PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Lucifer on February 10, 2018, 05:51:11 PM
-
Even the "Dreamers" have figured out how the dims are just using them.
http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/10/daca-recipient-dems-using-dreamers-pawns/
“The Democratic leadership, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, really have no clear message,” he argued. “We have been confused, I think at the end of the day they have been using us as pawns.”
“We should have never shut down the government over DACA. We should have never held our American people and our military hostage,” he said, noting that Democrats opted not to solve the DACA problem when they had control of Congress.
-
Now is the perfect time for Republicans to pass DACA legislation and comprehensive immigration reform. Too bad some pig headed members of their own party cannot see past their own noses.
-
Instead of 'passing' DACA legislation, it would be far better if the country would start enforcing existing immigration law and forcing D.C. to fix the immigration system to reflect reality instead of the blind blather of liberals.
-
Instead of 'passing' DACA legislation, it would be far better if the country would start enforcing existing immigration law and forcing D.C. to fix the immigration system to reflect reality instead of the blind blather of liberals.
So you think it's better strategy for the Republicans to leave the DACA issue out there and let Democrats continue to pound on it?
-
DACA is not even a law, it was another BHO executive order to circumvent congress.
When the dims had control of the WH and congress they did.....nothing. Nothing to put DACA into law or revise the current immigration laws. Why? Well, at that time it wasn't useful to them.
Pelosi and the dims could give two shits about the "dreamers". They are merely pawns to the progressive agenda.
DACA is designed to reward criminals. Let that sink in. Here is an EO that gives a right to non citizens that is not available to citizens. And it rewards them for crimes committed against our country.
-
Now is the perfect time for Republicans to pass DACA legislation and comprehensive immigration reform. Too bad some pig headed members of their own party cannot see past their own noses.
What a shock! A group of politicians contains some pig headed members. Even the Republican party.
This proves we need MORE Republicans in Congress, not fewer. I laugh at and scorn those that claim the Rs "control" Congress because they have a minuscule majority. The only way such a majority would control Congress is if they all voted in lock step. I don't want to see that from ANY party. That is what leads to people voting for the party instead of the man. They don't care if their vote goes to a flaming asshole as long as it goes to their party. But that is the system we have, so until we change it, we live with it.
If we had more Republicans in Congress, they wouldn't have needed to make so many concessions to the Dems to get something passed. But instead a bunch of idiots will vote D because the Rs couldn't get the job done when the Rs could get something done if there were more Rs.
edited to change "minority" to "majority"
-
The real fix to Congress is to get rid of the career politicians via term limits.
It's the career politicians (both parties) that have fucked everything up.
-
So you think it's better strategy for the Republicans to leave the DACA issue out there and let Democrats continue to pound on it?
YES. DACA is WRONG. Enforce existing immigration laws. Let the Dems, and their Media propagandists pound on it. Most Americans don't agree with DACA. If the R's cave on this one, they're done.
-
What do you suppose would be the consequences for any of us natural born citizens circumventing a port of entry after traveling abroad? A big fine and long stretch in a federal prison is my guess.
-
So your (all of you) solution to DACA is to fall back on law and order and deport dreamers, letting the left "prove" that the right is just mean heartless bigots who hate mexicans.
This is why Republicans lose.
-
So your (all of you) solution to DACA is to fall back on law and order and deport dreamers, letting the left "prove" that the right is just mean heartless bigots who hate mexicans.
This is why Republicans lose.
OK, if we are going to reward people (non citizens) for breaking our laws, where does it stop?
Also this country has a bad problem in giving amnesty to law breakers who break our laws by illegally entering our country. So we give amnesty to the dreamers, the next group of criminals will come in knowing if they wait it out they too will get amnesty, eventually.
So we screw over the immigrants who follow our laws and spend the time and money to do it correctly and reward those who openly break our laws.
Please explain.
-
So your (all of you) solution to DACA is to fall back on law and order and deport dreamers, letting the left "prove" that the right is just mean heartless bigots who hate mexicans.
This is why Republicans lose.
No. I actually agree with Trump. Tie a path to citizenship for the Dreamers to a serious commitment to border security. I can see the argument that the Dreamers themselves (the kids) didn't break any laws. Their parents did.
-
So your (all of you) solution to DACA is to fall back on law and order and deport dreamers, letting the left "prove" that the right is just mean heartless bigots who hate mexicans.
This is why Republicans lose.
It’s only silly headed liberals who think - I’m not sure think is correct word - that codifying criminality is a good thing.
-
No. I actually agree with Trump. Tie a path to citizenship for the Dreamers to a serious commitment to border security. I can see the argument that the Dreamers themselves (the kids) didn't break any laws. Their parents did.
I agree. Sometimes you are dealt a hand, and this one has been dealt. By ensuring the wall, Trump can accomplish a goal without giving up much. I really, really am pissed that he tripled the number of people considered dreamers. He could have narrowed that definition that anyone 21 or older wouldn’t qualify for any special treatment from other illegals. That would make future “dreamers” get their fucking act in order.
-
I agree. Sometimes you are dealt a hand, and this one has been dealt. By ensuring the wall, Trump can accomplish a goal without giving up much. I really, really am pissed that he tripled the number of people considered dreamers. He could have narrowed that definition that anyone 21 or older wouldn’t qualify for any special treatment from other illegals. That would make future “dreamers” get their fucking act in order.
Keep in mind that Trump made that offer, an extremely generous one, and the dims turned their noses up at it. He knew they would, and he rightfully showed everyone that the DACA is really just a pawn being manipulated by the dims. IMO it was a brilliant move.
-
OK, if we are going to reward people (non citizens) for breaking our laws, where does it stop?
Also this country has a bad problem in giving amnesty to law breakers who break our laws by illegally entering our country. So we give amnesty to the dreamers, the next group of criminals will come in knowing if they wait it out they too will get amnesty, eventually.
So we screw over the immigrants who follow our laws and spend the time and money to do it correctly and reward those who openly break our laws.
Please explain.
As I said, this is how Republicans lose.
Amnesty without border reform is idiotic. It was 40 years ago and it still is today. Amnesty for children who have never known any other country is reasonable amnesty.
Build the wall. Increase the penalties - make it illegal to be in the US without legal entry, make it extra bad if the person is PNG. Increase the border control. And then take DACA away from the Democrats and prove that they have no interest in solving the problem, they only have interest in having the problem. For the next 50 years, Republicans get to say they are the heros.
Good strategy. Too many fanatics will reject it, just like most of you did here.
-
As I said, this is how Republicans lose.
Amnesty without border reform is idiotic. It was 40 years ago and it still is today. Amnesty for children who have never known any other country is reasonable amnesty.
Build the wall. Increase the penalties - make it illegal to be in the US without legal entry, make it extra bad if the person is PNG. Increase the border control. And then take DACA away from the Democrats and prove that they have no interest in solving the problem, they only have interest in having the problem. For the next 50 years, Republicans get to say they are the heros.
Good strategy. Too many fanatics will reject it, just like you all did here.
Guess you missed the part where the President offered the dims everything they wanted in DACA, and more. And in return he asked for more border security (wall) and an end to chain migration and lottery immigration.
The dims said no way, proving they don't give two shits for DACA. Not even one shit.
And with this being an election year the republicans won't touch it.
-
Guess you missed the part where the President offered the dims everything they wanted in DACA, and more. And in return he asked for more border security (wall) and an end to chain migration and lottery immigration.
The dims said no way, proving they don't give two shits for DACA. Not even one shit.
And with this being an election year the republicans won't touch it.
You just agreed with me, but I don't think you know it.
-
You just agreed with me, but I don't think you know it.
It's interesting at times watching you attempt to come off as an intellectual. A massive fail, but interesting.
And yes, I was agreeing with you on the premise, but I still hold the position of not giving criminals a pass for breaking our laws and rewarding them with something we won't even give our own citizens or immigrants who chose to follow the law.
-
DACA would be unlawful if it were challenged in court. There is no standing for the exec to violate legislative law. Don't get me wrong, they do it all the time, but that doesn't make it legal. Lincoln "proclaimed" the end to slavery. That's not how things are done in a republic.
-
DACA would be unlawful if it were challenged in court. There is no standing for the exec to violate legislative law. Don't get me wrong, they do it all the time, but that doesn't make it legal. Lincoln "proclaimed" the end to slavery. That's not how things are done in a republic.
Wasn’t DACA indirectly challenged in court? A judge told Trump he could not cancel it? Or am I misremembering?
-
Wasn’t DACA indirectly challenged in court? A judge told Trump he could not cancel it? Or am I misremembering?
Your memory is substantially correct:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/09/politics/california-judge-daca-applications/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/09/politics/california-judge-daca-applications/index.html)
-
Would be interesting to see what happens if the president issues a PO that the DOJ will enforce ALL the laws as written and will not allow any individual, even a PO to countermand laws. I wonder if the same judge would rule that no, the DOJ must avoid enforcing a law because it would be unfair and discriminatory.
-
So your (all of you) solution to DACA is to fall back on law and order and deport dreamers, letting the left "prove" that the right is just mean heartless bigots who hate mexicans.
This is why Republicans lose.
Well, Republicans are far from losing. They've gained seats in every statehouse, and most counties in the US. Of course, they hold both houses of congress, and the presidency, as well as a slight majority in SCOTUS. But - go ahead, think what you want. BO and Hillary were the greatest thing for the GOP in decades.
DACA: The average age of the DACA illegal alien is just under 25 years old. That means, they have been in the US for at LEAST 6 years of their adult life without resolving their citizenship status. The oldest people in the program, more than 10% are in their mid-30s, and have been here for decades without solving their immigration status. The left's image of the destitute 9 year old innocent child is a myth. Those under 16 make up less than HALF OF ONE PERCENT. In raw numbers, those under 16 represent about 4000 kids. The other 796,000 are old enough to know they are here illegally, and haven't done anything about it. The critical number is almost 80% of DACA aliens are over the age of 18, which is legal age. That's 640,000 adults, which the left want us to believe are starving, impoverished, children with no hope. 88% are from Mexico and central America. Nearly all of them speak Spanish as their first language. Nearly all of them have immediate family(grandparents, aunt, uncle, parent) back in their host country.
