Republicans want this. Why is it bad?

[Sho Nuff 719]

Ok.

 

1 and 2. Good to see you admit Schumer offered way less then requested, and the opinions of DHS and the boarder agents are a "joke".

 

3. You have a link to republicans wanting state agencies to "actively persue" illegals? I've never heard that once. Republicans want state agencies to notify feds when they have illegals in custody. Never heard what you just claimed.

 

Please explain why it's disingenuous. She had a sworn duty to perform, but refused for religious and ideological differences. She, like sanctuary politicians, are refusing to uphold the laws they were put in place to enforce and follow. Point is, you can't pick and choose, once you become an elected official.

 

4. Are you saying Democrats don't push those talking points? If so, I'll provide link after link of democrat politicians wanting those two things. A pathway and/or Amnesty.

 

1 and 2...what was requested was a joke. Opinions of those agents are not a joke. The wall is. Its an inefficient thing to fight illegal immigration. Im sure they think it will help them (many other measures will too).

Some fencing...sure...have at it. As much wall as Trump has talked about and at that price (when Mexico was supposed to pay for it?) nope...its not worth it.

 

3. Ill find it...its been in several quotes. And its not just about that. Many of the laws would discourage people from calling in crimes if they thought they would then be turned over. In addition...federal officials want people held for the duration of deportation proceedings. And want them detained longer than their local law allows.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/248837-house-dems-pan-the-donald-trump-act

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/democrats-slam-gops-sanctuary-city-plan-as-mass-deportation/article/2623530

 

I think there is a compromise there somewhere. but the full on ideas of the GOP are not the correct answer IMO.

 

4. Pathway and amnesty for anyone? Sure...go ahead with a link. Im going to guess there are exclusions to who they feel should be granted such things.

[crackattack 513]

1&2. You can't have it both ways. DHS and Border agents say it's not a joke or a waste. So your saying their opinion is a joke on the matter.

 

3. So your saying illegals won't follow our laws in fear of deportation? That's because they know they shouldn't be here. Your links don't say republicans want state officials "actively pursuing" illegals. They want cooperation. You know, cooperation for the federal money they receive to help combat illegal immigration. If they won't cooperate, do you think they should still get funding?

 

4.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.c-span.org/video/%3Fc4705582/schumer-amnesty&ved=2ahUKEwi8r9y_zfPYAhWGnlMKHYwAAz04ChAWMAJ6BAgQEAE&usg=AOvVaw0CcCmVb6RXBRPSrO90TCAY

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/us/politics/immigration-wall-mexico-schumer-senate.html&ved=2ahUKEwi8r9y_zfPYAhWGnlMKHYwAAz04ChAWMAd6BAgIEAE&usg=AOvVaw143zJCIUyXq0xkQTPzzS96

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/daca-not-what-the-democrats-say-it-here-are-the-facts&ved=2ahUKEwjiqem7z_PYAhUI2lMKHQi-DKw4FBAWMAJ6BAgSEAE&usg=AOvVaw1E65eP1lOy5zNiu_B2P26V

[Sho Nuff 719]

1&2. You can't have it both ways. DHS and Border agents say it's not a joke or a waste. So your saying their opinion is a joke on the matter.

 

3. So your saying illegals won't follow our laws in fear of deportation? That's because they know they shouldn't be here. Your links don't say republicans want state officials "actively pursuing" illegals. They want cooperation. You know, cooperation for the federal money they receive to help combat illegal immigration. If they won't cooperate, do you think they should still get funding?

