| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 10:51 am Post subject: |
 |
|
mac said: | Quote: | | Current law, which stems back to a 1967 treaty, allows people to flee violence in their country and seek asylum in other countries |
Correct and that is a problem, but why do you bring that up, it wasn't part of my post. I am talking about illegals not on the wait list for asylum. Just diverting again rather responding to my points.
Every illegal caught these days just claims asylum, when the reality is that very few will actually get it. So now, thousands and thousands are free to roam the country, maybe coming back for their hearing. Most will not because they know they will not get it. So then they are illegals again in sanctuary cities, etc. Either working illegally or sucking off the government teat, or both. This problem has been going on for a long time.
So how many are too many? The left doesn't seem to care.
So, what do you find that is false in my statement: | Quote: | | Let's see: A sanctuary city arrests illegals found breaking laws. Instead of handing them off to ICE to likely be deported, they run the illegals through the city/state legal system and they are more often than not, released back into the community instead of imprisoned. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mac wrote: | | techno900 wrote: | Let's see: A sanctuary city arrests illegals found breaking laws. Instead of handing them off to ICE to likely be deported, they run the illegals through the city/state legal system and they are more often than not, released back into the community instead of imprisoned.
And why is this a good thing? Maybe -
Keeping families together? (the whole family could be deported)
The city/state is dependent on the illegal labor?
Either the employer is breaking the law or the illegal has fraudulent documents.
And why is this a good thing?
Sanctuary cities/states encourage illegal crossings because they offer a refuge with little chance of being deported.
So, when will there be too many illegals?
Is there a max number of illegals where liberals would feel a need to do more to control illegal crossings and visa overstays?
Trump sending those waiting for an amnesty hearing to sanctuary cities is a waste of federal dollars. That's where many/most will be heading anyway for the security of the cities. ICE should be handing out maps and directions to the closest sanctuary cities. |
More utter horseshit from Techno, who invents positions that he then assigns to those he makes no effort to understand.
By the numbers. Current law, which stems back to a 1967 treaty, allows people to flee violence in their country and seek asylum in other countries, including the US. Until Trump, that law enjoyed bi-partisan support. Trump and his minions do not have the political skill—or interest—to modify that law—or to comply with it. People who seek asylum are not “illegal”, rather, that term is a rhetorical device, akin to those used by Hitler, to describe asylum seekers as ‘others”, not worthy of protections from the rule of law. Shame on you.
Nancy Pelosi, who demonstrates the brainpower of those not deep into fast food-related dementia, has indicated her willingness to work on a bi-partisan solution to immigration.
Every logical element of your argument is false. I am so happy you weren’t in California failing at teaching our children |
Well listen to you mac, not only are you showing your hypocrisy in regards to sanctuary cities, you have to combine it with going down the Hitler road as well. If sanctuary cities don't want them, why should any other city be happy with taking them? Is it really an expense thing with you? Or a "fascist" thing with you? Probably not, from your other post from the 2020 thread.
"My solution? Keep South Carolinians in South Carolina. Been there, done that, won’t go back. I’m willing to subsidize them staying there and living in a made-up reality."
How "Hitler" of you. You are the perfect example of a far left hypocrite. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The main reason there is zero attempt to craft a comprehensive immigration bill, which would have bi-partisan support is that he knows the subject is a great divider, which keeps the minions in line. If he fails Ann Coulter again, he loses the base, and next years election. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nw30 wrote: | | mac wrote: | | techno900 wrote: | Let's see: A sanctuary city arrests illegals found breaking laws. Instead of handing them off to ICE to likely be deported, they run the illegals through the city/state legal system and they are more often than not, released back into the community instead of imprisoned.
And why is this a good thing? Maybe -
Keeping families together? (the whole family could be deported)
The city/state is dependent on the illegal labor?
Either the employer is breaking the law or the illegal has fraudulent documents.
And why is this a good thing?
Sanctuary cities/states encourage illegal crossings because they offer a refuge with little chance of being deported.
So, when will there be too many illegals?
Is there a max number of illegals where liberals would feel a need to do more to control illegal crossings and visa overstays?
Trump sending those waiting for an amnesty hearing to sanctuary cities is a waste of federal dollars. That's where many/most will be heading anyway for the security of the cities. ICE should be handing out maps and directions to the closest sanctuary cities. |
More utter horseshit from Techno, who invents positions that he then assigns to those he makes no effort to understand.
By the numbers. Current law, which stems back to a 1967 treaty, allows people to flee violence in their country and seek asylum in other countries, including the US. Until Trump, that law enjoyed bi-partisan support. Trump and his minions do not have the political skill—or interest—to modify that law—or to comply with it. People who seek asylum are not “illegal”, rather, that term is a rhetorical device, akin to those used by Hitler, to describe asylum seekers as ‘others”, not worthy of protections from the rule of law. Shame on you.
Nancy Pelosi, who demonstrates the brainpower of those not deep into fast food-related dementia, has indicated her willingness to work on a bi-partisan solution to immigration.