This myth of familial hardship has been sold to the public. The reality is far, far different. Almost all of them came across the border on their own, or with family, walking in as economic migrants, looking for better work, and money. Very, very, very few were carried here as infants, or young kids. In many cases where they were brought as young kids under 12, the parents have abandoned their children if/when the parents get deported, leaving the child behind in the care of other family, friends, and in some cases the state.
Most of the people in the US see the DACA as some kind of charity or family hardship case caused by the US govt. This drivel makes up less than 1/10 percent, and those are the minority report cases that make the news. The overwhelming majority of DACA cases could be deported back to their host country, and they would move back in with parents, grandparents, or other family members. If they are over the age of 18(80%, or 640,000 members), they are adults in the US, Mexico, Guatemala, and almost all other countries. They would be responsible for their own care, feeding and support no matter what nation they were in.
Got anymore ludicrous BULLSHIT about illegal aliens?
-
DACA puts ILLEGAL foreigners ahead of legal citizens. Americans have a right to dream also. Let's work to facilitate that first.
-
Got anymore ludicrous BULLSHIT about illegal aliens?
Why would I bring up anything else you piled on plenty yourself without ever addressing what I said.
It would be good strategy for Republicans to remove this issue from the table and while they're at it, lock down the rest of immigration. But Republicans will cut off their nose to spite their face. Far better to put a million people in the country and formally outlaw the other 39 million than wait until Democrats are in control of everything again and let them open the flood gates. When it happens, just remember that I told you so now.
If they are lucky, they will only lose the Senate.
-
No thanks. Don't remove the DACA program from any strategy. Just deport them after not renewing the 2 year period for Deferred Action. DACA is not a law, it's an exec order. Each and every DACA person has 2 years from their last deferral to sort things out. If you can't sort it out in 2 years, back you go.
DACA is getting the best press since sliced bread. However, the people go into the voting booth, and although they publicly supported it outside, in the privacy of the voting booth, they did what had to be done. It's called 'hypocrisy' and the left is the standard bearer for the game. What do you think happened with Schumer shutdown got going. The libs said; 'hey - you are willing to shut the US govt down for a bunch of ILLEGALS? WTF?' Even the progs couldn't sell that in Peoria. So endeth the Dems 'power'.
I'll be holding my breath when the Dems make this big comeback on the skirts of illegal aliens. It's such a losing proposition, which has so much liberal public support. Hoping the left keeps this on the front burner right through election day. It'll be another bloodbath.
QED.
OBTW - you went and looked up those DACA stats didn't you? Couldn't find anything to dispute,,, right? If you think my numbers are bullshit, I say bring it. Yours - is the superior - intellect. 8)
-
Despite the numbers indicated by InvFlatSpin, which may or may not be incorrect, ending the program is likely to be an image problem for Republicans. But it also doesn't finish the job. Ending DACA just pushes those folks back underground, along with other illegal immigrants, who make up the majority of the population. The next step is deportations, which would need to be done en masse or gradually but in very large numbers.
I think bflynn's point is that Republicans could completely disarm Democrats while getting the border security they want. Cancel DACA, amnesty for the 800k former DACA recipients, implement border wall, Republicans win.
-
No thanks. Don't remove the DACA program from any strategy. Just deport them after not renewing the 2 year period for Deferred Action. DACA is not a law, it's an exec order. Each and every DACA person has 2 years from their last deferral to sort things out. If you can't sort it out in 2 years, back you go.
DACA is getting the best press since sliced bread. However, the people go into the voting booth, and although they publicly supported it outside, in the privacy of the voting booth, they did what had to be done. It's called 'hypocrisy' and the left is the standard bearer for the game. What do you think happened with Schumer shutdown got going. The libs said; 'hey - you are willing to shut the US govt down for a bunch of ILLEGALS? WTF?' Even the progs couldn't sell that in Peoria. So endeth the Dems 'power'.
I'll be holding my breath when the Dems make this big comeback on the skirts of illegal aliens. It's such a losing proposition, which has so much liberal public support. Hoping the left keeps this on the front burner right through election day. It'll be another bloodbath.
QED.
OBTW - you went and looked up those DACA stats didn't you? Couldn't find anything to dispute,,, right? If you think my numbers are bullshit, I say bring it. Yours - is the superior - intellect. 8)
What are you rambling on about? I'm willing to assume that your numbers are right, but can you explain why I care? You have set up and run down a straw man all in the same post.
Do you recognize that Republicans are eventually going to lose over the DACA issue? My conclusions is that no, you don't. So remember that I told you so. Remember that I advised it would be better to accept a million (or 690,000) immigrants into the country now to prevent the entry of millions more later. Remember that you were fanatical about not accepting anything and when it gets crammed down your throat, remember that you insisted on not solving the problem under your own terms.
Why include DACA? Because if your solution to illegal immigrants is "screw them all and send them back where they came from", you cannot hope to win support. So I say, be gracious about these small numbers and then you can make harsh rules for the rest. I'm in favor of a mandatory jail sentence for anyone convicted of illegally being in the US, then deportation. On the second offense, it's 10 years. For the third offense, it's mandatory life, no parole. And we'll put the prisons on the border, with a clear view of Mexico...where they could have been free. Instead, they are locked up here because they were stupid. Remember, that isn't for just being caught crossing, that is if you are EVER caught. Those who assist these criminals to escape will be considered accomplices and can join them in prison, even or especially if they hold a government position. Plus full funding for the wall. Plus many, many more border guards.
Is that worth getting a "good guy" pat on the back for giving a pass to 690,000 people who grew up in the US and don't know how to function in another country? Oh, AND removing a major campaign issue for the Democrats in the mid-terms?
Nope, Republicans say no. Fanatic, I name thee.
-
There is right, and there is wrong. Sometimes you just have to pick the one that is right, and LEGAL. If we cave, and let things go, and go, and go, why have laws? Just like the Dems wanting to forgive all college loan debt. Maybe people should stop paying their mortgages, car payments, or other debt?
-
I didn't care for reply 9, with your own strawman; 'solution to DACA.... heartless bigots who hate Mexicans, and why they are always losing'. My reply was directly responding to this.
I showed you the numbers that rather than heartless, we are realists who know when we are being fed unadulterated bullshit. I gave the numbers, and if you want, I'll go get the ugly numbers on the Dem loss of power starting in 2014, and continuing through 2016 elections. It's pretty brutal.
When you call out a whole cast of people as heartless bigots, I'd say you care a lot. I only wish libs would care just as much about their own countrymen, rather than those who come here illegally, no matter their age. The entire liberal agenda on illegals woes in contrast to US citizens woes is despicable.
-
There is right, and there is wrong.
Well that's the rub. Some would say that amnesty for DACA folks is "right", because these are essentially people of our country. They grew up here, raised families here, had American kids, went to school here, served in the military here, etc.
'Lotta folks say - "but they broke the law to come here!" I actually don't find that argument especially compelling.
-
I only wish libs would care just as much about their own countrymen, rather than those who come here illegally, no matter their age.
"Maybe both are happening at the same time."
-- Forrest Gump
-
Well that's the rub. Some would say that amnesty for DACA folks is "right", because these are essentially people of our country. They grew up here, raised families here, had American kids, went to school here, served in the military here, etc.
'Lotta folks say - "but they broke the law to come here!" I actually don't find that argument especially compelling.
So should we start offering amnesty for people who rob banks? I mean, after all, all they are trying to do is provide for their families, send their kids to school, etc. And some folks who rob banks actually served honorably in the military.
Lotta folks say- "but he broke the law to rob the bank!" I actually find that argument especially compelling.
-
And here ya go:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/chrisreeves/2018/02/13/court-blocks-trump-from-deporting-daca-recipients-n2448744
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman just announced that a judge has granted a preliminary injunction preventing President Trump from ending DACA by executive memorandum.
Schneiderman's suit against the Trump administration for ending DACA is largely based on the contention that the memo rescinding DACA was motivated by animus towards Mexicans for their national origin, as is explained by the original complaint filed by Schneiderman and the attorney generals of 16 other states back in September 2017.
What a fuckin' joke......
-
And here ya go:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/chrisreeves/2018/02/13/court-blocks-trump-from-deporting-daca-recipients-n2448744
What a fuckin' joke......
Yep.
Witness: rescinding DACA was motivated by animus towards Mexicans for their national origin
That is true, but it was because they aren't "Americans", not because they are Mexicans.
-
Well that's the rub. Some would say that amnesty for DACA folks is "right", because these are essentially people of our country. They grew up here, raised families here, had American kids, went to school here, served in the military here, etc.
'Lotta folks say - "but they broke the law to come here!" I actually don't find that argument especially compelling.
When I hear terms like 'essentially ___ ____ ____ ___ ' kind of statements, it starts to get me going. The qualifier - 'essentially' is one of those words like 'virtually'. They are synonyms for "having the appearance or likeness of a feature, condition, or product without the factual feature, condition, or product".
Examples include: 'our top grain vinyl is essentially the same as leather'. 'The farmed salmon we provide is virtually the same as wild caught salmon'. In it's purest form, it is a subtle, but conniving kind of deception. vinyl is NOT leather. Farmed salmon is NOT wild caught. Aliens who come to the US through illegal border crossing are NOT people of our country. If we define 'country' as a nation with borders.
A couple more things on this while I'm at it, and no disrespect to the post I am replying to, but A) I really don't care what happened after they broke the law. Coming into the US illegally for any reason does not justify their supposed 'rights' to be here. That's so logically inconsistent that it doesn't require much debate. It would not work for ANY nation, and why it should work for the US is disingenuous. B) There are certainly contributors who are DACA people. I will not deny that. The nation as a whole may be better, or may be worse based on each individual case. Could there be a path to citizenship for SOME few of those with exceptional cases? Sure. I don't want to be a hard-ass about it, but first - you go back to the country you came from. You apply for US citizenship. In your application, you note, and describe your contribution to the US(Joined armed forces, provided special critical knowledge and skills, etc). Then your application is reviewed, and WE get to say yea or nay just like any other applicant. I guess what I want to know is why should DACA recipients be given special consideration, after they admit to breaking the law? Again - the logical inconsistency just screams 'unfair!' to me, and yes I do know that life is unfair.