 

4.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.c-span.org/video/%3Fc4705582/schumer-amnesty&ved=2ahUKEwi8r9y_zfPYAhWGnlMKHYwAAz04ChAWMAJ6BAgQEAE&usg=AOvVaw0CcCmVb6RXBRPSrO90TCAY

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/us/politics/immigration-wall-mexico-schumer-senate.html&ved=2ahUKEwi8r9y_zfPYAhWGnlMKHYwAAz04ChAWMAd6BAgIEAE&usg=AOvVaw143zJCIUyXq0xkQTPzzS96

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/daca-not-what-the-democrats-say-it-here-are-the-facts&ved=2ahUKEwjiqem7z_PYAhUI2lMKHQi-DKw4FBAWMAJ6BAgSEAE&usg=AOvVaw1E65eP1lOy5zNiu_B2P26V

 

Its not both ways. Im saying its a joke based on the percent of immigration that comes over the border vs other means of getting here. Im saying its a joke as it should not be funded by taxpayers. Im saying its a joke because $20-25 billion initial cost does not make it cost effective...and that does not then include additional cost for maintenance and actual security to go with it.

 

Im saying people won't call in tips or offer information for fear of deportment. Im saying some won't even work towards becoming legal here because of fear of being sent back (like the guy recently who had been here for 30+ years and working towards legal status and got deported and separated from his family.

 

1st link...DACA amnesty...thats not all illegals. Not even close to anyone here illegally.

2nd link...was again about DACA...the only one saying that the democrats want DACA for illegals was a republican claiming that.

3rd link...again about DACA.

 

My post was not about DACA...neither was your claim that democrats want amnesty for anyone here illegally. Thats not what DACA is.

[crackattack 513]

 

Its not both ways. Im saying its a joke based on the percent of immigration that comes over the border vs other means of getting here. Im saying its a joke as it should not be funded by taxpayers. Im saying its a joke because $20-25 billion initial cost does not make it cost effective...and that does not then include additional cost for maintenance and actual security to go with it.

 

Im saying people won't call in tips or offer information for fear of deportment. Im saying some won't even work towards becoming legal here because of fear of being sent back (like the guy recently who had been here for 30+ years and working towards legal status and got deported and separated from his family.

 

1st link...DACA amnesty...thats not all illegals. Not even close to anyone here illegally.

2nd link...was again about DACA...the only one saying that the democrats want DACA for illegals was a republican claiming that.

3rd link...again about DACA.

 

My post was not about DACA...neither was your claim that democrats want amnesty for anyone here illegally. Thats not what DACA is.

I'm trying to understand your point. It's the opinion of DHS and Border agents that a wall in areas is needed. It's the opinion of DHS and Border security that it's not a waste of money. So what your saying is your opinion, and the opinions of non DHS or border security employees/lawmakers, are more knowledgeable on the topic? You're completely discounting what they're saying as a "joke" and a "waste". That's your stance. It's your opinion.

 

Then those people need to go. They are illegal. They chose this path. They chose this risk. Right? They're breaking the law Right? While the 30+ year Dr is a sad story, he also knew the risk of breaking the law. Right? Who's to blame? Our government for executing and following the laws, or the people who broke them?

 

You didn't answer the other question. Since there's no proof that republicans want states to "actively pursue" illegals, should states who don't cooperate lose funding?

 

The last Democrat presidential candidate wanted a "pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens". Not just DACA recipients. It's on her own website. Her own words:

 

As president, Hillary will:

Introduce comprehensive immigration reform. Hillary will introduce comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to full and equal citizenship within her first 100 days in office. It will treat every person with dignity, fix the family visa backlog, uphold the rule of law, protect our borders and national security, and bring millions of hardworking people into the formal economy.

[Sho Nuff 719]

I'm trying to understand your point. It's the opinion of DHS and Border agents that a wall in areas is needed. It's the opinion of DHS and Border security that it's not a waste of money. So what your saying is your opinion, and the opinions of non DHS or border security employees/lawmakers, are more knowledgeable on the topic? You're completely discounting what they're saying as a "joke" and a "waste". That's your stance. It's your opinion.

 

Then those people need to go. They are illegal. They chose this path. They chose this risk. Right? They're breaking the law Right? While the 30+ year Dr is a sad story, he also knew the risk of breaking the law. Right? Who's to blame? Our government for executing and following the laws, or the people who broke them?

