DACA, immigration reform whatever

[David Dennison 18922]

Just now, EMAWesome said:

Do you actually think one Democrat in Congress is going to vote yes on any legislation that actually solves this?  The Democrats don't give one shit about these children.  This policy has been in effect since the Clinton administration and not one Democrat said a peep about it until Trump came along and it took over a year after his inauguration for them to raise their voice at that.  The Democrats only want to use this as propaganda for the midterm elections and will not vote for anything that will take away the opportunity for them to use this.  The only thing the Democrats care about on this issue is whether or not they can use it to tar Trump with. 

No, it hasn't. That's why you can't provide any examples of families being separated at the border. 

[JukeJointJunkie 43]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

It is true. You can't cite a single law that requires family separation at the border. Not one.

You were asked yesterday to produce one bill, law, order, etc that Trump had signed. You haven't. 

[JukeJointJunkie 43]

Just now, David Dennison said:

No, it hasn't. That's why you can't provide any examples of families being separated at the border. 

You're a dishonest troll.

[David Dennison 18922]

1 minute ago, JukeJointJunkie said:

You were asked yesterday to produce one bill, law, order, etc that Trump had signed. You haven't. 

Because there isn't one. It's a policy that was implemented by in the AG's zero-tolerance memo. It can be stopped immediately. It is not required by law.

Edited June 19, 2018 by David Dennison

[JukeJointJunkie 43]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Because there isn't one. It's a policy that was implemented by in the AG's zero-tolerance memo. It can be stopped immediately. It is not required by law.

Wrong.

[hayden_horn 11362]

man, the troll farms are going hard the last couple of days

[FWD 297]

1 minute ago, JukeJointJunkie said:

Wrong.

Sessions could send out a new memo this afternoon reversing the policy change initiated in his April 9th memo. This would immediately end the new family separation policy. 

[Brisketexan 105154]

Sessions could send out a new memo this afternoon reversing the policy change initiated in his April 9th memo. This would immediately end the new family separation policy. 

Your truth and facts are irrelevant. What the Fuhrer says is the truth, and if it was not true, it becomes true when he says it.

[atomheartbevo 89727]

1 hour ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Once this boondoggle of a distraction is over and some agreeable short term fix is implemented, maybe we can fix the immigration problems with a reasonable law, come up with some hard and fast rules and enforce them so there is no wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth that things aren't being enforced correctly or justly and people don't get hung out to dry.

One can dream, I guess. 

He’s doubling down on the stupidity and is going to give the Dems solid control of Congress and the White House in 2020. 

They will “fix” immigration the way they want to. 

And the Republicans will howl. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

13 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

Baseless assumption?  Partisan bullshit.  Blatant lie.  Partisan bullshit.  Partisan bullshit. 

Translated into reality. 

[Fozzz 152]

From the author of One Long Night: A Global History of Concentration Camps:

 

 

[Brian Fantana 6689]

18 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

man, the troll farms are going hard the last couple of days

Pretty much ever since Smokey got banned

[bad_teammate 13215]

1 hour ago, JBJ said:

There's been changes, but this isn't a new policy.

You should replace SHS at the podium.

[Message Board User 12395]

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Or...could be both. It’s definitely both.

And as for uniting a base around contempt/hatred for the other, it’s literally one of the oldest plays in the book. And it’s being run in textbook fashion now. This isn’t a mystery, it’s right out there in plain sight.

Are you doing the "both sides" thing that I hear so often about?

[Revolution512 1487]

39 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

More voices on the left need to start calling this what it is.

This is evil and it should be treated as such. 

 

The voices on the left suck. How do you think the Oompa Loompa won? Obama was among the worst liars in history......until now. 

The left doesn’t want to solve immigration. They want the political point come election time. 

Edited June 19, 2018 by Revolution512

[Mojo Hand 4580]

5 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

 

If only there were a legislative process for amendments and fixes to introduced legislation.   Oh well, I guess it's the initial text or nothing at all...

