Jump to content

Caravan

gsoda3

By gsoda3
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

GHOSTUSER

GHOSTUSER 361

Posted
Posted (edited)

Looks like President Trump’s deal with the Mexicans to limit the horde of migrants besieging our borders is working:

“Its latest effort is a policy that admits only a few asylum seekers a day, if that, at border crossings. As a result of this metering, migrants are now waiting on the Mexican side of the border for weeks and months before they can submit their applications.”

The article tries to make the claim that it will lead to increased attempts at illegal border crossings through the use of coyotes. Most can’t afford $5k-$7k a person to cross and if they do try most will hopefully get caught doing so. The reality that only a few asylum applicants a day will be accepted will cause these people to stay in Mexico where they have been offered asylum or they'll decide to go back home.

Finally, it’s attitudes of illegals who say shit like this that pisses me off and why I’ll never support a hayden horn “let them all in” policy.

”I honestly don’t want to cross illegally, but I don’t really have a choice,” said Mr. Moreno, 37.”

you have a motherfucking choice. Stay in Mexico or go back to the shithole you came from, learn English, get an education and try to immigrate legally and actually have something worthwhile to add to this country. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/world/americas/mexico-migrants-smugglers.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fworld&action=click&contentCollection=world&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront

Edited by Iconoclast Texan
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

bad_teammate
bad_teammate

Immediate Situation: Welcome them with open arms. Invite them to participate productively in our society and economy. Register them to quickly become participatory, tax-paying citizens. Educate t

hpslugga
hpslugga

No. We have a situation where one person, i.e. you, is absolutely wrong about absolutely everything regarding this topic. What is the root of your wanting to build a wall? I imagine it's that of

GHOSTUSER
GHOSTUSER

Looks like President Trump’s deal with the Mexicans to limit the horde of migrants besieging our borders is working: “Its latest effort is a policy that admits only a few asylum seekers a day, if

DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14339

Posted
Posted
Looks like President Trump’s deal with the Mexicans to limit the horde of migrants besieging our borders is working:
“Its latest effort is a policy that admits only a few asylum seekers a day, if that, at border crossings. As a result of this metering, migrants are now waiting on the Mexican side of the border for weeks and months before they can submit their applications.”
The article tries to make the claim that it will lead to increased attempts at illegal border crossings through the use of coyotes. Most can’t afford $5k-$7k a person to cross and if they do try most will hopefully get caught doing so. The reality that only a few asylum applicants a day will be accepted will cause these people to stay in Mexico where they have been offered asylum or they'll decide to go back home.
Finally, it’s attitudes of illegals who say shit like this that pisses me off and why I’ll never support a hayden horn “let them all in” policy.
”I honestly don’t want to cross illegally, but I don’t really have a choice,” said Mr. Moreno, 37.”
you have a motherfucking choice. Stay in Mexico or go back to the shithole you came from, learn English, get an education and try to immigrate legally and actually have something worthwhile to add to this country. 
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/world/americas/mexico-migrants-smugglers.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fworld&action=click&contentCollection=world&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront

Wow.

Icono’d!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9834

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Cajun said:

PSA - Roger Waters considers performing Pink Floyd’s The Wall on US-Mexico border

https://consequenceofsound.net/2017/02/roger-waters-considers-performing-pink-floyds-the-wall-on-us-mexico-border/?fbclid=IwAR3CcRsVgOKiov-wLNpj_DROlKtjv3DQeDXQ7N3rysoNyHq3uI6oelWpB1M

Pigs, Three Different Ones.

You guys would dig it the most.

He will fly his private plane down......

"I can't wait to see the look on those little Eichmann's faces when they hear this crunchy groove!"

hqdefault.jpg

 

Wonder if he will take some people home to his mansion in the Hampton's?  We should get all of our illegal immigration and border advise from a Brit who lives on the North East coast.  Lots of illegal traffic in the Hampton's, glad they can do their part.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18856

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Cajun said:

Oh, no doubt CS.  Ole Roger is nothing if not a huge hypocrite.

I wonder if he pondered rewriting "Money" while on his way to his attorney's office while putting David, Rick, and Nick a lawsuit?

Things that make you go hmmmm...

You're confusing Roger Waters with his songs' narrators. That's not how art works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cajun

Cajun 11705

Posted
Posted (edited)

Roger's lyrics reflect his personal feelings about the evils and effects that grotesque amounts of money has on the human psyche.

The tools he uses to voice and espouse those personal feelings are inconsequential.  This was how Roger felt about materialism at that time. Dude is plenty materialistic, but hides behind the "I'm an artist" facade.  This is not out on a limb thought, it's pretty well known amongst anyone who follows Pink Floyd.

That you feel the need to argue otherwise hints at a tich of oppositional defiance disorder.