 

You didn't answer the other question. Since there's no proof that republicans want states to "actively pursue" illegals, should states who don't cooperate lose funding?

 

The last Democrat presidential candidate wanted a "pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens". Not just DACA recipients. It's on her own website. Her own words:

 

As president, Hillary will:

Introduce comprehensive immigration reform. Hillary will introduce comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to full and equal citizenship within her first 100 days in office. It will treat every person with dignity, fix the family visa backlog, uphold the rule of law, protect our borders and national security, and bring millions of hardworking people into the formal economy.

 

Border agents opine on the efficiency and cost of the wall? That is what I am getting at.

Here is Trumps DHS head...

“Technology plays a key part, and we can’t forget it,” she said. “There’s a lot that we can do with technology to secure our borders.”

“In a much more cost effective way too, I might add,” Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) responded.

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/359486-trumps-dhs-nominee-no-need-for-full-us-mexico-border-wall

 

I think some combination of fence and more on technology is likely the best bang for the buck there...Mexican immigration has been a net negative as well (more leaving back to Mexico than coming from there for a period).

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/more-mexicans-leaving-than-coming-to-the-u-s/

 

And Border crossing has been declining for years.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Illegal-Border-Crossings-Have-Been-in-Decline-for-Years-417255733.html

 

Also...border crossing is the smaller issue when it comes to illegal immigration. (part of why I say its not the efficient method for the overall problem)

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/visa-overstays-outnumber-illegal-border-crossings-trend-expected-continue-n730216

 

The wall is a joke and a waste is my opinion...that mexico was going to pay for it was a joke as well (one too many bought into). You have yet to show where these DHS and border officials claim its such an efficient use of $20 billion.

 

Yeah...the guy I talked about came when he was 10 years old...was sent back to a country he doesn't even know at all. Leaving behind family who are citizens...and likely costing the taxpayers more. He was a taxpayer, he worked, he provided for his family. Now they likely end up on government assistance and we paid how much to send him back? Who is to blame? I guess his family members who brought him here 30 years ago...the system that focked up as he tried for years to gain legal status...and despite no criminal record was sent back because he was brought here as a child.

 

Who don't cooperate...define that? Should they detain people beyond their local laws? Should they lose funding for not spending more of their own state's funding to house people until ICE acts?

 

A pathway to citizenship...sure...never was it said about "everyone" here illegally. You are still not understanding what you even said. No democrat has called for amnesty for all who are here illegally. That would be a falsehood. Its that which I opposed from you.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,646]

How do the criminals we deport keep getting back in here? They can't fly back in, have to go through customs. Can anyone tell me?

[LOD01 191]

Low IQ losers, handed free stuff is a potential vote for the Ds. It's that simple. That's the angle they are working on now. The more let in, the more votes.

[LOD01 191]

How do the criminals we deport keep getting back in here? They can't fly back in, have to go through customs. Can anyone tell me?

You know how. We all know how. They walk across the border or are smuggled in.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Low IQ losers, handed free stuff is a potential vote for the Ds. It's that simple. That's the angle they are working on now. The more let in, the more votes.

 

Letting in people illegally does not lead to more votes by such people.

and really...low IQ losers is what you are going with?

Same as always Mr Ham and Egger

[Cdub100 3,380]

Please remember no posting articles unless the author is a law maker

[Cdub100 3,380]

 

Letting in people illegally does not lead to more votes by such people.

and really...low IQ losers is what you are going with?

Same as always Mr Ham and Egger

Liar

[Sho Nuff 719]

Please remember no posting articles unless the author is a law maker

 

Yeah...you keep going with that one to cover up the BS you tried yesterday.

Got that proof that you were kicked off of FBG simply for being a Trump supporter...was it you who claimed that? Or Rock?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,646]

You know how. We all know how. They walk across the border or are smuggled in.

