DACA, immigration reform whatever

[JimmyJames 12,271]

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Might some of them, like the Bushes and Trumps, also have shared business interests with the Saudis?

Why I do believe they might have!

Always follow the money. It will almost always lead you to the truth.

[GRHorn 105]

21 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

 

So, as to his overall remarks -- do you see ANY semblance of that kind of policy approach being discussed or advanced by this administration?

No, that’s not Trump.

I’m more moderate on immigration. It doesn’t really grind my gears like it does a lot of people. 

I’m from a town close to the border so I appreciate the relationship between us and Mexico, and that fully closing the border off is unreasonable and harmful. But I also can acknowledge that the situation there has worsened greatly and border security is an issue. I’m not a “Build the Wall” guy, but I can see where there are areas where an increased barrier would be helpful. I think immigration is overall good, but unfettered open borders are not.

There’s a middle ground there, which is why I posted the link. Obama seems to be far from the asinine “Abolish ICE” crap, which I appreciate. 

14 hours ago, TornACL said:

In other words, you didn't read the article. Good job. 

I did.  Probably just hurts your brain that I agree with something Obama said. 

13 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Republicans are functionally illiterate.

Who’s illiterate? Me? Or you, the poster who ignored where I said I agreed with Obama?

21 hours ago, GRHorn said:

I agree with what he said. 

 

[Biff Tannen 45,673]

10 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I’m from a town close to the border so I appreciate the relationship between us and Mexico, and that fully closing the border off is unreasonable and harmful. But I also can acknowledge that the situation there has worsened greatly and border security is an issue. I’m not a “Build the Wall” guy, but I can see where there are areas where an increased barrier would be helpful. I think immigration is overall good, but unfettered open borders are not.

I would venture to guess that 95% of the people on this board agree with this sentiment.  And the majority of Dems in government as well.

[Brisketexan 105,095]

42 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I would venture to guess that 95% of the people on this board agree with this sentiment.  And the majority of Dems in government as well.

Yep.  But we live in a world where the only acceptable approach is Trump's WALL SHUT DOWN THE BORDER WE ARE FULL RAPISTS CRIME! -- if you don't agree with that, 100%, then you are FOR OPEN BORDERS!

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

I would venture to guess that 95% of the people on this board agree with this sentiment.  And the majority of Dems in government as well.

If that’s the case then why does this board cheer when wall funding gets shot down? How far would $5B have built? Certainly not a huge part of the border. I say give some extra money to security and let the border patrol and security experts decide where it should go. 

23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yep.  But we live in a world where the only acceptable approach is Trump's WALL SHUT DOWN THE BORDER WE ARE FULL RAPISTS CRIME! -- if you don't agree with that, 100%, then you are FOR OPEN BORDERS!

So where does Abolish ICE or walls are immoral fit in? 

[Brisketexan 105,095]

10 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

If that’s the case then why does this board cheer when wall funding gets shot down? How far would $5B have built? Certainly not a huge part of the border. I say give some extra money to security and let the border patrol and security experts decide where it should go. 

So where does Abolish ICE or walls are immoral fit in? 

Abolish ICE MOSTLY fits on the fringes (although if the argument is one of making the entity what it used to be -- INS, a customs and border patrol entity instead of a militarized group, I'm listening).

"Walls are immoral" fits in with exactly the position most of us have.  Because that position doesn't mean that using any and all barrier techniques in any and all situations is wrong -- we've had barriers of some sort in relation to ports of entry for decades (we even have them in airports -- you can't just run around the Customs desk, there are....walls).  What it means is that walls for the sake of walls, walls as a symbol of separation, militarization, and pure exclusion, regardless of the costs ($$, human, environmental), are immoral.  Walls built and used in that way ARE immoral.  Walls built as a middle finger are immoral.  Walls built as a personal monument to how much you can stick it to the beaners are immoral.

Note how that doesn't talk about United States border security?  Notice how it doesn't talk about being done in the name of the United States?  It LITERALLY SAYS "President Trump's Border Wall."  Come the fuck on.