[Brisketexan 105154]

1 minute ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Are you doing the "both sides" thing that I hear so often about?

Ummm, nope?  The nativist xenophobia demonization card is being played by the Party of Trump.  Hard.  Relentlessly.  And with evil purpose.

[atomheartbevo 89727]

2 minutes ago, Revolution512 said:

The voices on the left suck. How do you think the Oompa Loompa won? Obama was among the worst liars in history......until now. 

The left doesn’t want to solve immigration. They want the political point come election time. 

Oh the left is going to “solve” it, just not in the way that will make the right happy. 

And Donnie is hell-bent on giving them the chance to do it. 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummm, nope?  The nativist xenophobia demonization card is being played by the Party of Trump.  Hard.  Relentlessly.  And with evil purpose.

You think so? That's an interesting perspective. From my vantage I see it two different ways:

- The country is full of nativist, xenophobes and if they are not a majority they are at least a big enough voting block to bring to the mainstream and the position of power their values, in a perfect storm situation (Hillary being horrible, Trump's hilarity at making fun of people in debates causing a Cult of Personality, etc.).

- Trump is an elitist/nativist/xenophobe/misanthrope/bully/weirdo with Asperger's who is unintentionally hilarious and as the most powerful man in the country, he's dragging along his party, a bunch of milquetoast bureaucrats, with him because, though they are fat and weak and would prefer to be quietly corrupt, their existence is at risk so they just keep accepting the next degree of humiliation and absurdity. 

I don't see this as a central and organized effort by the R's to come together as some powerful group with horrible intentions to destroy people and by portraying them as mastermind super-villains or people with advanced behavioral/hypnotist abilities to brainwash and control the masses and make them do their bidding, I think people lose the credibility of their arguments and fail the smell test of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Edited June 19, 2018 by Guest

[Dahobbs 17625]

6 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

You think so? That's an interesting perspective. From my vantage I see it two different ways:

- The country is full of nativist, xenophobes and if they are not a majority they are at least a big enough voting block to bring to the mainstream and the position of power their values, in a perfect storm situation (Hillary being horrible, Trump's hilarity at making fun of people in debates causing a Cult of Personality, etc.).

- Trump is an elitist/nativist/xenophobe/misanthrope/bully/weirdo with Asperger's who is unintentionally hilarious and as the most powerful man in the country, he's dragging along his party, a bunch of milquetoast bureaucrats, with him because, though they are fat and weak and would prefer to be quietly corrupt, their existence is at risk so they just keep accepting the next degree of humiliation and absurdity. 

Honestly, what are you even arguing about? Does A cause B or B cause A.  Hell, it probably looks like this: A<----->B.  But who fucking cares, the result is the same (evil) and should be resisted. If you're ok with it, you're evil. Period.  

Edited June 19, 2018 by Dahobbs

[Brisketexan 105154]

2 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

You think so? That's an interesting perspective. From my vantage I see it two different ways:

- The country is full of nativist, xenophobes and if they are not a majority they are at least a big enough voting block to bring to the mainstream and the position of power their values, in a perfect storm situation (Hillary being horrible, Trump's hilarity at making fun of people in debates causing a Cult of Personality, etc.).

- Trump is an elitist/nativist/xenophobe/misanthrope/bully/weirdo with Asperger's who is unintentionally hilarious and as the most powerful man in the country, he's dragging along his party, a bunch of milquetoast bureaucrats, with him because, though they are fat and weak and would prefer to be quietly corrupt, their existence is at risk so they just keep accepting the next degree of humiliation and absurdity. 