-
So were saying we want these people that haven't lifted a finger to become citizens and go to protests and wave the Mexican flag to just be allowed to stay?
-
So were saying we want these people that haven't lifted a finger to become citizens and go to protests and wave the Mexican flag to just be allowed to stay?
Yep. They want priority and the front of the line. And please don't expect the to pay for the privilege either!
-
Yep. They want priority and the front of the line. And please don't expect the to pay for the privilege either!
And I want a cirrus. Bloody small chance of either.
I do believe that not punishing people who were pulled along in the crime of crossing the border by their parents is good policy. They were children, they had no ability to not follow their parents. Quite possibly they had no knowledge at the time that there was a law or that they were breaking it.
But more than that, I'm confirming who the fanatics are, who will refuse to compromise even to get so much more that they want. You would give up getting the wall, getting stricter immigration control policies, criminalize being here illegally, getting more border guards...all so that you can maintain the law for 690,000 people who were minor children when they committed a crime.
You see...this IS the republicans losing. Nobody could hand you enough to win, you have no idea of how to compromise and claim victory. Even if you got all this AND criminalizing DACA, someone would point out that these immigrants are still getting benefits. or that all these criminals that get put into prisons for immigration crimes will get free room and board at the tax payer's expense. Or anything else and then you're right back to square zero, unable to take yes for answer.
This is why and how Republicans are losing. Too fracking caught up up in their own righteous to compromise anything.
-
Punishment?
I think I now understand. Illegals deserve to stay. There is some kind of natural, or god-given(if one believes) right that a border jumper gains once they make it into the country, and avoid deportation for X months, or Y years. Olly, Olly oxen free!
Hey, US - you didn't deport me when I was 16, or 20, or 26, or 32 - so, that means you can't deport me now. Neener, neener.
Punishment. Where do people come up with this bizarro stuff? What a massive, ego driven, god-like system of authority it takes to consider an illegal alien as worthy of some kind of consideration, because they came to the US under the age of 18! And further, after they know - for years, and years, and years and decades that they are breaking US law, they still do - nothing to resolve this, except fight the written, codified laws of this nation. Un-effing-believable.
Further, politicians on both sides are using this as some kind of bargaining chip. Like the laws, and rules are for sale to the high bidder. What ass-hattery. It's really quite simple. Enforce the laws equally. That's all I ask. I don't care what country of origin, color, race, creed, sex, etc. The law is supposed to be passionless. It's disgusting to see the left try their guilt trip games about poor, poor illegal alien. Been in this country for DECADES but refuses to follow the rules/laws.
And folks here know how much I HATE the fedguv and their idiotic laws. If we all just stop paying attention, I guess the result will be the shithole that they left for economic gain.
-
So were saying we want these people that haven't lifted a finger to become citizens and go to protests and wave the Mexican flag to just be allowed to stay?
Hey. How do you expect democrats to win elections without illegal and fraudulent votes?
What are you, some kind of racist?
-
And I want a cirrus. Bloody small chance of either.
I do believe that not punishing people who were pulled along in the crime of crossing the border by their parents is good policy. They were children, they had no ability to not follow their parents. Quite possibly they had no knowledge at the time that there was a law or that they were breaking it.
But more than that, I'm confirming who the fanatics are, who will refuse to compromise even to get so much more that they want. You would give up getting the wall, getting stricter immigration control policies, criminalize being here illegally, getting more border guards...all so that you can maintain the law for 690,000 people who were minor children when they committed a crime.
You see...this IS the republicans losing. Nobody could hand you enough to win, you have no idea of how to compromise and claim victory. Even if you got all this AND criminalizing DACA, someone would point out that these immigrants are still getting benefits. or that all these criminals that get put into prisons for immigration crimes will get free room and board at the tax payer's expense. Or anything else and then you're right back to square zero, unable to take yes for answer.
This is why and how Republicans are losing. Too fracking caught up up in their own righteous to compromise anything.
I want to say this nicely....
BULLSHIT.
All of it is bullshit and pablum directed at low information liberals too stupid to see that are being manipulated by a pile of horseshit on a platter.
Is that nice enough?
-
So should we start offering amnesty for people who rob banks? I mean, after all, all they are trying to do is provide for their families, send their kids to school, etc. And some folks who rob banks actually served honorably in the military.
Lotta folks say- "but he broke the law to rob the bank!" I actually find that argument especially compelling.
Well if we're going to ignore that there are varying levels of infractions and varying levels of consequences, why don't we just start executing people for speeding?
--
The reason I don't find the argument compelling is because it allows us to hand-wave the costs and consequences of what we're doing. I mean, it's a valid point to have -- that they shouldn't be here so kick 'em all out -- I just don't personally find the argument compelling.
-
When I hear terms like 'essentially ___ ____ ____ ___ ' kind of statements, it starts to get me going. The qualifier - 'essentially' is one of those words like 'virtually'. They are synonyms for "having the appearance or likeness of a feature, condition, or product without the factual feature, condition, or product".
Examples include: 'our top grain vinyl is essentially the same as leather'. 'The farmed salmon we provide is virtually the same as wild caught salmon'. In it's purest form, it is a subtle, but conniving kind of deception. vinyl is NOT leather. Farmed salmon is NOT wild caught. Aliens who come to the US through illegal border crossing are NOT people of our country. If we define 'country' as a nation with borders.
A couple more things on this while I'm at it, and no disrespect to the post I am replying to, but A) I really don't care what happened after they broke the law. Coming into the US illegally for any reason does not justify their supposed 'rights' to be here. That's so logically inconsistent that it doesn't require much debate. It would not work for ANY nation, and why it should work for the US is disingenuous. B) There are certainly contributors who are DACA people. I will not deny that. The nation as a whole may be better, or may be worse based on each individual case. Could there be a path to citizenship for SOME few of those with exceptional cases? Sure. I don't want to be a hard-ass about it, but first - you go back to the country you came from. You apply for US citizenship. In your application, you note, and describe your contribution to the US(Joined armed forces, provided special critical knowledge and skills, etc). Then your application is reviewed, and WE get to say yea or nay just like any other applicant. I guess what I want to know is why should DACA recipients be given special consideration, after they admit to breaking the law? Again - the logical inconsistency just screams 'unfair!' to me, and yes I do know that life is unfair.
A fine opinion to have. I just think it ignores all the details, and the reality of our current predicament.
We allowed these people to stay for decades, to become part of our society, to work here, pay taxes here, raise families here, have American kids here. I don't personally think that deporting all of them en masse is the right solution. The monetary and human cost is huge. It breaks up families. It puts American kids in foster care. It sends American kids to countries they've never known.
We allowed this mess to fester for decades and now we have to deal with it. You and I just have a different opinion on the best way to do it.
-
A fine opinion to have. I just think it ignores all the details, and the reality of our current predicament.
We allowed these people to stay for decades, to become part of our society, to work here, pay taxes here, raise families here, have American kids here. I don't personally think that deporting all of them en masse is the right solution. The monetary and human cost is huge. It breaks up families. It puts American kids in foster care. It sends American kids to countries they've never known.
We allowed this mess to fester for decades and now we have to deal with it. You and I just have a different opinion on the best way to do it.
Negative ghostrider. We did not 'allow' anything. Prior to DACA, any/all of those people were eligible for deportation had they been found, and the laws enforced. However, we had an exec at the helm who refused to respect the laws of our country, and made up his own get out of jail free for some small class of offenders. Once again, no one gets credit for what they have done after breaking the law, and staying here as illegals. Using the same metaphor, the farm raised salmon is the same as wild caught, if we put salt and some lemon on it. Uh-uh, doesn't work that way.
As for the old saw 'it breaks up families' that also is utter lies. The US govt will not force a child to leave its parent. If the parent is the DACA case, and they are deported we welcome and even encourage the child to go with the parent. No family will ever be broken up by the fedguv, by prohibiting anyone from leaving this country. If it sends an American kid to a country they don't know - who's fault is that? I will have great compassion for the illegal alien who A) Self-deports. B) Files his immigration papers to return to the US. C) Follow this countries immigration law. D) Takes full responsibility for his offspring.
Monetary cost. This one may have some merit - provided we have actual accounting of what the DACA case has been doing since they got in the program. I'm sure of the 800k people here, plenty are working. Plenty are paying taxes. Plenty are behaving, and contributing to a stronger nation and economy. That's fine, let them come forward, show their work, show their tax forms, and maybe they get to the front of the line - AFTER they leave and re-apply. The job they have may not be there, but hey - that's the same thing we all face in the US. I could have my job taken tomorrow, notwithstanding my citizenship, so why should the illegal alien expect full employment? Now - what about those cases who have come here as minors, been on the dole most or all of their time here, never worked, never paid taxes, are on many forms of supplemental consideration, and if allowed to stay would likely never offer any value to this country, except to pop out/father kids? Should they be given special consideration over those immigrants who have followed the law? You're gonna need to explain at some point why these DACA cases deserve 'special consideration'. Otherwise, I'm afraid my tears, taxes, and support will be reserved for deserving American families in financial/familial distress. For every dollar we spend on supporting an illegal, that's one dollar we don't have to spend on our own citizens. Show me the money.
-
Well if we're going to ignore that there are varying levels of infractions and varying levels of consequences, why don't we just start executing people for speeding?
That's a lame retort. There are federal laws on the books that covers people who illegally enter the country. And the federal code cites penalties for the infractions of the laws.
-
I want to say this nicely....
BULLSHIT.
All of it is bullshit and pablum directed at low information liberals too stupid to see that are being manipulated by a pile of horseshit on a platter.
Is that nice enough?
Actually, wasn't nice at all. But no worries, I'll try hold it against you if we run into each other a pancake breakfast, KOSH or SnF or somewhere.