Note that effectively nobody had a problem when even previous GOP presidents spent money on physical barriers, as part of an overall approach to border management.  There are places where barriers are cost-effective, make sense, and help control flow.  Of course, we already HAVE barriers in 99% of those places, so....yeah.

Only one side and admin has gone all-in on virulent and irrational anti-immigration bullshit.  Most of the rest of the world stands ready to have a sane conversation on immigration.  There is no possible way to have that conversation with this administration.

Edited April 10, 2019 by Brisketexan

[JimmyJames 12,271]

10 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

If that’s the case then why does this board cheer when wall funding gets shot down? How far would $5B have built? Certainly not a huge part of the border. I say give some extra money to security and let the border patrol and security experts decide where it should go. 

So where does Abolish ICE or walls are immoral fit in? 

5 billion dollars is a lot of money just to satisfy one mans ego. 

[GRHorn 105]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

Note that effectively nobody had a problem when even previous GOP presidents spent money on physical barriers, as part of an overall approach to border management.  There are places where barriers are cost-effective, make sense, and help control flow.  Of course, we already HAVE barriers in 99% of those places, so....yeah.

 

How did you determine that? 

3 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

5 billion dollars is a lot of money just to satisfy one mans ego. 

So, it’s about Trump, not actual security. Got it. 

[David Dennison 18,854]

9 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

So, it’s about Trump, not actual security. Got it. 

This has been obvious from the beginning. 

[Brisketexan 105,095]

11 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

How did you determine that? 

Ummmm.....I didn't?  Just like I didn't determine where to string certain electric transmission lines, or build a road, or place fire stations....the people and entities in charge of doing so did that.  That's kind of my point.  We have experienced players on the ground whose job it is to handle these things, and if something else is needed, make that request.  They have shown themselves to be quite capable of doing so in the past -- we have a shitload of barriers already in place, and I PRESUME that they didn't place them there because "a fence would look really pretty here."

Quote

So, it’s about Trump, not actual security. Got it. 

You don't have to listen to me.  Listen to Trump.  Read -- literally -- the writing on the wall (the last line says it all):

 

Whose wall is it?  Is it our wall?  Is it the United States' wall?  Nope.

[David Dennison 18,854]

That plaque is going to get so destroyed.

[XingTheRubicon 134]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

That plaque is going to get so destroyed.

Bet it doesn't

[InkaUtexas 25,904]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

That plaque is going to get so destroyed.

Hopefully faster than aggy's natty hopes. So how many of the people also listed were removed? 

[GRHorn 105]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummmm.....I didn't?  Just like I didn't determine where to string certain electric transmission lines, or build a road, or place fire stations....the people and entities in charge of doing so did that.  That's kind of my point.  We have experienced players on the ground whose job it is to handle these things, and if something else is needed, make that request.  They have shown themselves to be quite capable of doing so in the past -- we have a shitload of barriers already in place, and I PRESUME that they didn't place them there because "a fence would look really pretty here."

You don't have to listen to me.  Listen to Trump.  Read -- literally -- the writing on the wall (the last line says it all):

I meant the 99% part. 

[Brisketexan 105,095]

Just now, GRHorn said:

I meant the 99% part. 

Hyberbole, dude.  Maybe it's 98%. Maybe it's 89%.  The point being, in most places where a physical barrier makes sense when all factors are accounted for, it already exists.  If there are specific segments where it needs to be added/replaced/upgraded, that can and should be presented in a simple -- and likely non-controversial -- proposal from CBP.  You know, like the way it has been done for literally decades, resulting in the construction of hundreds of miles of physical barrier with little headache or controversy.

What we have NOT heard from this admin is anything like "CBP has presented a plan to the admin and Congress demonstrating that they need an additional $X amount to construct X miles of barrier in the locations shown on this map."  Nope.  The proposal is "BIG BEAUTIFUL WALL. [with Trump's name literally engraved on it]." That's the level of analysis.  That's fucking stupid, should be treated as fucking stupid, and any support of it is fucking stupid.  There is no deep analysis required -- sometimes fucking stupid is just fucking stupid.