Again, it's a mix of those.  A cocktail of different types of runny shit.  It takes evil motivating the base, a narcissistic valueless and clueless egomaniac, all enabled by a cowardly self-interested crew of "leaders" interested only in their own cushy spot and priority reservations at the Old Ebbitt Grill (FTR, I dig that place -- good oysters) at the expense of the country they purportedly serve.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Again, it's a mix of those.  A cocktail of different types of runny shit.  It takes evil motivating the base, a narcissistic valueless and clueless egomaniac, all enabled by a cowardly self-interested crew of "leaders" interested only in their own cushy spot and priority reservations at the Old Ebbitt Grill (FTR, I dig that place -- good oysters) at the expense of the country they purportedly serve.

 

11 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Honestly, what are you even arguing about? Does A cause B or B cause A.  Hell, it probably looks like this: A<----->B.  But who fucking cares, the result is the same (evil) and should be resisted. If you're ok with it, you're evil. Period.  

What I'm arguing about is essentially the focus and outrage is focused on the wrong thing here, and my guess is because it's easy and vague. I've used the drug war analogy before and I'll use it again, but trying to put the blame at the feet of the g-men and politicians because they are the output is ignoring the cause and the input which is that we are a nation of racists who don't like each other, at least in a sizable number to get power and execute it. Just like trying to have a war on the supply of drugs is meaningless without accounting for the demand variable and trying to fix the root cause.

Edited June 19, 2018 by Guest

[Dahobbs 17625]

3 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

 

What I'm arguing about is essentially the focus and outrage is focused on the wrong thing here, and my guess is because it's easy and vague. I've used the drug war analogy before and I'll use it again, but trying to put the blame at the feet of the g-men and politicians because they are the output is ignoring the cause and the input which is that we are a nation of racists who don't like each other, at least in a sizable number to get power and execute it. Just like trying to have a war on the supply is meaningless without accounting for the demand variable and trying to fix the root cause.

Again, its both. They reinforce each other. And I can be angry at both. And I am. 

I'll also say that attacking the public facing persona can work. Use to be these folks knew to stick to the shadows. If we can shame their leaders enough (read: jail), maybe we can get them back there. 

Edited June 19, 2018 by Dahobbs

[Brisketexan 105154]

1 minute ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

 

What I'm arguing about is essentially the focus and outrage is focused on the wrong thing here, and my guess is because it's easy and vague. I've used the drug war analogy before and I'll use it again, but trying to put the blame at the feet of the g-men and politicians because they are the output is ignoring the cause and the input which is that we are a nation of racists who don't like each other, at least in a sizable number to get power and execute it. Just like trying to have a war on the supply of drugs is meaningless without accounting for the demand variable and trying to fix the root cause.

Well, the problem is that the politicians are responding to a political minority.  Don't get me wrong -- it's a BIG minority, and a large minority can wield outsize power.  They are maybe 30-40% of the country, but they are presently CONTROLLING the country.  So, it's on the evil fucks driving these beliefs, and on the gutless power-hungry fucks (enabled my racists in their midst, like Stephen Miller) who are doing their bidding.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Again, its both. They reinforce each other. And I can be angry at both.

Fair enough, maybe I'm not being hard enough on those in power that supply the demand of the masses but my hunch is that, like with drug lords, there is no shortage of someone to take the head of a profitable enterprise driven by insatiable human demand. 

[WhatTheBuck 28788]

1 hour ago, LongestHorn said:

POTUS just said that he will cut aid to countries that are sending immigrants to our border.  

The U.S. 2018 budget cut aid to Guatemala by almost 40 percent compared with 2016, and by nearly a third to Honduras and El Salvador - the most murderous nations in the world.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R45089.pdf

Great. Make the situation in those countries more desperate, resulting in more refugees. Wash, rinse, repeat.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Cruz's plan is a good start.
 

Doubling the number of federal immigration judges, from roughly 375 to 750.

Authorizing new temporary shelters with accommodations to keep families together.

Mandating that immigrant families be kept together, absent aggravated criminal conduct or threat of harm to children.

Providing for expedited processing and review of asylum cases so that — within 14 days — those who meet the legal standards will be granted asylum and those who do not will be immediately returned to their home countries.