So are you saying that you're not a fanatic and screw everyone else who doesn't agree with you? That's what I just heard.
-
If there is fanaticism in this debate, I think Schumer is front and center. He went so far as to not take 'yes' for an answer to the budget deal and tanked what could have been a decent shot at some form of negotiated settlement with a path to citizenship for many of the DACA cases. Trump held out an olive branch(not a very big one, but at least he was willing to sit at the table) and Schumer set it on fire, and tossed it back. Douche-baggery of the highest order.
-
If there is fanaticism in this debate, I think Schumer is front and center. He went so far as to not take 'yes' for an answer to the budget deal and tanked what could have been a decent shot at some form of negotiated settlement with a path to citizenship for many of the DACA cases. Trump held out an olive branch(not a very big one, but at least he was willing to sit at the table) and Schumer set it on fire, and tossed it back. Douche-baggery of the highest order.
Pot, meet kettle.
I used to think that discussion boards like this became dominated by one group because that group had superior ideas. But I think I'm having to allow that it's entirely possible that one side just decides they have better things to do than listen to pedantic rhetoric.
It is a distinct possibility that ya'll aren't winning this. You're just convincing others that you're not worth listening to. On this topic, you're certainly convincing me. Remember that on the partisan scale, I'm very slightly right of center - like a 51/100 score. If you can't convince me, you have a problem.
-
Pot, meet kettle.
I used to think that discussion boards like this became dominated by one group because that group had superior ideas. But I think I'm having to allow that it's entirely possible that one side just decides they have better things to do than listen to pedantic rhetoric.
It is a distinct possibility that ya'll aren't winning this. You're just convincing others that you're not worth listening to. On this topic, you're certainly convincing me. Remember that on the partisan scale, I'm very slightly right of center - like a 51/100 score. If you can't convince me, you have a problem.
I see. You can't/won't refute that Schumer unwisely shut down the govt for a few days all due specifically to posturing on DACA, so you just take a pot-shot at "y'all aren't winning". But - high marks for using 'pedantic rhetoric'. Something the left never engages in.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/02/08/pelosi-speech-orig-zw.cnn
Pelosi sets record with 8 HOUR speech, not but a few days ago. I'm certain if we spent the whole day listening to it, there would be no rhetoric, and none of it would be pedantic in the least. Y'all sit through it, then let me know. :o
-
A fine opinion to have. I just think it ignores all the details, and the reality of our current predicament.
We allowed these people to stay for decades, to become part of our society, to work here, pay taxes here, raise families here, have American kids here. I don't personally think that deporting all of them en masse is the right solution. The monetary and human cost is huge. It breaks up families. It puts American kids in foster care. It sends American kids to countries they've never known.
We allowed this mess to fester for decades and now we have to deal with it. You and I just have a different opinion on the best way to do it.
Let them stay and have the Dems pay for them.
-
The reality of the predicament is that another group expects tp be treated outside th slaw and given special status they don’t dersever and didn’t earn. Illegal aliens are illegal.’the only people fighting this fact are those who unstand that democrats cant win without fraud and illegal voters are huge potential pool of fraudulent votes.
Pretending that we are all obligated to fund every perk possible for a group with no legal status is the kind of stupid that creates multi trillion dollar deficits and complains that it is racist to point that out.
-
Actually, wasn't nice at all. But no worries, I'll try hold it against you if we run into each other a pancake breakfast, KOSH or SnF or somewhere.
So are you saying that you're not a fanatic and screw everyone else who doesn't agree with you? That's what I just heard.
That’s what you READ because that is your mindset. Everyone that looks outside of your carefully built box of stupid stuff is some kind of freak and worthy of nothing but hatred.
Congratulations you built a pathetic strawman and and once it was described as a straw man you got your pathetic partied in. A twist because you have no facts on which to build an argument.
-
That's a lame retort. There are federal laws on the books that covers people who illegally enter the country. And the federal code cites penalties for the infractions of the laws.
Not entirely correct. There are federal laws regarding illegal entry, but not visa overstays, which are a civil infraction and constitute two thirds of the current flow.
-
Not entirely correct. There are federal laws regarding illegal entry, but not visa overstays, which are a civil infraction and constitute two thirds of the current flow.
Reading comprehension issues again? Reread my post you quoted.
That's a lame retort. There are federal laws on the books that covers people who illegally enter the country. And the federal code cites penalties for the infractions of the laws.
Start with U.S. Code › Title 8 › Chapter 12 › Subchapter II › Part VIII › § 1325
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
Then you can go to U.S. Code › Title 8 › Chapter 12 › Subchapter II › Part IV › § 1227
Then U.S. Code › Title 8 › Chapter 12 › Subchapter II › Part V › § 1253
-
Negative ghostrider. We did not 'allow' anything. Prior to DACA, any/all of those people were eligible for deportation had they been found, and the laws enforced. However, we had an exec at the helm who refused to respect the laws of our country, and made up his own get out of jail free for some small class of offenders. Once again, no one gets credit for what they have done after breaking the law, and staying here as illegals. Using the same metaphor, the farm raised salmon is the same as wild caught, if we put salt and some lemon on it. Uh-uh, doesn't work that way.
As for the old saw 'it breaks up families' that also is utter lies. The US govt will not force a child to leave its parent. If the parent is the DACA case, and they are deported we welcome and even encourage the child to go with the parent. No family will ever be broken up by the fedguv, by prohibiting anyone from leaving this country. If it sends an American kid to a country they don't know - who's fault is that? I will have great compassion for the illegal alien who A) Self-deports. B) Files his immigration papers to return to the US. C) Follow this countries immigration law. D) Takes full responsibility for his offspring.
Monetary cost. This one may have some merit - provided we have actual accounting of what the DACA case has been doing since they got in the program. I'm sure of the 800k people here, plenty are working. Plenty are paying taxes. Plenty are behaving, and contributing to a stronger nation and economy. That's fine, let them come forward, show their work, show their tax forms, and maybe they get to the front of the line - AFTER they leave and re-apply. The job they have may not be there, but hey - that's the same thing we all face in the US. I could have my job taken tomorrow, notwithstanding my citizenship, so why should the illegal alien expect full employment? Now - what about those cases who have come here as minors, been on the dole most or all of their time here, never worked, never paid taxes, are on many forms of supplemental consideration, and if allowed to stay would likely never offer any value to this country, except to pop out/father kids? Should they be given special consideration over those immigrants who have followed the law? You're gonna need to explain at some point why these DACA cases deserve 'special consideration'. Otherwise, I'm afraid my tears, taxes, and support will be reserved for deserving American families in financial/familial distress. For every dollar we spend on supporting an illegal, that's one dollar we don't have to spend on our own citizens. Show me the money.
I think your problem is that you're stuck at 20,000 feet applying your solutions based on strict theory and rigid language.
Yes, they shouldn't be in our country and we shouldn't have "let" them stay. Except that they are, and we did.
Yes, the FedGov won't "forcefully" break up families. Except when it happens (https://www.npr.org/2017/12/08/565426335/when-immigration-detention-means-losing-your-kids) despite that theory. And even if the family isn't broken up, the American-citizen kid is now being sent to a country they don't know, have never been to, and may not speak the language of. I'm not real fond of "sending" our youngest citizens away.
I get it. You want them to GTFO. Like I said, that's fine. I have a more nuanced perspective that comes from having some exposure to these things. What should happen based on rigid theory, and what should or can happen based on current realities, are two different things in my opinion.
-
Reading comprehension issues again? Reread my post you quoted.
Re-read your post. Looks the same as before. No time for a back-and-forth on reading comprehension, so I'll just concede your point, whatever it was.
-
Re-read your post. Looks the same as before. No time for a back-and-forth on reading comprehension, so I'll just concede your point, whatever it was.
(https://i.imgur.com/YNgmlTp.gif)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/YNgmlTp.gif)
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/013/564/doge.jpg)
-
I see. You can't/won't refute that Schumer unwisely shut down the govt for a few days all due specifically to posturing on DACA, so you just take a pot-shot at "y'all aren't winning". But - high marks for using 'pedantic rhetoric'. Something the left never engages in.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/02/08/pelosi-speech-orig-zw.cnn
Pelosi sets record with 8 HOUR speech, not but a few days ago. I'm certain if we spent the whole day listening to it, there would be no rhetoric, and none of it would be pedantic in the least. Y'all sit through it, then let me know. :o
I'm not at all sure why you think Schumer or Pelosi belong in this discussion and I have no desire to defend either. He was an idiot shutting down the government like he did and he gave the initiative to the Republicans....who are now doing nothing with it. I claim the reason is that they cannot get out of the way of their own high morals to agree to say yes to anything because there's always something else to object to. And as evidence I present the lot of you who want to ignore how you're behaving fanatically. This behavior drives me away from the right. The same behavior on the other side drives me away from the left.
-
Start with U.S. Code › Title 8 › Chapter 12 › Subchapter II › Part VIII › § 1325
If the problem is that you're getting hung up on the law, how about if the President pardons all of them after the law is passed. However you want to do it, a single pardon with 690,000 names on it or 690,000 individual pardons. Now the Dreamers are excused from the law and the fact that they broke it is recognized and legally handled. This is a legal path, 100% of the actions are authorized by US Law.
Or do you reject this and you aren't really about defending the Law?
-
If the problem is that you're getting hung up on the law, how about if the President pardons all of them after the law is passed. However you want to do it, a single pardon with 690,000 names on it or 690,000 individual pardons. Now the Dreamers are excused from the law and the fact that they broke it is recognized and legally handled. This is a legal path, 100% of the actions are authorized by US Law.
Or do you reject this and you aren't really about defending the Law?
(https://i.imgur.com/YNgmlTp.gif)
-
I think your problem is that you're stuck at 20,000 feet applying your solutions based on strict theory and rigid language.
Yes, they shouldn't be in our country and we shouldn't have "let" them stay. Except that they are, and we did.