[Skyline 325]

My understanding from a friend who wants to "Abolish ICE" is that they despise the actions ICE has become associated with, and that it's best to start over from scratch. The agency has had nothing but controversies , and I'd imagine a good chunk of people are willing to hit the reset button or see some changes to ICE. 

I also wonder how much of that is starting with an extreme position so that some changes can be negotiated if and when the issue hits congress under a D president. The GOP ran on making the EPA an enemy, and today they're able to justify running a toned down version of the EPA as a result. Did they actually abolish the EPA? No, certainly not. Did they undercut it? Of course. 

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4,976]

I bet there's very little overlap from the groups who say abolish the ICE and abolish the ATF. But they both think the other side is crazy for wanting to abolish such an important organization.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

2 hours ago, GRHorn said:

How did you determine that? 

So, it’s about Trump, not actual security. Got it. 

Glad you are finally getting it. 

[UTDD 362]

I think if the administration actually proposed a real plan with specific "border build" areas based off a well reasoned strategic plan, then I do believe it would be much easier to generate significant support.  My gut (which is just that, only a speculative gut feeling) is that the majority of Americans want a real solution to the border, but if that was mostly solved (nothing is 100% possible to shut It down completely) then there would be a great deal of openness to allow law abiding illegals to have options to stay in the country long-term.  Immigration is not really an issue that is high on my list (at least 11th or worse after at least ten other issues) so I'm never going to get that riled up either way.  

[JimmyJames 12,271]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

That plaque is going to get so destroyed.

It kind of reminds me of a certain schools wall of championships. Trying to recall which school...

[UncleCharlie 334]

These dumb mother fuckers don't realize without legal and illegal immigration we are Japan in the 80's within a decade.

Without population growth our economy is fucked.  Along with that our debt loses value and the dollar as the de facto world currency is gone.  

The trend is irreversible without immigration...

[retread 2,951]

But the brown people are going to destroy our way of life, and the Ds are for open borders. - RushFoxHannity

[hayden_horn 11,362]

2 minutes ago, UncleCharlie said:

These dumb mother fuckers don't realize without legal and illegal immigration we are Japan in the 80's within a decade.

Without population growth our economy is fucked.  Along with that our debt loses value and the dollar as the de facto world currency is gone.  

The trend is irreversible without immigration...

wait until the boomers really begin to retire. it's already a factor in my industry - older engineers in retirement have to come back and "consult" on old network troubleshooting issues. that's going to have a rather large impact on the state of the economy. i think it is a good thing for my generation, though. time for younger blood, imo.

[GSU&UT 1,798]

2 hours ago, Skyline said:

My understanding from a friend who wants to "Abolish ICE" is that they despise the actions ICE has become associated with, and that it's best to start over from scratch. The agency has had nothing but controversies , and I'd imagine a good chunk of people are willing to hit the reset button or see some changes to ICE. 

I also wonder how much of that is starting with an extreme position so that some changes can be negotiated if and when the issue hits congress under a D president. The GOP ran on making the EPA an enemy, and today they're able to justify running a toned down version of the EPA as a result. Did they actually abolish the EPA? No, certainly not. Did they undercut it? Of course. 

Exactly this. Don't know if I'd say I'm outright an abolish ICE person, but I absolutely get the argument those people are making. When ICE started to trick people (which could have started under Obama, I don't know and don't care) to get out of their vehicles because they don't have an actual warrant (see video), when they started literally detaining people at hospitals and courthouses etc., when they started deporting people who have been here for decades and have families it then became a tained organization that will be impossible to disassociate from these acts. There have been people deported who actually feared for their lives who were then subsequently killed, you're an inhumane evil organization when you do this and if you work for such a current organization then you are inhuman.