Hmm, perhaps a wall in certain areas might cut back on that?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,646]

 

Letting in people illegally does not lead to more votes by such people.

and really...low IQ losers is what you are going with?

Same as always Mr Ham and Egger

California is letting illegals vote. Ya heard?

[Strike 3,975]

California is letting illegals vote. Ya heard?

 

Even if CA wasn't, disingenuous Slodumb is not acknowledging that it's not just about votes NOW, but 20 years from now when the anchor babies of new illegals can vote. There never would have been this outcry back in the 70's because the number of illegals was much smaller and there weren't that many anchor babies. The continuous flow of illegals for the last 50 years, the refusal of our government to address the issue in a meaningful manner, and the citizen kids that has spawned is what has created this mess.

[Baker Boy 1,485]

Meh

Thanks...wont likely be in much. Honestly havent missed the place.

Liar!

[IMMensaMind 459]

You want to expand the workforce while decreasing immigration?

Make the inner city welfare scumbags go to work.

This. We have millions who have been coddled into laziness because of this stupid Government. We have plenty of able bodies in this country.

[crackattack 513]

 

Border agents opine on the efficiency and cost of the wall? That is what I am getting at.

Here is Trumps DHS head...

http://thehill.com/homenews/359486-trumps-dhs-nominee-no-need-for-full-us-mexico-border-wall

 

I think some combination of fence and more on technology is likely the best bang for the buck there...Mexican immigration has been a net negative as well (more leaving back to Mexico than coming from there for a period).

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/more-mexicans-leaving-than-coming-to-the-u-s/

 

And Border crossing has been declining for years.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Illegal-Border-Crossings-Have-Been-in-Decline-for-Years-417255733.html

 

Also...border crossing is the smaller issue when it comes to illegal immigration. (part of why I say its not the efficient method for the overall problem)

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/visa-overstays-outnumber-illegal-border-crossings-trend-expected-continue-n730216

 

The wall is a joke and a waste is my opinion...that mexico was going to pay for it was a joke as well (one too many bought into). You have yet to show where these DHS and border officials claim its such an efficient use of $20 billion.

 

Yeah...the guy I talked about came when he was 10 years old...was sent back to a country he doesn't even know at all. Leaving behind family who are citizens...and likely costing the taxpayers more. He was a taxpayer, he worked, he provided for his family. Now they likely end up on government assistance and we paid how much to send him back? Who is to blame? I guess his family members who brought him here 30 years ago...the system that focked up as he tried for years to gain legal status...and despite no criminal record was sent back because he was brought here as a child.

 

Who don't cooperate...define that? Should they detain people beyond their local laws? Should they lose funding for not spending more of their own state's funding to house people until ICE acts?

 

A pathway to citizenship...sure...never was it said about "everyone" here illegally. You are still not understanding what you even said. No democrat has called for amnesty for all who are here illegally. That would be a falsehood. Its that which I opposed from you.

1. They're not calling for a wall from sea to shining seas. They want the money for walls in some areas and technology in others. I think you're hung up on the word "wall". Trumps DHS:

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/11/08/politics/kirstjen-nielsen-homeland-security-confirmation-hearing/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjbhLng5PPYAhXK11MKHWSFATcQFjAAegQIERAB&usg=AOvVaw1mFoVk5b9IbGmSEal9V0C2&ampcf=1

 

Border crossing now is not relevant, as it is not static. It fluctuates. While down now, it could increase 10 fold in a year.

 

It's a sad story, but he's still technically illegal.

