottom 10%, and everything in between. Still "unfair" according to our Communist friends.

By the standards of most of the rest of the world, our poorest are very rich. They have potable running water, indoor plumbing, access to food, (if only the most unhealthy and cheapest, it still keeps them fat, not starving), big screen TV and cell phones. Except for the homeless, they've roofs over their heads. It's all relative, it doesn't matter how much you lift those at the bottom, they will still be seen as disadvantaged victims because others are higher.  It is completely against nature to try to equalize everyone's conditions. Our species is not an egalitarian one. People will act according to their DNA, not according to an ideal forced upon them by a political ideology. Leftist theory always requires that people suddenly and against their nature, lose their tendency to self sort into a pecking order and when they don't, force and threat of punishment is used. The irony is - this is exactly that - the self sorting into a pecking order with the leftist on top. There can be no such thing as an anarchist socialist utopia. It's a fantasy. Leftism will always be about those in power keeping a lock on the rest of us while preaching their utopian ideal out of a dishonest mouth.

I have never been an O'Reilly fan, nor a hater either.  When I did use to watch him, he would sometimes seem to have the right perspective on calling people out, both Democrats, and Republicans.  Other times he would show his hand as a classic, inside the NYC bubble Progressive, especially with the 2A, and right to legally bear arms, calling AR-15's "weapons of war", etc.  Also, I did not like him bullying guests, and talking over people all the time.

Although I no longer get Fox, I do like what I have seen of Tucker Carlson, Greg Gutfeld, and Jesse Waters. 

Absolutely.  Remember, our system includes millions upon millions of uninsured, who have no access to the system whatsoever.  Compare someone who has to wait a week to someone who has no access, it isn't a comparison.  Again, if you look at per capita spending the US places in dead last among Western nations.

I know these facts are inconvenient, but they are true.  You can look them up.  It is also true that if you look at the best health care of the richest here, it is far better than what you get with the nationalized system.  If everyone had access to that it would be great.  But everyone doesn't.

That is utter bullshit. You speak as if healthcare and health insurance were a free-for-all before 2010. It was not. There were no subsidies, no mandate, and a small minority of people weren't covered by insurance.  Miraculous but true.

That group can be split between two basic groups. Those who could not afford insurance. For the needy, we had Medicaid. Still do. For those that could afford it but that CHOSE not to buy insurance, the ACA turned the entire process upside down, eliminating affordable a la carte and catastrophic health insurance, forcing hundreds of millions of people to buy unaffordable plans that cover everything including unnecessary coverage like pregnancy for seniors, just so 10 or 20 million can get free or reduced cost insurance.

News flash:  Obama wasn't the first person to think about how insurance works. It has worked well for decades. Now insurance companies right and left are dropping out of the business.  What changed?

He doesn't claim infallibility in these matters and has actually said that he encourages discourse on his comments in the political arena.   

That said he pisses me off too.  I'm Catholic too, and I regularly question local catholics when they make statements that I think are stupid.  This guy is a socialist/communist.  These guys are always deriding capitalism and people who make well, yet live quite comfortably off the spoils of those earnings.  I could go on, but suffice it to say I question a lot that comes out of his mouth, sometimes though I go to the transcripts of what he actually said and like everything else in the media, what he actually says and what is reported are usually not the same.  I wish he would devote much more energy in solving the many problems in his own organisation.

I didn't claim that he did claim infallibility; I just wanted to point that out because many non-Catholics, and certainly the many Catholic haters, often try to imply that the Pope's spoken word is the equivalent of Doctrine, which must be followed by Catholics. It isn't, and we don't.

Only 1 arrest

let me guess, the person arrested was defending their property.