 

 

Edited April 10, 2019 by GSU&UT

[Biff Tannen 45,673]

It really is quite clear that the dotard can't think beyond the simplicity of building a wall and shutting down the border.  The actual nuances of border security are completely lost on him.  He thinks like a child. 

[Brisketexan 105,095]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

It really is quite clear that the dotard can't think beyond the simplicity of building a wall and shutting down the border.  The actual nuances of border security are completely lost on him.  He thinks like a child. 

Congratulations. You just insulted every child on earth.

[Bruh Man 3,160]

Quote

The immigration courts now have more than 800,000 pending cases; each one takes an average of 700 days to process. And because laws and court rulings aimed at protecting children prohibit jailing young people for more than 20 days, families are often simply released. They are dropped off at downtown bus stations in places like Brownsville, Tex., where dozens last week sat on gray metal benches, most without money or even laces on their shoes, heading for destinations across the United States.

At the current pace of nearly 100,000 migrants each month, officials say more than a million people will have tried to cross the border in a 12-month period. Some of those arriving today will have a strong legal case to stay under international refugee treaties and federal asylum laws, but most won’t have a formal asylum hearing until 2021.

The flow of migrant families has reached record levels, with February totals 560 percent above those for the same period last year. As many as 27,000 children are expected to cross the border and enter the immigration enforcement system in April alone. So crowded are border facilities that some of the nearly 3,500 migrants in custody in El Paso were herded earlier this month under a bridge, behind razor wire.

In recent days, officials have grasped for ever-more-dire ways to describe the situation: “operational emergency”; “unsustainable”; “systemwide meltdown.”

One top official said simply: “The system is on fire.”

Quote

Yet, perversely, the president’s own anti-immigrant rhetoric has helped supercharge the pipeline of migrants from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. Smugglers lately have been buying radio ads in Central America, warning that Mr. Trump is about to shut down all immigration. If you ever want to go to the United States, they say, go now!

Quote

Out of nearly 100,000 credible fear interviews during the year that ended in September of 2018, an asylum officer confirmed a credible fear 74,677 times — a nearly 75 percent approval rate. A senior Trump administration official vowed on Tuesday to dramatically reduce that rate by making the standards tougher.

But it is what happens after the credible fear interview that is at the heart of America’s bitter immigration debate.

In 2017, 11,292 immigrants who had been released on bond or on their own recognizance were ordered deported because they failed to show up for their immigration proceedings, a 26 percent increase over the previous year, according to Justice Department data.

 

[Skyline 325]

Quote

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s district in San Francisco was among those the White House wanted to target, according to DHS officials. The administration also considered releasing detainees in other Democratic strongholds.

White House officials first broached the plan in a Nov. 16 email, asking officials at several agencies whether members of the caravan could be arrested at the border and then bused “to small- and mid-sized sanctuary cities,” places where local authorities have refused to hand over illegal immigrants for deportation. The White House told U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that the plan was intended to alleviate a shortage of jail space but also served to send a message to Democrats. The attempt at political retribution raised alarm within ICE, with a top official responding that it was rife with budgetary and liability concerns, and noting that “there are PR risks as well.”

Owning the libs by giving them what they want. 

[mdmost 43,001]

I was going to say "the beauty of this" but frankly there's no beauty in how much of a shitshow the southern border has become under Trump. There is a growing problem but it's a problem that Trump helped partially create by not providing adequate resources to the border. Immigration judges, courts, manpower, laywers, etc. He thought his path of pain and separations would stem the flow and it hasn't. It's instead made the border even more of a problem. This past 2 years has exposed that he has no utter clue what to do at the border other than building a wall that won't do anything to help the immediate problems at the border. And he does nothing because he needs the red meat for the morons that support him. He has no desire to come up with a political solution to DACA or illegals, he only sees them as pawns he can use to get what he wants. And he's failing. 

Edited April 12, 2019 by mdmost

[GRHorn 105]

On 4/11/2019 at 7:28 PM, Skyline said:

Owning the libs by giving them what they want. 

