myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Immigration and children
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 38, 39, 40
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 3128

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler posted:
Quote:
"Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation"

Well techno900, the above tells us all more about your fact check article. Frankly, I'm surprised that you are fishing in that questionable pool for anything credible.


Typical - knock the source, when unable to state or identify anything about the post that is not factual.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 5128
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bluefish1 wrote:
Linking Mac and Dean is like linking you and Matty. Not sure you want that NW.

From you or any of your liberal buddies? OH MY GOD NO!!!!!!!!!!!
Kill myself now!

I'll I have to do is consider the source, and then continue to go about enjoying my day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 9131

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're joking right? Where are folks seeking asylum going to stay when their case for asylum is being considered? If that is a US port of entry, doesn't that still assume that the applicant would be allowed to legally enter the US pending review of their case?

One has to wonder why asylum seekers aren't going for the bait if things are that simple. That's because things aren't what they appear to be, and asylum seekers know that. I'm thinking that if you were in their shoes you'd better understand their predicament. But, you're hanging with the Daily Caller and their propaganda, because if the truth be told, you're arguably against America accepting immigrants, particularly those from _ _ _ _ hole countries.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 11128
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chandler—I’ll defend Techno on this one. Even Tucker Carlson gets one right now and then. We don’t have to have open borders and allow any one claiming asylum to enter if their claim is not well founded. But if we don’t follow due process, we are no longer the Country we thought we were.

The problem with Trump and Trumpists obsession with immigration from the South is not merely the lawlessness of their approach. Rather, this issue is not very important in the larger scheme of things—but is being used to divert attention from other problems, and from the many predations of the Trump administration. There are perhaps 500,000 homeless in the country—about 50,000 of them are vets. Automation has cost far more blue collar jobs tah competition from immigrants. Fewer people are crossing the border illegally, yet we have increased spending. But the Trump administration is spending about $2 billion more detaining rather than tracking asylum claimants. It’s all been written about before—in the Wizard of Oz. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 9131

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac, I'll offer you the same comment that I posed to techno900.


"One has to wonder why asylum seekers aren't going for the bait if things are that simple."


When the game is rigged with the odds deeply against you, asylum seekers will seek viable alternatives, even if that means crossing our border illegally to establish a foothold.

I've made myself quite clear in the past how I feel about illegal immigrants in the US. There is no way that I'm an "open borders" advocate, but those that hire illegal immigrants are advocates in concept because they are knowingly offering employment to illegal aliens for profit or gain.

What we really need is meaningful immigration reform to be fair with all parties, including to those that qualified under DACA rules who came to the US as children though no fault of their own. Unfortunately, Republicans don't want to do the hard work and offer the needed concessions to find agreement on this issue. Needless to say, the idea of promoting and funding the construction of a Trumpian border wall along our southern border is beyond ridiculous and it will not stem the tide.

Lastly, I don't think that anyone serious about true immigration reform will find anything credible or meaningful fishing around in the Daily Caller or at other similar right wing sites.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 3128

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler said:
Quote:
You're joking right? Where are folks seeking asylum going to stay when their case for asylum is being considered? If that is a US port of entry, doesn't that still assume that the applicant would be allowed to legally enter the US pending review of their case?


That's the issue. Before Trump, those seeking asylum at an entry point (as they should), were being let go with a promise to show up for a hearing assuming their initial claim had any merit. The problem was/is that many would just disappear and not show for their hearing.

Those entering illegally and then seeking asylum got the same treatment (let go until they got a hearing), but with Trump, I doubt that those that entered illegally would now be looking for a government agency to claim asylum.

Trump tried to improve the situation by holding the asylum seekers until they could have a hearing, plus the law/precedent doesn't allow holding parents and children together for more than a month. So now there is a mess, and there are no easy answers. Somehow we need to get control.

I didn't research this, just my recollection.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 9131

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900, you were holding me there until you offered the following nonsense.


"Trump tried to improve the situation..."


I know that's not even close to being true, but I have to ask, do you?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 11128
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 6:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900 wrote:
swchandler said:
Quote:
You're joking right? Where are folks seeking asylum going to stay when their case for asylum is being considered? If that is a US port of entry, doesn't that still assume that the applicant would be allowed to legally enter the US pending review of their case?


That's the issue. Before Trump, those seeking asylum at an entry point (as they should), were being let go with a promise to show up for a hearing assuming their initial claim had any merit. The problem was/is that many would just disappear and not show for their hearing.

Those entering illegally and then seeking asylum got the same treatment (let go until they got a hearing), but with Trump, I doubt that those that entered illegally would now be looking for a government agency to claim asylum.

Trump tried to improve the situation by holding the asylum seekers until they could have a hearing, plus the law/precedent doesn't allow holding parents and children together for more than a month. So now there is a mess, and there are no easy answers. Somehow we need to get control.

I didn't research this, just my recollection.


Simply untrue. Most showed up. https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/resource/myth-v-fact-asylum-seekers-united-states

They have figures for 2014 that have well over 90% of women with children showing up. Those figures are so high that I am skeptical. But not as skeptical as I am of an unsupported claim that “many did not show up”. And “we need to get control.” Rev up the base, don’t trouble me with facts, and spend billions on private prisons rife with abuse. That’s what we have to get control of. By respecting the laws and legal settlements.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vientomas



Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 333

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler wrote:
techno900, you were holding me there until you offered the following nonsense.


"Trump tried to improve the situation..."


I know that's not even close to being true, but I have to ask, do you?


Improve it by ending effective program like this: (said tongue in cheek)

"There are also systems that can ensure perfect compliance with court responsibilities. Over a year ago, the White House ended a program called the Family Case Management Program pilot system, which matched nearly 1,000 asylum-seeking families in several metropolitan areas with social workers. The program had an overall compliance rate of 99 percent.

Philip Wolgin, the managing director of immigration policy at the Center for American Progress, stressed that these are “people who are exercising their legal right to claim asylum.” (Editor’s Note: ThinkProgress is an editorially independent news site housed at the Center for American Progress.)

“It’s also not surprising that the administration has ended proven alternatives such as the Family Case Management Program, which cost a fraction of what it takes to incarcerate someone and work well. Instead they would rather lock up as many people as they can.”

https://thinkprogress.org/most-families-show-up-for-immigration-hearings-f44fff01ac44/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 11128
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Locking them up generates profits for Trump campaign contributors. Supercharge the swamp.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 38, 39, 40
Page 40 of 40

 
Jump to:  
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

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group