 

Cooperating with federal agencies in removing illegal aliens. Or holding them. Or notifying proper federal agencies. States get funding to cooperate with these federal laws.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/18/northern-california-police-refuse-to-cooperate-in-upcoming-ice-raids-report.amp.html&ved=2ahUKEwiB3IDI5vPYAhUCuVMKHVbRBakQFjABegQIExAB&usg=AOvVaw0J-rflYeL1X1vxZ6gQ7rjn&ampcf=1

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/small-georgia-town-limits-cooperation-immigration-agents-n755066&ved=2ahUKEwiB3IDI5vPYAhUCuVMKHVbRBakQFjAIegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw0-Yw1VM88VYpLiMe8etRwD

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://static.theintercept.com/amp/how-sanctuary-cities-can-protect-undocumented-immigrants-from-ice-data-mining.html&ved=2ahUKEwiD3Nrm6PPYAhUJvFMKHcdzBIMQFjAIegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw1tc73WhPcIp8UIj6zKNFhd&ampcf=1

 

These states are taking federal monies, yet are going to refuse to follow the law. Should they lose that funding? It's a simple question.

 

I understand it perfectly clear. She said this:

 

Introduce comprehensive immigration reform. Hillary will introduce comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to full and equal citizenship within her first 100 days in office. It will treat every person with dignity, fix the family visa backlog, uphold the rule of law, protect our borders and national security, and bring millions of hardworking people into the formal economy.

 

What does she mean? A pathway to citizenship for MILLIONS. How else can this be interpreted? Did I say all illegals?

[Sho Nuff 719]

 

Even if CA wasn't, disingenuous Slodumb is not acknowledging that it's not just about votes NOW, but 20 years from now when the anchor babies of new illegals can vote. There never would have been this outcry back in the 70's because the number of illegals was much smaller and there weren't that many anchor babies. The continuous flow of illegals for the last 50 years, the refusal of our government to address the issue in a meaningful manner, and the citizen kids that has spawned is what has created this mess.

 

How do you know what I am acknowledging...MR Grown Up who claims to ignore me yet responds about me and talks about me constantly without provocation.

 

And no...even in CA it takes more than a drives license to vote.

https://www.snopes.com/california-motor-voter-act/

Quite believing everything you hear on FoxandFriends.

 

You mean...when US citizens can vote? You want to restrict voting based on nationality of parents now?

[crackattack 513]

Also Sho. Trump won on a pledge to build a wall. He owes that to his voters. While you or me or anyone else might think it's dumb, he's trying to fulfill a campaign promise.

 

I thought the ACA was worthless in comparison to the cost, but that was what democrats wanted. Well, guess what? This is what republicans want. Well, some want. It's political. As Obama once said "elections have consequences".

 

I didn't want to pay more taxes for the ACA, you don't want to possible pay more taxes for a wall. Maybe it happens, maybe it doesn't

[crackattack 513]

 

How do you know what I am acknowledging...MR Grown Up who claims to ignore me yet responds about me and talks about me constantly without provocation.

 

And no...even in CA it takes more than a drives license to vote.

https://www.snopes.com/california-motor-voter-act/

Quite believing everything you hear on FoxandFriends.

 

You mean...when US citizens can vote? You want to restrict voting based on nationality of parents now?

Do you think this is Right?

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/local/md-politics/college-park-decides-to-allow-noncitizens-to-vote-in-local-elections/2017/09/13/2b7adb4a-987b-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html&ved=2ahUKEwitpLSm7_PYAhXI0VMKHdtwAhUQFjABegQIExAB&usg=AOvVaw2TJ19ePYrSSjd7ejwupKTg&ampcf=1

[Baker Boy 1,485]

This. We have millions who have been coddled into laziness because of this stupid Government. We have plenty of able bodies in this country.

The work force Participation rate is in the low 60s. That is where we expand our workforce instead of adding people who don’t work.

[Sho Nuff 719]

1. They're not calling for a wall from sea to shining seas. They want the money for walls in some areas and technology in others. I think you're hung up on the word "wall". Trumps DHS:

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/11/08/politics/kirstjen-nielsen-homeland-security-confirmation-hearing/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjbhLng5PPYAhXK11MKHWSFATcQFjAAegQIERAB&usg=AOvVaw1mFoVk5b9IbGmSEal9V0C2&ampcf=1

 

Border crossing now is not relevant, as it is not static. It fluctuates. While down now, it could increase 10 fold in a year.