Yes, the FedGov won't "forcefully" break up families. Except when it happens (https://www.npr.org/2017/12/08/565426335/when-immigration-detention-means-losing-your-kids) despite that theory. And even if the family isn't broken up, the American-citizen kid is now being sent to a country they don't know, have never been to, and may not speak the language of. I'm not real fond of "sending" our youngest citizens away.
I get it. You want them to GTFO. Like I said, that's fine. I have a more nuanced perspective that comes from having some exposure to these things. What should happen based on rigid theory, and what should or can happen based on current realities, are two different things in my opinion.
Alright, you found the needle in the haystack, and publicized it. Well done. Could the parent have solved this before getting stuck in the immigration dragnet?
A) Don't be an illegal alien in our country! (My gosh, people want to work backward and create the problem, then come up with these trick solutions)
B) Should you be an illegal alien in our country, self deport, and take(or don't take) your offspring with you.
C) If you leave your US children behind, take care of their needs - just like any normal American parent would.
D) If you take them with you, insure they have their paperwork, including US birth certificate so they can get back into the US.
E) Don't have kids in the US when you are here illegally.
Having said that, here is me being overly magnanimous. I will go the extra mile, protect these kids, and see that everything is ok. Stick with me, this isn't complicated, but there are things that they need to do:
Part A: Path to citizenship for DACA recipient. All ages eligible. All steps must be met:
1. Have NO criminal record anywhere in the US, including outstanding warrants. (incl drugs) (traffic tickets exempted, except driving without license)
2. Self-deport on or before your Deferral Action date to the country of origin.
3. Apply for immigration, and citizenship from your host country.
4. Provide any contributions you made while you were here, including work, study, created cure for cancer, etc.
5. Take the interview.
6. Never have taken ANY US form of financial aid, including but not limited to AFDC, Welfare, EBT, SNAP, etc. while a DACA recipient.
7. Get in the immigration line, and wait your turn. Immigration spots will be determined by the INS, and DACA will not be subjected to any other litmus test.
See how easy?
Special consideration.
Part B. Path to residency, restricted. To remain in the US as a RESIDENT, renewable every 5 years, but never a US citizen the DACA recipient must meet all the following:
1. Be a minor, under the age of 18 on or before Jan 21, 2017.
2. Have no criminal record, including outstanding warrants. (incl drugs)
3. Be enrolled in a accredited state school, or trade school, or college, including attendance. OR - have a HS/GED diploma, and have work history(see #5).
4. Never have taken ANY US form of financial aid(see above).
5. Be a active duty member in good standing of the US armed forces, including Coast Guard, or see #3.
If citizenship is desired, the resident must self deport, and follow all steps in Part A.
I appreciate nuance in language, art, film, writing, even finance, and engineering have a place for nuance. Law? Well, unless one is making $500,000/year, or is a state/fed employee, I don't see a need for nuance. It doesn't have a place in law, except sentencing - after the arrest, arraignment, trial, conviction, and possible appeal. Then - and only then should nuance be considered. Putting nuance way before the process is doomed to failure.
This is the best I can do. It's the compromise that respects the US citizens, and shows compassion for those younger people who are here for economic reasons. As for hardship on families, if they don't self-deport on or before Deferral date of their Action, they will be subject to deportation, and never eligible for residents, and certainly not for citizenship. This program will likely cover about 5-15% of current DACA cases. The other ~700,000, yeah - GTFO.
-
A fine opinion to have. I just think it ignores all the details, and the reality of our current predicament.
We allowed these people to stay for decades, to become part of our society, to work here, pay taxes here, raise families here, have American kids here. I don't personally think that deporting all of them en masse is the right solution. The monetary and human cost is huge. It breaks up families. It puts American kids in foster care. It sends American kids to countries they've never known.
We allowed this mess to fester for decades and now we have to deal with it. You and I just have a different opinion on the best way to do it.
Fine. Kids under 18 can stay. Anyone over that including parents are subject to deportation. Cool?
And these under 18 kids can also go with their parents. They don’t have to become foster kids. Why would you endorse breaking up families? They’re citizens of the countries from which they left.
My 7th grade daughter was NOT happy when we moved from Iowa to North Carolina. But she adapted and excelled in her new home despite major cultural differences. It happens.
-
I thought all you libs were outraged when it was falsely reported that Donald Trump said some of these foreign countried that send us their refuse were, 'shit holes?'
If these foreign nations are such garden spots, why are their refugees so anxious to avoid going home?
The total, top down, hypocrisy in the DACA defender argument is sickening.
They came illegally and that IS the real issue.
It's not about the ten people who are afraid that they will have start all over when they get deported. If they wanted to stay they would have begun the legal immigration process while being cared for under DACA. They didn't. They have no interest in the laws, just like the entire fucking democratic party. Now that they are in danger of being legally deported (after years and years of being here illegally) they want to be made legal based on the fact they they are present.
Presence isn't a legal defense unless you're a pathetic, loser, arguing that continuing break the law is the only way to insure that the lawfully is followed.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/twin-sisters-future-us-uncertain-parents-deported-200605410--abc-news-topstories.html
These sisters are the part of the special class that I'm talking about. Aside from them sounding like idiots when they speak, it would seem they haven't done anything wrong. Parents are not citizens. The kids have been in the DACA program for YEARS. They have been adults for almost 4 years now. They are mooching off grandma, and in return sounds like they take care of her. OK, fine. You've done ok, you didn't ask to come here at 5. But your 18th birthday came, and went with you and your family(including the US citizen grandma) doing NOTHING. And now you deserve to stay?
No, no, no, and no. If you fit the program and want to remain, follow my Part A and self-deport, then apply. We'll call you when we're ready to have you back.
-
Fine. Kids under 18 can stay. Anyone over that including parents are subject to deportation. Cool?
And these under 18 kids can also go with their parents. They don’t have to become foster kids. Why would you endorse breaking up families? They’re citizens of the countries from which they left.
My 7th grade daughter was NOT happy when we moved from Iowa to North Carolina. But she adapted and excelled in her new home despite major cultural differences. It happens.
The vast majority of these kids under 18 with an undocumented parent are US citizens (almost 6 million of them), so I don't know what you're offering by allowing them to stay. We can't kick them out in the first place. I'm not clear on the numbers, but I think most follow the deported parent. Some go into foster care. Some stay in-country with relatives.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/YNgmlTp.gif)
You don't want to defend what you say. Gotcha. I find you annoying anyway, probably best this way.
-
I thought all you libs were outraged when it was falsely reported that Donald Trump said some of these foreign countried that send us their refuse were, 'shit holes?'
If these foreign nations are such garden spots, why are their refugees so anxious to avoid going home?
The total, top down, hypocrisy in the DACA defender argument is sickening.
They came illegally and that IS the real issue.
It's not about the ten people who are afraid that they will have start all over when they get deported. If they wanted to stay they would have begun the legal immigration process while being cared for under DACA. They didn't. They have no interest in the laws, just like the entire fucking democratic party. Now that they are in danger of being legally deported (after years and years of being here illegally) they want to be made legal based on the fact they they are present.
Presence isn't a legal defense unless you're a pathetic, loser, arguing that continuing break the law is the only way to insure that the lawfully is followed.
You're painting everyone with one brush. Mistake #1.
If the entire fucking democrat party has no interest in the laws, why not kick them out of the country too? Is that the criteria? You guys really are all over the place here.
The best I can come up with is that you hate illegal immigrants because they broke the law once and forgiveness is unthinkable. Therefore they must be punished and their birthdays taken away.
Want to know a secret? That still won't change that they broke the law once upon a time.
-
You don't want to defend what you say. Gotcha. I find you annoying anyway, probably best this way.
Pot, meet kettle.
-
I thought all you libs were outraged when it was falsely reported that Donald Trump said some of these foreign countried that send us their refuse were, 'shit holes?'
...
The total, top down, hypocrisy in the DACA defender argument is sickening.
They came illegally and that IS the real issue.
..
I don't care what the president said, if you recall. i agreed that a lot of the places that he talked about ARE pretty much shit holes.
The real issue is that they are here. You aren't going to get Republicans together to agree on what to do about them, so you are going to need Democrat help. That means making a compromise. And that means being mature and realizing that your choices are really bad and just bad. If you have another choice, then I am all up for hearing about it.
How are you going to round up 40 million people? It can't be done. You have to make them want to leave by making the fear of being here worse than going back to the shit holes they left to come here.
So then on the list you have to have a full border wall. Hands down, you cannot control immigration until you stop the flow of people coming in. You also need more border agents. A wall without people manning it will easily be breached.
You also need incentive for people illegally here to leave. That mean criminalizing their presence until they are afraid of being here.
Last, you have to get these things through Congress. But you will never do that because Republicans are not a unified party. They...like people here...and so caught up in "they broke the law" that they refuse to consider asking for help. By including DACA reform, you can bring in Democrats because they cannot afford to be left out on it.
But you cannot do that when you focus on what happened in the past, when you fixate on things that cannot be changed. They came illegally? You are right and they ARE STILL COMING ILLEGALLY because Republicans won't swallow their pride and make a deal. Pride? No, Republican arrogance is ensuring the border stays open.
The choices are pass legislation or dont pass it. If you don't pass it, then eventually Democrats will and you will really, really not like what they pass. So, you want to pass something now.
Be smart. You cannot do that until you stop with the hangups about what other people's parents did.
-
The idea that the fact that they are herem eans they get to stay is ludicrous.
If Russia invaded Oregon would you be so cavalier as to proclaim that they are here therefore they get to stay? Its unadulterated bullshit like this that makes the liberal position so stupid to begin with.
These are a bunch of parasites unlawfully usurping tax dollars, wasting our resources and clogging up the system that issues LEGAL status to those who earned it, because pansy ass liberals don't have the courage to tell the truth in this debate.
-
Pot, meet kettle.
You are funny.
But you are the one who quit talking. I will and have given reasons for what I say.
What I see from is a lot of poeple sticking your fingers in you ears and chanting "they broke the law and I cant hear you la-la-la".