Every logical element of your argument is false. I am so happy you weren’t in California failing at teaching our children |
Well listen to you mac, not only are you showing your hypocrisy in regards to sanctuary cities, you have to combine it with going down the Hitler road as well. If sanctuary cities don't want them, why should any other city be happy with taking them? Is it really an expense thing with you? Or a "fascist" thing with you? Probably not, from your other post from the 2020 thread.
"My solution? Keep South Carolinians in South Carolina. Been there, done that, won’t go back. I’m willing to subsidize them staying there and living in a made-up reality."
How "Hitler" of you. You are the perfect example of a far left hypocrite. |
The perfect example of a fascist. The incessant repeating of "illegals" as a means to marginalize humans. How Hitler of you--even if you have no idea of what fascism entails. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vientomas
Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 2343
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| techno900 wrote: | mac said: | Quote: | | Current law, which stems back to a 1967 treaty, allows people to flee violence in their country and seek asylum in other countries |
Correct and that is a problem, but why do you bring that up, it wasn't part of my post. I am talking about illegals not on the wait list for asylum. Just diverting again rather responding to my points.
Every illegal caught these days just claims asylum, when the reality is that very few will actually get it. So now, thousands and thousands are free to roam the country, maybe coming back for their hearing. Most will not because they know they will not get it. So then they are illegals again in sanctuary cities, etc. Either working illegally or sucking off the government teat, or both. This problem has been going on for a long time.
So how many are too many? The left doesn't seem to care.
So, what do you find that is false in my statement: | Quote: | | Let's see: A sanctuary city arrests illegals found breaking laws. Instead of handing them off to ICE to likely be deported, they run the illegals through the city/state legal system and they are more often than not, released back into the community instead of imprisoned. |
|
Are undocumented immigrants eligible for federal public benefit programs?
Generally no. Undocumented immigrants, including DACA holders, are ineligible to receive most federal public benefits, including means-tested benefits such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, sometimes referred to as food stamps), regular Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for health care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and are prohibited from purchasing unsubsidized health coverage on ACA exchanges.
Undocumented immigrants may be eligible for a handful of benefits that are deemed necessary to protect life or guarantee safety in dire situations, such as emergency Medicaid, access to treatment in hospital emergency rooms, or access to healthcare and nutrition programs under the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-immigrants-and-public-benefits/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mat-ty
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 7850
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| boggsman1 wrote: | | The main reason there is zero attempt to craft a comprehensive immigration bill, which would have bi-partisan support is that he knows the subject is a great divider, which keeps the minions in line. If he fails Ann Coulter again, he loses the base, and next years election. |
Correct!! it divides people with common sense and the ability to accept the reality and severity of the situation WITH COMPLETE MORONS.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wrong. It divides people who value the rule of law from those that value mob rule. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mat-ty wrote: | | boggsman1 wrote: | | The main reason there is zero attempt to craft a comprehensive immigration bill, which would have bi-partisan support is that he knows the subject is a great divider, which keeps the minions in line. If he fails Ann Coulter again, he loses the base, and next years election. |
Correct!! it divides people with common sense and the ability to accept the reality and severity of the situation WITH COMPLETE MORONS.. |
Comprehensive reform would address everything, but given Drumpf can't even figure out a work- around for asylum, and is making the situation worse, you know NOTHING will get done..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bogg--it goes a little beyond that. Democrats would like to see more staffing resources in the review of asylum cases to help clear the backlog, and won't go anywhere without a path to citizenship for long time residents and DACA. That was ok with the vast majority of the Senate before Trump lit up the "hate them all" contingency with opposition to all immigrants. He lit that fuse and hopes to ride the resulting chaos to another term. He has no comprehension of what he can or can't do legally. But he has managed to cow all the moderate Republican Senators that actually know how to pass legislation. Trump has no intention of being part of an effort that passes legislation; he and his crime family are just intent on stealing as much as they can. The far right has been conned--again.
By the way, the "how many are too many" talking point is utter nonsense. This is a country of immigrants that has absorbed immigrants and made them Americans for centuries. There are 327 million in the U. S. The border "emergency" is about There are 733,000 asylum claims pending. That's right, less than 1/3 of one percent.
For those who are not just panicky white people afraid of immigrants, but want to keep Republican majorities, the ship has already sailed. Because of citizens of Hispanic descent a number of states will likely move from red to purple or blue. Minorities now outnumber whites in Texas https://www.texastribune.org/2018/06/21/hispanic-texans-pace-become-biggest-population-group-state-2022/ Arizona will be a majorioty minority state by 2010, and the US will be a majority minority country by about 2045.
Republicans successfully demonized Hispanic immigrants in California--and killed their brand. No statewide offices held, and nearly irrelevant--in the state that generates a huge portion of jobs created--3/4 of the US total in February. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/22/california-accounted-for-nearly-three-quarters-of-us-jobs-added-in-february.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2019 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mac you just can't and won't give it up, you just keep cancelling out your own sense of seriousness with your broad brush racial claims.
From you~
"For those who are not just panicky white people afraid of immigrants, but want to keep Republican majorities, the ship has already sailed." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