 

It's a sad story, but he's still technically illegal.

 

Cooperating with federal agencies in removing illegal aliens. Or holding them. Or notifying proper federal agencies. States get funding to cooperate with these federal laws.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/18/northern-california-police-refuse-to-cooperate-in-upcoming-ice-raids-report.amp.html&ved=2ahUKEwiB3IDI5vPYAhUCuVMKHVbRBakQFjABegQIExAB&usg=AOvVaw0J-rflYeL1X1vxZ6gQ7rjn&ampcf=1

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/small-georgia-town-limits-cooperation-immigration-agents-n755066&ved=2ahUKEwiB3IDI5vPYAhUCuVMKHVbRBakQFjAIegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw0-Yw1VM88VYpLiMe8etRwD

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://static.theintercept.com/amp/how-sanctuary-cities-can-protect-undocumented-immigrants-from-ice-data-mining.html&ved=2ahUKEwiD3Nrm6PPYAhUJvFMKHcdzBIMQFjAIegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw1tc73WhPcIp8UIj6zKNFhd&ampcf=1

 

These states are taking federal monies, yet are going to refuse to follow the law. Should they lose that funding? It's a simple question.

 

I understand it perfectly clear. She said this:

 

Introduce comprehensive immigration reform. Hillary will introduce comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to full and equal citizenship within her first 100 days in office. It will treat every person with dignity, fix the family visa backlog, uphold the rule of law, protect our borders and national security, and bring millions of hardworking people into the formal economy.

 

What does she mean? A pathway to citizenship for MILLIONS. How else can this be interpreted? Did I say all illegals?

Simply asked for any DHS official claiming this is an efficient use of 20billion. You stated DHS officials and border agents want the wall (in places). I think they want fences in some places...a far cry still from what Trump has been proposing to this point.

It is not up to local authorities to remove illegals...that is the feds job.

Holding them...again, how long. The are under their own laws as well as far as detaining people for crimes.

How long will they have to hold them for what the Feds should be holding them for?

Should they lose all federal funding? No.

Should they lose funding that is for them if they hold people? ARe they getting such funding?

Your first fox link is about wanting local authorities to pursue people to assist ICE.

2nd link...

 

The resolution, approved Tuesday and signed by Mayor Ted Terry, states law enforcement officials in Clarkston “shall not arrest, detain, extend the detention of, transfer custody of, or transport anyone solely on the basis of an ICE ‘detainer request.”

 

So if they get a request...local authorities should arrest and detain people for ICE? Doing the feds job again?

 

3rd link...interesting. Sounds to me like what a lot of 2nd Amendment people use as justification for not registering guns. Afraid they might use that registration to come get them. So cities have an ID system...but don't want to give up that information to ICE to use that information then to round up people and deport them or arrest them.

 

They take federal monies for other programs...does accepting federal funds for other things mean you have to assist in all federal issues? I don't believe it does (this from knowing a bit about federal grants).

Violation of one federal statute say on a grant for childrens services...even getting to the point of questioned cost and paying the feds back money...does not mean they have to give up funding for a completely unrelated program.

You seem to want to punish other programs in a state for not using their own resources to aid ICE. I highly disagree with that.

 

For Millions...and yes...you said for "anyone" here illegally. That is what I took issue with.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Also Sho. Trump won on a pledge to build a wall. He owes that to his voters. While you or me or anyone else might think it's dumb, he's trying to fulfill a campaign promise.

 

I thought the ACA was worthless in comparison to the cost, but that was what democrats wanted. Well, guess what? This is what republicans want. Well, some want. It's political. As Obama once said "elections have consequences".

 

I didn't want to pay more taxes for the ACA, you don't want to possible pay more taxes for a wall. Maybe it happens, maybe it doesn't

 

He won on a variety of things...and part of his wall pledge that was important...was that Mexico was going to pay for it.