You should have that checked.  Maybe rub some Robitussin on it.

Edited by Cajun
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18856

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Cajun said:

Roger's lyrics reflect his personal feelings about the evils and effects that grotesque amounts of money has on the human psyche.

The tools he uses to voice and espouse those personal feelings are inconsequential.  This was how Roger felt about materialism at that time. Dude is plenty materialistic, but hides behind the "I'm an artist" facade.  This is not out on a limb thought, it's pretty well known amongst anyone who follows Pink Floyd.

That you feel the need to argue otherwise hints at a tich of oppositional defiance disorder.

You should have that checked.  Maybe rub some Robitussin on it.

So senior citizen Roger Waters is hypocritical because the art he produced forty years ago no longer jibes with his current economic condition.

Got it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cajun

Cajun 11705

Posted
Posted (edited)

So, Waters sues David, Rick, and Nick at the golden age of 43 yrs old.

That's a "senior citizen".

Got it.

You should probably know your PF history just a leeeeeetle bit better before you joust this windmill next time.

Edited by Cajun
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cajun

Cajun 11705

Posted
Posted
Just now, Brisketexan said:

Just wanted to say that Dennis, Cajun, I think both of you are fucking stupid, and having a pointless conversation.

BUT, you're managing to have an argument about artistry and Pink Floyd on a thread about immigration, so, you still get Surly points.

Yeah, I feel a bit like Walter and The Dude.

"What the fuck was that with Viet Nam?"

"Face it Dude, there is a literal connection."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jiggy-Z

Jiggy-Z 3432

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Just wanted to say that Dennis, Cajun, I think both of you are fucking stupid, and having a pointless conversation.

BUT, you're managing to have an argument about artistry and Pink Floyd on a thread about immigration, so, you still get Surly points.

Pink Floyd "The Wall" talk, not going away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted

That's some serious bootstrappin' going on

Quote

Erik Prince, the founder of the private security company Blackwater USA and a board member of Fund the Wall, compared this effort to how much of the Western United States was settled by private rail, telegraph, and security companies.

“This is the way for lots of Americans of good will and vision and innovation and capital to see that their country is protected,” he said. “And the private sector building it will cost a fraction of what it costs the federal government.”

Experts are skeptical that a DIY wall-building plan would have much of an effect, pointing out that, if anything, it would make the project more expensive, since the government wouldn’t be able to use eminent domain to seize land.

“If somebody wants to buy land and build a wall, more power to them I guess,” said David J. D’Angelo, the director of field research at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and an expert on border security. “It would have zero impact on the real political issues at play. But it’s a free country. For now.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28779

Posted
Posted

All alone, or in twos
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands
The bleeding hearts and the artists
Make their stand

And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad bugger's wall

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28779

Posted
Posted

"Erik Prince, the founder of the private security company Blackwater USA and a board member of Fund the Wall, compared this effort to how much of the Western United States was settled by private rail, telegraph, and security companies."

Also by the federal government forcing the natives off their land and giving it away for free to immigrants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45682

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

If you want people eliminated without regard for the law or decency, I'm 100% confident that Erik is your man.

 

18 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Prince is a scary dude, has the ears of this admin and you are right, he would do it. 

 

Mueller better be taking him down too.  He's an evil motherfucker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The People’s Elbow

The People’s Elbow 707

Posted
Posted
On 12/26/2018 at 2:00 PM, Iconoclast Texan said:

I donated $10 to the church offering plate on Christmas Eve towards some outfit in the valley feeding refugees. I have done my part to help these people 

 

On 1/7/2019 at 2:03 PM, Iconoclast Texan said:

you have a motherfucking choice. Stay in Mexico or go back to the shithole you came from, learn English, get an education and try to immigrate legally and actually have something worthwhile to add to this country.

I wish I could be a fly on the wall when you righteously saunter up to Saint Peter and Heaven’s Gates. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cajun

Cajun 11705

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, The People’s Elbow said:

 

I wish I could be a fly on the wall when you righteously saunter up to Saint Peter and Heaven’s Gates. 

These three nuns perish when their bus goes over a cliff.  When the three arrive at the Pearly Gates, St. Peter says, "Step forward Sisters and confess your sins."

One of the nuns sheepishly moves forwad and quietly speaks - "St. Peter, I must confess I once saw a man's penis."

St. Peter responds and points to a bucket - "Sister, go to the Holy Water and wash your eyes!"  She does and the Pearly Gates open.  She walks in.

A second nun starts to step up, but the third yanks her back, scrambles up to St. Peter and asks, "Would you mind if I gargled with that water before she puts her rear end in there?"