Does anyone know how this differs from the Dem plan?

[InkaUtexas 25986]

1 minute ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Great. Make the situation in those countries more desperate, resulting in more refugees. Wash, rinse, repeat.

We have been cutting aid to those countries since the early 1990's. Though the Central American Regional Security Initiative was promised by earlier admins it was never pushed through. This is why I said earlier we need a micro Marshall plan for the Northern Triangle nations and be ready to extend it south into Nicaragua if it continues to have the recent social issues. 

[Spankytoes 1742]

16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Again, it's a mix of those.  A cocktail of different types of runny shit.  It takes evil motivating the base, a narcissistic valueless and clueless egomaniac, all enabled by a cowardly self-interested crew of "leaders" interested only in their own cushy spot and priority reservations at the Old Ebbitt Grill (FTR, I dig that place -- good oysters) at the expense of the country they purportedly serve.

To be fair, what separates that description from how pro-lifers feel about pro-choice and the current laws? They believe that lives are actually being taken rather than separated for an unknown amount of time. Why is that not true? Because life doesn't begin at conception and the law agrees with that stance except in limited circumstances. If abortion became illegal, we'd be hearing about the Bible-thumping crusaders that want to tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies.

It's all relative and didn't start with the Idiot in Charge.

[Spankytoes 1742]

6 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Cruz's plan is a good start.
 

Doubling the number of federal immigration judges, from roughly 375 to 750.

Authorizing new temporary shelters with accommodations to keep families together.

Mandating that immigrant families be kept together, absent aggravated criminal conduct or threat of harm to children.

Providing for expedited processing and review of asylum cases so that — within 14 days — those who meet the legal standards will be granted asylum and those who do not will be immediately returned to their home countries.

Does anyone know how this differs from the Dem plan?

Surprisingly, I agree with you. Never thought I'd take Cruz seriously.

[Hank Kingsley 20967]

From March 3rd, 2017

 

[scottsins 1967]

The executive branch doesn't make laws, the legislative branch does.  The executive branch enforces the laws that are made.  If you think the law needs to be changed you bitch to Congress, not the president.  Executive orders are not laws any future president can do whatever they want with them.  The president can't disenact actual legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by a previous president unless Congress first votes to repeal or amend that legislation and then the president can only sign into law what Congress has approved.  He can't fine tune it himself.  High school civics class out front should have told you this.

I don’t recall taking “high school civics”, but my doctorate told me that expecting or having a system where ALL LAWS are ALWAYS enforced to the extent allowed by the law...

is totally impossible and ridiculous.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

I want to know how it differs from the Dems plan.  If it doesn’t, he needs to support their plan. If it does, how is it different.  I’ve only  heard rhetoric about the dem plan.  Some pro and some against. The devil is in the details.  I’m sitting at a bar watching soccer or I’d look it up. 

[Hank Kingsley 20967]

 

[scottsins 1967]

Wrong.

Well, the POTUS, AG and Homeland Sec. Director all claim that this was their new policy, whilst touting its merits.

So they are all just making that up?

[Anastasis 23475]

Cruz knows he will get hammered on this issue. 

[Spankytoes 1742]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

More voices on the left need to start calling this what it is.

This is evil and it should be treated as such. 

 

What do you think the end result of that will be? Has Trump reversed anything because people on the Left didn't like it? 

The more likely result is that more and more people get tired of being called xenophobic and uncaring for disagreeing with someone on the Left on an issue that it virtually is going to end up guaranteeing another 4 years for Trump. As someone that could not fathom voting for anyone hinting that they are Conservative a few years ago, and thought the R's wouldn't have another Presidential Candidate to take seriously without major reform of social policies, trust me on that one. There is a silent majority in today's political landscape where people are seething. Trump is the golem for their patience of taking the punches. No one elected gives a shit about any of us. Some are just better public figures to represent our ideals than others.

At least the PC culture is going the way of the dodo, which is the only silver lining I can grasp on to. 