Read my post just above here...it isn't organized well because I am typing on my Ipad and. Editing is difficult at best. But see if you can understand the theme. If not, ask and I will reorganize it when I am at a computer.
You of all people should recognize the dangers in irritating others.
-
The idea that the fact that they are heere emans they get to stay is ludicrous.
If Russia invaded Oregon would you be so cavalier as to proclaim that they are here therefore they get to stay? Its unadulterated bullshit like this that makes the liberal position so stupid to begin with.
These are a bunch of parasites unlawfully usurping tax dollars, wasting our resources and clogging up the system that issues LEGAL status to those who earned it, because pansy ass liberals don't have the courage to tell the truth in this debate.
What truth isn't being told? How about this truth, your canard about Russia is ridiculous. That is truth.
I also want illegals gone. I just recognize that Republicans will never accomplish it without help and Democrats will never do it when they are in power - they will tear down the gates and let anyone in. Tell me how it happens in another way. My analysis says there is no other way, which is why I work in the real world.
Grow up and start having an adult conversation.
-
What truth isn't being told? How about this truth, your canard about Russia is ridiculous. That is truth.
I also want illegals gone. I just recognize that Republicans will never accomplish it without help and Democrats will never do it when they are in power - they will tear down the gates and let anyone in. Tell me how it happens in another way. My analysis says there is no other way, which is why I work in the real world.
Grow up and start having an adult conversation.
You mean grow up and agree with your self serving bullshit.
No thanks.
-
The vast majority of these kids under 18 with an undocumented parent are US citizens (almost 6 million of them), so I don't know what you're offering by allowing them to stay. We can't kick them out in the first place. I'm not clear on the numbers, but I think most follow the deported parent. Some go into foster care. Some stay in-country with relatives.
What are you talking about?!? DACA is Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals - people who arrived with their parents who illegally entered this country. DACA doesn’t apply to those children born here. And there are about 600,000 documented DACA recipients, and Trump foolishly tripled that for those who never registered.
Now you want the parents of the 6 million non-DACA US-born children to stay because what - they successfully fucked someone and got a woman pregnant? That’s your criteria?
-
You're painting everyone with one brush. Mistake #1.
Do you mean like this?
So your (all of you) solution to DACA is to fall back on law and order and deport dreamers, letting the left "prove" that the right is just mean heartless bigots who hate mexicans.
This is why Republicans lose.
-
We'll get what we got in the 80's. The Dems will say. "let them stay and give them amnesty and we promise to build the wall". The Repubs will, "What a great deal, we'll take it" The wall will never get built and 20 years from now we'll right back in the same place.
-
You mean grow up and agree with your self serving bullshit.
No thanks.
No, I mean grow up, realize that holding your breath until you turn blue isn't going to get you what you want and be mature. Republicans have a choice to make a compromise now or have a really, really bad things shoved down their throats later (if you do nothing now).
Which do you want? Your current path is to do nothing and defer to what the Democrats want to do the next time they are in power.
You can't always get what you want. That is catchy, they should make a song out of that.
We'll get what we got in the 80's. The Dems will say. "let them stay and give them amnesty and we promise to build the wall". The Repubs will, "What a great deal, we'll take it" The wall will never get built and 20 years from now we'll right back in the same place.
That is where this is heading. Republicans have the opportunity to make a better deal now, but they can't get out of their own way.
-
You are funny.
Thank you. I'm here all night, be sure to tip the waitress......
But you are the one who quit talking. I will and have given reasons for what I say.
No, just tired of arguing with your bullshit. We obviously have a difference of opinion, and mine is one you can't tolerate even though it's closer to reality than yours.
What I see from is a lot of poeple sticking your fingers in you ears and chanting "they broke the law and I cant hear you la-la-la".
And reading your post this is what I see:
(https://i.imgflip.com/1xzsus.jpg)
Read my post just above here...it isn't organized well because I am typing on my Ipad and. Editing is difficult at best. But see if you can understand the theme. If not, ask and I will reorganize it when I am at a computer.
I've read what you have wrote, ad nauseam.
You of all people should recognize the dangers in irritating others.
Yes, here in hell we've made it a cottage industry. It's what we do.
-
We'll get what we got in the 80's. The Dems will say. "let them stay and give them amnesty and we promise to build the wall". The Repubs will, "What a great deal, we'll take it" The wall will never get built and 20 years from now we'll right back in the same place.
Thanks for summing it up so well!
-
We obviously have a difference of opinion, and mine is one you can't tolerate even though it's closer to reality than yours.
I don't know what your opinion is. I agree that they broke the law. And...???
We aren't going to round up 40 million illegal immigrants. It will never happen. That is fantasy.
Republicans are not going to get together and pass laws that change anything on their own. They have to have a reason to do it.
So what do you propose?
My opinions on this are:
If Republicans do nothing now, then Democrats will eventually gain control of the government again and then they WILL pass something that is really, really detestable. Republicans will have very little power to oppose it. So their best outcome is to deal with the the problem now. Is this opinion wrong?
Republicans are dysfunctional and even if they weren't, they don't have enough votes to get something through the Senate without help from at least some Democrats. In order to get something passed, Republicans are going to have to compromise on something. Is this opinion wrong?
Republicans have rare power in any compromise because Democrats have been beating the DACA drum for so long that they cannot afford to oppose any deal that includes DACA. Schumer stepped in by shutting down the government over this because he committed Democrats even more strongly to support DACA. Therefore Democrats can be forced into the situation of either denying DACA or accepting things they really don't want. Is this opinion wrong?
I think this adds up to a potential win for Republicans. The Democrats are in a trap, but Republicans have to get past the "la-la-la-they-broke-the-law-I-can't-hear-you-la-la-la" thing in order to spring it.
I am open to hearing about other ideas, but I hear nothing but condemnation of me for being a realist. Not having a dog in the fight, I can more easily get past the hangups.
Are my opinions self serving? Of course they are, as are yours. In my case, I value personal freedom above almost everything else and I believe we need very strong immigration control, including very strong border security to help protect that freedom for those who should be in the US. I want illegal aliens out of the country. I think our best chance of doing that is giving way on 690,000 Dreamers in order to remove the 39.3 million others.
Of course people disagree with this plan - their are hung up on their own fanaticism and incapable of even thinking about it. But I don't think anyone has ever rationally disagreed with my plan and presented a reasonable alternative. If you're going to disagree with something, at least say what you think is wrong so I can consider it.
-
They broke(and continue to be in violation of) the law - check.
Whether we can round up 40 mil illegals depends on what our trillion $ budget priority becomes. It could be done, by slashing govt assistance, building the wall and enforcing our borders correctly. Maybe not every one of 40 mil, but we could put a real dent in it.
There are no new laws needed to be passed! We have all the laws we need. What is needed is enforcement. My position is that anyone in LEO not enforcing immigration holds, and checks gets fired, and loses their donut.
Whether Dems gain any power in the US again remains to be scene. If they do, they can attempt change the laws to reduce national sovereignty. Until they, the laws on immigration stand, and need enforcement. Just let DACA expire, then start rounding up all those registered. Too bad, your Deferral has run out. Cya.
-
Whether Dems gain any power in the US again remains to be scene. If they do, they can attempt change the laws to reduce national sovereignty. Until they, the laws on immigration stand, and need enforcement. Just let DACA expire, then start rounding up all those registered. Too bad, your Deferral has run out. Cya.
Dems WILL control the government again. It doesn't remain to be seen, it will happen one day. 9 years ago Democrats declared conservatism dead and defeated and joyously went out to fundamentally change the world. And look where we are now.
We do not have the manpower to do what you propose and there is no budget for it. How does Congress authorize that money if Senate Democrats will sit on any proposal to increase border guards? And how do you propose even getting Republicans together to agree to fund what you're talking about in the first place? How are we going to close the holes in the dam when our actions are limited to bailing the water back into the ocean?
It's like you didn't read what I wrote, you only read the parts that you wanted to object to.
-
What are you talking about?!? DACA is Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals - people who arrived with their parents who illegally entered this country. DACA doesn’t apply to those children born here. And there are about 600,000 documented DACA recipients, and Trump foolishly tripled that for those who never registered.
Now you want the parents of the 6 million non-DACA US-born children to stay because what - they successfully fucked someone and got a woman pregnant? That’s your criteria?
Your response to me mentioned foster kids, and my post that you quoted talked about foster kids. But my reference to kids going into foster care is when the undocumented parents are deported, and the citizen children of said parent go into foster care temporarily or permanently. So when your reply said allow those under 18 to stay, I thought you were talking about those kids.
If you're talking about DACA recipients under 18, ok. I believe that's a very small percentage of the total.
-
Your response to me mentioned foster kids, and my post that you quoted talked about foster kids. But my reference to kids going into foster care is when the undocumented parents are deported, and the citizen children of said parent go into foster care temporarily or permanently. So when your reply said allow those under 18 to stay, I thought you were talking about those kids.
If you're talking about DACA recipients under 18, ok. I believe that's a very small percentage of the total.
Ok, I think we agree that the DACA recipients under 18 is a small group. Those are who I am exempting.
Do we really need to exempt 30 year old who made no effort to become US Citizens, and have been working probably using a false identity for their entire adult lives?
-
Outrage is not a solution, though many of you think it is.
I give InvFlatSpin credit for some proposals. I believe we are so far away from implementing those proposals that they are about as likely as my finding a Chupacabra. The bureaucratic dysfunction that is part and parcel of our government would never allow it to get done. And the monetary, logistical, and human costs of deporting tens of millions of people is just massive.
-
Ok, I think we agree that the DACA recipients under 18 is a small group. Those are who I am exempting.
Do we really need to exempt 30 year old who made no effort to become US Citizens, and have been working probably using a false identity for their entire adult lives?
No, we don't "need" to. I don't think anyone here in this thread is arguing otherwise. The idea here is that we come to some solution that is DOABLE from a logistical/political perspective, and is the least bad option than the others, and comes with some political capital or gain in other areas. I think bflynn's point is fair.