Do they really want it?

 

[Skyline 325]

Do you really believe Cher is representative of any major group? 

 

[JimmyJames 12,271]

48 minutes ago, Skyline said:

Do you really believe Cher is representative of any major group? 

 

Apparently he believes it. Because if Cher says something, grhorn listens.

[Brisketexan 105,095]

Apparently he believes it. Because if Cher says something, grhorn listens.

Well, now we know that he believes in life after love.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

8 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, now we know that he believes in life after love.

I can feel something inside me say
I really don't think grhorn is strong enough, no

[DigglerontheHoof 21,186]

9 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, now we know that he believes in life after love.

Maybe he just wants to turn back time. 

[VRHorn 718]

55 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Maybe he just wants to turn back time. 

Yeah, to the 1850s.

[tucker 238]

Who were the posters asking why minorities overwhelming vote D? Arguing that D policies weren't representing their interest.

lulz, Ds don't try to put your kids in cages or shoot them. Not sure how Rs expect to capture any minority votes with their outright racist policies. 

[elfenix 34,230]

1 hour ago, tucker said:

Who were the posters asking why minorities overwhelming vote D? Arguing that D policies weren't representing their interest.

lulz, Ds don't try to put your kids in cages or shoot them. Not sure how Rs expect to capture any minority votes with their outright racist policies. 

republicans freed the slaves and voted for the civil rights act!  democrats implemented jim crow!

[4th&Five 41,525]

 

[Brisketexan 105,095]

 

OTHER than cruelty? Nope, nothing.

[lemonlime 5,503]

Some more cruelty. Combined with private prison profits

[retread 2,951]

Emergency (that we're making worse)!

[WhatTheBuck 28,776]

I see Barr has both jowls wrapped around Trump's mushroom dick. 

[retread 2,951]

Quote

Rep. Nanette Barragán (D-CA) visited the facility in early April with a congressional delegation.

“One woman had a baby, a five-month-old baby and said she’d been there for five days. The baby had filthy clothes,” Barragán said. “The situation is unhealthy. People are in a confined space, they’re not getting showers, their clothes are dirty, babies are not getting Pampers like they should be. These ladies were crying and telling us their stories and it was just heartbreaking.”

Barragán was banned from taking photos of migrants, but she described a desperate scene inside. The tents contained no cots and migrants slept on a temporary floor that covered the asphalt parking lot beneath, with babies sometimes sleeping on their parents’ legs to avoid the hard floor.

 

 

Edited April 17, 2019 by retread

[Post Oak 20,209]

Thought this was an interesting idea.  When we stop being governed by cruelty and inhumanity.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/04/inequality-america-heartland-economy-immigration-data/586873/

 

[Brisketexan 105,095]

14 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

Thought this was an interesting idea.  When we stop being governed by cruelty and inhumanity.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/04/inequality-america-heartland-economy-immigration-data/586873/

 

The concept sounds nice.

But when you re-state it as "let's send people to places where there are no jobs, and force them to stay there," the, ummm, economics of that don't seem too great.

[Post Oak 20,209]

51 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The concept sounds nice.

But when you re-state it as "let's send people to places where there are no jobs, and force them to stay there," the, ummm, economics of that don't seem too great.

true. however there should be some soybean farms to be had for cheap.

[Brisketexan 105,095]

21 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

true. however there should be some soybean farms to be had for cheap.

I couldn't imagine a more Trumpian outcome on earth:

Central American immigrants working on chinese-owned soybean farms while the former American farm owners either languish on welfare or die from opioid overdoses.

[lemonlime 5,503]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I couldn't imagine a more Trumpian outcome on earth:

Central American immigrants working on chinese-owned soybean farms while the former American farm owners either languish on welfare or die from opioid overdoses.

While the U.S. taxpayers pay for destruction of the soybean crops when the soy stops selling due to the "easy to win" trade war.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]