I'm here all week.  Tip your waitresses.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GHOSTUSER

GHOSTUSER 361

Posted
Posted (edited)

Farhad Manjoo of the NYT pens one of the most laughable op-eds I have ever read advocating for open borders. For real. 2020 Democratic Presidential candidates- please, please, please advocate for this, you know you want to. This useful idiot helps confirm the suspicions Republicans like me have when it comes to progressive Democrats and their true feelings when it comes to immigration. Haha. It would be worth it for a Democrat to get elected espousing such bullshit because it would lead to a backlash so severe that the GOP would rule for a generation and we would then finally put a stop to illegal immigration once and for all.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/16/opinion/open-borders-immigration.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

 

The internet expands the bounds of acceptable discourse, so ideas considered out of bounds not long ago now rocket toward widespread acceptability. See: cannabis legalization, government-run health care, white nationalism and, of course, the flat-earthers. 

Yet there’s one political shore that remains stubbornly beyond the horizon. It’s an idea almost nobody in mainstream politics will address, other than to hurl the label as a bloody cudgel.

I’m talking about opening up America’s borders to everyone who wants to move here.

Imagine not just opposing President Trump’s wall but also opposing the nation’s cruel and expensive immigration and border-security apparatus in its entirety. Imagine radically shifting our stance toward outsiders from one of suspicion to one of warm embrace. Imagine that if you passed a minimal background check, you’d be free to live, work, pay taxes and die in the United States. Imagine moving from Nigeria to Nebraska as freely as one might move from Massachusetts to Maine.

[Farhad Manjoo answered your questions about this column on Twitter.]

There’s a witheringly obvious moral, economic, strategic and cultural case for open borders, and we have a political opportunity to push it. As Democrats jockey for the presidency, there’s room for a brave politician to oppose President Trump’s racist immigration rhetoric not just by fighting his wall and calling for the abolishment of I.C.E. but also by making a proactive and affirmative case for the vast expansion of immigration.

It would be a change from the stale politics of the modern era, in which both parties agreed on the supposed wisdom of “border security” and assumed that immigrants were to be feared. 

As an immigrant, this idea confounds me. My family came to the United States from our native South Africa in the late 1980s. After jumping through lots of expensive and confusing legal hoops, we became citizens in 2000. Obviously, it was a blessing: In rescuing me from a society in which people of my color were systematically oppressed, America has given me a chance at liberty.

But why had I deserved that chance, while so many others back home — because their parents lacked certain skills, money or luck — were denied it?

When you see the immigration system up close, you’re confronted with its bottomless unfairness. The system assumes that people born outside our borders are less deserving of basic rights than those inside. My native-born American friends did not seem to me to warrant any more dignity than my South African ones; according to this nation’s founding documents, we were all created equal. Yet by mere accident of geography, some were given freedom, and others were denied it.

“When you start to think about it, a system of closed borders begins to feel very much like a system of feudal privilege,” said Reece Jones, a professor of geography at the University of Hawaii who argues that Democrats should take up the mantle of open borders. “It’s the same idea that there’s some sort of hereditary rights to privilege based on where you were born.”

I admit the politics here are perilous. Although America’s borders were open for much of its history — if your ancestors came here voluntarily, there’s a good chance it was thanks to open borders — restrictions on immigration are now baked so deeply into our political culture that any talk of loosening them sparks anger.

People worry that immigrants will bring crime, even though stats show immigrants are no more dangerous than natives. People worry they’ll take jobs away from native workers, even though most studies suggests that immigration is a profound benefit to the economy, and there’s little evidence it hurts native workers. And if we worry that they’ll hoover up welfare benefits, we can impose residency requirements for them.

But these are all defensive arguments, and when you’re on defense, you’re losing. For opponents of the president’s xenophobic policies, a better plan is to make the affirmative case for a lot more immigrants.

Economically and strategically, open borders isn’t just a good plan — it’s the only chance we’ve got. America is an aging nation with a stagnant population. We have ample land to house lots more people, but we are increasingly short of workers. And on the global stage, we face two colossi — India and China — which, with their billions, are projected to outstrip American economic hegemony within two decades.

How will we ever compete with such giants? The same way we always have: by inviting the world’s most enthusiastic and creative people — including the people willing to walk here, to risk disease and degradation and death to land here — to live out their best life under liberty.

A new migrant caravan is forming in Honduras, and the president is itching for the resulting political fight. 

Here’s hoping Democrats respond with creativity and verve. Not just “No wall.” Not just “Abolish ICE.” 

Instead: “Let them in.”