[Captainant 27680]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Cruz knows he will get hammered on this issue. 

I had to call three of his offices before I found one that picked up / had an open voicemail box. He is getting hammered on this issue and he should be, being the child of an asylum seeker who overstayed their visa thereby being a LAW BREAKER AND WE SHOULD RIP APART HIS FAMILY according to the trump admin.

[seven 1367]

6 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I want to know how it differs from the Dems plan.  If it doesn’t, he needs to support their plan. If it does, how is it different.  I’ve only  heard rhetoric about the dem plan.  Some pro and some against. The devil is in the details.  I’m sitting at a bar watching soccer or I’d look it up. 

I think cruz has a better plan. The dem bill (from what I gather) clumsily places a blanket ban on doj or dhs removing a child from their parents. Seems to be some significant concern about unintended consequences. 

[kevwun 15797]

Cruz is going to get hammered by Beto if he doesn't help solve this.  Cruz has to real pissed at Trump.  Good reminder to him about why he should have never bent the knee.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Welp. I just blessed out my own father for defending this garbage.

Fucking 18 hours a day of Fox News has rotted the brain of a once free thinking man.

Us Gen X kids need to file a class action suit against Fox News for ruining our parents.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

25 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Cruz's plan is a good start.
 

Doubling the number of federal immigration judges, from roughly 375 to 750.

Authorizing new temporary shelters with accommodations to keep families together.

Mandating that immigrant families be kept together, absent aggravated criminal conduct or threat of harm to children.

Providing for expedited processing and review of asylum cases so that — within 14 days — those who meet the legal standards will be granted asylum and those who do not will be immediately returned to their home countries.

Does anyone know how this differs from the Dem plan?

The difference is that the Dem plan would restore to the status quo of a few months ago, before this crisis, and the Cruz plan uses this crisis to gut the asylum system while throwing families into the same prisons that didn't pass court muster a few years ago. 

I'm down with what the Cruz bill appears to be superficially, but not with what it actually is. 

More judges?  Great.  No plan for how to fill the slots?  Not great. 

New shelters, families kept together?   Great.  No standards for making sure they have humane living conditions?  Not great. 

Expedited processing for asylum cases?  Sure, if it is an option that can be chosen by the applicant.  But it appears to actually be a strict limitation on the time to make and decide an asylum claim, permitting just two weeks. Legal process takes time and counsel.  No good. 

The devil's in the details.  

Edited June 19, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[Bozo_Casanova 26488]

 

[hayden_horn 11362]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

not a good look, P. not a good look at all. good on jeb.

[scottsins 1967]

Cruz's plan is a good start.
 
Doubling the number of federal immigration judges, from roughly 375 to 750.
Authorizing new temporary shelters with accommodations to keep families together.
Mandating that immigrant families be kept together, absent aggravated criminal conduct or threat of harm to children.
Providing for expedited processing and review of asylum cases so that — within 14 days — those who meet the legal standards will be granted asylum and those who do not will be immediately returned to their home countries.
Does anyone know how this differs from the Dem plan?

I had a really positive reaction to Cruz’ plan. I was skeptical of my own opinion, because Cruz.

I just heard Trump shit all over said proposal, which confirms that it is, in fact, something I can get behind.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Does the P in George P. stand for pussy?

[Brisketexan 105154]

6 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

Jesus.  You'd have better luck finding a vertebrae in a plate of escargot than you would searching among GOP politicians.

They're an inch away from just being this:

 

[bad_teammate 13215]

11 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

Imagine being so pathetic you get cucked by a Trump. lol

[TornACL 7703]

Don Jr didn't man up and call Jeb, because Jeb has no need for the Trumps and would tell them to get fucked.

The Trumps like to bully and lean on people who they perceive as needing something in return. If George P had told Jr to get fucked, I would have wholeheartedly supported his campaign.

Edited June 19, 2018 by TornACL