We all know they shouldn't be here, and broke a law or civil rule to get here. Saying that over and over again does nothing for us. A lot of things shouldn't happen, but they do, and we have to figure out what to do about it.
-
I gave the numbers of DACAs back a few posts ago. If we assume 800,000 DACAs in the US, the number under 18 is < 0.5% or about 4000. Of course, this tiny percentage is the part that makes all the lib headlines, making people think that every DACA is a hungry infant, when the reality is - the overwhelming majority are functioning adults(see example of the whiny twins). I willing to let the under 18 stay, if they meet the rules but NO citizenship. Just residency permits for life. Citizenship means self-deport, no criminal record, apply from your host nation, note your DACA status and contributions. Then wait by the phone.
As for the Dems ever gaining govt power, there is the possibility that sufficient bribes + campaign money + media attacks + voting irregularities + dirty tricks could someday put them back in power. But if we discount two or three of this kind of shit happening, then their chances in a fair and open election are tiny.
-
We all know they shouldn't be here, and broke a law or civil rule to get here. Saying that over and over again does nothing for us. A lot of things shouldn't happen, but they do, and we have to figure out what to do about it.
So the present laws we have on the books should be ignored? Has it occurred to anyone that if the laws, as written, were enforced this problem would be a lot smaller than it is?
So we institute new laws because "things happen", and these new laws fix the current problem. Then what happens 10 years from now when we have a whole new group that are here and they are looking for their amnesty as well? After all, if our current laws don't work because "things happen", what will make a new set of laws work, especially when politics gets involved and lawmakers look the other way?
I've spent a significant amount of time living and working internationally. Most countries around the world, even shithole countries have very strict immigration laws and enforce them. Even the countries that are desirable to live in enforce their immigration laws, thus they don't have the problems of the US.
While once working in Asia I had a local tell me how wrong it was I was in "his" country working and depriving a local from a good paying job. I told him the reason I was there is due to the lack of qualified people from within his country to provide the skill needed. He still contended how wrong it was I was there. Then I told him that the US had thousands upon thousands of his citizens working in the US taking good paying jobs from Americans. His response? "Well, that's different".
So we have other countries that view our weak immigration policies as opportunities, and we the taxpayer get stuck holding the tab. And as long as we keep carving out laws to accommodate even more law breakers, it will never, ever get any better.
-
Not sure you have to round them all up. I wonder if the current aggressive stance is not making some of them head home on their own.
-
As for the Dems ever gaining govt power, there is the possibility that sufficient bribes + campaign money + media attacks + voting irregularities + dirty tricks could someday put them back in power. But if we discount two or three of this kind of shit happening, then their chances in a fair and open election are tiny.
Believe so at your own peril.
-
I will say it again. given a fair and open election, the chances of the Dems ever regaining power are very slim. Of course, a fair and open election in the US is quickly vanishing. I clearly recall the screams of outrage from the left about campaign cash back in 2012 and their attempt to silence PACs though limitations on speech. Until 2016 when they spent every dime the RNC put up and then doubled it.
If total campaign spending were ever limited to equal dollar share per party - the Dems would completely die out in a few cycles. Propaganda and giveaways are the only thing that's kept them alive since before 1930.
-
I will say it again. given a fair and open election, the chances of the Dems ever regaining power are very slim. Of course, a fair and open election in the US is quickly vanishing. I clearly recall the screams of outrage from the left about campaign cash back in 2012 and their attempt to silence PACs though limitations on speech. Until 2016 when they spent every dime the RNC put up and then doubled it.
If total campaign spending were ever limited to equal dollar share per party - the Dems would completely die out in a few cycles. Propaganda and giveaways are the only thing that's kept them alive since before 1930.
No offense, man, but that's stupid. US political history is riddled with folks who thought the other party was done for. Nearly all of them were wrong. But please, feel free to instill a sense of complacency on the Right. No skin off my back.
On another note, absolutely no one should want a single-party system. We need more political parties, not less.
-
So the present laws we have on the books should be ignored? Has it occurred to anyone that if the laws, as written, were enforced this problem would be a lot smaller than it is?
Notice you're speaking in the PAST tense? Your entire post is about golly gee wiz, if only we hadn't fucked up to put us in our current situation.
Fifteen years ago I completely lacked the self-discipline needed to obtain my bachelor's degree. Had a great opportunity. Squandered it. I fucked up, and can't change that now. So I deal with the past, and make realistic decisions in the current, and for the future. We have to do the same with our current immigration fiasco.
-
Uhhhh,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Defunct_political_parties_in_the_United_States
No one said anything about a one party system. At least I can't find anyone talking about it here. No offense taken.
There was a time, back when I was a kid that the Dems were a strong and vibrant platform. They had a goal, they had vision, they had a large central part of the US behind them, cities, suburbs, rural. That's gone now. Dems have the fringes. Sadly, the fringes rarely vote.
-
So the present laws we have on the books should be ignored?
No, not at all. But who is going to enforce them? WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH OFFICERS. It is fantasy to believe that the current border patrol, even with cooperation, can handle this. If every officer caught and processed one person every day, it would take over 20 years just to process the people here today.
Meanwhile, the dam is still breached and there is zero dollars allocated to fix it. Unless this is fixed, the efforts of the border patrol above is just like sweeping the water out the door during a flood....it's coming right back in again.
Meanwhile, Republicans cannot get their collective shit together. So none of this is changing.
Meanwhile, the initiative is quickly moving into gun control and the moment is being lost. Time is on the side of the democrats, all they have to do is wait.
-
Notice you're speaking in the PAST tense? Your entire post is about golly gee wiz, if only we hadn't fucked up to put us in our current situation.
Fifteen years ago I completely lacked the self-discipline needed to obtain my bachelor's degree. Had a great opportunity. Squandered it. I fucked up, and can't change that now. So I deal with the past, and make realistic decisions in the current, and for the future. We have to do the same with our current immigration fiasco.
Our immigration fiasco was caused by our elected officials choosing not to follow our laws that they themselves put into code. They chose to not staff Border and Immigration to adequate levels and we had people in the Executive Branch that issued orders such as catch and release, which was contrary to the laws.
Now these same elected officials want to create a whole set of new laws to "fix" the problem. After the fix is in we will have these same officials decide to go contrary to these laws, let more illegals in and then cry "crisis!" and want a new set of laws to cover this new group. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.
Pure stupidity.
-
I will say it again. given a fair and open election, the chances of the Dems ever regaining power are very slim. Of course, a fair and open election in the US is quickly vanishing. I clearly recall the screams of outrage from the left about campaign cash back in 2012 and their attempt to silence PACs though limitations on speech. Until 2016 when they spent every dime the RNC put up and then doubled it.
If total campaign spending were ever limited to equal dollar share per party - the Dems would completely die out in a few cycles. Propaganda and giveaways are the only thing that's kept them alive since before 1930.
Keep dreaming. As I said before, 9 years ago Democrats declared conservatism dead and triumphantly went about fundamentally changing America. Here just 9 years later you're saying the same about them. I'm willing to put down a significant amount of money to bet that you are wrong - Democrats are not done and they WILL be back in control of the government one day, maybe much sooner than you think and much to our common dismay.
-
Uhhhh,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Defunct_political_parties_in_the_United_States
No one said anything about a one party system. At least I can't find anyone talking about it here. No offense taken.
There was a time, back when I was a kid that the Dems were a strong and vibrant platform. They had a goal, they had vision, they had a large central part of the US behind them, cities, suburbs, rural. That's gone now. Dems have the fringes. Sadly, the fringes rarely vote.
A ratio needs a denominator.
-
Our immigration fiasco was caused by our elected officials choosing not to follow our laws that they themselves put into code. They chose to not staff Border and Immigration to adequate levels and we had people in the Executive Branch that issued orders such as catch and release, which was contrary to the laws.
Now these same elected officials want to create a whole set of new laws to "fix" the problem. After the fix is in we will have these same officials decide to go contrary to these laws, let more illegals in and then cry "crisis!" and want a new set of laws to cover this new group. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.
Pure stupidity.
Yeah, agreed, the pols fucked up. Now what?
-
Yeah, agreed, the pols fucked up. Now what?
Now a miracle happens and the border patrol officers do what they haven't been able to do for decades. That miracle also includes the people being caught and released not reentering the US the next day, making all that effort to process them useless.
Magic. That's all we need.
-
Yeah, agreed, the pols fucked up. Now what?
You are about to get a new set of laws. Everyone will applaud, the illegals get something that law abiding citizens and those residents who followed the law cannot get.
And then it's back to business as usual, and in a few years a NEW problem will emerge, and thousands more will demand their amnesty.
Or we can secure the border (like countless other countries), properly staff Border and Immigration (like other countries) and follow our laws as written (like other countries).
But as the brain trust here keeps saying, that's just impossible.
-
You are about to get a new set of laws. Everyone will applaud, the illegals get something that law abiding citizens and those residents who followed the law cannot get.
And then it's back to business as usual, and in a few years a NEW problem will emerge, and thousands more will demand their amnesty.
Or we can secure the border (like countless other countries), properly staff Border and Immigration (like other countries) and follow our laws as written (like other countries).
But as the brain trust here keeps saying, that's just impossible.
Holy shit, man. That's what bflynn has been saying this ENTIRE time. Swallow your fucking pride, DISARM the Dems by allowing amnesty for DACA recipients, IN CONCERT with a deal that fully funds border security among other things, and get some shit done.
In case you didn't know, we are a Republic. We have no dictator that can just decide things. So if you want to get something done, you gotta' figure out how to do it, and it almost NEVER means you get everything you want, how you want it. Or you can just bitch about how none of this should have happened.
-
Holy shit, man. That's what bflynn has been saying this ENTIRE time. Swallow your fucking pride, DISARM the Dems by allowing amnesty for DACA recipients, IN CONCERT with a deal that fully funds border security among other things, and get some shit done.
In case you didn't know, we are a Republic. We have no dictator that can just decide things. So if you want to get something done, you gotta' figure out how to do it, and it almost NEVER means you get everything you want, how you want it. Or you can just bitch about how none of this should have happened.