You all whined that obama was going for Obamacare...he won on that as well.

As you say...you t hink it was worthless in comparison to the cost...its not just what democrats wanted...it was what the country overwhelmingly wanted.

The wall does not have near the popularity that ACA did initially.

Hell, ACA still polls better than the wall.

RCP Average for ACA

51% approve

39% oppose

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html#polls

Wall? Even on Rasmussen...a traditionally conservative leaning poll

37% approve

56% disagree

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/344631-rasmussen-poll-most-dont-want-border-wall

 

Now polling difference could change some things...but man...even the conservative poll last summer didn't support the wall.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Do you think this is Right?

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/local/md-politics/college-park-decides-to-allow-noncitizens-to-vote-in-local-elections/2017/09/13/2b7adb4a-987b-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html&ved=2ahUKEwitpLSm7_PYAhXI0VMKHdtwAhUQFjABegQIExAB&usg=AOvVaw2TJ19ePYrSSjd7ejwupKTg&ampcf=1

 

I would disagree with that and oppose it in my area.

States seem to have that right to decide for themselves in local elections.

I am all for the States having such rights to decide for themselves.

[patweisers44 697]

The only thing this thread is missing is Torrid Joe. I guess we will have to settle for Torrid Sho

[Sho Nuff 719]

The only thing this thread is missing is Torrid Joe. I guess we will have to settle for Torrid Sho

 

Being here illegally isn't a crime.

Feel better now.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,584]

wait so sanctuary cities is all about wasting resources, but I have never heard about the complaints of wasted resources policing the illegals

[crackattack 513]

I never said anyone here illegally. I went back and checked. Obviously democrats wouldn't extend that to felons. I hope.

 

It's a give and take. Feds help states out all the time. Should the feds just quit helping and say "that's a state problem, not a federal one". Of course not. These are actual laws. These are laws states refuse to help enforce, yet take federal funding for. In that quote you left out the rest: "extend the detention of, transfer custody of, or transport anyone solely on the basis of an ICE detainer request. That means no help at all. None. Why?

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/andyjsemotiuk/2017/04/18/dispute-over-illegal-immigrants-threatens-federal-funding-for-sanctuary-cities/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwj0qqaE8_PYAhVN6VMKHSdwDGYQFjAAegQIERAB&usg=AOvVaw3qGHcgmcAf9lF53iYoM7QW&ampcf=1

 

Nevermind some of these cities are setting up taxpayer funded legal defense for illegal aliens.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/525162/&ved=2ahUKEwj0qqaE8_PYAhVN6VMKHSdwDGYQFjAJegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw34BNn00RWLcugW0hELTCT0&ampcf=1

 

Remember the feds threatened to withhold highway funds if states didn't comply?

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/454167/&ved=2ahUKEwiH2uux9PPYAhXK6lMKHbmZCaUQFjAAegQIDxAB&usg=AOvVaw2NkHaAMYCPkySPOTs9VWYb&ampcf=1

 

It's not new for the feds to impose their will on the states.

[Strike 3,975]

wait so sanctuary cities is all about wasting resources, but I have never heard about the complaints of wasted resources policing the illegals

 

The notion that sanctuary cities simply don't have the resources to help the feds is ludicrous on it's face. Another lib talking point. What takes more resources? Calling the Feds on a detainer or the cost of investigating and prosecuting the illegal alien who killed Kate Steinle? It doesn't take significant resources to simply pick up the phone and tell the feds when an illegal is being released so they can pick him up. Not to mention, now ICE has to pick the illegal up in a much more dangerous manner than simply taking custody from another law enforcement agency.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,646]

 

The notion that sanctuary cities simply don't have the resources to help the feds is ludicrous on it's face. Another lib talking point. What takes more resources? Calling the Feds on a detainer or the cost of investigating and prosecuting the illegal alien who killed Kate Steinle? It doesn't take significant resources to simply pick up the phone and tell the feds when an illegal is being released so they can pick him up. Not to mention, now ICE has to pick the illegal up in a much more dangerous manner than simply taking custody from another law enforcement agency.