Edited by Iconoclast Texan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18856

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

Farhad Manjoo of the NYT pens one of the most laughable op-eds I have ever read advocating for open borders. For real. 2020 Democratic Presidential candidates- please, please, please advocate for this, you know you want to. Haha. It would be worth it for a Democrat to get elected espousing such bullshit because it would lead to a backlash so severe that the GOP would rule for a generation and we would then finally put a stop to illegal immigration once and for all

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/16/opinion/open-borders-immigration.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

The internet expands the bounds of acceptable discourse, so ideas considered out of bounds not long ago now rocket toward widespread acceptability. See: cannabis legalization, government-run health care, white nationalism and, of course, the flat-earthers. 

Yet there’s one political shore that remains stubbornly beyond the horizon. It’s an idea almost nobody in mainstream politics will address, other than to hurl the label as a bloody cudgel.

I’m talking about opening up America’s borders to everyone who wants to move here.

Imagine not just opposing President Trump’s wall but also opposing the nation’s cruel and expensive immigration and border-security apparatus in its entirety. Imagine radically shifting our stance toward outsiders from one of suspicion to one of warm embrace. Imagine that if you passed a minimal background check, you’d be free to live, work, pay taxes and die in the United States. Imagine moving from Nigeria to Nebraska as freely as one might move from Massachusetts to Maine.

[Farhad Manjoo answered your questions about this column on Twitter.]

There’s a witheringly obvious moral, economic, strategic and cultural case for open borders, and we have a political opportunity to push it. As Democrats jockey for the presidency, there’s room for a brave politician to oppose President Trump’s racist immigration rhetoric not just by fighting his wall and calling for the abolishment of I.C.E. but also by making a proactive and affirmative case for the vast expansion of immigration.

It would be a change from the stale politics of the modern era, in which both parties agreed on the supposed wisdom of “border security” and assumed that immigrants were to be feared. 

As an immigrant, this idea confounds me. My family came to the United States from our native South Africa in the late 1980s. After jumping through lots of expensive and confusing legal hoops, we became citizens in 2000. Obviously, it was a blessing: In rescuing me from a society in which people of my color were systematically oppressed, America has given me a chance at liberty.

But why had I deserved that chance, while so many others back home — because their parents lacked certain skills, money or luck — were denied it?

When you see the immigration system up close, you’re confronted with its bottomless unfairness. The system assumes that people born outside our borders are less deserving of basic rights than those inside. My native-born American friends did not seem to me to warrant any more dignity than my South African ones; according to this nation’s founding documents, we were all created equal. Yet by mere accident of geography, some were given freedom, and others were denied it.

“When you start to think about it, a system of closed borders begins to feel very much like a system of feudal privilege,” said Reece Jones, a professor of geography at the University of Hawaii who argues that Democrats should take up the mantle of open borders. “It’s the same idea that there’s some sort of hereditary rights to privilege based on where you were born.”

I admit the politics here are perilous. Although America’s borders were open for much of its history — if your ancestors came here voluntarily, there’s a good chance it was thanks to open borders — restrictions on immigration are now baked so deeply into our political culture that any talk of loosening them sparks anger.

People worry that immigrants will bring crime, even though stats show immigrants are no more dangerous than natives. People worry they’ll take jobs away from native workers, even though most studies suggests that immigration is a profound benefit to the economy, and there’s little evidence it hurts native workers. And if we worry that they’ll hoover up welfare benefits, we can impose residency requirements for them.

But these are all defensive arguments, and when you’re on defense, you’re losing. For opponents of the president’s xenophobic policies, a better plan is to make the affirmative case for a lot more immigrants.

Economically and strategically, open borders isn’t just a good plan — it’s the only chance we’ve got. America is an aging nation with a stagnant population. We have ample land to house lots more people, but we are increasingly short of workers. And on the global stage, we face two colossi — India and China — which, with their billions, are projected to outstrip American economic hegemony within two decades.

How will we ever compete with such giants? The same way we always have: by inviting the world’s most enthusiastic and creative people — including the people willing to walk here, to risk disease and degradation and death to land here — to live out their best life under liberty.

A new migrant caravan is forming in Honduras, and the president is itching for the resulting political fight. 

Here’s hoping Democrats respond with creativity and verve. Not just “No wall.” Not just “Abolish ICE.” 

Instead: “Let them in.”

 

The GOP doesn't want to solve the problem of illegal immigration. The GOP wants it as an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4058

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

 Haha. It would be worth it for a Democrat to get elected espousing such bullshit because it would lead to a backlash so severe that the GOP would rule for a generation and we would then finally put a stop to illegal immigration once and for all.

That's just you and your Make Believe again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 21813

Posted
Posted

I honestly don't care if its true or not. The problem is that, if true, half this fucking country is scared for no reason. Worse, if it's true, like last time they are fleeing terrible violence and we should be welcoming refugees not demonizing them and using them as political pawns. And worst of all, the hate is coming from people who claim they know Jesus. They know only Republican Jesus, which is a figment of hateful imaginations.

imgur

  • Like 1
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...