Yep, disarm the dems.....you're fucking delusional.
What you and the braintrust can't figure out is no matter how many times you allow amnesty, and when you proclaim the new law will give amnesty this final time, and from now on we will follow the NEW laws, it never happens.
The dims don't give a shit about the dreamers, they never have. It's just a wedge. Giving in to them and giving amnesty just opens the door for next time (and there will be a next time) for them to repeat this whole charade.
-
Yep, disarm the dems.....you're fucking delusional.
What you and the braintrust can't figure out is no matter how many times you allow amnesty, and when you proclaim the new law will give amnesty this final time, and from now on we will follow the NEW laws, it never happens.
The dims don't give a shit about the dreamers, they never have. It's just a wedge. Giving in to them and giving amnesty just opens the door for next time (and there will be a next time) for them to repeat this whole charade.
You are the human embodiment of the outrage media. All cane-waving, no solutions. I have no idea what it is you even suggest we do.
-
You are the human embodiment of the outrage media. All cane-waving, no solutions. I have no idea what it is you even suggest we do.
Oh, I have a suggestion on what you should do. ;D
-
Holy shit, man. That's what bflynn has been saying this ENTIRE time. Swallow your fucking pride, DISARM the Dems by allowing amnesty for DACA recipients, IN CONCERT with a deal that fully funds border security among other things, and get some shit done.
In case you didn't know, we are a Republic. We have no dictator that can just decide things. So if you want to get something done, you gotta' figure out how to do it, and it almost NEVER means you get everything you want, how you want it. Or you can just bitch about how none of this should have happened.
Maybe I missed something, but didn't Obama do just that (act like a Dictator) by deciding what laws should be and should not be enforced?
-
Libertarian, Green, Constitution, peace and freedom.....
??
-
Holy shit, man. That's what bflynn has been saying this ENTIRE time. Swallow your fucking pride, DISARM the Dems by allowing amnesty for DACA recipients, IN CONCERT with a deal that fully funds border security among other things, and get some shit done.
No thank you. Stick with the defend DACA platform. Please. It'll be great fodder.
-
Libertarian, Green, Constitution, peace and freedom.....
??
Denominator.
-
How many US pol parties do you want? If the Dems fold, they will not take down the other 20-ish political parties remaining. Parties come and go, the Dems are on the decline badly. If a new party comes along that displaces them, so much the better.
The Republicans displaced the Whig party. Frankly, I wouldn't mind bringing the Whigs back.
-
How many US pol parties do you want? If the Dems fold, they will not take down the other 20-ish political parties remaining. Parties come and go, the Dems are on the decline badly. If a new party comes along that displaces them, so much the better.
The Republicans displaced the Whig party. Frankly, I wouldn't mind bringing the Whigs back.
Ah, yes, the American Delta Party is poised to replace the Dems. ::)
-
I would say a come-to-reality between Libertarian and Green parties could reasonably displace much of the dis-affected moderate left, such as yourself.
Think about it.
-
Ah, yes, the American Delta Party is poised to replace the Dems. ::)
Actually if members of the DNC were smart, they would leave it. Considering the tainted history of the democrats with regards to their anti black pro slavery background, their fights against segregation and civil rights and their history of white supremacy with groups such as the KKK.
Now the DNC has been hijacked by a group calling themselves Progressives, who have ties back to the communist party.
So yes, those who identify as moderate or centrist democrats would do themselves good to find another home away from the radical alt left progressive DNC.
-
I notice that no matter what, not a single democrat, liberal, progressive, communist in this discussion has suggested an actual alternative to DACA.
It’s all and only about keeping those future democrat voters here and using them to get and stay in power.
The truth is that problem would quickly begin to solve itself the instant the federal branch cut off ALL social welfare from illegals.
Not a fucking dime no matter what.
Watch them run off to greener pastures and Nancy Pelosi clones will scream to kingdom come over the lost vote fraud opportunities.
-
Uh - the alternative I think I saw was 'amnesty'.
Which is the typical idealism of 'compromise' from the left, meaning do it my way. Open borders or unlimited war against everyone who disagrees.
-
I would say a come-to-reality between Libertarian and Green parties could reasonably displace much of the dis-affected moderate left, such as yourself.
Think about it.
I'm more Libertarian each year. I've seen no evidence they have a snowball's chance in hell in DC.
-
I notice that no matter what, not a single democrat, liberal, progressive, communist in this discussion has suggested an actual alternative to DACA.
It’s all and only about keeping those future democrat voters here and using them to get and stay in power.
The truth is that problem would quickly begin to solve itself the instant the federal branch cut off ALL social welfare from illegals.
Not a fucking dime no matter what.
Watch them run off to greener pastures and Nancy Pelosi clones will scream to kingdom come over the lost vote fraud opportunities.
Haha, you act like you're arguing against a wave of Progressives here. There is only one Liberal in this discussion. Me. bflynn is not a modern Liberal, and I don't mean any offense by that, just trying to differentiate.
Anyway, I'm fine with letting DACA expire.
-
Uh - the alternative I think I saw was 'amnesty'.
Which is the typical idealism of 'compromise' from the left, meaning do it my way. Open borders or unlimited war against everyone who disagrees.
Wrong. You haven't been reading. The alternative was letting DACA expire, offering amnesty only for DACA recipients, and only in return for robust border security and tough immigration reform. This is called compromise. You might have heard of it.
Here is an example of fake compromise from fanatics -
From the right - DEPORT THEM ALL AND FUCK YOU ON ANY PATH TO CITIZENSHIP OR RESIDENCY FOR ANYONE
From the left - AMNESTY FOR ALL ILLEGALS AND FUCK YOU ON BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION REFORM EVER
Also ref - political dysfunction and how nothing gets done.
-
This whole thread is about DACA. Every post in the thread is about DACA. You just said what I wrote. Amnesty for everyone in DACA.
So, once again, no thank you. No amnesty. DACA expires, DACAs are deported, and build the wall.
I offered a compromise, you read it.
-
This whole thread is about DACA. Every post in the thread is about DACA. You just said what I wrote. Amnesty for everyone in DACA.
So, once again, no thank you. No amnesty. DACA expires, DACAs are deported, and build the wall.
I offered a compromise, you read it.
I believe what he was saying is that this isn't compromise. You are not giving up anything.
Go for it. I am enthralled waiting to hear your plan for implementing this.
-
bflynn is not a modern Liberal, and I don't mean any offense by that, just trying to differentiate.
I would be offended if someone called me a modern Liberal. I am a classic liberal, closer to Jefferson than Clinton. There is a huge difference.
-
I would be offended if someone called me a modern Liberal. I am a classic liberal, closer to Jefferson than Clinton. There is a huge difference.
I understand.
-
I would be offended if someone called me a modern Liberal. I am a classic liberal, closer to Jefferson than Clinton. There is a huge difference.
By the posts here, you are the textbook definition of the modern progressive. :Hatred of the right, no matter the policy; Centralized control of power; Taxes solve every problem; No respect for BOR, constitution; Scream about intolerance - while being the most intolerant people on the planet. etc
-
By the posts here, you are the textbook definition of the modern progressive. :Hatred of the right, no matter the policy; Centralized control of power; Taxes solve every problem; No respect for BOR, constitution; Scream about intolerance - while being the most intolerant people on the planet. etc
Did you even look at his posts?
-
Haha, you act like you're arguing against a wave of Progressives here. There is only one Liberal in this discussion. Me. bflynn is not a modern Liberal, and I don't mean any offense by that, just trying to differentiate.
Anyway, I'm fine with letting DACA expire.
I knew that. This being an internet board, it's almost required to throw everyone else under the bus, like liberals throw all republicans under the bus every time a registered democrat shoots up another school.
-
By the posts here, you are the textbook definition of the modern progressive. :Hatred of the right, no matter the policy; Centralized control of power; Taxes solve every problem; No respect for BOR, constitution; Scream about intolerance - while being the most intolerant people on the planet. etc
But you still don't know how you get your plan to work.
Look, I don't blame you for deflecting. The simple truth is, the plan to "just" enforce the law won't work because that is what they are already trying. Do you think Border Patrol just sits around all day waving to people as they cross the border? Do you think they are being held back and if so, the name names. Who is holding them back? Nobody is, they are trying to sweep the flood waters out the door with predictable results.
One last time, then I am out. We need something different. We need a wall, we need more border guards and we need to make it hard to be here illegally. Congress is dysfunctional and because the Republican party contains the freedom caucus and RINOs, they are dysfunctional too. Fortunately Schumer has handed Republicans a gift by putting the full weight of the Democrat party behind DACA. Not quite anything, but anything reasonable sounding that Republicans can put together is something they have to support. They cannot oppose a wall on any grounds, including that it costs money. They cannot oppose more border guards. I really don't think they can oppose a way for federal laws to override state laws which try to negate immigration law because then they would be taking a stance for lawlessness. And I don't think they can oppose laws making to very difficult to be here illegally.
The cost? Republicans have to compromise and use DACA to force Democrats to vote yes. Democrats have put their moral prestige behind DACA, they cannot afford to oppose it. But if they did it might even be the unifying force which brings enough Republicans together to pass it anyway, although there will be some wrangling to be done in the Senate...I suspect reminding a few Senators that they DO want to vote for this or else their picture will be next to the words "screw the Dreamers" in Spanish on billboards all over their state.
Thats it.
BTW, I spent 4 years, 3 months poking holes in the ocean in a submarine to serve this country. I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution, an oath that had no expiration date. The next time you want to throw down about me and the Constitution, keep this in mind. I do not want thanks, I do not want parades, but I will ask you not to insult me by questioning the sincerity of my promises and the integrity of my service. Roger that?
-
BTW, I spent 4 years, 3 months poking holes in the ocean in a submarine to serve this country. I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution, an oath that had no expiration date. The next time you want to throw down about me and the Constitution, keep this in mind. I do not want thanks, I do not want parades, but I will ask you not to insult me by questioning the sincerity of my promises and the integrity of my service. Roger that?
Thank you young man! And please don't leave.