Great point. But the left and independent Shonuff only care about chair jockeys at the FBI. Rank and file Law enforcement can go scratch.

[crackattack 513]

 

The notion that sanctuary cities simply don't have the resources to help the feds is ludicrous on it's face. Another lib talking point. What takes more resources? Calling the Feds on a detainer or the cost of investigating and prosecuting the illegal alien who killed Kate Steinle? It doesn't take significant resources to simply pick up the phone and tell the feds when an illegal is being released so they can pick him up. Not to mention, now ICE has to pick the illegal up in a much more dangerous manner than simply taking custody from another law enforcement agency.

Agree.

[LOD01 191]

 

Letting in people illegally does not lead to more votes by such people.

and really...low IQ losers is what you are going with?

Same as always Mr Ham and Egger

Ok, How about we let these Einstein's in one for one - We ship out our prisoners, our heroin addicts, crack smokers, meth heads and our lazy no good, living off welfare do nothing losers? See if we had a wall, a big tall beautiful wall, we could put these terdlets in straight jackets and use catapults to fire them over the fence in to that garbage dump called Mexico.

 

That work for you?

[Sho Nuff 719]

No but they fight border security and fight enforcing laws, and fight for citizenship for anyone who snuck in

Sorry crack...it wasnt you.

But my reply to his is where you came in taking issue with my response to him in disagreement of this point.

[Mr. Hand 482]

Sorry crack...it wasnt you.

But mynreplybti this is where you came in taking issue with my response to him in disagreement of this point.

What language is that?

[Gladiators 1,904]

Ok, How about we let these Einstein's in one for one - We ship out our prisoners, our heroin addicts, crack smokers, meth heads and our lazy no good, living off welfare do nothing losers? See if we had a wall, a big tall beautiful wall, we could put these terdlets in straight jackets and use catapults to fire them over the fence in to that garbage dump called Mexico.

 

That work for you?

 

I have been a proponent of this for a long time. Sure, we'll take people in, but we're sending an equal number back. Call it a like-kind-exchange.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Ok, How about we let these Einstein's in one for one - We ship out our prisoners, our heroin addicts, crack smokers, meth heads and our lazy no good, living off welfare do nothing losers? See if we had a wall, a big tall beautiful wall, we could put these terdlets in straight jackets and use catapults to fire them over the fence in to that garbage dump called Mexico.

 

That work for you?

FOolish as usual.

In addition immigration from Mexico has been a net negative for a while (or at least had been) . More going to Mexico than coming in.

Posted the link earlier I believe.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,646]

FOolish as usual.

In addition immigration from Mexico has been a net negative for a while (or at least had been) . More going to Mexico than coming in.

Posted the link earlier I believe.

Stats were juked under Obama.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,584]

So Democrats, here is my proposal. We collect 13,888$ per DACA and family member here and they get a path to citizenship. How does that sound, every DACA member gets to stay, parents get the path as well, and in turn we set aside 13,888$ per person we allow here, as an up front fee to allow these people to stay, get schooling, medical, a chance to work and welfare.

 

now to get this which I think is completely fair, we will end chain migration (only from extended family, parents/kids will get to come as a family), and we will end lottery visas, and those visas will goto people who are already waiting in line. We will also for the time being cut the total number of immigrants allowed annually by 280,000, unless we as a country see the need to bring in more people.

 

deal?

 

of course not this is completely a white supremacy play

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/25/politics/daca-democrats-reaction-white-house-donald-trump/index.html

[Hardcore troubadour 12,646]

If he doesn't give them everything they want he's a racist. If he gives them everything they want he's still a racist. I hope he realizes this.